Constitutional Law 2 - page 6

FACTS: Petitioner, an Assistant City Fiscal, was assigned to investigate a complaint for qualified theft. In the course of said investigation, petitioner demanded money from a party litigant to the case in consideration for a favorable resolution thereof. Said litigant reported the demand to the National Bureau of Investigation and petitioner was arrested in an entrapment operation. An information was filed with the Sandiganbayan which found petitioner guilty of violating the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. ISSUE(S): Whether or not petitioner was deprived of his right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him. HELD:…

Keep Reading

FACTS: As early as his arraignment for murder, accused-appellant refused to be assisted by a counsel de oficio, insisting that he be assisted by a counsel of his own choice. He also refused to secure the services of a counsel de parte and to present evidence in his defense despite ample opportunity accorded to him. Due to the delays and postponement which dragged the case for years, the trial court was forced to render a decision convicting him of murder. ISSUE(S): Whether or not appellant had been denied effective legal representation. HELD: NO. Appellant had been given ample time to…

Keep Reading

FACTS: Appellant was charged with slight illegal detention. On the day of the trial, the trial court proceeded with the accused appearing without a lawyer, pleading guilty and submitting himself to the proceedings. Two days later, the trial court rendered a decision convicting the appellant. ISSUE(S): Whether or not appellant validly waived his right to counsel during the trial. HELD: NO. The right to be heard would be of little avail if it does not include the right to be heard by counsel. Even the most intelligent or educated man may have no skill in the science of the law,…

Keep Reading

FACTS: Petitioner and his father were the defendants and losing party in a civil case where a piece of their land was levied upon and sold on execution to satisfy the award of damages in favor of the plaintiff. They failed to redeem the property sold to plaintiff’s heirs. For his failure to vacate the land in favor of said heirs, contempt proceedings were instituted against him without the assistance of his counsel who was unable to attend the hearing. ISSUE(S): Whether or not petitioner was denied due process. HELD: YES. The right of the accused to counsel in criminal…

Keep Reading

FACTS: Petitioner was charged with malversation after he failed to produce the missing amount incurred during his designation as Acting Supervising Cashier. He insisted his innocence, claiming that the shortage imputed to him was malversed by other people. ISSUE(S): Whether or not petitioner’s presumed innocence was not sufficiently proved contrary. HELD: NO. The evidence of the prosecution is overwhelming and has not been overcome by the petitioner with his nebulous claims of persecution and conspiracy. The presumed innocence of the accused must yield to the positive finding that he malversed the missing money to the prejudice of the public whose…

Keep Reading

FACTS: Appellant was arraigned under an information charging him and four others with the crime of robbery with homicide and frustrated homicide. A few days after his arrest, he was presented to the victim for identification. After the confrontation, he was brought to Camp Crame where he wilted under interrogation and confessed his participation in the crime. He was convicted and sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. ISSUE(S): Whether or not the conviction was valid. HELD: NO. It has been stated often enough that conviction must be based on the strength of the prosecution, and not the weakness…

Keep Reading

FACTS: Congress enacted Batas Pambansa Blg. 52, Section 4 of which disqualifies any person who has committed any act of disloyalty to the State to be a candidate for any of the offices covered by the statute or to participate in any partisan political activity therein, provided, “that the filing of charges for the commission of such crimes before a civil court or military tribunal after preliminary investigation shall be prima facie evidence of such fact.” ISSUE(S): Whether or not Paragraph 2, Section 4, Batas Pambansa Blg. 52 violates the constitutional presumption of innocence. HELD: YES. An accusation, according to…

Keep Reading

FACTS: Appellant was charged with rape with homicide. During the trial, he withdrew his plea of not guilty to rape with homicide and entered a plea of guilty to murder. The trial court accepted his plea, convicted him of murder and sentenced him to death. ISSUE(S): Whether or not the trial court failed to comply with its mandatory duties when appellant pleaded guilty to murder. HELD: YES. When an accused enters a plea of guilty to a capital offense, the trial court is mandated to: (1) conduct a searching inquiry into the voluntariness of the plea and the accused’s full…

Keep Reading

FACTS: In October 1974, a formal report was filed charging petitioner with alleged violations of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. No action was taken on said report until it was revived on December 12, 1979, two months after it became public that petitioner had a falling out with the president. Criminal charges were thereafter lodged against petitioner. ISSUE(S): Whether or not the delay in the termination of the preliminary investigation violates petitioner’s right to due process. HELD: YES. Substantial adherence to the requirements of the law governing the conduct of preliminary investigation, including substantial compliance with the time limitation…

Keep Reading

FACTS: Petitioner was found guilty of violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act for using her position as branch clerk of court to demand and receive money from the persons involved in certain cases in consideration of a promise that she will help in getting them a favorable judgment. Under P.D. No. 1606, petitioner is only afforded one stage of appeal. ISSUE(S): Whether or not petitioner was denied due process. HELD: NO. If an accused has been heard in a court of competent jurisdiction, and proceeded against under the orderly processes of law, and only punished after inquiry and…

Keep Reading