Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Persons Doctrine: Judicial Decisions Form Part of The Law of The Land Title People V. Jabinal G.R. No. L-30061 Date: February 27, 1974 Ponente

    Uploaded by

    nikol crisang
    15 views1 page
    The accused admitted to possessing a firearm and ammunition without a license. He claimed he was exempt because he had appointments as a secret and confidential agent from local authorities that authorized firearm possession. The Court had previously ruled such appointments exempt those agents from licensing requirements, but had recently reversed this doctrine. The Court held it could not punish the accused based on the new ruling, as his actions were legal under the precedent in place at the time. It therefore acquitted the accused based on the prior judicial interpretations that were considered part of the legal system.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    20_People v Jabinal

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The accused admitted to possessing a firearm and ammunition without a license. He claimed he was exempt because he had appointments as a secret and confidential agent from local authorities that authorized firearm possession. The Court had previously ruled such appointments exempt those agents from licensing requirements, but had recently reversed this doctrine. The Court held it could not punish the accused based on the new ruling, as his actions were legal under the precedent in place at the time. It therefore acquitted the accused based on the prior judicial interpretations that were considered part of the legal system.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    15 views1 page

    Persons Doctrine: Judicial Decisions Form Part of The Law of The Land Title People V. Jabinal G.R. No. L-30061 Date: February 27, 1974 Ponente

    Uploaded by

    nikol crisang
    The accused admitted to possessing a firearm and ammunition without a license. He claimed he was exempt because he had appointments as a secret and confidential agent from local authorities that authorized firearm possession. The Court had previously ruled such appointments exempt those agents from licensing requirements, but had recently reversed this doctrine. The Court held it could not punish the accused based on the new ruling, as his actions were legal under the precedent in place at the time. It therefore acquitted the accused based on the prior judicial interpretations that were considered part of the legal system.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    PERSONS Doctrine: Judicial Decisions form part of the law of the land

    Title G.R. No. L-30061


    PEOPLE V. JABINAL Date: February 27, 1974
    Ponente: ANTONIO, J.
    THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner JOSE JABINAL Y CARMEN, respondents.
    Nature of the case: Illegal Possession of Firearm and Ammunition.
    FACTS
    The accused admitted that on September 5, 1964, he was in possession of the revolver and the
    ammunition described in the complaint, without the requisite license or permit. He, however, claimed to
    be entitled to exoneration because, although he had no license or permit, he had an appointment as
    Secret Agent from the Provincial Governor of Batangas and an appointment as Confidential Agent from
    the PC Provincial Commander, and the said appointments expressly carried with them the authority to
    possess and carry the firearm in question.
    The accused contended before the court a quo that in view of his above-mentioned appointments as
    Secret Agent and Confidential Agent, with authority to possess the firearm subject matter of the
    prosecution, he was entitled to acquittal on the basis of the Supreme Court’s decision in People vs.
    Macarandang(1959) and People vs. Lucero(1958) and not on the basis of the latest reversal and
    abandonment in People vs. Mapa (1967).
    ISSUE/S
    WON appellant should be acquitted on the basis of the court’s rulings in Macarandang and Lucero, or
    should his conviction stand in view of the complete reversal of the Macarandang and Lucero doctrine in
    Mapa.
    RATIO
    Decisions of this Court, under Article 8 of the New Civil Code states that “Judicial decisions applying or
    interpreting the laws or the Constitution shall form a part of the legal system … .” The settled rule
    supported by numerous authorities is a restatement of legal maxim “legis interpretatio legis vim
    obtinet” — the interpretation placed upon the written law by a competent court has the force of law.
    Appellant was appointed as Secret Agent and Confidential Agent and authorized to possess a firearm
    pursuant to the prevailing doctrine enunciated in Macarandang and Lucero under which no criminal
    liability would attach to his possession of said firearm in spite of the absence of a license and permit
    therefor, appellant must be absolved. Certainly, appellant may not be punished for an act which at the
    time it was done was held not to be punishable.
    WHEREFORE the appellant was acquitted
    Notes
    1-C 2015-16 (DE JOYA)
    Modifications:

    You might also like