Claudine - page 21

FACTS: Accused-appellant, an illiterate 15-year-old pushcart cargador, was accused of murder. During the investigation of the case, the investigating officer brought Hassan to the sole eyewitness for identification. Accused-appellant was later convicted of murder based on the testimony of said eyewitness. ISSUE(S): Whether or not the rights of the accused was violated. HELD: YES. The accused-appellant was presented alone – not in a police lineup – and unaccompanied by a counsel to the eyewitness, in the funeral parlor, and in the presence of the grieving relatives of the victim. Such procedure is as tainted as an uncounselled confession and thus…

Keep Reading

FACTS: Felipe Ramos, a ticket freight clerk of the Philippine Airlines (PAL), was charged with estafa for irregularities in the sale of plane tickets. Respondent judge admitted all evidentiary and testamentary evidence offered against Ramos except for the latter’s handwritten note expressing his willingness to settle the irregularities alleged against him as well as his statement during an administrative investigation where he admitted to the offense. ISSUE(S): Whether or not respondent judge is correct in not admitting the note and statement in evidence. HELD: NO. Felipe Ramos was not in any sense under custodial interrogation prior to and during the…

Keep Reading

FACTS: The Supreme Court of the United consolidated four separate cases with issues regarding the admissibility of evidence obtained during police interrogations. In each of these cases, the defendant, while in police custody, was questioned by police officers, detectives, or a prosecuting attorney in a room in which he was cut off from the outside world. None of the defendants was given a full and effective warning of his rights at the outset of the interrogation process. In all four cases, the questioning elicited oral admissions, and, in three of them, signed statements as well, which were admitted at their…

Keep Reading

FACTS: Petitioner Rodolfo Ganzon executed a deed of absolute sale of a parcel of land in favor of private respondents. Several months later, a deed of real estate mortgage was executed between the same parties to secure the payment by the private respondents of a promissory not in favor of petitioner. Private respondents filed a civil action against petitioners after Ganzon initiated extrajudicial foreclosure proceedings in accordance with the terms and conditions of the said mortgage. Respondent judge ordered the substitution of the mortgage lien with a surety bond. ISSUE(S): Whether or not the order of respondent judge violates the…

Keep Reading

FACTS: A municipal resolution declared the area along the western part of EDSA a commercial and industrial zone. Such area covers the two parcels of land originally owned by plaintiff-appellant and later acquired by defendant-appellee from third persons. The Transfer Certificates of Title of both parcels of land contained building restrictions that such land be only used for residential purposes. Defendant-appellee commenced the construction of a building to be devoted to banking purposes. ISSUE(S): Whether or not a municipal resolution can nullify contractual obligations. HELD: YES. While non-impairment of contracts is constitutionally guaranteed, the rule is not absolute, since it…

Keep Reading

FACTS: Petitioner and the Associated Labor union of Metal Workers (ALUMETAL) jointly entered into a collective bargaining agreement with respondent companies where it was agreed that the respondent company will make payroll deductions twice a month for membership dues and other fees/fines. After some time, a majority of petitioner’s members decided to disaffiliate from respondent federation in order to operate on its own as an independent labor group. ISSUE(S): Whether or not petitioner union’s disaffiliation from respondent federation valid. HELD: YES. A local union, being a separate and voluntary association, is free to serve the interest of all its members…

Keep Reading

FACTS: Petitioner challenges the constitutionality of some sections of the Barangay Election Act of 1982 (BP Blg. 222) which prohibits any political party, political group, political committee from intervening in the barangay election. ISSUE(S): Whether or not the ban on the intervention of political parties in the barangay election violates the right to form associations. HELD: NO. The right to form associations or societies for purposes not contrary to law is neither absolute nor illimitable; it is always subject to the pervasive and dominant police power of the state and may constitutionally be regulated or curtailed to serve appropriate and…

Keep Reading

FACTS: Petitioner is a labor federation of unions of in government-owned corporations and state schools took collective action to demand the inclusion of government employees in the coverage of PD 851 which requires employers to pay their employees receiving not more than P1,000 a month a 13th month pay. ISSUE(S): Whether or not may act through labor federations which uses the collective bargaining power to secure increased compensation for its members. HELD: NO. It is the legislature or, in proper cases, the administrative heads of government and not the collective bargaining process nor the concessions wrung by labor unions from…

Keep Reading

FACTS: Petitioner, a member of the Movie and Television Review and Classification Board (MTRCB), was denied access to the voting slips accomplished by the individual board members after a review of the movies and television productions. Consequently, the Board issued Resolution No. 10-89 declaring as confidential, private and personal, the decision of the reviewing committee and the voting slips of the members. ISSUE(S): Whether or not the decisions of the Board are private and personal. HELD: NO. The decisions of the Board and the individual voting slips accomplished by the members concerned are acts made pursuant to their official functions,…

Keep Reading

FACTS: Petitioner, after having been convicted of violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, filed several motions for leave to travel overseas to seek medical attention for various illnesses. The Sandiganbayan denied all such motions. ISSUE(S): Whether or not the petitioner was denied her right to travel. HELD: NO. A person’s right to travel is subject to the usual constraints imposed by the very necessity of safeguarding the system of justice. In such cases, whether the accused should be permitted to leave the jurisdiction for humanitarian reasons is a matter of the court’s sound discretion. Petition is DISMISSED.

Keep Reading