Was the search conducted on petitioners No. the SC ruled that the proper
office computer and the copying of his remedy to a supposed ambiguity in an
personal files without his knowledge and otherwise valid information is merely
consent alleged as a transgression on to move for a bill of particulars. It is
his constitutional right to privacy? applicable if the information charges
an offense, but the averments are so
No. The CSC in this case had vague that the accused cannot
implemented a policy that put its prepare to plead or prepare for trial.
employees on notice that they have (Enrile vs. Pp)
no expectation of privacy in anything
they create, store, send or receive on 4. What is escape doctrine?
the office computers, and that the
CSC may monitor the use of the There are two kinds of escape. The
computer resources using both first escape is when after
automated or human means. This arraignment, when he is tried in
implies that on-the-spot inspections absentia. The second escape is during
may be done to ensure that the the promulgation of judgment, so the
computer resources were used only accused loses his right to appeal. But
for such legitimate business that right is restored if he appeared
purposes. within 15 days.
2. What is the purpose of the bill of Yes. I will grant it, and remand the
particulars? case to the trial court for the
reception of the newly discovered
Its purpose is to define, clarify, evidence. (People vs. Licayan) Note:
particularize, limit, or circumscribe this case is pro hac vice
the issues in the case, to expedite the
trial, and assist the court. A general 7. The SC held that while there is a
function or purpose of a bill of fundamental law requires a mandatory
review by the SC of cases where the Supreme Court by petition for review
penalty imposed is death, reclusion on certiorari in accordance with Rule
perpetua, and life imprisonment, nowhere 45.
has it prohibits an intermediate review. A
prior determination by the CA on the Mode of appealAn appeal to the
factual issues would minimize the Supreme Court may be taken only by a
possibility of an error of judgment before petition for review on certiorari, except in
it is elevated to the SC. (People vs. criminal cases where the penalty imposed
mateo) is
1. death,
8. The court issued 42 general warrants. Is it reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment
valid? notice of appeal to the CA (not SC, PP v.
Mateo).
No. Search warrants issued were
violative of the Constitution, thus,
illegal. The warrant did not
particularly specify the things to be
seized. The purpose of the
requirement is to avoid placing the
sanctity of the domicile at the mercy
of the whims, caprice or passion of
peace officers. (Stonehill vs. Diokno)
Modes of appeal.