4SBCEF Poli Gabriel Sec.21 Art III(continuation) to Art IV
11, 2020 XV 1
DECEMBER 11, 2020 - FRIDAY(Sec 21 - Art 4)
START: 10:18
34. What is double jeopardy? What is the right against double
jeopardy?
35. What are the two kinds of Double Jeopardy?  
35. Double jeopardy of punishment for the same
offense ----Traditional type of double jeopardy
36. Double jeopardy of punishment for the same act
----- Only applies when an act is punishable by law
and an ordinance
1. WHY IS THERE A NEED TO PROVIDE FOR A SECOND TYPE
OF DOUBLE JEOPARDY? IS THE FIRST TYPE INSUFFICIENT?
The first type only applies when the 2 offenses are either the same
or identical. There can be no identity of offenses if one of the
offenses is punished by the national government and the other by
an ordinance. Even if the elements of the offenses are the same, if
the offense is punished by law and the other by ordinance, there
can be no identity of offenses. This is the reason why there is a need
to provide for the second type of double jeopardy.
36. What if same offense punished by 2 ordinances? Does it
constitute double jeopardy?
37. HOW DO WE DETERMINE IF THERE IS IDENTITY OF ACTS IN
ORDER TO CONSTITUTE DOUBLE JEOPARDY OF
PUNISHMENT FOR THE SAME ACT?
● By determining the location of the series of acts so that if the acts
are impelled by single criminal design then the acts are identical. If
the acts will give rise to violation of a law and an ordinance then
conviction or acquittal on either shall constitute a bar to another
prosecution for the same act. (People v. Relova)
● Double jeopardy of punishment for the same offense requires
identity of offenses.
37. How do the courts determine whether the acts which
would result to violation of law and violation of ordinance
are identical?
Recit Questions Dec.
38. In People v. Relova, there was only a dismissal, not
conviction. Was there double jeopardy?
38. Dismissal because of prescription is dismissal on the merits
39. When it comes to double jeopardy of the same offense,
does it require similar acts?
41. No. Only identity of the offense      
 
42. Same evidence test in Melo, was it deficient?
43. YES, The SC in Melo v. People said that the Same
Evidence Test is inaccurate because Double
Jeopardy of Punishment for the Same Offense does
not require similarity of offenses but what is
required by the Constitution is only identity of
offenses. There is an identity of offense even if the
evidence for the conviction for one offense is not
the same as the evidence needed to convict the
accused in the second offense as long as one is an
attempt or frustration of the other or includes or
necessarily included in the former charge or
complaint.
44. What are the requisites of double jeopardy in People v.
Tampal?
There are only 3 requisites of double jeopardy of punishment for
the same offense:
 First jeopardy must have attached prior to
the second,
 The first jeopardy must have been validly
terminated, and
 Second jeopardy must be for an identical
offense as that in the first. (People v.
Tampal)
45. What are the requisites of legal or first  Jeopardy or first
jeopardy (People v. Tampal)
1. There must be a valid complaint or information;
2. It must be filed before a competent court;
3. The accused had been arraigned or pleaded to the charge; and
4. Had been convicted, acquitted or the case against him is
dismissed without his express consent.
4SBCEF Poli Gabriel Sec.21 Art III(continuation) to Art IV
46. X & Y spouses. X, husband has a friend, A who is a
prosecutor. A filed a case for adultery which was
dismissed, can it be a source of double jeopardy?
47. Under the RPC, private offenses can be instituted at the
instance of the offended spouse (adultery, concubinage),
supposing husband discovered wife having extra marital
affairs with X, H told bff, bff assured H that justice will be
served. BFF was a public prosecutor. Public Prosec filed
case against wife. Wife was acquitted due to insufficiency
of evid. After acquittal of Wife, can Husband consequently
file for another case for the same acts?
No, adultery is a private offense and must be initiated by the
offended spouse, no valid complaint or information
47. In order that double jeopardy must attach, first jeopardy
must attach, and legal jeopardy must have been
terminated. Suppose prosec filed a criminal case against A.
After trial, Court acquitted A due to failure to prove
beyond reasonable doubt. Suppose after trial, it was
discovered that the killing was actually in a different city.
Can the public prosec file the same case in the other city?
Yes. Trial court was not a competent court. Place of
commission of crime is jurisdictional.
48. Suppose after arraignment, accused pleaded guilty. In trial,
accused presented justifying circumstances. Court
acquitted accused. Did Legal Jeopardy already attach?
People vs Balisacan - There was no valid plea. There is no DJ
because there is no legal jeopardy yet. There can only be
legal termination if there is acquittal or conviction or
dismissal without the express consent or at the instance of
the accused. This is because it will amount to waiver of his
right or privilege; in total, he prevents the court from
proceeding with the trial to resolve the case based on its
merits.
Recit Questions Dec. 11, 2020 XV 2
49. Why does dismissal with the consent of the accused will
not set in motion DJ? Estoppel? Why Estoppel?
People v. Obsania. When dismissal is with the express
consent of the accused, there is an implied admission on
the part of the accused that he cannot be convicted of the
charge against him, thus, there is no danger of jeopardy yet.
50. In the case of People vs Obsania and Paulin v. Gimenez,
the SC distinguished between acquittal and dismissal.
Acquittal is always based on the merits, that is, the defendant is
acquitted because the evidence does not show that defendant’s
guilt is beyond reasonable doubt; but dismissal does not decide the
case on the merits or that the defendant is not guilty. Dismissals
terminate the proceedings, either because the court is not a court
of competent jurisdiction, or the evidence does not show that the
offense was committed within the territorial jurisdiction of the
court, or the complaint or information is not valid or sufficient in
form and substance, etc.
48. Two exceptions to the dismissal without express consent
49. Dismissal is based on insufficiency of evidence
(demurrer to evidence also amounts to judgments
on the merits and acquittal); and
50. On the denial of the right to speedy trial. This
amounts to judgment on the merits because there
is a failure on the part of the prosecution to present
sufficient evidence.
50. In Paulin v. Gimenez, the SC enumerated 3 reqs in order
that waiver will not preclude the subsequent dismissal.
51. The dismissal must be with the express consent or
upon motion of the accused;
52. The dismissal must be on the merits or an acquittal;
and
53. Only issues of law are raised.
52. Will provisional dismissal of a case put in set double
jeopardy? Even if the accused agreed to such dismissal?
4SBCEF Poli Gabriel Sec.21 Art III(continuation) to Art IV
53. Supposing there was a long delay in the presentation of
evidence, the accused contends “my right to speedy trial
has already been violated”; the other party asked to
provisionally dismiss the case to find witnesses. The
parties agreed. Hence, the case was provisionally
dismissed. Is this a waiver? Can the prosecution revive the
case?
In essence, where a criminal case is dismissed provisionally not only
with the express consent of the accused but even upon the urging of
his counsel there can be no double jeopardy under Sect. 9 Rule 113, if
the indictment against him is revived by the fiscal.
55. Is dismissal due to violation of the right to speedy trial
equivalent to a judgment on the merits?
56. How about dismissal due to demurrer on evidence, is that
a Judgment on the Merits? What did the SC say in People
v. City Court of Silay?
56. Double jeopardy for the same offense presupposes that
there are two identical offenses filed against the accused.
Can there be double jeopardy if the accused was charged
with only one offense?
57. What were the reasons given in  PSB vs BERMOY  and
Lejano vs People on appeal after acquittal violates right
against DJ?
The fundamental philosophy highlighting the finality of an acquittal
by the trial court cuts deep into "the humanity of the laws and in a
jealous watchfulness over the rights of the citizen, when brought in
unequal contest with the State x x x x" Thus, Green [v. United
States] expressed the concern that "(t)he underlying idea, one that
is deeply ingrained in at least the Anglo-American system of
jurisprudence, is that the State with all its resources and power
should not be allowed to make repeated attempts to convict an
individual for an alleged offense, thereby subjecting him to
embarrassment, expense and ordeal and compelling him to live in a
Recit Questions Dec. 11, 2020 XV 3
continuing state of anxiety and insecurity, as well as enhancing the
possibility that even though innocent, he may be found guilty."
 Right of repose? Wisdom behind this? PSB v. Bermoy
 How about Motion for Reconsideration? Is it also covered?
 In the case of PSB v. Bermoy, what are the three instances
where right against double jeopardy may be invoked?
(a) the accused is charged with the same offense in two separate
pending cases, or
(b) the accused is prosecuted anew for the same offense after he
had been convicted or acquitted of such offense, or
(c) the prosecution appeals from a judgment in the same case.
57. Do you agree that there is DJ when the accused is charged
with the same offense in 2 different cases?
58. Not yet, when the two cases are still pending. See
requisites.
59. Reconcile Bermoy and Pineda.
60. In the case of Pineda, main issue is whether there is DJ
when two pending charges no DJ yet.
61. In Bermoy issue is propriety of  appeal after acquittal,
bermoy on pending charges is an obiter
62. Pineda is controlling even if decided earlier than Bermoy
61. Under the last paragraph of Sec.7 Rule 117, motion to
quash, there is a rule called the doctrine of supervening
event. When do we apply this doctrine? As stated in Melo
v. People and People v. Adil.
The accused may still be prosecuted for another offense if a
subsequent development changes the character of the first
indictment under which he may have already been charged or
convicted. Thus, under Section 7, Rule 117, Rules of Court, the
conviction of the accused shall not be a bar to another prosecution
for an offense which necessarily includes the offense charged in the
original complaint or information when:
(a) the graver offense developed due to supervening facts arising
from the same act or omission;
4SBCEF Poli Gabriel Sec.21 Art III(continuation) to Art IV
(b) the facts constituting the graver offense arose or were
discovered only after arraignment; or
(c) the plea of guilty to a lesser offense was made without the
consent of the fiscal or the offended party
63. Suppose accused was charged with grave physical injuries.
During trial, victim died. Can Prosecution file a subsequent
criminal information for homicide? Will this be covered by
People v. Pineda? Or Doctrine of Supervening Event
64. Pineda, attack it based on multiplicity of suits
65. Use Pineda, not Doctrine of Supervening Event, bec
in the latter, other remedies such as litis pendencia,
and multiplicity of suits are not available, unlike in
the former.
65. Is there a need of a previous conviction in applying the
doctrine of supervening event?
        Yes, previous conviction of a lesser offense
Sec 22 EX POST FACTO LAW
 Are all ex post facto laws considered bill of attainder?
Why? What is the missing element in an ex post facto law
that it cannot be a bill of attainder?
There is no legislative determination of the guilt of the accused.
66. What are the 6 kinds of an ex post facto law in the case of
Salvador v. Mapa?
KINDS:
70. Every law that makes criminal an action done
before the passage of the law and which was
innocent when done, and punishes such action;
71. Every law that aggravates a crime, or makes it
greater than it was when committed;
72. Every law that changes punishment, and inflicts a
greater punishment than the law annexed to the
crime when committed;
73. Every law that alters the legal rules of evidence, and
receives less or different testimony than the law
Recit Questions Dec. 11, 2020 XV 4
required at the time of the commission of the
offense, in order to convict the offender;
74. Every law which, assuming to regulate civil rights
and remedies only, in effect imposes a penalty or
the deprivation of a right for something which when
done was lawful; and
75. Every law which deprives persons accused of a
crime of some lawful protection to which they have
become entitled, such as the protection of a former
conviction or acquittal, or of a proclamation of
amnesty..
71. What are the characteristics of Ex post facto law?
-(i) It refers to criminal matters;
(ii) It is retroactive in application; and
(iii) It works to the prejudice of the accused.
In the case of US v. Conde, involving anti-usury law, at the
time of the loan, there was no law on usury. During the
period of the installments, a law on usury was passed. Can
the law on usury be used to consider the loan obligation in
this case?
-No, the laws in force at the time the contract was made must
govern its interpretation and application. Laws must be construed
prospectively and not retrospectively. If a contract is legal at its
inception, it cannot be rendered illegal by any subsequent
legislation.
Loan contracted in 1990, payable for 10 years (up to year
2000). Law on Usury was passed in 1995. The 1995 law
cannot be charged against the lender for a loan contracted
in 1990. Can it however be used to consider the lender to
have violated the law in 1995 to year 2000?
-No, will impair the obligations of contracts.
In the case of Garcia v. Concepcion, initially a bond was
not required to be paid. During the pendency of the case, a
law was passed exempting the government from payment
of the bond. Can ex post apply? (Di ko sure if baliktad yung
scenario ko di ko narinig maayos)
4SBCEF Poli Gabriel Sec.21 Art III(continuation) to Art IV Recit Questions Dec. 11, 2020 XV 5

Supposing that a criminal charge was filed for violating the

labor code. Subsequently, a law was passed increasing the Art 4 - CITIZENSHIP
penalty for the offense. Can we say that the amendatory What does citizenship mean? Under David v SET?
law is unconstitutional for being an ex post facto law? -Citizenship is the right to have
-No. A law increasing the penalty of the offense is not an ex post rights and it is one’s personal and
facto unless it is expressly made applicable retroactively (Nasi-Villar permanent membership in a
case) political community

Will the creation on the ad hoc committee on anti behest

loan an ex post facto law (Salvador v. Mapa)
-No, they are only created for investigative functions not for
prosecution. Memorandum Order 61 merely provides a frame of
reference for determining behest loans. Not being penal laws,
Administrative Order 13 and Memorandum Order 61 cannot be
characterized as ex post facto laws. There is therefore no basis for
the Ombudsman to rule that the subject administrative and
memorandum orders are ex post facto.
Bill of attainder. Term for bill of attainder if penalty is less
than death?
        -Bill of pains check Bernas
Under the recently passed ATA, is the declaration of
terrorist groups considered a bill of attainder?
- no
Suppose that accused is charged in an admin proceeding,
and was dismissed. May the prosecutors file a case against
the accused for violation of RA 3019?
Yes, in order that DJ may attach the two identical
offenses must be both criminal
If a charge was filed in the office of the Ombudsman, and
was subsequently dismissed, may another complaint be
filed in the same office for the same offense?
-DJ does not attach in PI
What is the core of citizenship?
--The core of citizenship is the capacity to enjoy political rights, i.e.,
the right to participate in government principally through the right
to vote, right to hold public office, and right to petition the
government for redress of grievances.
Is citizenship the same as nationality?
-Nationality is membership in any class or form of political
community. Thus, nationals may be citizens (if members of a
democractic community) or subjects (if members of a monarchical
community)
- It does not necessarily include the right or privilege of exercising
civil or political rights
2 Traditional modes of acquiring citizenship?
1. Naturalization (Bengzon v. HRET)
2. Birth (Bengzon v. HRET)
2 kinds of fil citizens: natural-born or naturalized
What is the third mode?
 ● Marriage as a third mode is a derivative naturalization so
covered by naturalization
Acquisition by birth--What are the two principles covered
in this? Under the 1987 Constitution, what principle is
applied?
-Jus Sanguinis - applied
-Jus Soli (loci)
4SBCEF Poli Gabriel Sec.21 Art III(continuation) to Art IV
Was there any stage in our history where we applied Jus
Soli?
Does that mean that
In DAVID v. SET the SC discussed the history of Filipino citizenship,
during the Spanish colonization there is no such animal called
Filipino citizens so native inhabitants of the Philippines are either
called “Spanish subjects” or “Indios”. The first time that the term
citizens of the Philippines was used was in July 1, 1902 under the
Philippine Bill of 1902. Under the Treaty of Paris signed by US and
Spain on December 10, 1898, all inhabitants of the Philippine Islands
who continuously reside therein and who are Spanish subjects upon
the effectivity of the Treaty of Paris and who do not elect the option
to continue to become Spanish subjects shall bete considered as
citizens of the place where they reside.we have never applied jus
soli in our country?
        
What is the specific date of the en masse naturalization in
the Treaty of Paris?
December 10, 1898
For those who are Spanish citizens in april 11, 1899, until
how long can they choose their citizenship?
1 year
UNDER THE PHILIPPINE BILL OF 1902, CUT-OFF DATE IS
APRIL 11, 1899. WHAT IS THE SIGNIFICANCE OF APRIL 11,
1899?
-The Treaty of Paris was signed December 10, 1898 but unlike
ordinary contracts, Treaties become effective upon the exchange of
the instrument of ratification. The instrument of ratification
between US and Spain were exchanged on April 11, 1899 so this is
the effectivity date of the Treaty of Paris
  Under the Treaty of Paris, Spanish subjects have 1 year from the
effectivity of that Treaty to choose whether to continue to become
Spanish subject or to become a citizen of the place where they
reside.
WHAT IS THE STATUS OF THE CHILD WHO IS NOT A
SPANISH SUBJECT BUT BORN ON APRIL 11, 1899 UNTIL
JULY 1, 1902 WHICH IS THE EFFECTIVITY OF THE PHILIPPINE
BILL 1902? THEY ARE NOT COVERED BY THE TREATY OF
PARIS NOR THE PHILIPPINE BILL OF 1902. UNDER
Recit Questions Dec. 11, 2020 XV 6
PHILIPPINE BILL OF 1902, TO BE CONSIDERED AS A
FILIPINO CITIZEN THE CHILD MUST BE A SPANISH SUBJECT
AS OF APRIL 11, 1899 AND THAT HE HAS RESIDED IN THE
PHILIPPINES AND THIS INCLUDES CHILDREN WHO ARE
BORN FROM THESE GROUPS OF PEOPLE.
  Jus soli was applicable. Any child born from April 11, 1899 until July
1902 regardless of alien parentage is a Filipino citizen. (David v. SET)
 The SC justified that since under that time we are under American
protection then we apply the principles in the United States which is
jus soli
DOES THE 1935 CONSTITUTION APPLY JUS SOLI?
To a limited extent the 1935 Constitution also applies jus soli
principle because if you look at Art. 4 of the 1935 Constitution,
there are 5 groups of Filipino citizens. First group, those who are
citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of the 1935
Constitution. Second group, those born in the Philippines of foreign
parents which means that children of foreign parents born in the
Philippines are citizens of the Philippines with the condition that
before the adoption of the Constitution they had been elected to
public office. This provision was called Caram Doctrine or Principle
WHY IS IT CALLED CARAM DOCTRINE OR PRINCIPLE? Why
the accommodation?
If you look at the list of the delegates of the Constitutional
Convention you would see a delegate named Fermin Caram. Caram
is a delegate of the 1935 constitution representing Iloilo. He was
born in the Philippines. His parents are Syrians who are subject to
persecution and in order to evade persecution they migrated to the
Philippines where Dr. Caram was born. During the 1935
constitutional convention, he ran and he was elected.
To fill out the vacuum of having a foreigner to be one on those  who
drafted the consti, In order to  make the 1935 constitutional
convention an all-filipino convention
Who are citizens of the Philippines under Section 1 of Art.
IV of the 1987 Constitution?
Is this an exclusive list?
- No. Foundlings are considered as Fil citizens.
4SBCEF Poli Gabriel Sec.21 Art III(continuation) to Art IV
In Poe and David, SC cited the deliberation of the 1984
Concon. Can we say that the proposal to include in the list
the foundlings, and the subsequent rejection of this
proposal by the Concon, means that they cannot be
Filipino citizens?
No. The SC said here that the number of foundlings are too few to
merit an expressed constitutional provision. Plus they are already
considered as such under international law.
A Filipino mother may only transmit an inchoate right in
citizenship. The SC discussed this in Tecson, with regard to
the 1987 and the 1935 Constitution. Why did Bernas in this
case say that the 1987 Constitution bent backward
particularly to those born of Filipino mothers? What is the
accommodation given by the 1987 Constitution to this
group of individuals?
 Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect
Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority;
● 1935: children born of Filipino mothers under the 1935
Constitution only have an inchoate right or an expectancy that they
may become Filipino citizens upon reaching the age of majority
● 1973: Children born of Filipino mothers regardless of filiation
legitimate or illegitimate will automatically become a filipino citizen
at birth. It confers citizenship to these groups of children without
need to perform any other act.
● 1987: it did not only consider them as Filipino citizens but also
bent backward by considering those who were under this group as
natural-born Filipino citizens because under the 1973 Constitution
they are considered as naturalized because as was said by the SC in
Benzon v. HRET there are only two kinds of citizens: Natural-born or
naturalized. Meaning if the child is not a naturalized citizen then he
is natural-born. Therefore, under the 1987 Constitution they are
now given the status as natural-born Filipino citizens in accordance
with Section 2 of Article 4.
Recit Questions Dec. 11, 2020 XV 7
In the third group of citizens, what are the conditions for
the grant of Filipino Citizenship? What is the significance of
the date/cut-off?
- Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect
Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority;
 WHY THE CUT OFF
 JAN 17 1973 is the effectivity of the 1973 Constitution -
Children born after the date are considered natural born
already, no need to elect
This requirement of those born of Filipino mothers and of
alien fathers before the effectivity of the 1973 Consti, does
this mean that it covers ALL children born of Filipino
mothers?
(Follow up Question) There was no qualification in the
Constitution regarding the distinction/qualification
between illegitimate and legitimate children. Where did
the Supreme Court get this qualification?
Can we say that Fernando Poe, Jr. is not a Filipino citizen
due to the generally accepted principles of International
Law?
Can Filipino citizenship be established by presumption?
Yes - Case of FPJ (David case)
Is this conclusive?
No, only disputable.
May be disputed through what evidence?
4SBCEF Poli Gabriel Sec.21 Art III(continuation) to Art IV Recit Questions Dec. 11, 2020 XV 8
If foundling has green eyes, blonde hair, etc., does the Co v HOR Acts of respondent are considered as informal
foundling still enjoy the presumption that he is a filipino election. Why is there a need to consider these informal
citizen? acts when they are already citizens? - for them to be
considered natural born

The burden of proof to prove otherwise rests on whom? -

the party asserting the same; the burden does not shift

Who are natural born citizens under 1987 consti?

What is the citizenship of a legitimate child born to a

chinese father, filipino mother under 1935 consti, prior to How about foundlings; they are still considered natural-
attaining age of majority? - he is not a filipino citizen born even if there is a need to issue a certificate of
foundling?

Republic v Lim - did the SC agree with the SolGen that the
respondent is not a filipino citizen? - no, because he was an Non-registration within 3 years from reaching majority, will
illegitimate child. The 1935 consti provision applies only to that bar the election of Philippine citizenship?
legitimate issue.

FPJ an American Citizen?

END: 12:09 - HW up to sec. 5 of Article 6

Is there a formal reqt for children belonging to the 3rd

group? see CA 625

Di ko nanote sorry - tanong kay jamil; yung may reasonable

time

Co v. HOR differentiate from In re: Ching