aga
circumstance being alleged must be stated in the
joven at trial, will not be
fe aggravating
People vs Francisco, May 05,2014 + —
It should be remembered that every aggravating
information, Failure to state an aggravating circumstance, even if duly pr:
therefore, incumbent on the prosecution to state the
.d to that effect, to be admissible
It was,
in order for all the evidence, introduces
appreciated as such
circumstance in the information
by the trail court.
Settled Is the rule
Alberto vs. The Hon, Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. Nos. 182130 and 182132, June 19,2013 —~ ae. 8°
ite wetheettied that courts of law ave prechided tram disturbing the findings of public proséeutors and
the Gol of the existence or non-existence of probable cause for the parcels of filing the criminal
unless such findings are tainted with grave abuse of discretion, Smounting to lack or excess
ale behind the general rule rests on the princit
e for the purpose of indicting a sust
informations,
of jurisdiction. The ration: iple of separation of powers,
dictating that the determination of probable causs pect is properly an
executive function.
eriytion
pes
van G.R. No. 152662, June 13,2012 ——
imprisonment of not less than thirty days but
law that imposes a penalty of
ne for its violation, It therefore prescribes in four (4) years in accordance
scriptive period, however, should be tolled upon the institution,
there is no more distinction between cases under the Revised
spect to the interruption of the period of
People vs. Pangilit
Since BP Big. 22 is a speci
not more than one year or by a fit
with the aforecited law. The running of pre:
of proceedings against the guilty person. 7!
Fanal Code and those covered by special laws with re
prescription.
and Lawrence Wang Y Chen, March 16, 2007
court may review dismissal orders of trial courts granting an accuse
tbe done via special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65 based on’
ounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. Such dismissal or
when the order of dismiss
ult in jeopardy. Thus,
ginal special civil action via certiorari, the right °
People vs. Hon. Perfecto Laguio, Jr.
It is settled that the appellate
demurrer to evidence. This may
ground of grave abuse of discretion, am
being considered void judgment, does not rest
annulled or set aside by an appellate court in an or!
accused against double jeopardy is not violated.the weakest of defenses
positive identification
‘prosper, the requirements of time and Place (ot -——
.s somewhere else” |
‘ot enough to prove that the accused wa:
rwincing evidence that it |
‘also demonstrate by clear comvincng s
ee Tent of the erime curing Wis commes'o"
People vs Pareja
‘As regards appellants alibi,
because itis easy to fab
of the accused by witnesses. Fi
distance) must be strictly met: It is n«
when the crime was committed; he must
was physicaily impossible for him fo have bee!
Com
Francisco vs Court of Appeals \ue oof
th or immunity
used, but rather an act of grace and clemency
re nourt tq_a seemingly desennrg, defendant
weed BY ew Ter ‘or group of Persone
Probation is not @ right of an acc
mig by tw to & Pers
conferred by the state which may
fie"stands conv’
not enjoyed by others or by all
Multiple prison terms imposed against an accused found guilty of several ofensce in one
up. And, the sum of multiple Prison terms imposed
lity for his qualification from
decision are not, and should not be, added , r
against an applicant shoi native of his eligibil
the terms exceeds
jed to probation,
uid not be determi
probation. ‘The multiple prison terms are distinct from each other, and if none of
Poot ret out in the Probation Law, not more then ‘six years, then he is entitl
unless he is otherwise disqualified fot gumber af ffenses is immatetial-s.lond.2s.2l.‘ne
penalties imposed, taken separately, are within the probationable period.
Se ee ge Ne ae
Serana vs. Sandiganbayan
Student Regent is a public officer. A public office is the right,
given period, either fixed by
‘A University of the Philippine
vad conferred by law, by which for a
dual is invested with some
authority, and the duty created a
law or enduring at the time pleasure of the creating power, an indi
portion of the sovereign functions of the government, to be exercise by him for the benefit of the
public.
It is not only the salary grade that determines the jurisdiction of the
Sandiganbayan has also jurisdiction over other officers enumerated in P.D.
Sandiganbayan. The
No. 1608.
Zaldivia vs Reyes
10 of the Rules on Criminal Pi
In this case, the charge 2!
les on Summary Procedure an
ure, the running of the prescriptive period shall
d not on any date before that.
rocedure does not apply to offenses which are subject to
ainst the petitioner, which is for violation of a municipal
Section 1, Rule 11
d not Section 1, Rule 110.
summary procedure.
ordinance and is governed by the Rul
Under Section 9 of the Rule on Summary Proced
be halted on the date the case is actually filed in court an
. ————