Tony La Viña – Last day run-through reviewer, with my notes and additions

Bill of Rights – purpose is to regulate Police Power

Procedural v. Substantive Due Process

 Overbreadth and void-for-vagueness test applies to SDP
o Overbreadth – when the legislative action or exercise of police power is such
that it intrudes or is invasive of certain constitutionally-guaranteed rights
o Void-for-Vagueness – when the title or the heading of the law is such that it
misleads or does not sufficiently convey the purpose and the scope of the law

 Court is more liberal anent procedural process anent adherence to procedure and equal
protection
o Refer to Ang Tibay v. CIR (7 requisites or points of Procedural Due Process)

Eminent Domain
- Know “public use” and “just compensation”
o Jurisprudence dictates that public use need not necessarily pertain to indefinite
indiscriminate benefit for all. Public use, by the use of the word “public” could
well be akin to pertaining to what the government deems to be priority or state
interest, and yet only a certain class or few might benefit.
 Another point: when we speak of equity, it need not be that all be 100%
alike or similar in treatment or benefit
 “Legal equity’ pertains to being equally protected and accorded the rights
and application of tests and standards under law.
o Just compensation is when the State returns the value or pays the value of the
damage suffered or property/action taken
- Public Power v. Eminent Domain
o Public Power – regulation (effect: limits)
o Eminent Domain – actual taking or express taking (effect: deprives)
o Impairment of Contracts
 Applicable as long as contrary to Law Magic Pop (Law MGC PoPP)
 Law, Morals, Good Customs, Public Policy

Freedom of Expression
- Benefit of the doubt is on freedom of expression
- Certain demonstrations need a permit (Reyes v. Bagatsing, but more prominently,
Primicias v. Fugoso)

Freedom of Religion
- Estrada v. Escritor (Jehovah’s Witness; Pledge of Undying Faithfulness)
Freedom of the Press
- Chavez v. Gonzalez (if I’m not mistaken)
o Hello Garci tape came out. Palace neither confirms nor deny. Warns the press
that subsequent publishing or sharing of the same will cause the Government to
sue them.
o WoN this is violative of the Constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech, of
expression, and of the press?
o Holding: Yes. This constitutes prior restraint. The members of the press are being
prevented from publishing such material yet to be determined if even violative
of the law.

Custodial Investigation; Privacy of Communication; Miranda Rights; Unreasonable Searches or

Seizures
- Sec.12 and Sec.14, Sec. 17
- Miranda Rights are now, according to People v. Chavez, inclusive even of invitations to
interrogation (Leonen ponencia; refer to Duero to Escobedo digests I sent you)

Right to Bail:
 Enrile cases. More well-known is Enrile v. Salazar
o Doctrine anent Criminal Law regarding rebellion and murder committed in
facilitation of, or in the course of, the same
 Cannot be complexed, should not be complexed
 Hence, the punishment not being reclusion perpetua, cannot be
prevented or deprived of the right of bail
 Remember: presumption of innocence, however must be bolstered by
insufficiency or totality of evidence whereby proof of guilt is shown not to
be strong

Right to form Unions, Associations, Societies

 Does not include the right to strike (jurisprudence; ratiocination is that the government,
through its employees, perform certain functions which are not only essential to
continuing service to the people, but are ultimately matters of public interest and policy)
Garcia v. Drilon; VAWC
 Constitutional Issue – Equal Protection
o Remember the complaint here in this case is that the law supposedly violates
equal protections as men don’t have the same law seemingly preferring their
rights or priority issues such as abuse and exploitation
o The Court uses factual bases and the wisdom or purpose of the law under Art. III
Sec.1
 Women and children are statistically, and hence, factually established, to
be subject to more exploitation and abuses
 This is not to say that men cannot or are not prone to such abuses; it only
means to point to the need to protect those who are more vulnerable
and be subject to stricter scrutiny and protection to those who are
seemingly afforded less protection