S.

Self-incrimination clause
1. Scope and coverage
1. Applies only to testimonial compulsion and production of documents, papers
and chattels in court
2. No, Ong cannot refuse to answer the question on the ground that he would
incriminate himself, since the law grants him immunity and prohibits the use
against him in a criminal prosecution of the testimony or evidence produced by
him. As stated by the United States Supreme Court in Brown vs. Walker, 161
U.S. 591, 597, what the constitutional prohibition against self-incrimination seeks
to prevent is the conviction of the witness on the basis of testimony elicited from
him. The rule is satisfied when he is granted immunity
a. Foreign laws
1. Alienmae cannot invoke her right against self-incrimination even if the
fear of incrimination is in regard to her foreign law. Under the territoriality
principle, the general rule is that a state has jurisdiction over all persons
and property within its territory. The jurisdiction of the nation within its
own territory is necessary, exclusive, and absolute. However, the are a few
exceptions on when a state cannot exercise jurisdiction even within its
own territory, to wit: 1) foreign states, head of states, diplomatic
representatives, and consults to a certain degree; 2) foreign state property;
3) acts of state; 4) foreign merchant vessels exercising rights of innocent
passage or arrival under stress; 5) foreign armies passing through or
stationed in its territories with its permission; and 6) such other persons or
property, including organisations like the United Nations, over which it
may, by agreement, waive jurisdiction. Seeing that the circumstances
surrounding Alienmae do not fall under those exceptions, that she is a
foreign tourist who received a complaint for fraud, such principle of
territoriality can be exercised by the State to get the information it needs to
proceed with the case.
2. Application
1. Availability
1. Criminal proceedings
2. All governmental proceedings
3. Civil actions
4. Administrative actions if nature of penalty partakes of a criminal
proceeding
5. Legislative investigations
2. Who may invoke
1. Accused, he may refuse to take the witness stand. If he takes, he can
still invoke if an incriminating question is asked which is not related to his
testimony
2. Witness, only when an incriminating question is propounded
3. Immunity statutes
1. Transactional immunity, immune from criminal prosecution for an offense to
which such compelled testimony relates
 2. Use and fruit immunity statutes, prohibits the use of the witness’ compelled
testimony and its fruits in any manner in connection with the criminal prosecution
of the witness
T. Involuntary servitude and political prisoners
1. Exceptions to involuntary servitude
1. Punishment for a crime
2. Service in defense of State
3. Naval enlistment
4. Posse commitatus
5. Return to work order in industries affected with public interest
U. Excessive fines and cruel and inhuman punishments
1. When penalty is disproportionate to the nature of the offense as to shock the senses of
the community
V. Non-imprisonment for debts
1. Includes non-imprisonment for poll tax
W. Double jeopardy
1. Requisites
1. Valid complaint or information
2. Competent court
3. Pleaded
4. Acquitted or convicted or dismissed without express consent
1. Even if with express consent if based on speedy trial or through
demurrer
5. Crimes covered
1. Same offense
2. Necessarily includes, higher
3. Necessarily included, lower
6. Where the offenses charged are penalized either by different sections of the
same statute or by different statutes, the important inquiry relates to the identity of
offenses charged
7. Where one is punished by law and an ordinance, the inquiry is on the identity
of the acts
8. Doctrine of supervening event, no double jeopardy
1. Graver offense developed due to supervening facts arising from the
same act or omission
2. Facts constituting the graver offense arose or discovered only after the
filing of the former complaint or information
2. Motions for reconsideration and appeals
1. Generally, it is not allowed in case of conviction because of double jeopardy
2. Exceptions
1. Court gravely abused its discretion
2. Mistrial or sham trial and denial of due process on the State
3. Dismissal with consent of accused