Violations of the corporation's intellectual property

rights case: Read the case decided by the Supreme

Court: Petron Corporation and People of the
Philippines Vs. William, Sr., et al. G.R. No. 243328.
March 18, 2021

While generally an accused cannot be convicted of

an offense that is not clearly charged in the
complaint or information, this rule is not without
exception. The right to assail the sufficiency of the
information or the admission of evidence may be
waived by the accused-appellant. In People v.
Lopez, 432 Phil. 500 (2002), we held that an
information which lacks certain essential allegations
may still sustain a conviction when the accused fails
to object to its sufficiency during the trial, and the
deficiency was cured by competent evidence
presented therein. Thus failure to object was thus a
waiver of the constitutional right to be informed of
the nature and cause of the accusation. It is
competent for a person to waive a right guaranteed
by the Constitution, and to consent to action which
would be invalid if taken against his will. This Court
has, on more than one occasion, recognized waivers
of constitutional rights, e.g., the right against
unreasonable searches and seizures; the right to
counsel and to remain silent; the right to be heard;
and the right to bail (Id. at 509).

Conspiracy is not the product of

negligence but of intentionality on
the part of cohorts. [Magsuci v.
Sandiganbayan, 240 SCRA18]
A home is not just property; it is a
sanctuary, a realized dream. If for
justifiable causes it must be seized,
courts must ensure that the same is
in accordance with law and upon
observance of the requisites of due
process. [Justice Zalameda in
Spouses Wilfredo and Dominica
Rosario vs. GSIS, G.R. No. 200991,
March 18, 2021]