You are on page 1of 3
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 . ————

You might also like