Per Curiam
(Topic on Warrant Issued by RTC)
Facts:
Soliven broadcasted the statement that President Aquino hid under her bed during a coup d' etat. The President sued for libel. Soliven claimed that he can't be sued because the President was immune from suit.
Issue: WON Beltran's rights were violated when the RTC issued a warrant of arrest without personally examining the complainant and the witnesses to determine probable cause.
Held: No
Ratio:
In satisfying himself of the existence of probable cause to issue a warrant of arrest, the judge isn't required to examine the complainant and the witnesses.
He shall only personally evaluate the report and supporting documents submitted by the fiscal regarding the existence of probable cause and issue a warrant of arrest on the basis thereof.
Also, if he finds no probable cause, he may disregard the fiscal's report and required the submission of supporting affidavits of witnesses to aid him in arriving at a conclusion as to the existence of probable cause.
Otherwise, judges would be burdened with preliminary investigation instead of hearing cases.
Showing posts with label Criminal Procedure. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Criminal Procedure. Show all posts
Monday, November 25, 2013
Defensor v Vasquez 217 SCRA 613 January 27, 1993
J. Regalado
(Topic: definition of Arrest)
Facts:
An information was filed against Defensor-Santiago for violating Sec. 3(e) of RA 3019 or the Anti Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. An warrant of arrest was issued against her with bail of Php 15,000.
She posted bail in exchange of the recall of the warrant of arrest.
The Ombudsman filed a manifestation that alleged Miriam's lack of injury when she came to the office. This was contrary to her allegation that she wanted to post bail due to the injuries she suffered from a car accident.
The Sandiganbayan acted on the manifestation and set Miriam for arraignment. The petitioners filed a motion for her provisional liberty under a recognizance and averred that her continuance to remain under a bail bond may imply that she had intent to flee.
She also filed a petition with the SC for the suspension of the RTC proceedings against her. The SC issued a TRO. It subsequently lifted the TRO and denied the MR.
The Sandiganbayan issued a hold departure order as regards her announcement to leave for the U.S. to pursue a fellowship in Harvard.
Issue: WON the hold departure order deprived her of her due process rights.
Held: No
Ratio: The order is an exercise of a respondent Court's inherent power to preserve and maintain the effectiveness of its jurisdiction over the person of the accused.
A court has the power to prohibit a person admitted to bail an opportunity to leave the Philippines. This is the consequence of the bond.
R114, s.1- bail is the security required and given for the welfare of a person in custody of the law, that he will appear before any court in which his appearance may be required or stipulated in the bond.
(Topic: definition of Arrest)
Facts:
An information was filed against Defensor-Santiago for violating Sec. 3(e) of RA 3019 or the Anti Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. An warrant of arrest was issued against her with bail of Php 15,000.
She posted bail in exchange of the recall of the warrant of arrest.
The Ombudsman filed a manifestation that alleged Miriam's lack of injury when she came to the office. This was contrary to her allegation that she wanted to post bail due to the injuries she suffered from a car accident.
The Sandiganbayan acted on the manifestation and set Miriam for arraignment. The petitioners filed a motion for her provisional liberty under a recognizance and averred that her continuance to remain under a bail bond may imply that she had intent to flee.
She also filed a petition with the SC for the suspension of the RTC proceedings against her. The SC issued a TRO. It subsequently lifted the TRO and denied the MR.
The Sandiganbayan issued a hold departure order as regards her announcement to leave for the U.S. to pursue a fellowship in Harvard.
Issue: WON the hold departure order deprived her of her due process rights.
Held: No
Ratio: The order is an exercise of a respondent Court's inherent power to preserve and maintain the effectiveness of its jurisdiction over the person of the accused.
A court has the power to prohibit a person admitted to bail an opportunity to leave the Philippines. This is the consequence of the bond.
R114, s.1- bail is the security required and given for the welfare of a person in custody of the law, that he will appear before any court in which his appearance may be required or stipulated in the bond.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)