Professional Documents
Culture Documents
D
D
Q: Is it not enough that sanctions will be A: Allows only of matters of public concern
imposed on erring law enforcement officers? does not allow discussions beyond the realm of
public concern (private matters).
A: It is not enough in order to procure the
violation of the constitutional guarantee. The
courts must exclude in order to strengthen the
constitutional guarantees. Q: Does the freedom of expression in general
exist for the protection of majority group or
Q: What are the different constitutional popular group?
guarantees in Sec.4 Art.3?
A: The freedoms of press, expression, speech,
A: 1) Freedom of speech 2) Freedom of assembly and petition are included among the
expression 3) Freedom of the press 4) immunities reserved by the sovereign people.
Freedom of assembly 5) Freedom of petition In the rhetorical aphorisms of Justice
Holmes, to protect the ideas that we abhor or
Q: Are these important constitutional
hate more than the ideas that we cherish.
guarantees?
According to Socrates, not only to protect the
minority who want to talk but also the majority
A: Yes. As the Supreme Court said in the case
who refuse to listen. And as Justice Douglas
of Bayan v. Ermita, ruled that the right of the
cogently stresses, liberties of one are liberties
people to peaceably assemble and right of
of all. Liberties of one are not safe unless
people free speech, expression and the press is
liberties of all are protected.
included among the rights that are given the
Q: Can judicial officers be criticized like all Q: May a citizen in his exercise of free speech
other public officers? discuss the lifestyle of Janet Lim Napoles? Can
she be a subject of public discussion without
violating her constitutional right to privacy?
*in presence of clear and present danger in Q: When can we say that the persons are
which the State has a right to prevent, the exercising a right to assembly and petition and
local government may prevent a holding of right to strike?
assembly and petition.
A: In Dela Cruz v. Court of Appeals,
Q: Do students have a right to exercise this concerted action was declared as a strike
constitutional guarantee, the right to assembly because they were raising their issues about
and petition? better pay, employment and they were engage
in strike against their employer, incidentally,
A: Yes. In Malabanan v. Ramento, the Court the government. The concerted action is to
citing Justice Fortas in Tinker v. De Moines raise employer/employee relationship issues.
Community School District, “Students do
not shed their constitutional rights to freedom PBM Employees Association v. Philippine
of speech or expression at the schoolhouse Blooming Mills, their petition is about the
gate.” abuses of the police. If the concerted effort is
A fair and impartial reading of B.P.880 thus Q: Section 5 of Art. 3 establishes two
readily shows that it refers to all kinds of public important religious clauses and these are?
assemblies that would use public places. The
reference lawful cause does not make it A: Non establishment of religion clause and
content based because assemblies really have free exercise clause
to be for lawful causes, otherwise they would
Q: What does non establishment clause mean?
not be “peaceable” and entitled to protection.
Neither are the words opinion, protesting
A: Non establishment clause prohibits the
nor influencing in the definition of public
government from favoring one religion or
assembly content based, since they can refer
favoring all religion and discriminating one
to any subject. The words petitioning for
religion or discriminating against all religion.
redress of grievances come from the
wording of the Constitution, so its use cannot Q: Any use of public funds or property with
be avoided. some religious color is prohibited by the
Constitution?
Q: Supposing instead of the maximum
tolerance mandated by law in regulating public A: No. In Aglipay v. Ruiz, the stamps were
assembly the President mandates the law made for a secular activity in which the
enforcement officers to use calibrated Supreme Court ruled that it only tends to
preemptive response can that pass promote the site of National Eucharistic
constitutional challenge? Congress and not any religious activity. It only
used the activity in order to promote a secular
A: The Supreme Court said in Bayan v.
activity to promote tourism.
Ermita that CPR has no place in the legal
firmament and must be struck down as Q: Is the purchase of the wooden image of
darkness that shrouds freedom. patron saint violates the principle of the
Church and State?
Q: What is religion?
A: No. In the case of Garces v. Estenzo, the
A: Religion is a profession of faith to an active
funds used for the acquisition of the image
power that binds and elevates man to his
was from private funds and does not directly or
Creator. (Aglipay v. Ruiz)
indirectly establish any religion, nor abridge
religious liberty, nor appropriate money for the
Q: A system of belief that does not espouse a
benefit of any sect, priest or clergyman.
belief in the Supreme Being is not a religion?
2)Freedom to act on One’s Beliefs- where the Iglesia ni Cristo v. Court of Appeals and
individual externalizes his beliefs in acts or American Bible Society v. City of Manila, in
omissions that affect the public, his freedom to these two cases they apply clear and present
do so becomes subject to the authority of the danger test because apart from religious
State. freedom there are other constitutional rights
involve, religious freedom is invoked in
Q:In Iglesia ni Cristo v. Court of Appeals, conjunction with another constitutional rights
petitioner contends that its shows cannot be like freedom of speech, press and expression.
reviewed by MTRCB because they are merely
exercising their religious freedom, did the In Estrada v. Escritor case pure and
Supreme Court agree? exclusive use of religious freedom. The
Compelling State Interest test is applied
A: Supreme Court citing Justice Frankfurter, because where the conduct is involved for the
the constitutional provision on religious whole gamut of human conduct has different
freedom terminated disabilities, it did not interest; some effects may be immediate and
create new privileges. It gave religious liberty, short term while others delayed and far
not civil immunity. Its essence is freedom from reaching.
conformity to religious dogma, not freedom
from conformity to law because of religious Q: What are the three questions that must be
dogma. Mere invocation of religious freedom asked in applying the Compelling Interest test?
will not exempt the activity from governmental
regulation. A:
Q: Petitioner contends the issue regarding on 1)Has the statute or government action
attacks on another religion is between the two created a burden on the free exercise of
religions so the State should not interfere. Did religion?
the Supreme Court agree?
2)Is there a sufficiently compelling state
A: No. When religion divides and its exercise interest to justify this infringement of religious
destroys, the State should not stand still. In liberty?
Taruc v. Dela cruz and Fonacier v. Court of
3)Has the state in achieving its legitimate
Appeals, the Supreme Court ruled that there
purposes used the least intrusive means
is only one aspect of religion that the State
possible so that the free exercise is not
cannot interfere, that is doctrinal and
infringed any more than necessary to achieve
disciplinary. In Fonacier case the issue there
the legitimate goal of the state?
is who among the two groups is the duly
elected leader. The Court interfered because it
Q: In Estrada v. Escritor, may these
involves property rights. In Taruc case, the
objectives of the laws be able to be achieved
issue is the validity of the expulsion of the
other than prohibiting the religious beliefs of
member who disobeyed the order of the
the respondents?
elders, the Court did not interfere because the
A: In the case of American Bible Society v. A: Without a law implementing that, although
City of Manila, imposing tax on religious with noblest intention the conduct of mayor is
activity violates the constitutional guarantee of illegal. For ours is government of laws and not
religious freedom. Supreme Court ruled that of men.
the power to tax in exercise of privilege is
Q: Right to travel within the Philippines is
power to control or suppress the enjoyment of
covered by the constitutional right to travel?
a right. The right becomes meaningless,
useless and at times burdensome if the
A: Yes
government imposes the same in the
enjoyment of the right. Q: Right to return to one’s country is covered
by the international human rights and on
Q: Religious organizations are exempt from
political and civil rights?
taxation?
A: Right to return to one’s country is not
A: Incidental use not exempted
among the rights specifically guaranteed in the
Bill of Rights, which treats only one of the
Q: Can the government require the priests and
liberty of abode and the right to travel, but it is
ministers to pass the government qualification
our well considered view that the right to
test?
return may be considered as a generally
A: No because no religious test shall be accepted principle of international laws and
required for the exercise of civil and political under our Constitution, is part of the law of the
rights. land. (Doctrine of incorporation)
Q: Compensation of priest exempted from Q: Why did the Supreme Court make a
taxation? distinction if the right to travel and right to
return is both an exercisable right in our
A: Privilege of accepting the compensation Constitution?
(excise tax) not exempted to tax. Lladoc v.
CIR A: It is distinct and separate from the right to
travel and enjoys different protection under the
Q: What is right of Liberty of abode? International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights.
A: The right to choose once residence and to
leave it whenever he pleases. Q: What is a residual power?
Q: If the guarantee of the government is not Q: As you said earlier, there must be a law in
present do you think that the right to order to prohibit the release of information but
information is still meaningful? in the case of In Re: Production of court
records and documents and the
A: No. if the individuals claim the right and
attendance of court officials and
that there is no guarantee that the government
employees as witnesses under the
would disclose such information then it would
subpoenas of February 10,2012 and the
be meaningless.
various letters for the impeachment
prosecution panel dated January 19 and
Q: In Legaspi v. Civil Service Commission,
25 2012, does it mean that the ruling of
there must be questions asked and be
Supreme Court is unconstitutional because in
answered and these questions are?
this case the Court prohibit outright the release
1)Being a public concern or one that involves of information?
public interest
A: No. The Supreme Court ruled that they
2)Not being exempted by law from the cannot disclose the information because of
operation of the constitutional guarantee deliberative process privilege; it is not
based on law but is based on legal principle,
Q: Does the right to information include the the Principle of Comity. Any information that
right to demand copies or to demand is within the internal judicial function is not
summaries? subject for a subpoena.
Q: Under Sec.11 Art.3, the Constitution A: Custodial investigation begins when the
guarantees that persons shall be given a right investigation or interrogation ceases to be a
to free access to court. Does it mean when general inquiry to an unsolved crime but focus
people go to court to seek legal remedies they to a specific person as a suspect.
cannot be assess any filing fees because
Constitution says, “free access to courts”? Q: Applying the definition of custodial
investigation in the case of People v. Judge
A: No. It only means that without Ayson and part when custodial begins in
discrimination, any person can go to court to People v. Bolanos, we can say that there are
seek legal remedy. Free access does not imply two conditions wherein custodial investigation
that courts cannot assess fees. is deemed to have been complied on when?
A: It was already part of custodial investigation Q: What are the constitutional rights subjected
because the officer already started to ask in the custodial investigation? Section 12
questions pertaining to the crime that occurred
and ceases to be only a general inquiry. It is A: 1)Right to remain silent and to have
not admissible as evidence for it violated Sec. competent and independent counsel preferably
12 Art.3, confession was made during in a of his own choice
custodial investigation without the benefit of a
counsel. 2)Right to be informed of his rights
Q: Are the rights under custodial investigation Atty. Gabriel: Any vitiated consent including
a waivable right? confession and admission without
voluntariness cannot be admitted in any courts
A: Right to remain silent. After the warnings
of justice because of the lack of consent. This
have been given, such opportunity afforded
was the issue in the case of People v. Andan
him, the individual may knowingly and
wherein the accused confessed to the Mayor.
intelligently waive these rights and agree to
The Supreme Court ruled that when the
answer or make a statement.
appellant talked with the mayor as a confidant
and not as a law enforcement officer, his
Q: In People v. Macam, the accused prior to
uncounselled confession to him did not violate
this requirement that he participates in police
his constitutional rights. Constitutional
lineup proceedings was already questioned can
procedures on custodial investigation do
he be required to participate in police lineup
not apply to a spontaneous statement not
proceedings without according him his
elicited through questioning by
constitutional right. The accused herein were
authorities, but given in an ordinary
already interrogated in the factory of the father
manner whereby appellant orally
of the accused and police officers already
admitted having committed the crime.
asked them about the involvement in the said
crime prior to being presented in the hospital.
Q: One of the constitutional rights under
One of the issues in the case is that whether or
custodial investigation is that he must be
not the uncounseled identification is admissible
informed of his rights meaning the right to
in evidence?
remain silent and to counsel. Is it enough to
read only the rights enshrined in Sec.12 Art.3?
A: When prior to the police lineup if there has
been a interrogation then the police lineup is
A: In People v. Pinlac, the Supreme Court
deemed to be included in custodial
ruled that when the Constitution requires a
investigation. (People v. Macam)
person under investigation “to be informed” of
his right to remain silent and to counsel, it
Q: How about public investigations are these
must be presumed to contemplate the
part of custodial investigation?
transmission of a meaningful information
A: No. In the case of Navallo v. rather than just the ceremonial and
Sandiganbayan, the Supreme Court ruled perfunctory recitation of an abstract
that a person under a normal audit constitutional principle.
examination is not under custodial
Q: Does custodial investigation include
investigation. An audit examiner himself can
reenactment? In People v. Pinlac, the
hardly be deemed to be the law enforcement
accused was forced to reenact the crime. The
officer contemplated in Sec.12.
prosecution contends that the reenactment
Q: Is the spontaneous statement not elicited was voluntarily made although without a
through questioning is part of custodial counsel.
investigation?
A: Yes. Any uncounselled re enactments are
inadmissible as evidence. Before requiring an
A: No. First the court must conduct a hearing A: No. In People v. Fortes the Supreme Court
for the determination of the bail bond that will ruled that the accused is charged with a crime
be imposed. Summary hearing is mandatory punishable by reclusion perpetua is convicted
even if bail is a matter of right. by trial court and sentenced to suffer such
penalty, bail is neither a matter of right or
Q: What are the factors that the court should discretion on the part of the court. The court
consider in determining the amount of bail? would not have only determined that the
evidence of guilt is strong, sufficient to deny
a)Financial ability of the accused to give bail bail even before conviction. It would have
likewise ruled that the accused’s guilt has been
b)Nature and circumstances of the offense
proved beyond reasonable doubt. Bail must not
be granted to the accused during the pendency
c)Penalty for the offense charged
of his appeal from the judgment of conviction.
d)Character and reputation of the accused
Q: Considering the expressed declaration
e)Age and health of the accused under the Constitution note that under Sce.13
Art.3, the provision provides that “All persons”
f)Weight of the evidence against the accused the guarantee applies to all except those falling
under the exception and there are two
g)Probability of the accused appearing at the conditions first is the penalty of the offense
trial
Q: Character of bail shall be determined when? Atty. Gabriel : Right to bail to members of AFP
are not accorded to them because of their
A: In the case of People v. Judge Donato, pecuniary structure, they carry firearms and
the Supreme Court ruled that the character of operate within the government therefore they
bail shall be determined by the law in force at cannot demand for the same right as any
the time that the application is pending. private citizen entitled to.
Q: In the case of People v. Judge Donato, Q: What are the five postulates of extradition
the prosecution that the accused impliedly proceedings as enumerated in the case of
wiaved his right by remaining in custody but Government of U.S. v. Puruganan?
the accused said that the waiver must be
express and explicit. Did the Supreme Court A:1)Extradition is a major instrument for
agree with the accused? suppression of crime
A: No. The Supreme Court ruled that the 2)The requesting State will accord due process
accused herein impliedly waived his right to to the accused
bail and an implied waiver is allowed in right to
bail. 3)The proceedings are sui generis
2)There exist a humanitarian, special and 3)That the accused is given an opportunity to
compelling circumstances including as a matter be heard
of reciprocity those cited by the highest court
in requesting state when grants provisional
4)Judgment is rendered only upon lawful
liberty in extradition cases therein.
hearing
3)Testify in his own behalf, subject to cross A: Lack of preliminary investigation. The
examination by the prosecution Supreme Court ruled in Tatad v.
Sandiganbayan that the long delay in the
termination of preliminary investigation by
Tanodbayan as violative of the constitutional
A: In the case of Galman v. Sandiganbayan, A: No, the Supreme Court ruled that in the
the Supreme Court ruled that any avowal of case of Dumlao v. COMELEC and People v.
independent action or resistance to presidential Dramayo, that a person merely charged with
pressure become illusory from the very an offense cannot be treated like a person who
moment they stepped inside the Malacanang has been found guilty to an offense.
palace. The Supreme Court cannot permit such
sham trial and verdict and travesty of justice
Q: But in the case of Marquez v. COMELEC,
to stand unrectified. The courts of the land
the Supreme Court said that limitation of the
under its aegis are courts of law and justice
definition of “fugitive from justice” from those
and equity.
already convicted after trial is unduly
circumscriptive. The Supreme Court said that
Q: What is the right to be presumed innocent? fugitive from justice was likewise be applied to
persons who flee to avoid prosecution. In that
A: Person is presumed to be innocent until his regard, the Supreme Court is saying that the
guilt is proved beyond reasonable doubt. persons who are already convicted should be
treated the same manner as to persons who
Q: Disputable or conclusive? are merely charged. In that regard is it a
violation of presumption of innocence?
A: It is a disputable presumption or prima facie
presumption. A:
The prosecution exerted all efforts to produce A: She is required to attend at the trial
the witness. Defense did not make any move whether the trial is postponed. The Supreme
to invoke the constitutional right of the Court dismissed the case because of the
accused to a speedy trial violation of the right to speedy trial of the
accused.
Q: What are the tow compulsory processes 2)Such books must be reasonably described by
available to the accused? the parties to be readily identified (Test of
definiteness)
A: 1)Subpoena ad testificandum
In Roco v. Contreras, the Supreme Court
Person is required by the court to testify ruled that the books and documents that the
petitioner requested to be subpoenaed are
designated and described in his request with
2)Subpoena duces tecum
definiteness and readily identifiable.
2) Speedy trial
A: This is one the issue in the case of People
v. Mapalao, the Supreme court ruled that the
accused while at large, cannot seek relief from Q: Consequence in the petition for bail of a
the court as he is deemed to have waived his person who filed a petition for habeas corpus?
right and has no standing in court. Upon
promulgation of the judgment, he failed to A: This is the issue in the case of Jackson v.
appear without justifiable cause although his Macalino, wherein the Supreme Court ruled
bondsmen and counsel were given notice, he is that by offering of the petitioner to post bail
therefore waived his right to appeal. bond, the petitioner thereby admitted that he
was under custody of CID and voluntarily
Q: What is Habeas Corpus(you have the accepted the jurisdiction of CID.
body)?
Q: Can the court continue to hear the petition
A: of writ of habeas corpus after the petitioner
A writ requiring a person to be brought before filed for bail?
a judge or court, especially for investigation of
a restraint ofthe person's liberty, A: If the accused applied for bail, it is an
used as a protection against illegal expressed admission or recognition of the
imprisonment. validity of his detention and would render the
petition for habeas corpus moot and academic.
Q:May the writ of habeas corpus be
suspended? The writ itself? Q: Only the privilege of the writ of habeas
corpus may be suspended and not the writ.
A: Only the privilege only. Who may suspend the privilege of the writ of
habeas corpus? What are the valid grounds of
the suspension?
Q: What is the difference on the suspension of
the privilege writ of habeas corpus and writ of
habeas corpus? A: The president and the grounds are in cases
of invasion when public safety requires it and
A: In the case of Lansang v. Garcia, the Q: What happens to the person who post bail
Supreme Court ruled that Art. 7 vest the in suspension of the privilege of habeas
Atty. Gabriel: Let’s assume that the penalty for A: No. although the constitution provides only
rebellion is reclusion temporal. Supposing after for the suspension of the writ of habeas
the President suspended the privilege, all the corpus, all similar writs are also suspended
members of a group were arrested being because if it is allowed then the provision in
suspected rebels. Supposing there are 100 the constitution would be useless.
rebels can they post bail? As we said earlier
right to bail is a matter of right if the penalty Q: Speedy disposition of cases covers
of the offense is lower than reclusion perpetua proceedings previous to trial or those after
regardless of the weight of the evidence of trial?
guilt? Remember, right to post bail shall not be
impaired in the suspension of the privilege of A: speedy disposition applies to all stages of
the writ of habeas corpus. the trial.
A: This is the issue in the case of In re: The Q:Which means that there are two rights
issuance of the writ of habeas corpus for operating during the trial stage, the right to
Dr. Aurora Parong, et.al. Ponce Enrile, speedy trial and right to speedy disposition of
wherein the Supreme Court ruled that cases. Both of which prohibits any
transcends in the importance that if these unreasonable delay. How can we identify which
person would be given the right to bail, after operates?
they are released, they may rejoin the rebels
and continue their furtherance of invasion or
A: Right to speedy trial applies to trial proper
rebellious activities. The constitutional
and proceedings anterior to the trial. Right to
guarantee provided in Sec.13, does not apply
speedy disposition applies to all stages of the
in offenses of rebellion or offenses inherent or
criminal proceedings. The latter covers criminal
directly connected with invasion. They cannot
administrative, civil, quasi judicial proceedings
post bail as a matter of right, regardless of the
while the former covers only criminal
penalty and the weight of evidence of guilt.
proceedings. Prosecution is not entitled in
speedy trial while in speedy disposition the
Q: We said earlier that the purpose of the writ prosecution and the accused.
of habeas corpus is to test the validity of the
arrest and detention of the accused and
If the trial is attended by vexatious, capricious
ultimately retain the liberty of the person.
and oppressive delays caused by prosecution
Aside from the writ of habeas corpus there are
the accused may claim the right to speedy
other high prerogative writ that produce the
trial. If the right claimed is speedy disposition
same effect like writ of amparo. Five types of
of cases, the only objective is to expedite the
writ of amparo as enumerated in the case of
disposition the case.
Secretary of defense v. Manalo
A: Public policy because the witness is placed A: No. Writing is something more than moving
in the strongest temptation to commit perjury the body, or the hands, or the fingers; writing
and humanity because to extract a confession is not purely a mechanical act, because it
of truth by a kind of duress every species and requires the application of intelligence and
degree of which the law abhors. attention. In Beltran v. Samson, the
Supreme Court rule that privilege is not limited
to testimony, but extends to all giving or
Q: So this constitutional guarantee according
furnishing of evidence. The constitutional
to Supreme Court in the case of Chavez v.
inhibition is directed not merely to giving of
Court of Appeals is not only intended to
oral testimony but embraces as well as the
protect the guilty and imprudent but the
furnishing of evidence by other means than by
innocent and foresighted. What does it mean?
the word of mouth, the divulging in short of
any fact which the accused has a right to hold
A: secret.
Q: How about in administrative proceedings? Is A: If such belief would be allowed then it would
this constitutional guarantee available? disturb the peace and would be detrimental to
the public and to the State.
A: Yes. In the case of Pascual v. Board of
Medical Examiners , the Supreme Court Q: What are two aspects of involuntary
ruled this right does not apply to all servitude?
administrative proceedings and similar
proceedings. Applies to Administrative and A:1)Compulsion to perform or work in
civil proceedings but with qualification, consideration of debt against his will
constitutional guarantee applies with
administrative and civil proceedings which are
2)concept of slavery
penal in character or where there is an
attached penalty.
A: Like in the case of Caunca v. Salazar it is
a case wherein a habeas corpus was filed by a
*Constitutional guarantee does not apply in all
house helper who was being detained and
proceedings. Rule 25, rules of court (Modes of
required to render domestic services in
discovery)
payment for the money advanced for her
transportation from the province. Is this
Q: In cases where a constitutional issue is allowed?
involved it is always a balancing of interest of
the state and an individual. Insofar as issues
A: No. A person cannot be compelled to work
involving right against self incrimination it is a
against his will in payment of a debt.
conflicting interest of the state to penalize the
violation of laws. It is the interest of the
accused to keep to himself an information that Q: Under the constitution, this right is not
may incriminate him. Does that meaning given absolute. The exceptions are?
this conflicting interest, there is no way the
state can compel a person to incriminate A: 1)punishment of a crime whereof the party
himself? shall have been duly convicted
A: No, by granting immunity of the State to 2)render service to defend the state
the person.
3)Return to work order in assumption
Q: What are the two kinds of immunity jurisdiction cases
statutes granted to a witness?
4)Naval enlistment
A: 1)Transactional immunity – a witness can
no longer be prosecuted for any offense 5)Posse comitatus – command to help them
whatsoever arising out of the act or transaction find some criminals
A: No. It may impose new punishment as long Q: In the case of Lozano v. Martinez
as long it is not cruel, degrading, inhuman. petitioner contends that B.P.22 is
unconstitutional because it imposes the penalty
of imprisonment of the failure of the drawer to
Q: Does the 1987 constitution prohibit death
pay the face value of the check. Did the
penalty?
Supreme Court agree?
There must be acquittal, conviction or A: They do not have evidence. They only fish
dismissal for evidence.
3)A second jeopardy must be for the same Q: Punishment of the same offense
offense as that in the first presupposes that there are two charges
against a complaint based on the same offense
Q: Bestfriends A and B wanted to ensure that is the presumption when double jeopardy
they’ll win the case. the public prosecutor for the same act becomes operative. Can
saying that I have a best friend judge who sits double jeopardy of the same offense apply
in branch 1 of MTC, under the law the crime of even if there is only one charged? Supposing A
concubinage are cognizable by RTC, but A and is indicted for homicide and after the trial of
B want to initiate the proceedings in the MTC in the merits, prosecution failed to present
order to ensure the victory of A. The complaint sufficient evidence to convict A. Can the
was initiated before MTC. Because of lack of prosecution appeal the judgment of acquittal?
evidence, the MTC dismissed and acquitted D
and C. Can A and B initiate a second complaint A: No. The accused has the right of repose.
before RTC? The prosecution is barred from appealing
judgment of acquittals, the accused is entitled
A: Although the MTC has no jurisdiction over to rest. Therefore he may not be continuously
the case, A and B being estopped from or successively prosecuted by the State for the
questioning the jurisdiction of the court hope that the fate of the accused in the
because A and B knew that the MTC had no appellate court may be overturned. (Lejano v.
jurisdiction over the case but induced it to People)
have a jurisdiction; hence they are barred from
an appeal under the principle of estoppel. Q: Can a motion of reconsideration (same
court will review its decision) be filed in order
Q: Supposing A is being indicted for homicide , to review its decision of acquittal?
he pleaded guilty for the offense charged and
when asked by the court if he is going to A: Not allowed because of the right of final
present any mitigating circumstances to which acquittal rule or right of repose.
he said yes. He produced an evidence of self
defense; because of this the court acquitted Q: Supposing the judge before whom the case
him. Can the judgment of acquittal be is filed was administratively charged for
appealed in the appellate court? rendering partial decisions, gross partiality and
gross ignorance of the law. It was filed in the
A: In the case of People v. Balisacan, a new Supreme Court , after trial the SC dismissed
of plea of not guilty must be entered for him the complaint for lack of merit. What the
but it was not done. It follows the effect there complainant did filed a criminal complaint
having been no standing plea at the time the based on the same act or omission. Can the
court a quo rendered its acquittal, there can be respondent judge invoke double jeopardy?
no double jeopardy with respect to appeal
herein. A: No. Supreme Court ruled in the case of
Icasiano v. Sandiganbayan, that double
Q: Is dismissal based on the right to speedy jeopardy does not attach when the first action
trial is dismissal on the merits? is administrative in nature. It is, therefore,
correct for the Sandiganbayan to hold that
A: Yes. The dismissal of a criminal case upon double jeopardy does not apply in the present
option of the accused because the prosecution controversy because the SC case was
was not prepared for trial since the administrative in character while the
complainant and his witnesses did not appear Sandiganbayan case is criminal in nature.
at the trial is a dismissal equivalent to an
acquittal that would bar further prosecution of Q: Supposing after the filing of the criminal
the defendant for the same offense. (Esmena complaint after the dismissal of the
v. Pogoy) administrative complaint, the criminal
A: No. double jeopardy does not attach in Q: What is the same evidence rule in the case
preliminary investigation. There is no of People v. Adil?
arraignment so therefore there is no first
jeopardy that is attached. A: The offense 1 is considered as the same as
to the offense 2 under the same evidence test
Q: Supposing, A was indicted for killing B and if the evidence is necessary to convict the
after arraignment, A pleaded not guilty. After accused in the first offense for the conviction
the arraignment of A, second criminal of the accused to the second offense. But the
information was initiated by the public Supreme Court ruled in Adil that the same
prosecutor for killing B. Can A claim double evidence test is not sufficient to under the first
jeopardy? jeopardy, because double jeopardy for the
same offense is not only applicable to similar
A: No. The Supreme Court ruled in the case of offense but also covers offenses considered as
People v. Pineda, the mere filing of two an attempt or frustration or included or
information charging the same offense is not includes in the former complaint or
and appropriate basis for invocation of double information.
jeopardy since the first jeopardy has not yet
set in by a previous conviction, acquittal or END
termination of the case without the consent of
the accused.