Skip to main content

Posts

POINTS TO CONSIDER TO CONVICT ACCUSED IN DRUG CASES

HERE ARE SOME POINTS TO CONSIDER IN ORDER TO CONVICT THE ACCUSED BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT IN DRUG CASES 1. Certainly, the prosecution bears the burden of proof to show valid cause for non-compliance with the procedure laid down in Section 21 of R.A. No. 9165, as amended.   It has the positive duty to demonstrate observance thereto in such a way that, during the proceedings before the trial court, it must initiate in acknowledging and justifying any perceived deviations from the requirements of the law.   Its failure to follow the mandated procedure must be adequately explained and must be proven as a fact in accordance with the rules on evidence. The rules require that the apprehending officers do not simply mention a justifiable ground, but also clearly state this ground in their sworn affidavit, coupled with a statement on the steps they took to preserve the integrity of the seized item. A stricter adherence to Section 21 is required where the quantity of illegal drugs seize...
Post a Comment
Read more
Recent posts

DUTIES OF JUDGES IN BAIL APPLICATION

In the light of the applicable rules on bail and the jurisprudential principles just enunciated, this Court reiterates the duties of the trial judge in case an application for bail is filed: (1) Notify the prosecutor of the hearing of the application for bail or require him to submit his recommendation (Section 18, Rule 114 of the Rules of Court as amended); (2) Conduct a hearing of the application for bail regardless of whether or not the prosecution refuses to present evidence to show that the guilt of the accused is strong for the purpose of enabling the court to exercise its sound discretion (Sections 7 and 8,  supra ); (3) Decide whether the evidence of guilt of the accused is strong based on the summary of evidence of the prosecution (Baylon v. Sison,  supra ); (4) If the guilt of the accused is not strong, discharge the accused upon the approval of the bailbond. (Section 19,  supra ). Otherwise, petition should be denied. The above-enumerated procedure sh...
Post a Comment
Read more

IMPORTANCE OF APPEAL BOND TO PERFECT APPEAL IN LABOR CASES

Article 223 of the Labor Code, which sets forth the rules on appeal from the Labor Arbiter's monetary award, provides: ART. 223. Appeal. --- Decisions, awards, or orders of the Labor Arbiter are final and executory unless appealed to the Commission by any or both parties within ten (10) calendar days from receipt of such decisions, awards, or orders. Such appeal may be entertained only on any off the following grounds: (a) If there is  prima facie  evidence of abuse of discretion on the part of the Labor Arbiter; (b) If the decision, order or award was secured through fraud or coercion, including graft and corruption; (c) If made purely on questions of law; and (d) If serious errors in the finding of facts are raised which would cause grave or irreparable damage or injury to the appellant. In case of a judgment involving a monetary award, an appeal by the employer may be perfected only upon the posting of a cash or surety bond issued by a reputable bonding ...
Post a Comment
Read more

RIGHT TO APPEAL

The Court has time and again held that "[t]he right to appeal is neither a natural right nor is it a component of due process. It is a mere statutory privilege, and may be exercised only in the manner and in accordance with the provisions of the law."  "The party who seeks to avail of the same must comply with the requirements of the rules. Failing to do so, the right to appeal is lost." G.R. No. 207156, TURKS SHAWARMA COMPANY/GEM ZEÑAROSA v. FELICIANO Z. PAJARON and LARRY A. CARBONILLA , January 16, 2017
Post a Comment
Read more

GRAVE MISCONDUCT

1.     My lawyer shared the case of  Office of the Ombudsman-Visayas and Emily Rose Ko Lim Chao v. Mary Ann T. Castro, G.R. No. 172637, April 22, 2015, the Supreme Court says; We point out that to constitute an administrative offense, misconduct should relate to or be connected with the performance of the official functions and duties of a public officer. The respondent in the present case summoned the SWAT for a purely personal matter, i.e., to aid her brother and sister-in-law. There was no link between the respondent’s acts and her official functions as a city prosecutor. In Manuel v. Judge Calimag, Jr., the Court explained that: x x x Misconduct in office has been authoritatively defined by Justice Tuazon in Lacson v. Lopez in these words: "Misconduct in office has a definite and well-understood legal meaning. By uniform legal definition, it is a misconduct such as affects his performance of his duties as an officer and not such only as affects hi...
Post a Comment
Read more

GRAVE THREATS

ART. 282.  Grave threats . — Any person who shall threaten another with the infliction upon the person, honor or property of the latter or of his family of any wrong amounting to a crime, shall suffer: 1. The penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for the crime he threatened to commit, if the offender shall have made the threat demanding money or imposing any other condition, even though not unlawful, and said offender shall have attained his purpose. If the offender shall not have attained his purpose, the penalty lower by two degrees shall be imposed. If the threat made in writing or through a middleman, the penalty shall be imposed in its maximum period. 2. The penalty of  arresto mayor  and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos, if the threat shall not have been made subject to a condition . In the case of  SANTIAGO PAERA vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, G.R. No. 181626, May 30, 2011, the Supreme Court said; Article 282 of the RPC h...
Post a Comment
Read more

PROHIBITED ACTS: ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS AND PENALTIES

RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CASES ( A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC)                                                               RULE 2 PLEADINGS AND PARTIES Section 8.   Issuance of Temporary Environmental Protection Order (TEPO).  - If it appears from the verified complaint with a prayer for the issuance of an Environmental Protection Order (EPO) that the matter is of extreme urgency and the applicant will suffer grave injustice and irreparable injury, the executive judge of the multiple-sala court before raffle or the presiding judge of a single-sala court as the case may be, may issue ex parte a TEPO effective for only seventy-two (72) hours from date of the receipt of the TEPO by the party or person enjoined. Within said period, the court where the case is assigned, shall conduct a summary hearing to determ...
Post a Comment
Read more