Atty. Laurie Pe Notes On Consti 2

ATTY.
PE NOTES ON CONSTI 2 2015 - 2016

San Beda College - Manila
First Meeting: December 15, 2015
1. What is Constitutional Law?
a) Study of the proper balance between the power of the
state, and the rights and liberty of the people
b) Study of the structure and powers of the Government
of the Republic of the Philippines
c) Branch of public law which treats of constitutions,
their nature, formation, amendment and interpretation
2. What is a Constitution?
a) Body of rules and principles in accordance with which
the powers of sovereignty are regularly exercised. Cooley
b) Written instrument enacted by which the fundamental
powers of the government are established, limited,
and defined and by which their powers are distributed
among the several departments or branches for their
safe and useful exercise for the benefit of the people.
3. What are the Essential Qualities of a Constitution?

a.) Broad Must be comprehensive enough to provide
for every contingency.
b.) Brief Must confine itself to basic principles to be
implemented within legislative districts.
c.) Definite Must be clear in its provisions.
4. What are the advantages and disadvantages of a
written Constitution?
Advantage Its capacity to resist capricious or
whimsical change dictated by passing fancies,
temporary passions or occasional infatuations of the
people with ideas or personalities.
Disadvantage Unable to adjust to the need for change
justified by new conditions and circumstances.
5. What are the parts of a Constitution?
a) Constitution of Government: provisions on government
structure and powers.
b) Constitution of Liberty: Bill of Rights
c) Constitution of Sovereignty: amendatory and revision
provisions
6. How to amend the Constitution?
Any amendment to, or revision of, this Constitution may be
proposed by:
(1) The Congress, upon a vote of three-fourths of all its

Members; or (2) A constitutional convention.
Amendments to this Constitution may likewise be directly
proposed by the people through initiative upon a petition of
at least twelve per centum of the total number of registered
voters, of which every legislative district must be
represented by at least three per centum of the registered
voters therein. No amendment under this section shall be
authorized within five years following the ratification of this
Constitution nor oftener than once every five years
thereafter. The Congress shall provide for the
implementation of the exercise of this right.
The Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of all its
Members, call a constitutional convention, or by a majority
vote of all its Members, submit to the electorate the
question of calling such a convention. Any amendment to,
or revision of, this Constitution under Section 1 hereof shall
be valid when ratified by a majority of the votes cast in a
plebiscite which shall be held not earlier than sixty days nor
later than ninety days after the approval of such amendment
or revision. Any amendment under Section 2 hereof shall
be valid when ratified by a majority of the votes cast in a
plebiscite which shall be held not earlier than sixty days nor
later than ninety days after the certification by the
Commission on Elections of the sufficiency of the petition.
7. What is an Amendment?
Refers to isolated or piecemeal change without considering
the whole document.
8. What is a Revision?
Re-examination of the entire document, or of provisions of
the document which have overall implications for the entire
document
9. What are the Inherent Powers of the State? Discuss
each.
a.) Police Power The power of the State to regulate
liberty and property for the promotion of the general
welfare.
b.) Eminent Domain The power of the State to forcibly
acquire private property, upon payment of just
compensation for public use.
c.) Taxation The power of the State to demand from the
members of the society their proportionate share or
contribution in the maintenance of the government.
10. What are the similarities among the Inherent
Powers of the State?
1 |R e v i e w e r b y A L E A K I M S a n d i e g o L a v i s t a
ATTY. PE NOTES ON CONSTI 2 2015 - 2016

a.) They are inherent in the State and may be
exercised without need of constitutional grant
b.) They are necessary and indispensable
c.) They are enduring and indestructible as the
State itself
d.) These are methods by which State interferes
with private rights
e.) They presuppose equivalent compensation
f.) These are exercised primarily by the legislature
11. What are the differences among the Inherent
Powers of the State?
Scope
Exercisi
ng
Authorit
y
Valid
Delegati
on by:
Purpose
Property
Involved
Compen
sation
Dept. Order 1 of DOLE: Guideline governing the temporary

suspension of deployment of Filipino Household Workers.
Police power has been defined as the state authority to
enact legislation that may interfere with personal liberty or
property in order to promote general welfare. It refers to the
plenary power of the State to govern its citizens.
2. Ichong v. Hernandez
RA 1180: An Act to Regulate the Retail Trade Business.
Police power cannot be bargained away through a treaty.
The State in the exercise of its Police Power has the
authority to protect the nations economy and security
against the monopolistic control of aliens.
Police
Power
Regulates
liberty
and
Property
Government
Eminent
Domain
Regulates
Property
Taxation
Regulates
Property
3. Lutz v. Araneta
Government
and
Private
Entities
Government
The protection of the Sugar Industry which constitutes one

of the great sources of the States wealth is within the
sphere of protection of the States Police power.
President
Administrativ
e Bodies
Law-making
Bodies
of
LGUs
President
Administrative
Bodies
Law-making
Bodies
of
LGUs
Public
and
Quasi-Public
Corporations
Public Use
President
Administrativ
e Bodies
Law-making
Bodies
of
LGUs
Public
and
Quasi-Public
Corporations
Public
Necessity
4. Lozano v. Martinez
Public
Necessity
States right
to
selfpreservation
and
selfprotection
Property
is
noxious
Unselfish
feeling that
an individual
has
contributed to
public good
Property
is
wholesome
and for public
use
Full and fair
equivalent of
the property
taken
Case Doctrines on Police Power

1. PASEI v. Drilon
Property
is
wholesome
and for public
use
Protection
and
Public
Improvement
Act 567: The Sugar Adjustment Act
BP Blg. 22: The Bouncing Checks Law

The State in the exercise of its Police power can authorize a
law that punishes the act of making and issuing a worthless
check or a check that is dishonored upon its presentation
for payment in the interest of public policy and economic
welfare.
5. Ynot v. IAC
EO No. 626 which penalizes the transportation of a carabao
or carabeef from one province to another is an unlawful
exercise of Police power of the State because the method
employed to conserve the carabaos is not reasonably
necessary to the purpose of the law which is to prevent the
indiscriminate slaughtering of carabaos and is evidently
oppressive.
6. City v. Ericta
Ordinance No. 6118 which requires that at least 6% of the
total area of the memorial park be set aside for charity burial
is an invalid exercise of Police power because Police power
does not include the power to prohibit.
7. Manila v. Secretary
RA 9257 which provides that the 20% discount to Senior
Citizens may claimed as a tax deduction by private
establishments.
As a form of reimbursement, the law provides that business
establishments extending the twenty percent discount to
senior citizens may claim the discount as a tax deduction.

The law is a legitimate exercise of police power which,
similar to the power of eminent domain, has general welfare
for its object.
While the Constitution protects property rights, petitioners
must accept the realities of business and the State, in the
exercise of police power, can intervene in the operations of
a business which may result in an impairment of property
rights in the process.
The very nature of police power as elastic and responsive to
various social conditions as well as the evolving meaning
and scope of public use and just compensation in eminent
domain evinces that these are not static concepts. Because
of the exigencies of rapidly changing times, Congress may
be compelled to adopt or experiment with different
measures to promote the general welfare which may not fall
squarely within the traditionally recognized categories of
police power and eminent domain.
Second Meeting: January 12, 2016
1. What is Eminent Domain?
It enables the State to forcibly acquire private property upon
payment of just compensation for some public use.
e.) For Just Compensation.

f.) Subject to the Due Process of Law.
5. What is private property?
Anything that can come under the dominion of man.
6. Are all private property subject to the power of
Eminent Domain?
No, money and choses of action cannot be subjects of
expropriation.
a. Expropriation of money would be a futile act because
the requirement for the payment of just compensation,
usually also in money.
b. Choses of Action is a personal right not reduced into
possession but recoverable by suit of law, a right to
receive , demand or recover a debt, demand or
damages on a cause of action or for a tort or omission
of duty.
7. What is public use?
2. When can Eminent Domain be used as Police

Power?
It is any use directly available to the general public as a

matter of right not merely forbearance or accommodation.
Eminent Domain can be used as Police Power through

CARP.
8. What is the expansive concept of public use?
3. The Congress wants to expropriate the land of Mr.

Panginoong May Lupa to create a playground and
offered the latter just compensation for such. Mr.
Panginoong May Lupa does not want to sell it and
alleged that Ms. Katawang Lupa owns a more
playground conducive property than him. Mr.
Panginoong May Lupa now challenges the
necessity of the expropriation proceedings, will the
case prosper?
No, the question of genuine necessity is a political question
in which the courts cannot resolve.
4. What are the requisites for a valid exercise of
Eminent Domain?
In the case of Ouano v. Republic, it was said that public use

includes any use that is of usefulness, utility or advantage
or what is productive of general benefit of the public.
In the case of Manosca v. CA, it was said that as long as
the public has a right of use whether exercised by one or
many members of public, a public advantage or public
benefit accrues sufficient to constitute a public use.
Ex. How is CARP for Public Use?
There is no direct benefit given to the people. However,
CARP is a program designed to help farmers earn a living in
line with the Constitutional concept on dynamic social
justice. When these farmers earn a living, it results to a
diminution of squatter areas which is beneficial to our
Tourism and which can help our national economy.
a.) There must be a necessity which must be of public

character.
9. What is taking? Give its requisites.
b.) It is done on a private property.
A physical dispossession of the owner, as when he is

ousted from his land or relieved of his watch and is thus
deprived of all beneficial use and enjoyment of his property.
c.) It results in the taking or appropriation of title to and

possession of the expropriated property.
d.) It is intended for public use.
As held in the case of Republic v. Castellvi, the requisites of

taking are the ff:
a.) The expropriator must enter a private property.

b.) The entry must be for more than a momentary period.
c.) The entry must be under a warrant or color of legal
authority.
d.) The property must be devoted to public use or
otherwise informally appropriated or injuriously affected.
The Courts have power to restrict the exercise of Eminent

Domain to actual reasonable necessities of the case and for
purposes designated by law.
Republic v. PLDT
All private property capable of
expropriated.
ownership may be
Amigable v. Cuenca
e.) The utilization of property for public use must be in such
as to oust the owner and deprive him of beneficial
enjoyment of his property.
10. What are the steps in expropriation?
The Congress / President / Local Legislative Body / Public
and Quasi Public Corporations offers to buy the property. If
the offer is rejected, there will be petition for expropriation.
The petition will determine the legality of the necessity,
validity and just compensation in the expropriation
proceedings.
11. Can a property for public use be designated for
another public use?
Yes, a private property devoted for public use like a
cemetery is a proper subject of expropriation as held in the
case of City of Manila v. Chinese Community of Manila.
12. What is just compensation?
A full and fair equivalent of the property taken from the
private owner by the expropriator.
13. How do you determine just compensation?
It is determined as of the date of the filing of the complaint
for eminent domain.
14. What is the effect
Compensation?
of
non-payment
of
Just
In case of non-payment of Just Compensation, the owners

shall have the right to recover possession of their property
as held in the case of Republic v. Lim.
In case of taking without going through the legal process,

the aggrieved party may properly maintain a suit against the
government without violating the doctrine of governmental
immunity from suit without its consent. The doctrine of
governmental immunity from suit cannot serve as an
instrument for perpetrating an injustice on a citizen.
PPI v. COMELEC
Taking of private property for public use without just
compensation is not authorized by the Constitution.
COMELEC has no delegated authority to exercise police
power.
Sumulong v. Guerrero
The public use requirement for a valid exercise of eminent
domain is flexible and evolving concept influenced by
changing conditions. The lands in question are expropriated
by the NHA for the expansion of Bagong Nayon Housing
Project to provide housing facilities to low salaried
government employees. This is in line with solving the
national problems of the society of shortage of houses and
squatters areas.
EPZA v. Dulay
The determination of just compensation in eminent domain
cases is a judicial function.
Third Meeting: January 16, 2016
15. What is Fair Market Value?
1. What is Taxation?
The market value of the property is the price that may be

agreed upon by the parties who are willing but are not
compelled to enter into a contract of sale. It includes the
consequential damages and special benefits of the owner of
the property.
The power of the State to demand from the members of the

society their proportionate share or contribution in the
maintenance of the government.
Case Doctrines on Eminent Domain
2. Taxation is enforced by the State through what

form?
City of Manila v. Chinese Community

It is enforced through taxes. Taxes are enforced
proportional contribution from persons and property, levied
by the State by virtue of its sovereignty for the support of
the government and for all public needs.
Gift tax on Donation.
3. The power of Taxation is based on what aspects?
Abra Valley College v. Aquino
a.)
b.)
Fiscal Adequacy The sources of government

revenue must be sufficient to meet government
expenditures and other public needs.
Theoretical Justice A good tax system must be
based on the taxpayers ability to pay.
Ex. A law mandating everyone to pay Php 1,000, 000. 00 as

income tax per year is against Theoretical Justice.
c.)
Administrative Feasibility Taxes should be

capable of being effectively enforced.
Ex. A person living in Mindanao has to pay his taxes in

Metro Manila is against Administrative Feasibility.
A donees gift tax is tax upon the privilege of receiving

properties which is not exempted by the Constitution.
Satisfaction of RPT.
The exemption in favor of property used exclusively for
educational purposes extends to facilities which are
incidental to and are reasonably necessary for the
accomplishment of its educational purposes.
Examples:
a.) The use of the 2nd floor of the school as the school
directors family residence.
b.) The use of the Benedictine monks of a small farm inside
the school as the source of their food.
4.) Why is the Power to Tax the power to Destroy?
4. What is the concept of Due Process?
When a legislative body having the power to tax a certain

subject matter actually imposes such burdensome tax as
effectually to destroy the right to perform the act or to use
the property subject to the tax, the validity of the enactment
depends upon the nature and character of the right
destroyed.
The Due Process of Law is a guaranty against any

arbitrariness on the part of the government whether
committed by the legislature, the executive or the judiciary.
Its purpose is to protect every person from deprivation of
life, liberty or property without due process of law.
5.) When can taxation be used as an implement of

Police Power?
When State Funds are used to imposed higher regulatory
fees and licenses.
5. What are kinds of Due Process of Law?

a.)
Substantive DP Requires the intrinsic validity of

the law in interfering with the rights of the person to
his life, liberty or property.
Sison v. Ancheta
Ex. A law punishing rapists by castrating them is violative of

Substantive DP because the State has the right to protect
the life of a person. The law itself is invalid for it deprives a
persons right to life which includes his physical attributes.
BP Blg. 135: Tax on Citizens and Residents
Cases: Agustin v. Edu & Southern Hemisphere v. ATC
Case Doctrines on Taxation
Equality and uniformity in Taxation means that all taxable

articles or kinds of property of the same class shall be taxed
at the same rate. The taxing power has the authority to
make reasonable and natural classifications for purposes of
taxation.
b.)
Procedural DP Requires notice and hearing.

Hears before it condemns, which proceeds upon
inquiry and renders judgment only after trial.
Pascual v. Secretary
Cases: Webb v. De Leon, People v. Teehankee, Ang Tibay

v. CIR, Ateneo v. Capulong and Go v. Letran
Sec. 1-C of RA No. 920 appropriates Php 85,000 for the

repair and construction of Pasig Feeder Roads
Case Doctrine on Due Process
It is a general rule that the legislature is without the power to

appropriate public revenue for anything but a public
purpose.
Southern Hemisphere v. ATC
Lladoc v. CIR

Petitioners assail the Human Security Act of 2007 for being
intrinsically vague and impermissibly broad the definition of
terrorism.
a. There is an impartial court or tribunal clothed with

judicial power to hear and determine the matters
before it;
There is a violation of Due Process when a law is vague or

ambiguous. In Due Process, one must know the law clearly
and what is prohibited by law.
b. Jurisdiction is properly acquired over the person of the

defendant and over the property which is the subject
matter of the proceeding;
Void for Vagueness Rule When a statute forbids or

requires the doing of an act in terms so vague that man of
common intelligence must necessarily guess as to its
meaning and differ as its application, that law is deemed
VOID.
c.
Fourth Meeting: January 19, 2016

1. What is the Bill of Rights (BOR)?
The BOR guarantees that there are certain areas of a
persons life, liberty and property which governmental power
may not touch (Bernas).
A declaration and enumeration of a persons rights and
privileges which the Constitution is designed to protect
against violations by the government (De Leon).
2. Who grants the BOR?
The State through its Constitution grants the BOR.
3. What if there is no BOR?
The people have natural rights.
4. What are the grounds for the Mandatory Inhibitions
of a Judge?
Sec. 1 Disqualification of Judges No judge or judicial
officer shall sit in any case in which he or his wife or child is
peculiarly interested as heir, legatee, creditor or otherwise,
or in which he is related to either party within the sixth
degree of consanguinity or affinity or to counsel within the
fourth degree, computed according to the rules of the civil
law, or in which he has been executor, administrator,
guardian, trustee or counsel on in which he has presided in
any inferior court when his ruling or decision is the subject
or review, without the written consent of all parties in
interest, signed by them and entered upon the record.
A judge may, in the exercise of his sound discretion,
disqualify himself from sitting in a case, for just or valid
reasons other than those mentioned above.
5. What are the requirements of Procedural Due
Process in Judicial Proceedings?
The defendant must be given an opportunity to be

heard;
d. The judgment was rendered upon lawful hearing and

based on evidence adduced.
6. What is an impartial court?
7. What are the requirements of Procedural Due
Process in Administrative Proceedings?
As held in Ang Tibay v. CIR, the requirements of Procedural
Due Process in Administrative Proceedings are as follows:
a. Right to hearing it includes right to present ones case
and submit evidence to support thereof;
b. The tribunal or body or any of its judges must act on its
own independent consideration of the law and facts of
the controversy;
c. The tribunal must consider the evidence presented;
d. Evidence presented must be substantial which means
relevant evidence as a reasonable mind would accept
as adequate to support a conclusion;
e. The decision must have something to support itself;
f.
The decision must be based on evidence presented

during hearing or at least contained in the record and
disclosed by the parties and;
g. The decision must be rendered in a manner that the

parties can know the various issues involved and the
reason for the decision rendered.
8. What are the requirements for Procedural Due
Process in Academic Settings?
As held in ADMU v. Capulong, the requirements for
Procedural Due Process in Academic Settings are as
follows:

a. The students must be informed in writing of the nature
and cause of any accusation against them;
b. That they shall have the right to answer the charges
against them with the assistance of counsel, if desired;
c.
They shall be informed of the evidence against them;
d. They shall have the right to adduce evidence on their

own behalf;
a.
b.
c.
d.
It must be based on substantial distinctions;

It must be germane to the purposes of the law;
It must not be limited to existing conditions only;
It must apply equally to all members of the class.
Case Doctrines in EPC:

Villegas v. Hio Chiong Tsai Pao Ho
Cayat
Dumlao
Himagan
e. The evidence must be duly considered by the

investigating committee or official designated by the
school authorities to hear and decide the case.
Biraogo v. PTC
Case Doctrines in Due Process of Law:
International School of Manila v. Quisumbing
PBMEO v. PBMC
Ormoc Sugar Company
Primacy of human rights over property rights is recognized

because these freedoms are delicate and vulnerable, as
well as supremely precious in our society and the threat of
sanctions may deter their exercise almost as potently as the
actual application of sanctions, they need breathing space
to survive permitting government regulation only with
narrow specificity.
Philippine Judges Association v. Prado
Republic v. Sandiganbayan
Ichong v. Hernandez
Ynot v. IAC
Almonte v. Vasquez
Whitelight v. City of Manila

3. What is the right against Unreasonable Searches
and Seizures?
4. What are the requirements of a valid Search
Warrant?
5. What is the meaning of Probable Cause as to SWs
and as to Was?
Alonte v. Savellano
Case Doctrines in Searches and Seizures:
People v. Teehankee
People v. Marti
Agustin v. Edu
Stonehill
SJS v. DDB
Soliven vs. Makasiar
Aniag v. COMELEC
Burgos v. Chief of Staff
Go v. Letran
Remman Enterprises
Sixth Meeting: January 26, 2016
Webb v. De Leon
Quiz
Fifth Meeting: January 23, 2016
1. When can there be a valid warrantless arrest?
1. What is the Concept of EPC?

All persons or things similarly situated should be treated
alike, both as to right conferred and responsibilities
imposed.
2. What is the test for a valid classification?
a. When the person to be arrested has committed, is

actually committing, or is attempting an offense;
b. When an offense has just been committed and he has
probable cause to believe that based on personal
knowledge of facts or circumstances that the person to
be arrested has committed it;

c.
When a person to be arrested is an escapee or

detention prisoner. (ROC, Rule 113, Sec. 5)
d. Membership in organizations like NPA is a continuing

offense, thus a person can be arrested at anytime.
(Umil v. Ramos)
e. When the right is waived by the person arrested,
provided that he knew of such right and knowingly
decided not to invoke it.
An order in writing issued in the name of the People of the

Philippines signed by a judge and directed to a peace
officer, commanding him to search for personal property
described therein and bring it before the court.
2. Who can issue a Search Warrant? Can a Justice of
the Supreme Court issue a SW?
A judge can issue a SW.
3. Could cabinet officials issue a WOA?
No, only a judge can issue a SW.
2. When can there be a valid search without a

warrant?
4. What are the difference between a SW and a WOA?
a. When the right has been voluntarily waived;
5. Discuss the difference between the case of People

v. Mengote and People v. Posadas.
b. A person caught in flagrante delicto as an incident to a

lawful arrest, provided search is contemporaneous to
arrest and within permissible area of search;(ROC, Rule
126, Sec.13)
c.
Searches of vessel and aircraft for violation of fishery,

immigration and customs laws;
d. Searches of automobiles at borders or constructive

borders for violation of immigration and smuggling laws;
e. Inspection of buildings and other premises for the
enforcement of fire, sanitary and building permits;
f.
Visual search at checkpoints (Vamonte v. De Villa);
g. Conduct of aerial target zoning and saturation drive in

the exercise of military powers of the President;
h. When there is a genuine reason to stop and frisk in the
light of the police officers experience and surrounding
conditions to warrant a belief that the person detained
has weapons concealed;
i.
Where prohibited articles are in plain view;
j.
Doctrine of Exigent Circumstances under urgency and

exigency of the moment, a SW should be lawfully
dispensed with.
6. What is the doctrine of Stop and Frisk?

When there is a genuine reason to Stop and Frisk in light of
the police officers experience and surrounding conditions to
warrant belief that the person detained has weapons
concealed.
Purpose: To prevent the unbridled discretion of a Police
officer
7. A standing near a convenient store was looking
from left to right for 4 mins.
8. Within the presence of a police officer: A crime was
committed 10 meters away from As house.
9. Searches in vehicles is limited to what purpose?
10. Who could allow a consented search? A owns a
condo unit. As gf B, was guest of A for a week.
While A was at work, police asked B if they could
search the condo unit of A. B agreed. Is the search
valid?
CASE DOCTRINES IN SEARCHES AND SEIZURES:

Mata v. Bayona
Requisites of Search Warrant
Soliven v. Makasiar
Seventh Meeting: February 2, 2016

1. What is a Search Warrant?
20th Century Fox

Unilab

Del Rosario
Posadas
Mengote
Musa
Umil v. Ramos
People v. Malmsted
Sucro
7. Does the Anti-Wire Tapping Act require that a

recording device be used in order to violate a
persons RTP? What if you only heard them?
No, it does not require a recording device to be used.
This law prohibits any person, not being authorized by
all parties to any private communication or spoken word
to tap any wire or cable or by using any other device or
arrangement to secretly overhear, intercept, or record
the same or to communicate the content thereof to any
other person.
People v. Amminudin
Al Ghoul v. CA
Eighth Meeting: February 9, 2016
1. Incidental to lawful arrest.
A person caught in flagrante delicto as an incident to a
lawful arrest, provided search us contemporaneous to
arrest and within permissible area of search.
A being in possession of drugs was arrested.
2. Discuss the Plain View Doctrine.
Objects within the sight of an officer who has a right to
be in a position to have that view are subject to seizure
and may be presented as evidence.
3. What is the meaning of communication?
Information that is transferred.
4. During Atty. Adobos class, his student, Menudo,
secretly recorded the class discussion. Is that a
violation of Atty. Adobos right to privacy?
Yes. There is no consent on the part of Atty. Adobo.
5. What are the forms of correspondence covered in
the Anti-Wire Tapping Act?
8. Married couple Marian Rivera and Dingdong

Dantes were shouting at each other. Passerby,
Karylle Yuzon heard them and told her manager,
Boy Abunda, about their verbal tussle. Boy
Abunda wrote an article about the said incident.
Did Karylle and Tito Boy violate the RTP of Marian
and Dingdong?
No. When the parties are shouting at each other, there is no
private communication.
9. Piper is a prisoner, her boyfriend, Peter, sends
snail mail to her. Prison Warden Pepper, scans all
mails first before it gets to Piper. Is that a
violation of Pipers ROP?
Detainees have diminished expectation of privacy rights.
Security officers may undertake reasonable measures to
secure their safety and prevent escaping detainees.
CASE DOCTRINES UNDER RIGHT OF PRIVACY
People v. Marti
Zulueta
Ramirez v. CA
Letters, messages, telephone calls, telegrams and other

analogous to the foregoing.
Ople v. Torres
6. Avah Chen was talking to her boyfriend, Neo
Domingo. Avahs sister, Avery Chen, recorded
their conversation through their telephone
extension line. Did Avery violate Avahs Right to
Privacy?
NO, a telephone extension line is not among the
devices covered by RA 4200.
Ninth Meeting: February 13, 2016

1. What is the test on Privacy?
a. A person has exhibited an actual expectation of
privacy;

b. The expectation is one that society is prepared to
recognize as reasonable.
2. Elements of the FOE.
c.) Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious

literary, artistic, political or scientific value.
7. Is a nude painting obscene?
a.) Freedom from Punishment
No, it has an artistic value.
Freedom of speech includes freedom after speech.
8. Is a nude picture obscene?
b.) Freedom from Censorship
Censorship conditions the exercise of the FOS upon the

prior approval of the government.
3. What is the Difference between the Freedom of the
Press and the Freedom to produce Movies?
Press
Movies
9. What if Mr. Roboto compiles pictures of nude

paintings and publishes it as a coffee table book, is
that obscene?
10. What is libel?
The act of publishing a false statement that causes people
to have a bad opinion of someone.
4. Discuss the 3 tests on the FOE.

a. Dangerous Tendency Rule
If the words uttered create a dangerous tendency which the
State has a right to prevent, then such words are
punishable.
b. Clear and Present Danger Rule
Whether the words used are used in such circumstances
and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present
danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that
the State has a right to prevent? If they do, the speaker
shall be punished.
c. Conflict of Interests Tests
When a particular conduct is regulated in the interest of
public order and the regulation results in an indirect,
conditional partial abridgment of speech, the duty of the
courts is to determine which of the two conflicting interests
demands the greater protection under the particular
circumstances present.
5. What is Obscenity?
Utterly without any redeeming social value.
6. What is the test of Obscenity?
a.) Whether the average person applying contemporary
community standards, would find that the work, taken
as a whole appeals to prurient interests;
b.) Whether the work depicts or describes in a patently
offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by
the applicable law; and,
A malicious defamation, expressed in writing, printing or by

signs or pictures or the like tending to blacken the memory
of one who is dead, impeach honesty or defects of one who
is alive which pose him to public hatred.
11. Why is libel considered as an unprotected speech?
It is considered as a crime and punishable under the RPC.
12. What is the Doctrine of Fair Comment?
The people have a right to scrutinize and comment or
condemn the conduct of their chosen representatives in the
government. As long as their comments are made in good
faith and with justifiable ends, they are insulated from
prosecution or damage suits for defamation even if such
views are found to be inaccurate or erroneous.
13. Discuss the OBrien test.
A government regulation is justified when:
a. It is within the constitutional power of the government;
b. It furthers an important or substantial government
interest;
c. The government interest is unrelated to the
suppression of free expression;
d. The incident restriction on alleged freedom of speech
and expression is no greater than is essential to the
furtherance of that interest.
14. Who is a Public Figure?
A person who by his accomplishments fame or mode of
living or by adopting a profession or calling which gives the
public a legitimate interest in his doings, affairs and
character who became a public personage.

15. Content Neutral v. Content Based
SWS
Content Neutral
Restraint is aimed at the
message or idea of the
expression
CASE DOCTRINES UNDER ASSEMBLY AND PETITION
Strict Scrutiny
Content Based
Restraint aims to regulate
the time, place and manner
of the expression in public
places
OBrien Test
16. What is the importance of the Right to Assembly

and Petition?
Public issues are better resolved after an exchange of views
among citizens in a meeting for such purpose.
17. What are the instances when you are not required
to a get a permit for a rally?
Meeting is to be held in a private place, in the campus of a
government owned and operated educational institution or
in a freedom park.
18. What are the tests to determine the lawfulness of an
assembly?
a. Purpose for which it is held regardless of the auspices
under which it is organized;
b. Auspices Test inquires into the nature of the people
composing the assembly.
CASE DOCTRINES UNDER THE RIGHT OF PRIVACY
Disini
Bagatsing
Primacias v. Fuguso
Tenth Meeting: February 16, 2016

1. What are the two aspects of the Freedom of
Religion?
a. Free Exercise Clause
The freedom to believe and to act on such belief.
A crime is a crime whatever religious practice you have.
For instance, offering the life of a virgin to please gods.
b. Non-Establishment Clause
The State must be neutral. It must not favor any
religion.
Aglipay case. Postage stamps depicting Philippines as
the site of a significant religious event is not a violation
of the Non-establishment for it seeks to advertise the
Philippines to the world.
2. What is the meaning of Religion?
It is any specific system or belief, worship, conduct, etc,
often involving a code of ethics and philosophy; profession
pf faith to an active power that binds and elevates man to
his creator.
Vivares
3. Does religion require belief need to believe in God

or a Supreme Being?
CASE DOCTRINES UNDER THE FOE
No.
Ayer
INC
ALARCON
CABANSAG V. FERNANDEZ
The SC has the power of supervision over all lawyers. If you
are a lawyer, your rights to FOE are limited compared to an
individual. It is the duty of a lawyer as an officer of the court
not to undermine the judiciary.
PITA
Borjal
Moises Padilla
4. Is Taoism, Agnostics, Atheism a religion?

5. What is Benevolent Neutrality Test?
It is an approach that looks further than the secular
purposes of government action and examines the effect of
these actions on religious exercise; the Court will strive to
accommodate religious beliefs and practices when it can
within flexible constitutional limits.
Ex. It is provided in our laws that persons below 18 years of
age cannot drink liquor but through this test the State
accommodates a person below 18 years of age to drink
wine for his communion in his religion.

6. What is the Strict Scrutiny Test?
It examines only whether government action is for a secular
purpose and does not consider inadvertent burden on
religious exercise; a rigid reading of the principle of
separation church and state.
7. What are the steps in weighing the States interest
and religious freedom? How was it applied to the
case of Estrada v. Escritor.
a.) Has the statute or government action created a
burden on the free exercise of religion?
Yes, the burden on respondent in the case at bar is even
greater as the price she has to pay for her employment is
not only her religious precept but also her family which, by
the Declaration Pledging Faithfulness, stands honorable
before God and men.
b.) Is there a sufficiently compelling state interest to
justify this infringement of religious liberty?
The states interest is the preservation of the integrity of the
judiciary by maintaining among its ranks a high standard of
morality and decency. There is nothing in the OCAs
(Office of the Court Administrator) memorandum to the
Court that demonstrates how this interest is so compelling
that it should override respondents plea of religious
freedom. Indeed, it is inappropriate for the complainant, a
private person, to present evidence on the compelling
interest of the state. The burden of evidence should be
discharged by the proper agency of the government which
is the Office of the Solicitor General.
c.) Has the state in achieving its legitimate purposes
used the least intrusive means possible so that the
free exercise is not infringed any more necessary to
achieve the legitimate goal of the State?
2.) Can the Mayor of Manila, exile all lepers to a

leprosarium in Davao without Court Order?
No, ours is a government of laws and not of men. Without a
court order, the Mayor of Manila cannot exile all lepers to
Davao.
3.) What is the purpose of Sec. 8: Right to Form

Associations?
The organization can be used as a vehicle for the
expression of views that have a bearing on public welfare.
4.) Discuss the non-impairment clause?
Sec. 10: No law impairing the obligation of contracts shall
be passed.
Purpose: To safeguard the integrity of valid contractual
agreements against unwarranted interference by the Sate.
Contract: Lawful agreements on property or property rights,
whether real or personal, tangible or intangible.
Impairment: There is impairment when the law retroacts so
as to affect the existing contracts concluded before its
enactment. Impairment is material when the original rights
of either parties are changed to their prejudiced.
5.) Can a Franchise be subject to the non-impairment
clause?
No, franchises partakes of the nature of a grant which is
beyond the purview of the non-impairment clause of the
Constitution.
Ex. MSL Mining Corp was granted by the government, a
franchise to operate for 10 years. Subsequently, a law was
passed, prohibiting all acts of mining. Can the government
validly do that without violating the non-impairment clause?
Eleventh Meeting: February 23, 2016
Yes, because franchises are not protected by the nonimpairment clause, only obligations of contracts are
protected.
1.) A strong typhoon will be coming to the province of

Dagupan (located near bodies of waters). Can the
LGU asked the inhabitants of the said place to
transfer inland?
6.) Discuss the concept of Free Access to Courts.
Yes, the liberty of abode can be impaired upon lawful order

of the court and within the limits provided by law. LGUs in
the interest of public safety can validly do this without a
court order.
Sec. 11, Art. 3: The free access to the courts and quasijudicial bodies and adequate legal assistance shall not be
denied to any person by reason of poverty.
Cases Discussed:

Silverio v. CA
Art. 3, Sec. 6 of the Constitution should by no means be
construed as delimiting the inherent power of the Courts to
use all means necessary to carry their orders into effect in
criminal cases pending before them.
Manotoc v. CA
Manotoc who was facing criminal charges for estafa was
bailed out. He filed motions to leave for the US, however,
the Court denied it because one of the conditions of a bail
bond is that he would make himself available at any time
whenever the Court requires his presence.
a convenient substitute for money; it forms part of the

banking system and therefore, not entirely free from
regulatory power of the State.
Mijares v. Ranada
Petitioners invoke Section 11, Article III of the Bill of Rights
of the Constitution, which provides that Free access to the
courts and quasi-judicial bodies and adequate legal
assistance shall not be denied to any person by reason of
poverty, a mandate which is essentially defeated by the
required exorbitant filing fee. The adjudicated amount of the
filing fee, as arrived at by the RTC, was characterized as
indisputably unfair, inequitable, and unjust.
FINAL TERM
Twelfth Meeting: March 12, 2016
Laws Recited: Secs. 12, 15 and 17
Yap v. CA
1. What is Custodial Investigation?
To fix the bail at an amount equivalent to the civil liability

which Yap was charged is to permit the impression that the
amount paid as bail is an exaction of the civil liability that
the accused is charged of; this is not allowed because bail
is not intended as a punishment nor a satisfaction of a civil
liability/
a.) It is any questioning initiated by law enforcement

officers after a person has been taken into custody or
otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any
significant way (Miranda v. Arizona).
Marcos v. Manglapus
The SC sustained the refusal of the government to allow
Marcos to return to the Philippines on the ground that it
would endanger national security.
In re: Atty. Edillon
To compel a lawyer to be a member of the IBP is not
violative of his constitutional right to associate. Integration
does not make a lawyer a member of any group of which he
is not already a member. He became a member of the Bar,
the moment he passed the bar exams. The only compulsion
to which he is subjected is the payment of IBP dues.
Victoriano v. Elizalde
The right to join a union includes the right to refrain from
joining it.
Ortigas v. Feati Bank
Contract v. Resolution. The SC ruled that the zoning
resolution had been adopted in the exercise of the police
power, which was superior to the impairment clause which
could validly modify the contract.
Lozano v. Martinez
Checks cannot be categorized as contracrs. It is a mere
instrument, which in this modern day and age, has become
b.) It shall include the practice of issuing an invitation to a

person who is investigated in connection, with an
offense he is suspected to have committed, without
prejudice to the liability of the inviting officer for any
violation of the law (R.A. No. 7438).
c.) A critical pre-trial stage when police investigation is no
longer a general inquiry into an unsolved crime but has
begun to focus on a particular person as a suspect who
had been taken into custody by the police who carry out
a process of interrogation and profound questions to the
person to elicit incriminating statements (Bernas).
d.) The time when the investigation is no longer a general
inquiry into an unsolved crime but begun to focus on a
particular suspect, the suspect has been taken into
police custody out a process of interrogations that
lender itself to eliciting statements (Escobedo v. Illinois).
2. When does a person need a counsel in a police lineup?
GR: A police line-up is not considered part of any custodial
investigation because it is conducted before that stage of
investigation is reached (Gamboa v. Cruz).
ER: From the moment the investigating officer starts to ask
questions to illicit information or confession or admission,
the accused shall have the right to counsel.

After the start of the custodial investigation, any
identification of an uncounseled accused made in a police
line-up is inadmissible.
In Galman v. Pamaran, the SC ruled that the protection

covered persons not yet in custody but already under
investigation.
Rationale: The process has not yet shifted from

investigatory to accusatory stage and it is usually the
witness / complainant who is interrogated and who gives
statement in the course of the line-up.
In People v. Dela Cruz, the right begins to operate only

when the person is taken into custody and to whom the
police would then direct interrogatory questions which tend
to elicit incriminating statements.
13th Meeting: March 15, 2016
Rationale: What the Constitution bars is the compulsory

disclosure of incriminating facts and circumstances.
Law Recited: Sec. 12

1.) What are the rights provided in Sec. 12?
a) Right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to
counsel;
b) Right to remain silent;
c) Right to be reminded that if he waives his right to
remain silent, anything he says can and will be used
against him;
d) Right to have competent and independent counsel
preferably of his own choice;
e) Right to be provided with counsel, if the person cannot
afford the services of one;
f) No torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation or any
other means which vitiate the free will shall be used
against him;
g) Secret detention place, solitary, incommunicado or
other similar forms of detention are prohibited;
h) Confessions or admissions obtained in violation of
these rights are inadmissible as evidence.
2.) Mr. A is under the custody of the police for murder,

he was provided a counsel who works for the PNP.
Said counsel obtained an Extrajudicial Confession
from Mr. A, can it be used in court?
No, it cannot be used as admissible evidence in court
because Sec. 12 mandates that an accused has a right to
have competent and independent counsel preferably of his
own choice. A counsel who works for the PNP has interest
adverse to Mr. A, thus he cannot be considered as
independent counsel.
3.) When Custodial Investigation does starts?

It starts when the investigation is no longer a general inquiry
into an unsolved crime but has begun to focus on a
particular suspect, the suspect has been taken into police
custody, the police carry out the process of interrogations
that will lead to eliciting statements.
4.) What does

evidence?
Custodial
Investigation
cover
as
Testimonial evidence which are confessions and admissions

of the accused against himself. (Ho Wai Pang v. People)
5.) What is the difference between a confession and an
admission?
Confession a written or oral acknowledgment of guilt by a
party accused of an offense.
Admission a statement or action by which someone
admits his fault.
6.) Does re-enactments entitle the accused to have
counsel?
Yes, re-enactments amounts to disclosure of incriminatory
facts, hence, it is covered by the inhibition in Sec. 12.
7.) When can arresting officers inform the accused of
his Miranda rights?
At the moment of the arrest.
8.) What is the Fruit of the Poisonous Tree?
Illegally seized evidence is obtained as a direct result of an
illegal act.
Cases Discussed:
People v. Bolanos
In the police vehicle, Bolanos admitted that he killed
Pagdalian. Such EJC is inadmissible as evidence because
he was not informed of his rights under Art. 3, Sec. 12 of the
Constitution.
People v. Andan
Andan raped and killed a nursing student. Without the
assistance of a counsel, he admitted his guilt to the Mayor
and to news reporters. The EJC is admissible as evidence.
The constitutional procedures on custodial investigation do
not apply to a spontaneous statement, not elicited by the
authorities but given in an ordinary manner whereby Andan
orally admitted having committed the crime.

People v. Dy
Dy told Pat. Padilla that he killed a Swiss tourist using a
caliber .38 Wesson, which he surrendered to the latter.
Such is admissible evidence against Dy.
RES GESTAE RULE Any person otherwise competent as
a witness, who heard the confession is competent to testify
as to the substance of what he heard and understood of all
of it.
People v. Judge Ayson
Ramos was charged by PAL with Estafa. Judge Ayson did
not accept as competent evidence the EJC of Ramos as it
was not made the assistance of counsel. The SC held that
the rights under custodial investigation are not available in
administrative proceedings.
Laws Recited: Secs. 12, 13 & 14
Yes, his parent or guardian who is of legal age and in

charge of his person can waive his right.
b. The younger brother of the above mentioned
person.
Yes, as long as his younger brother is has legal capacity, is
of age and no other person has a better right over him.
5.)
GR: Before conviction, all persons shall be bailable by

sufficient sureties.
ER: The said rule shall not apply to those charged with
offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua when evidence
of guilt is strong.
Rationale: An accused in presumed innocent until his guilt
has been proven beyond reasonable doubt by final
judgment.
6.)
1.)
Can you waive your rights under custodial

investigation? If yes, what rights can be
waived?
Yes. The Rights under Sec. 12, which cannot be waived are
the following:
a. The right to be informed of his right to remain silent
and to counsel;
b. The right to counsel when making the waiver of the
right to remain silent or to counsel.
2.)
How do you waive your rights under custodial

investigation?
a. When making a waiver, it must be in writing and in the

presence of counsel.
b. In EJC it must be expressly and voluntarily given by
the accused in writing with the assistance of the
counsel.
3.)
Is making a waiver a personal right?
No, a third person can another persons right provided that

the latter was informed of such and that is can be done as
provided in law.
4.)
Can the following waive their rights?
a. An adult person with a mind of a 14 year old.
What is the right provided in Sec. 13? Discuss.

The Right to Bail.
What is Bail?
It is the security given for the release of a person in custody

of law, furnished by him or a bondsman to guarantee his
appearance before any court as required under conditions
specified under the rules of court.
7.)
Who can post bail?
a.) As a matter of right - a person charged with an offense

not
punishable
by
reclusion
perpetua,
life
imprisonement or death.
b.) When Discretionary the court may allow the accused
to continue on provisional liberty after the same bail
bond during the period to appeal subject to the consent
of the bondsman.
8.)
Who cannot post bail?
The Right to post bail shall be denied to any person
charged with a capital offense or an offense punishable by
relusion perpetua, or life imprisonment or death and
evidence of guilt is strong.
9.)
What is a capital offense?
An offense which under the law existing at the time of its

commission and of the application for admission to bail,
may be punished with death.
10.)
Differentiate Reclusion
imprisonment.
Reclusion Perpetua
1.
The duration is
from 20 years and 1 day to
Perpetua
from
life
Life Imprisonment
1. Indefinite in duration;
2. Imposed by Special

40 years;
2.
Penalty imposed
by the RPC;
3. It carries accessory
penalties.
11.)
Can a person post bail, without a WOA?
No. it is only available to persons who are detained even

before formal charges are made.
12.)
RECOGNIZANCE
It is an obligation of record,
entered into before some
court or magistrate duly
authorized to take it, with
the condition to do some
particular act.
What if a person is charged and convicted in

violation Dangerous Drugs Law for 100 kilos of
shabu, can he post bail?
No, since it is punishable by reclusion perpetua.

14.)
Can a person
Proceedings?
post
bail
in
Deportation
Can a person
Proceedings?
post
bail
in
Extradition
An extradite has the right to apply for bail. Provided that:

a. He is in not flight-risk or a danger to the community
b. There
exists
humanitarian
and
compelling
circumstances
16.)
What is excessive bail?
A bail larger than the amount that is necessary to ensure a
person will not jump bail and will appear in court.
17.)
18.)
Nature and circumstances of offense;

Penalty for the offense;
Character and reputation of accused;
Probability of his appearance at trail
Age and health of accused;
Weight of evidence against him;
Forfeiture of other bail;
Whether he was a fugitive from justice when
arrested;
Pendency of other cases where he is on bail.
A killed B. He was convicted of Homicide and
was allowed to post bail for P100, 000. A only
has 1 peso. Is that considered as excessive
bail?
No, the nature of the crime which is homicide

19.)
What are the rights of the accused before trial?

a.) To remain silent and to counsel;
b.) To be informed thereof;
c.) Not to be subjected to force, violence, threat or
intimidation which vitiates free will;
d.) To have evidence obtained in violation of these
rights as inadmissible.

ME were given and answers were explained.
1.) When is evidence of guilt considered strong?
No, as a general rule the constitutional right to bail is

available only in criminal proceedings.
15.)
j.
What is Recognizance? Differentiate it from bail.
BAIL BOND
It is an obligation under
seal given by the accused
with one or more sureties
and made payable to the
proper officer with the
condition to be void upon
performance
by
the
accused of such acts as he
may legally be required to
perform.
13.)
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
Laws;
3. Does
not
carry
accessory penalties.
What are the considerations of a judge in

imposing bail?
The grant or denial of bail in capital offense hinges on the

strength of the evidence of guilt. This requires that the trial
court to conduct bail hearings wherein both the
prosecution and the defense are afforded sufficient
opportunity to present their respective evidence. The
burden of proof lies with the prosecution to show the
evidence of guilt is strong. But the determination of whether
the evidence of guilt is strong is a matter of judicial
discretion. Though not absolute nor beyond control, the
discretion of the trial court must be sound and exercised
within reasonable grounds.
2.) In an application for bail, is a hearing required?

Ex. For an offense punishable by a day, is an
accused required to wait for 4 days upon the notice
of hearing to post bail?
Sec. 3, Rule 114 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure states
that:
a. Financial ability of the accused;

All persons in custody shall be admitted to bail as a matter
of right, with sufficient sureties, or released on recognizance
as prescribed by law or this Rule (a) before or after
conviction by the Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial
Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, or Municipal Circuit
Trial Court, and (b) before conviction by the Regional Trial
Court of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion
perpetua, or life imprisonment.
3.) Why is rebellion bailable, while murder is not
(absorbed in rebellion)?
Bail cannot be denied to a person accused of rebellion
because the penalty attached thereto is prision mayor and a
fine not exceeding P 20,000. It is therefore a bailable
offense under Sec. 13, Art. 3 of the Constitution. (People v.
Judge Donato)
Case Discussed:
Basco v. Rapatalo
If the denial of bail is authorized in capital offenses, it is only
in theory that the proof being strong, the defendant would
flee, if he has the opportunity, rather than face the verdict of
the court. Hence the exception to the fundamental right to
be bailed should be applied in direct ratio to the extent of
probability of evasion of the prosecution. In practice, bail
has also been used to prevent the release of an accused
who might otherwise be dangerous to society or whom the
judges might not want to release.

1.) In extradition proceedings can an extradite post
bail?
Yes. As held in Hongkong v. Olalia, the Phil. Govt has the
obligation of ensuring the individual has the right to liberty
and due process and should not deprive the extradite of his
right to bail provided that certain standards are met.
a.) Accused is heard by a court of competent jurisdiction;

b.) Accused us proceeded against under the orderly
processes of law;
c.) Accused is given notice and opportunity to be heard;
d.) Judgment rendered was within the authority of
constitutional law.
4.) Rihanna held in her hands a phone which she
brought from her friend Nicki Minaj. She did not
know that it was stolen from Beyonce. There arises
a disputable presumption that Rihanna stole
Beyonces phone, is that violative of Rihannas
constitutional right to be presumed innocent until
the contrary is proven?
The presumption under the ROC establishes only a prima
facie presumption, thus, giving the accused the opportunity
to present evidence to rebut it. But again, this is only prima
facie and rebuttable presumption of innocence.
5.) What are the rights of the accused during trial?
a.)
To refuse to be witness against himself;
b.)
Not to have prejudice imputed on him as a result of
such refusal;
c.)
To testify on his behalf;
d.)
To cross-examination, while testifying to refuse
questions which tend to incriminate him for some crime
other than the present charge.
6.) Why are delayed trials dismissed?

As Atty. Pe said, kapag ang prosecutor humihingi ng
postponements without just cause violative na yun ng right
to have a speedy trial. Conde v. Rivera
***It can be inferred that the Phil. Govt has the burden of
proof to prove that the extraditee met the standards****
As Justice Laurel said, the government should be the last to

set an example of delay and oppression in the
administration of justice. It is the moral and legal obligation
of the Court to see that criminal proceedings come to an
end (People vs. Calamba 63 Phil 496).
2.) What are the conditions for an Extraditee to be

allowed to post bail?
7.) What are the purposes of the Right to be informed

of the Nature and Cause of Accusation?
As held in US v. Puruganan, these conditions are:

a.) The applicant will not be a flight risk or a danger to the
community;
b.) There exist special humanitarian and compelling
circumstances.
3.) What are the requisites of Criminal Due Process?
a.) To furnish the accused with such a description of the

charge against him as will enable him to make a
defense;
b.) To avail himself of his conviction or acquittal for
protection against further prosecution for the same
cause;
c.) To inform the court of the facts alleged, so that it may
decide whether they are sufficient in law to support a
conviction, if one should be had.

Cases Discussed:
Galman v. Sandiganbayan
An impartial court, which is the very essence of due
process of law. The People are entitled to due process
which requires an impartial tribunal and an unbiased
prosecutor. If the State is deprived of a fair opportunity to
prosecute and convict because certain material evidence is
suppressed by the prosecution and the tribunal is not
impartial, then the entire proceedings would be null and
void.
SEC. 4. Judgment in case of variance between allegation

and proof. -- When there is variance between the offense
charged in the complaint or information, and that proved or
established by the evidence, and the offense as charged is
included in or necessarily includes the offense proved, the
accused shall be convicted of the offense proved included
in that which is charged, or of the offense charged included
in that which is proved.
Note: It can be inferred from above that there could be a
conviction even if there is a variance in the information
charged.
Marquez v. COMELEC
17th Meeting: April 5, 2016
The confinement of the term fugitive from justice in Article

73 of the Rules and Regulations Implementing the LGC of
1991 to refer only to a person who has been convicted by
final judgment is an inordinate and undue circumscription
of the law.
1.) Could a corporate entity invoke the right to be

presumed innocent until the contrary is proven?
Dumlao v. COMELEC
An accusation, according to the fundamental law, is not
synonymous with guilt. The challenged proviso contravenes
the constitutional presumption of innocence, as a candidate
is disqualified from running from public office on the ground
alone that charges have been filed against him before a civil
or military tribunal. It condemns before one is fully heard. In
ultimate effect, except as to the degree of proof, no
distinction is made between a person convicted of acts of
disloyalty and one against whom charges have been filed
for such acts, as both of them would be ineligible to run for
public office. A person disqualified to run for public office on
the ground that charges have been filed against him is
virtually placed in the same category as a person already
convicted of a crime with the penalty of arresto, which
carries with it the accessory penalty of suspension of the
right to hold office during the term of the sentence.
People v. Dramayo and People v. Quitlong
Conspiracy must be alleged, not just inferred in the
information on which basis an accused can aptly enter his
plea, a matter that is not to be confused or likened to the
adequacy of evidence that may be required to prove it.
People v. Pecho
What determines the real nature and cause of accusation
against an accused is the actual recital facts stated in the
information or complaint and not the caption or preamble of
the information or complaint nor the specification of the
provision of the law alleged to have been violated they
being conclusions of law. An incorrect caption is not a fatal
mistake.
Section 4, Rule 120 of the Rules of Court thus provides:
No, as held in FISL v. CA, a corporate entity has no

personality to invoke the right to be presumed innocent
which right is available only on an individual who is accused
in a criminal case.
2.) Are all rights under Sec. 14, Art. 3 available only to
natural persons?
The Rights of the Accused are considered as individual
rights accorded only to natural persons.
3.) What is the Equipoise Rule?
When pieces of evidence of both sides are equally
balanced, the constitutional presumption of innocence
should tilt the scales in favor of the accused. (Corpus v.
People)
4.) When is the Right to a Speedy Trial violated?
As held in Conde v. Rivera, People v. Flores and Binay v.
SB:
a.) When the proceedings is attended by vexatious,
capricious and oppressive delays;
b.) When unjustified postponements of the trial are asked
for and secured;
c.) When without cause or justifiable motive a long period
of time is allowed to elapse without the party having his
case tried.
5.) Give the salient points of the Speedy Trial Act of
1998.
Sec. 6. Time limit for trial. In criminal cases involving
persons charged of a crime, except those subject to the
Rules on Summary Procedure, or where the penalty
prescribed by law does not exceed six (6) months
imprisonment, or a fine of One thousand pesos (P1,000.00)
or both, irrespective of other imposable penalties, the justice

or judge shall, after consultation with the public prosecutor
and the counsel for the accused, set the case for
continuous trial on a weekly or other short-term trial
calendar at the earliest possible time so as to ensure
speedy trial. In no case shall the entire trial period exceed
one hundred eighty (180) days from the first day of trial,
except as otherwise authorized by the Chief Justice of the
Supreme Court pursuant to Sec. 3, Rule 22 of the Rules of
Court.
another session of the court, granted by a court in response

to a motion made by a party to a lawsuit. The entry into the
trial record of the adjournment of a case for the purpose of
formally evidencing it.
Sec. 7. Time limit between filing of information and

arraignment and between arraignment and trial. The
arraignment of an accused shall be held within thirty (30)
days from the filing of the information, or from the date the
accused has appeared before the justice, judge or court in
which the charge is pending, whichever date last occurs.
Thereafter, where a plea of not guilty is entered, the
accused shall have at least fifteen (15) days to prepare for
trial. Trial shall commence within thirty (30) days from
arraignment as fixed by the court.
(a) Whether the failure to grant such a continuance in the

proceeding would be likely to make a continuation of such
proceeding impossible, or result in a miscarriage of justice.
If the accused pleads not guilty to the crime charged,

he/she shall state whether he/she interposes a negative or
affirmative defense. A negative defense shall require the
prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond
reasonable doubt, while an affirmative defense may modify
the order of trial and require the accused to prove such
defense by clear and convincing evidence.
Sec. 8. Time limit following an order for new trial. If the

accused is to be tried again following an order of a court for
a new trial, the trial shall commence within thirty (30) days
from the date the order for a new trial becomes final, except
that the court retrying the case may extend such period but
in any case shall not exceed one hundred eighty (180) days
from the date the order for a new trial becomes final if
unavailability of witnesses or other factors resulting from
passage of time shall make trial within thirty (30) days
impractical.
Sec. 9. Extended time limit. Notwithstanding the
provisions of Sec. 7 of this Act, for the first twelve-calendarmonth period following its effectivity, the time limit with
respect to the period from arraignment to trial imposed by
Sec. 7 of this Act shall be one hundred eighty (180) days.
For the second twelve-month period the time limit shall be
one hundred twenty (120) days, and for the third twelvemonth period the time limit with respect to the period from
arraignment to trial shall be eighty (80) days.
6.) Give instances when the Court can grant a
Continuance.
Continuance - The adjournment or postponement of an
action pending in a court to a later date of the same or
Sec. 11. Factors for granting continuance. The factors,

among others, which a justice or judge shall consider in
determining whether to grant a continuance under
subparagraph (f) of Sec. 10 of this Act are as follows:
(b) Whether the case taken as a whole is so novel, so

unusual and so complex, due to the number of accused or
the nature of the prosecution or otherwise, that it is
unreasonable to expect adequate preparation within the
periods of time established by this Act.
No continuance under subparagraph (f) of Sec. 10 shall be
granted because of general congestion of the court's
calendar, or lack of diligent preparation or failure to obtain
available witnesses on the part of the public prosecutor.
7.) What is the Totality of Circumstances Test?

A totality of the circumstances standard suggests that there
is no single deciding factor, that one must consider all the
facts, the context, and conclude from the whole picture
whether there is probable cause, or whether an alleged
detention is really a detention, or whether a citizen acted
under color of law.
A test originally formulated to evaluate whether a
defendants constitutional rights were violated in the eliciting
of a confession. It concentrates on looking at all the
circumstances surrounding the alleged violation rather than
only one or two aspects, as had been the case before. It
had been used as a measure of whether a defendants
privilege against self incrimination had been violated, but
since the advent of the Miranda rule (1966), that use has
become obsolete. It is now used to determine whether a
defendant consented to a warrantless search, and whether
probable cause exists for the issuing of a search warrant.
Cases Discussed:
Senador v. People
Rule 110, Sec. 12 of the ROC mandates the correction of
information does not warrant dismissal.
In offenses against property:

a.) Generic error in the designation of the offended party
is a fatal and would result to acquittal.
b.) Specific error in the designation of the offended party
is immaterial and would not result to a fatal mistake.
People v. Tee
(b) The judge previously served as a lawyer or was a

material witness in the matter in controversy;
(c) The judge, or a member of his or her family, has an

economic interest in the outcome of the matter in
controversy;
Delay of less than 2 months is not an unreasonable lengthy

period of time.
Flores v. People
15 years delay. If the proceedings itself are deferred the trial
itself is necessarily delayed.
People v. Teehankee
Permissive publicity is not per se prejudicial to the right of
an accused to a fair trial. The mere exposure of judges to
publications and publicity stunts does not fatally affect their
impartiality.
Garcia v. Domingo
Aircon trial. There is no showing that the public was
excluded. The Right to a Public Trial is satisfied when the
accused can have his friends, relatives and counsel
present, no matter with what offense he may charged.
Mateo v. Villaluz
When a party subscribes before a judge an extra-judicial
statement purporting to describe the manner in which an
offense was committed, later on repudiated by him as a
product of intimidation in the course of having to testify
against petitioners, would negate that degree of objectivity
required of a judge hearing the case.
1.) What are the grounds for the Mandatory Inhibitions
of a Judge to consider him as impartial?
SEC. 5. Judges shall disqualify themselves from
participating in any proceedings in which they are unable to
decide the matter impartially or in which it may appear to a
reasonable observer that they are unable to decide the
matter impartially. Such proceedings include, but are not
limited to, instances where
(a) The judge has actual bias or prejudice concerning a

party or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts
concerning the proceedings;
(d) The judge served as executor, administrator, guardian,

trustee or lawyer in the case or matter in controversy, or a
former associate of the judge served as counsel during their
association, or the judge or lawyer was a material witness
therein;
(e) The judges ruling in a lower court is the subject of

review;
(f) The judge is related by consanguinity or affinity to a party

litigant within the sixth civil degree or to counsel within the
fourth civil degree; or
(g) The judge knows that his or her spouse or child has a
financial interest, as heir, legatee, creditor, fiduciary, or
otherwise, in the subject matter in controversy or in a party
to the proceeding, or any other interest that could be
substantially affected by the outcome of the proceedings;
Sec. 1 Disqualification of Judges No judge or judicial

officer shall sit in any case in which he or his wife or child is
peculiarly interested as heir, legatee, creditor or otherwise,
or in which he is related to either party within the sixth
degree of consanguinity or affinity or to counsel within the
fourth degree, computed according to the rules of the civil
law, or in which he has been executor, administrator,
guardian, trustee or counsel on in which he has presided in
any inferior court when his ruling or decision is the subject
or review, without the written consent of all parties in
interest, signed by them and entered upon the record.
A judge may, in the exercise of his sound discretion,
disqualify himself from sitting in a case, for just or valid
reasons other than those mentioned above.
2.) What do you mean by a Public Trial?
A public trial is when anyone interested in observing the
manner a judge conducts may do so.
Purpose: To prevent possible abuses which may be
committed against the accused.

AP: Para yung judge di gumawa ng kalokohan. JAJAJAJA.
Cases Discussed:
Mateo v. Villaluz
Robbery with Homicide. A party having subscribed before a
judge an extra-judicial statement purporting to describe the
manner in which an offense was committed, later on
repudiated by him as a product of intimidation in the course
of having been asked to testify against the petitioners
negates the degree of objectivity required of an impartial
judge. There is already partiality when a party had already
taken an oath.
Garcia v. Domingo
The trial was held in the air-conditioned room of the judge
for the convenience of the parties. There was no evidence
whatsoever that the public was excluded. It suffices to
satisfy the requirement of a trial being public if the accused
could have his friends, relatives and counsel present, no
matter with what offense he may be charged.
In Re: Request for Live Radio and TV coverage
Plunder case against ERAP. The rights of the accused are
more important than the right of the people to have a public
trial because:
a. The witnesses may shy away from the stand;
(Estes v. Teves Testimony in criminal trials will be
impaired on the psychological aspect of the
witness)
b. Cameras, lights and recording materials destructs the
dignity and calm ambience of the court.
AP: Actual proof that the judge ruled against you due to
publicity.
People v. Holgado #tbt
Kidnapping and serious illegal detention. Even though the
accused pleaded guilty he is still entitled to a counsel. He
was thus, deprived of due process.
Four-Fold Duties of the Court as to the RTC
1. Inform the defendant that it is his right to have an
attorney;
2. Ask him if he desires the aid of an attorney;
3. Assign an attorney de oficio, if he desires and is unable
to procure an attorney of his own;
4. Grant him a reasonable time, if he desires to procure an
attorney of his own.
People v. Agbayani
Rape of his daughters. Failure of the TC to inform the
accused of his right to choose his own counsel and violation
of his right for a two-day preparation for trial. The Court
proceedings are presumed to be proper as recorded in its
records. The two-day preparation for trial must be requested
otherwise, he waives it.
US v. Javier
Stolen Carabao. Deceased witness gave a sworn
statement. The Right to Confrontation is intended to prevent
conviction of the accused upon depositions or ex parte
affidavits and particularly to preserve the right of the
accused to test the recollection of the witness in the
exercise of his right to cross-examination.
Conclusion: Due Process denied to the accused

Re: Petition for Radio and TV Coverage of Multiple
Murder Cases
Maguindanao Massacre. As GR, a court room should have
enough facilities for a reasonable number of the public to
observe the proceedings, not too small as to render the
openness neglible and not too large as to distract the trial
participants from their proper functions. However, in this
case, there is great public interest, thus, the SC partially
grants their request as based on guidelines given by them.
People vs. Teehankee
Teehankee shot Hultman, Leino and Chapman. The mere
exposure of judges to publications and publicity suits does
not fatally affect their impartiality.
Test of Prejudicial Publicity: There must be allegation and
proof that the judges have been unduly influenced and not
simply that they may be by the barrage of publicity.

1.) What is the difference of the rights between the
Speedy Disposition of cases and Speedy Trial?
Speedy Disposition of Cases Speedy Trial
Covers all phases of any Covers only the trial
judicial,
quasi-judicial
or phase of criminal cases.
administrative
proceedings. (Sec. 14, Art. 3)
(Sec. 16, Art. 3)
2.) Discuss the Right to Compulsory Process.
The accused is entitled to this right for the purpose of
compelling the attendance of the witnesses and the
production of evidence that he may need for his defense.
Subpoena A process directed to a person requiring him to
attend and to testify at the hearing or trial of an action or at
any investigation conducted under the laws of the
Philippines or for taking of his deposition.

Kinds of Subpoenas
a. Subpoena Ad Testificandum Used to compel a
person to testify
b. Subpoena Duces Tecum Used to compel the
production of books, records, things or documents
specified.
Roco v. Contreras
5 charges for a violation of BP 22. The Right to Compulsory
Process is prohibited in a general inquisitorial examination
of all the books and papers of an adversary conducted with
a view to ascertain whether something of value may show
up or not.
Test: Definiteness and Relevancy
People v. Yambot
The subpoenas for the witnesses were not properly served.
The Court abused its discretion for deciding the case
without giving the accused their right to compulsory
process. This right is very essential especially in cases
where the penalty is death.
3.) What are the requisites for Trial in Abstencia?
a. The accused has already been arraigned;
b. He has been duly notified of the trial;
c. His failure to appear is unjustified.
prosecution, in order to convict one of a crime, to produce

evidence showing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and the
accused cannot be called upon either by express words or
acts to assist in the production of evidence.
7.) What is the scope of the Right against SelfIncrimination?
Applies to testimonial compulsion and production of
documents, papers and chattels in court except when books
of account are to be examined in the exercise of police
power and the power of taxation.
When applicable?
US v. Tan Teng
The results of Physical Examination / bodily evidence can
be used as admissible evidence in court.
Villaflor v. Summers
A woman accused of Adultery may be compelled to be
tested for pregnancy.
People v. Gallarde
Taking of pictures of the accused under the mercy of the
police without a counsel, being a purely mechanical act is
allowed.
When not applicable?
4.) When is the presence of the accused required

during the trial?
a. During arraignment and plea;
b. During trial, for identification unless the accused
has already stipulated on his identity during the pretrial.
c. During the promulgation of the decision.
Samson v. Beltran
5.) Could you compel the accused to testify against

himself?
Petitioner was forced to testify to incriminate himself, in full

breach of his constitutional right to remain silent. It cannot
be said now that he has waived his right. He did not
volunteer to take the stand and in his own defense; he did
not offer himself as a witness.
No, it would be violative of his constitutional right against

self-incrimination enshrined in Sec. 17, Art. 3.
6.) What is the purpose of the Right against SelfIncrimination? (Basis US v. Navarro)
Public Policy If the party were required to testify, it would
place the witness under the strongest temptation to commit
perjury.
Humanity It would prevent the extorting of confession by
duress.
A court order requiring the accused to write is incrimination.
Chavez v. CA
Pascual v. BOM
The accused has a perfect right to remain silent and his
silence cannot be used as a presumption of guilt. The right
against Self-Incrimination enables a person to create a zone
of privacy which the government may not force to surrender
to his detriment.
US v. Navarro
8.) Are juridical persons protected by the right against

self-incrimination?
The accused kidnapped Punsalan and did not tell his

whereabouts or if they set him free. It is the duty of the
No. Only natural persons are protected. Thus, a corporation

may be compelled to submit to the visitorial powers of the

State even if it will result in disclosure of criminal acts of the
corporation.
shall constitute a bar to another prosecution for the same

act.
9.) In what proceedings may the right against selfincrimination be invoked?
When a person is charged with an offense and the case is

terminated either by acquittal or conviction or in any other
manner without his express consent, he cannot again be
charged for the same offense.
In any judicial or administrative proceeding or in any official

government enquiry.
10.) Is the Right against Self-Incrimination absolute?
An accused is placed in double jeopardy if the following

conditions are present:
No, there are immunity statutes that limits this right.
1. He has been previously brought to trial;
a. Transactional Immunity Statute
2. The trial court has jurisdiction over the case;
The testimony of any person or whose possession of

documents or other evidence necessary or convenient to
determine the truth in any investigation conducted is
immune from criminal prosecution for an offense to which
such compelled testimony relates.
3. The complaint or information is valid;
b. Use and Fruit Immunity Statute

This statute prohibits the use of the witness compelled
testimony and its fruits in any manner in connection with the
criminal prosecution of the witness.
Mapa v. Sandiganbayan
An immunity statute was granted to the accused to testify
against the Marcoses for corruption in New York. The
accused were not able to testify against the Marcoses
during the trial, since it is a special privilege they are still
immuned from cases charged against them.
4. The accused has been arraigned and entered a plea;

5. The accused has been convicted or acquitted or the
case against him has been dismissed or otherwise
terminated without his express consent; and
6. He is being charged again for the same offense.
Kinds of DJ:
a. DJ of punishment for the same offense.
Ex. Homicide and Murder
b. DJ of punishment for the same act
Ex. State Law and Ordinance Law
Cases Discussed:
Paulin v. Gimenez
Grave Threat to Brgy. Captain. For DJ to attach, the
dismissal of the case must be without the express consent
of the accused. In this case, the dismissal was granted
upon the motion of the petitioners.
Discuss Double Jeopardy?

When the accused is acquitted or convicted or the case
against him is dismissed or otherwise terminated without his
express consent, by a court of competent jurisdiction, upon
a complaint or information or when a formal charge
sufficient in form and substance to sustain a conviction and
after the accused had pleaded to the charge, the conviction
or acquittal of the accused or the dismissal of the case shall
be a bar to another prosecution for the offense charged, or
for any attempt to commit the same or frustration thereof, or
for any offense which necessarily includes or is necessarily
included in the offense charged in the former complaint or
information. (Sec. 7, Rule 117, ROC)
Icasiano v. Sandiganbayan
Section 21. No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of

punishment for the same offense. If an act is punished by a
law and an ordinance, conviction or acquittal under either
People v. Balisacan
DJ will not attach to a criminal case (graft and corruption)

because the administrative case (grave abuse of authority)
was dismissed.
Lejano v. People
Vizconde Massacre. As a rule, a judgment of acquittal
cannot be reconsidered because it places the accused on
DJ. Exceptions are (1) when the court absolved the
accused gravely abused its discretion resulting in loss of
jurisdiction or a (2) when a mistrial has occurred.
Stabbing to death. When the accused entered a guilty plea

and subsequently entered a not guilty plea because he

acted in self-defense. He in turned withdrew his plea. Thus,
no DJ attach.
SECTION 1. The following are citizens of the

Philippines:
Esmena v. Pogoy
(1) Those who are citizens of the Philippine Islands

at the time of the adoption of this Constitution.
Grave co-ercion to a priest. The petitioners were placed in

DJ by the provisional dismissal of the case without their
consent.
Melo v. People
Frustrated Homicide to Consummated Homicide. One who
has been charged with an offense cannot be again charged
with same or identical offense though the latter be lesser or
greater than the former.
Bulaong v. People
Rebellion and Subversion. There can be no DJ since the
case for subversion is still pending in the CFI of Manila
while the case for rebellion has already been decided by the
CFI of Laguna adversely against the accused.
People v. Adil
Slight to Serious Physical Injuries. If after the first, the
prosecution finds a new fact supervenes on which the
defendant may be held liable, resulting in altering the
character of the crime and giving rise to a new and distinct
offense, the accused cannot be said to be in second
jeopardy, if indicted for the new offense.
People v. Relova
(2) Those born in the Philippine Islands of foreign

parents who, before the adoption of this
Constitution, had been elected to public office in the
Philippine Islands.
(3) Those whose fathers are citizens of the
Philippines.
(4) Those whose mothers are citizens of the
Philippines and, upon reaching the age of majority,
elect Philippine citizenship.
(5) Those who are naturalized in accordance with
law.
b. 1973 Constitution
ARTICLE III
CITIZENSHIP
Philippines:
(1) Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the
time of the adoption of this Constitution.
Municipal Ordinance v. RPC. If an act is punished by a law

and an ordinance, conviction or acquittal under either shall
constitute a bar to another prosecution for the same act.
(2) Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of

the Philippines.
Ivler v. San Pedro
(3) Those who elect Philippine citizenship pursuant

to the provisions of the Constitution of nineteen
hundred and thirty-five.
Reckless Imprudence. The doctrine that reckless

imprudence under Article 365 is a single quasi-offense by
itself and not merely a means to commit other crimes such
that conviction or acquittal of such quasi-offense bars
subsequent prosecution for the same quasi-offense,
regardless of its various resulting acts, undergirded this
Courts unbroken chain of jurisprudence on double jeopardy
as applied to Article 365. These cases uniformly barred the
second prosecutions as constitutionally impermissible under
the Double Jeopardy Clause

law.
c. 1987 Constitution
ARTICLE IV
Citizenship
April 26, 2016: 20th and Last Meeting

1.) Who are Citizens of the Philippines?
a. 1935 Constitution
ARTICLE IV.CITIZENSHIP

Philippines:
(1) Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the
time of the adoption of this Constitution;

(2) Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of
the Philippines;
Co v. HOR
(3) Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino

mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon
reaching the age of majority; and
When Ong Jr. was only 9 years of age, his father Ong Sr.,
became a naturalized Filipino. Thus, under Sec. 15 of the
RNL, a minor then residing in the country derives the
naturalization of his father. He is not required to elect
Philippine Citizenship.

law.
Yu v. Santiago
2.) What is citizenship?

Citizenship is a personal and more or less permanent
membership in a political community.
3.) Who are the Citizens of the Philippines at the time
of the adoption of this Constitution?
a. Those who are citizens under the Treaty of Paris;
b. Those declared citizens by judicial declaration
applying the jus soli principle;
c. Those who are naturalized according to law;
d. Those who are citizens under the 1935
Constitution;
e. Those who are citizens under the 1973
Constitution.
4.) What are the modes in acquiring citizenship?
a. By Birth jus sanguinis (blood) & jus soli (place)
b. By Naturalization
c. By Marriage of a woman to a foreigner whose laws
automatically make the wife a citizen of his country.
5.) Can an Islam Qatari who practices polygamy be
naturalized?
6.) In derivative naturalization, it vests citizenship on
the wife who might herself be lawfully naturalized,
can same be applicable to a naturalized wife to her
husband?
Cases Discussed:
Poe v. COMELEC
Foundlings are natural born citizens based on circumstantial
evidence, legislation (constitutional deliberations) and
generally accepted principles of international law.
Tecson v. COMELEC
The Philippine Bill of 1902 made Filipino citizens (including
FPJs grand father) of all inhabitants of the Philippine
Islands continuing to reside in them who were Spanish
subjects on April 1899 and then resided in said islands.
While, normally, the question of w/n a person has

renounced his Philippine citizenship should be heard before
a trial court of law in adversary proceedings, this has
become unnecessary as this Court, no less, upon insistence
of petitioner in using his Portuguese citizenship despite
having been naturalized as Filipino citizen, had to look into
the facts and satisfy itself on w/n petitioners claim to
continued Philippine citizenship is meritorious.
Republic v. Dela Rosa
Frivaldos naturalization proceedings were flawed.
Labo v. COMELEC
Osmena as a holder of an Alien Certification of Registration,
does not mean that he is not a Filipino, because it was
unaccompanied by proof of performance of acts whereby
Philippine Citizenship had been lost is not adequate proof of
loss of citizenship. There must be an express renunciation.
Aznar v. COMELEC
By virtue of being a son of a Filipino father or mother, the
presumption is that he is Filipino and remains Filipino until
proof is shown that he has renounced or lost Philippine
citizenship. Possession of an alien registration certificate
accompanied by proof of performance of acts whereby
Philippine citizenship is lost is not adequate proof of loss of
citizenship.
Mercado v. Manzano
By declaring in his COC, that he is a Filipino citizen, that he
is not a permanent resident or immigrant of another country,
that he will defend and support the Constitution. Manzano
has effectively repudiated his US citizenship.
In Re: Application for admission to the Bar of Vicente
Ching
A legitimate child born under the 1935 Constitution of a
Filipino mother and an alien father cannot validly elect
Philippine Citizenship 14 years after he has reached the
age of majority.
Bengzon III v. HRET
Repatriation results in the recovery of the original
nationality. Since Cruz repatriated, it allows him to recover

or return to his original status before he lost his Philippine
Citizenship.
Mo Yao Lim v. COI
Under Sec. 15 of CA 473, an alien woman marrying a
Filipino, native born or naturalized becomes ipso facto a
Filipino provided the she is not disqualified to be a citizen of
the Philippines.
Republic v. Lim
By being an illegitimate child of a Filipino mother, Lim
automatically became a Filipino upon birth and as such,
there was no more need for her to validly elect Filipino
citizenship upon reaching the age of majority. (1935 Consti)
Altajeros v. COMELEC
Altajeros took his Oath of Allegiance in 1997 but submitted
his Certificate of Repatriation in 2004. He is considered as
a Filipino Citizen since his application (retroacts) otherwise
he will be stateless.
Arnando v. COMELEC
Arnando continued to use his US Passport after his affidavit
of renunciation of US Citizenship, such act is violative of RA
9225 which mandates its applicants to make a personal and
sworn renunciation of all foreign citizenships before any
public officer authorized to administer oaths.

Atty. Laurie Pe Notes On Consti 2

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Atty. Laurie Pe Notes On Consti 2

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

ATTY.

PE NOTES ON CONSTI 2 2015 - 2016

3. What are the Essential Qualities of a Constitution?

(1) The Congress, upon a vote of three-fourths of all its

ATTY. PE NOTES ON CONSTI 2 2015 - 2016

Dept. Order 1 of DOLE: Guideline governing the temporary

The protection of the Sugar Industry which constitutes one

Case Doctrines on Police Power

Act 567: The Sugar Adjustment Act

BP Blg. 22: The Bouncing Checks Law

ATTY. PE NOTES ON CONSTI 2 2015 - 2016

e.) For Just Compensation.

2. When can Eminent Domain be used as Police

It is any use directly available to the general public as a

Eminent Domain can be used as Police Power through

8. What is the expansive concept of public use?

3. The Congress wants to expropriate the land of Mr.

In the case of Ouano v. Republic, it was said that public use

a.) There must be a necessity which must be of public

9. What is taking? Give its requisites.

b.) It is done on a private property.

A physical dispossession of the owner, as when he is

c.) It results in the taking or appropriation of title to and

As held in the case of Republic v. Castellvi, the requisites of

ATTY. PE NOTES ON CONSTI 2 2015 - 2016

The Courts have power to restrict the exercise of Eminent

In case of non-payment of Just Compensation, the owners

In case of taking without going through the legal process,

15. What is Fair Market Value?

The market value of the property is the price that may be

The power of the State to demand from the members of the

Case Doctrines on Eminent Domain

2. Taxation is enforced by the State through what

City of Manila v. Chinese Community

ATTY. PE NOTES ON CONSTI 2 2015 - 2016

Gift tax on Donation.

3. The power of Taxation is based on what aspects?

Abra Valley College v. Aquino

Fiscal Adequacy The sources of government

Ex. A law mandating everyone to pay Php 1,000, 000. 00 as

Administrative Feasibility Taxes should be

Ex. A person living in Mindanao has to pay his taxes in

A donees gift tax is tax upon the privilege of receiving

4.) Why is the Power to Tax the power to Destroy?

4. What is the concept of Due Process?

When a legislative body having the power to tax a certain

The Due Process of Law is a guaranty against any

5.) When can taxation be used as an implement of

5. What are kinds of Due Process of Law?

Substantive DP Requires the intrinsic validity of

Ex. A law punishing rapists by castrating them is violative of

BP Blg. 135: Tax on Citizens and Residents

Cases: Agustin v. Edu & Southern Hemisphere v. ATC

Case Doctrines on Taxation

Equality and uniformity in Taxation means that all taxable

Procedural DP Requires notice and hearing.

Cases: Webb v. De Leon, People v. Teehankee, Ang Tibay

Sec. 1-C of RA No. 920 appropriates Php 85,000 for the

Case Doctrine on Due Process

It is a general rule that the legislature is without the power to

Southern Hemisphere v. ATC

ATTY. PE NOTES ON CONSTI 2 2015 - 2016

a. There is an impartial court or tribunal clothed with