Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Bill of Rights Information alleged that the two information is sufficient to charge
accused killed the victim by defendant with simple rebellion
REQUISTES OF CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS: stabbing him multiple times. Enrile v. Salazar
1. The accused has been heard in a court of competent jurisdiction; However, one of the accused was
2. The accused is proceeded against under the orderly processes of only proved to have helped the
law; other accused in throwing the body
3. The accused has been given notice and the opportunity to be into a well. It was determined by the
heard; AND medical examiner that the cause of
4. The judgment rendered was within the authority of a constitutional death was drowning not stabbing.
law Thus, the other accused was
WAIVABLE NOT WAIVABLE acquitted because of the
1. Right to counsel (but waiver 1. Right to be represented by Information. People v. Ortega
must be in writing and in the counsel during the trial; REQUISITIES OF RIGHT TO BE INFORNMED OF NATURE & CAUSE
presence of counsel) 2. Right to be informed of OF ACCUSATION:
2. Right to choose counsel nature and cause of The Information must state:
3. Right to enter a plea accusation against him (but 1. Name of the accused;
4. Right to object to multiple cannot hold court hostage 2. Designation given to the offense by statute;
offenses in Information or by refusal) 3. A statement of the acts or omissions so complained of as
an Information that lacks constituting the offense;
material allegations (which 4. The name of the offended party;
is cured by competent 5. The approximate time and date of the commission of the offense;
evidence presented during 6. Place where the offense had been committed
trial) (p.204, Nachura)
5. Right to cross-examine
witnesses REQUISITIES RE: PLEA OF GUILT TO A CAPITAL OFFENSE;
6. Right to appear during trial FAILURE TO COMPLY = GADALEJ
(distinct from duty to appear 1. The trial court must conduct a searching inquiry into the
when ordered by court for voluntariness of the plea;
purposes of identification) 2. The prosecution shall be required to present evidence to prove
7. Right to seek relief from the guilt of the accused and the precise degree of his
court culpability;
8. Right to appeal conviction 3. The accused must be asked if he desires to present evidence
9. Right against self- on his behalf and allow him to do so if he so desires
incrimination (provided the
waiver is certain, No right to send written interrogatories abroad Fajardo v. Garcia
unequivocal, and Facts of a different case cannot be adopted in another case; such violates
intelligently made) right to confront witnesses People v. Miyake
A portion of direct-examination that was not subject to cross-examination
was excluded People v. Seneris
NOT INFORMED INFORMED Requisites for Subpoena duces tecum:
Information did not allege that Information charged defendant with 1. The books, documents or other things requested must appear
defendant knew, before or at the rebellion with murder and frustrated prima facie relevant to the issue subject of the controversy (test of
time of the assault, that the victim murder. Although rebellion may not relevancy);
was an agent of a person in be complexed crimes committed in 2. Such books must be reasonably described by the parties to be
authority People v. Regala furtherance of rebellion such as
1
readily identified (test of definiteness)
p.210, Nachura Who may invoke the right:
1) Accused;
2) Any witness to whom a question calling for an incriminating answer
is addressed.
When is presence of the accused mandatory?
1. During arraignment and plea;
2. During trial, for identification;
3. During promulgation of sentence, unless for a light offense
wherein the accused may appear by counsel or a representative Rules:
Factors considered:
1) Length of delay Scope:
2) Reasons for the delay 1) Testimonial compulsion only.
3) Assertion or failure to assert such right by the accused Not object evidence, substance emitted from his body,
4) Prejudice caused by the delay fingerprinting, photographing, paraffin testing, pregnancy
test, ultraviolet ray examination.
Extends to all citizens, including those in the military, and covers 2) Production of documents, papers and chattels.
the period before, during and after trial. Exception: Where State has the right to inspect under
However, individual rights shall not work against and preclude the police or taxing power.
peoples equally important right to public justice and failure to 3) Compel accused to furnish a specimen of his handwriting in a
assert such right seasonably may be interpreted as waiver. falsification case.
Immunity:
Section 17. No person shall be compelled to be a witness against 1) Transactional Immunity
himself. Immunity from criminal prosecution for an offense to which
his compelled testimony relates.
A. Right against self-incrimination That which may be granted by the Commission on Human
Rights.
Availability: 2) Use and fruit immunity
1) Criminal prosecutions;
2) All other government proceedings, including civil actions,
administrative or legislative investigations.
2
Prohibits use of witnesses compelled testimony and its Substance emitting from body US
fruits in any manner in connection with a criminal v. Tan Teng
prosecution of the witness
When summoned as a resource
Liberal interpretation person to a legislative inquiry, even
o Reason: Those given this privilege paid a high price for it,
if there are pending criminal cases
the surrender of their right to remain silent.
in the courts involving the same
Right against self-incrimination may be waived: subject Standard Chartered
1) Directly; or Bank v. Senate Committee on
2) Indirectly. Banks
Failure to invoke it provided certain and unequivocal and
intelligently made.
Thus, an accused who takes the witnesses stand
voluntarily may be cross examined and asked incriminating
questions Section 18.
Section 19.
PROTECTED NOT PROTECTED
The act of writing (cannot be Official documents in the custody of (1) Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or
compelled) Bermudez v. Castillo government offices such as the inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall death penalty be
Economic Intelligence and imposed, unless, for compelling reasons involving heinous
(Cannot be compelled) to testify in Investigation Bureau (EIIB) [may be crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty
a committee created by the subject of subpoena duces tecum] already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua.
President to investigate the Almonte v. Vasquez (2) The employment of physical, psychological, or degrading
accuseds unexplained wealth punishment against any prisoner or detainee or the use of
Cabal v. Kapunan Malakis wallet, identification card, substandard or inadequate penal facilities under subhuman
conditions shall be dealt with by law.
residence certificate and keys
Urine test if it immaterial to the [object evidence] People v.
To violate this, the penalty must be flagrantly oppressive and
offense charged (in this case it was Malimit wholly disproportionate to the nature of the offense as to shock the
extortion) Dela Cruz v. People moral sense of the community.
3
debt through fraud as responsibility arises not from the contract of
The death penalty is not a cruel punishment as it is the exercise of loan but from the commission of the crime.
the States power to secure society against the threatened and Trust receipts law does not violate this provision as it does not seek
actual evil. to enforce a loan but to punish dishonesty and abuse of confidence
in the handling of money to the prejudice of another.
The congress can, at any time, reduce the death penalty to life
imprisonment. A. Imprisonment for debt
NO TERMINATION
Two informations were filed against the accused (rebellion + subversion); C. Same offense; ordinance and states
The subversion case was still pending; the rebellion case was appealed
from CA to SC; accused alleged that he had been placed in double AN ACT PUNISHED BY LAW + AN ACT PUNISHED BY 2
jeopardy due to the pending subversion case; SC disagreed; no ORDINANCE STATUTES
termination yet of subversion case Bulaong v. People Batangas City Ordinance for RA 3060 = punishment for exhibition
installing unauthorized electric of motion pictures not sanctioned by
wiring and devices = prescribed Board of Censors for Motion Pictures
AMENDMENT OF INFORMATION RPC = Theft of electricity (malum prohibitum)
1. Information for rape; SC held that there was RPC = exhibiting scenes of totally
2. Judge ordered prosecutor to amend information to include lewd identity between the offenses naked female and males persons
designs When the acts of the with exposed private parts doing sex
3. Prosecution amended Information accused as set out in the two acts in a place open to public view
4. Petitioner filed MTQ, alleging that the case had terminated due to informations are so related to each (malum in se)
the amendment of the information; other in time and space as to be SC held that there was NO
5. Judge granted MTQ reasonably regarded as having identity between the offenses
6. SC reversed and remanded taken place on the same occasion Considering these
and where those acts have been differences in elements and nature,
- People v. Obsania moved by one and the same, or a there is no identity of the offenses
continuing, intent or voluntary here involved for which legal
Amendment of information from Homicide to Murder. Since the facts design or negligence, such acts jeopardy in one may be invoked in
alleged in the accusatory portion of the amended Information are identical may be appropriately the other. Evidence required to prove
with those of the original Information for Homicide, there could not be any characterized as an integral whole one offense is not the same
effect on the prosecutions theory of the case; neither would here be any capable of giving rise to penal evidence required to prove the other.
possible prejudice to the rights or defense of petitioner. Pacoy v. Cajigal liability simultaneously under - People v. City Court of Manila
different legal enactments (a
Verbal order of dismissal does not terminate case; in order for a judgment municipal ordinance and a
or an order of dismissal in order to be complete: 1) must be written; 2) national statute).
personally and directly prepared by the judge; and 3) signed by him - People v. Relova
Rivera, Jr. v. People
Upon finality of the judgment (after appeal to the CA and SC) was D. Rule on "supervening facts"
unsuccessful for the defendant; the RTC promulgated the judgment
against the accused but only as to the civil indemnity. The promulgation Doctrine of Supervening Event
did not include a sentence of imprisonment. The SC held that the RTC
issued a substantially incomplete promulgation. Thus, there was no
6
The accused may still be prosecuted for another offense if a ELEMENTS OF FIRST JEOPARDY:
subsequent development changes the character of the first 1. Court of competent jurisdiction;
indictment under which he may have been charged or convicted. 2. Valid complaint or information;
Examples: 3. Arraignment;
a) When a graver offense developed due to supervening facts 4. Valid plea;
arising from the same act or omission;
5. The defendant was acquitted or convicted or the case was
b) Facts constituting the graver offense arose or were
discovered only after the filing of the 1st; dismissed or otherwise terminated without the express consent
c) Plea of guilty to a lesser offense was made without the of the accused.- Cudia v. CA
consent of the fiscal or offended party; ATTACHED HAD NOT ATTACHED
(2) Defendant was charged in a (1) Aurelio Balisacan was
Doctrine of Supervening Fact court of competent charged with homicide.
The accused may still be prosecuted for another offense if a subsequent jurisdiction; (2) He entered a plea of guilty.
development changes the character of the first indictment under which he (3) Upon Information for SP (3) He was allowed to present
may have already been charged or convicted. Injuries; evidence to prove mitigating
See S7, Rule 117 Rules of Court: no double jeopardy when: (4) The defendant was arraigned; circumstances.
(a) The graver offense developed due to supervening facts arising (5) Pleaded not guilty (4) During which, the accused
from the same act or omission; (6) The private prosecutor and the testified to the effect that he
(b) The facts constituting the graver offense arose or were discovered deputy provincial fiscal moved stabbed the deceased in self-
only after filing of the former complaint or information; for the dismissal; not objected defense because the latter was
(c) The plea of guilty to a lesser offense was made without the to or consented to by D strangling him.
consent of the fiscal or the offended party (7) Another information was filed (5) The lower court acquitted him
in the same court charging the based on the evidence he
Supervening Fact No Supervening Fact defendant with the same presented. The People
Frustrated to consummated Less serious to serious because offense of serious physical appealed.
because victim died of his wounds first doctor did not do an x-ray on injuries. The plea was invalid and the
Melo v. People the hand; fracture was there all (8) Defendant was arraigned, prosecution was not given the
along, it was not a supervening fact again. opportunity to present evidence.
People v. Buling (9) Defendant pleaded that he had - People v. Balisacan
been placed in double
jeopardy.
ELEMENTS OF DOUBLE (1) A first jeopardy must have (10) The lower court sustained the (1) City prosecutor filed the case
JEOPARDY: attached prior to the second; plea and dismissed the case in Angeles City instead of
1. Valid complaint or (2) The first jeopardy must have - People v. Ylagan Mabalacat;
information; been validly terminated; and (2) The Information stated that
2. Filed before a competent (3) The second jeopardy must be the crime was committed in
court; for the same offense or the Angeles City instead of
3. To which the defendant had second offense includes or is Mabalacat;
pleaded; necessarily included in the - Cudia v. Court of Appeals
4. Defendant was previously offense charged in the first JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL
acquitted or convicted or the information, or is an attempt Vizconde case; Judgment of acquittal; appeal alleged no GADALEJ Lejano v.
case dismissed or otherwise to commit the same or a People
terminated without his express frustration thereof.- Cudia v.
consent - NACHURA (P223- CA The rule against double jeopardy does not apply in these instances because a Rule
224) 65 petition does not involve a review of facts and law on the merits in the manner
done in an appeal.
7
- Ysidoro v. Leonardo-de Castro
Kinds:
1) Every law that makes criminal an action done before the passage
of the law and which was innocent when done, and punishes such
action;
2) Every law that aggravates a crime, makes it greater than it was
when committed;
3) Every law that changes the punishment and inflicts a greater
punishment than the law annexed to the crime when committed;
4) Every law that alters the legal rules of evidence, and receives less
or different testimony than the law required at the time of the
commission of the offense in order to convict the offender;
5) Every law, which, assuming to regulate civil rights and remedies
only, in effect imposes a penalty or the deprivation of a right for
something which when done was lawful;
6) Every law which deprives persons accused of a crime of some
lawful protection to which they have been entitled acquittal or
amnesty
Characteristics:
B. Bills of Attainder
Legislative act that inflicts punishment without trial.
Substitutes legislative fiat for a judicial determination of guilt