The crime committed is P.I which is below six years. It matters therefore whether
Congress is in session or not.
Both requisites must concur to claim immunity from arrest under Article
6, Section 11.
B. WON the action of the House is legal. (I got a wrong answer here)
The penalty of suspension should not exceed 60 days- here, 50 days only.
C. WON the court can validly take cognizance (intervene) of the petition of Rep.
Bugoy.
B. Senator Tong cannot validly run again in the Senate in the elections of 2013, after
he resigns.
Resignation means failure for him to acquire again the former position.
III. DND (Department of National Defense) enters into a contract with BUTAS
Corporation.
Each CITY with a population at least 250k, or each province shall have at
least one representative.
V. The action is not in accordance with the Constitution. Here, there is NO VALID
DELEGATION.
For the President to exercise EMERGENCY POWERS, the following must concur:
BUT FIRST there must be a VALID GRANT coming from Congress. Absent
such delegation, the exercise is not valid.
VI. POWER OF THE PRESIDENT TO VETO BILL.
WON the objection of Rep. PALAKUL is correct. (veto item- appropriations bill)
VII. SENATOR INGLESERA’S remarks are still covered by parliamentary immunity if,
made during a privilege speech or committee hearings.
No Member shall be questioned nor be held liable in any other place for any
speech or debate in Congress or in any committee thereof.
It will be stopped only when the right of the person appearing therein, in this
case OBERO, are already prejudiced. The law requires that their must in the
conduct of legislative inquiry must be respected.
IX. WON the HRET has jurisdiction to hear and decide the case involving nomination of
JOVITO, a member of the party list group of BANTAY.
PETRA being a member of the JBC is not considered as an incompatible office. Hence,
he does not need to resign from his post as Chairman of the Committee on Justice.
I. A. Yes. SC can take cognizance of the case filed by the President on the ground that
Congress committed GAD.
There must be a (SECOND LETTER) last written declaration coming from the
majority of the Cabinet Members to be transmitted to the SP and HS that the
President is unable to discharge the functions of his office, before Congress can
vote by 2/3 votes of both Houses, voting separately.
The deployment of the AFP and PNP is a valid exercise of police power.
The President has the authority to call out the AFP and PNP in order to prevent
and suppress all incident of lawless violence, and to maintain peace and order
as the protector of the people.
Article 6, Section 23(2) will apply- there must be a valid delegation by the
Congress for the President to exercise this power.
President Arroyo’s issuance of such order seeks to amend the laws of the
CHED, which is clearly legislative in nature.
Amending the law is a power lodged in the legislature, not in the President.
IV. WON the CHR can grant immunity from prosecution in favor of TISOY.
The State shall regulate or prohibit monopolies when the public interest so
requires. No combinations in restraint of trade or unfair competition shall be
allowed.
IPRA law is constitutional. There is no deprivation of the state of its ownership over
lands of the public domain and natural resources in them.
JOSE, candidate for a seat in HOR, has won, proclaimed and taken his oath of office.
(when PEDRO filed and election protest)
Therefore, the jurisdiction to try and decide such election protest is given to
the Electoral Tribunal.
In camera inspection allowed and not violative of the Bank Secrecy Law, provided - -
IX. WON MAE TAGASIGNI may be allowed to buy the land and have it registered in her
name.
The land involved here is a parcel of land in the TANGYAN RIVER IN IGBARAS.
Whether or not the Two donated school buses are exempted from the payment of
import duties.
It is in the discretion of the Bureau of Customs to imposed such duties. (got a wrong
answer)
XI. WON the action of the President in issuing an EO for the temporary operation of the
public utility is constitutional.
CERES BUS COMPANY operates through its franchise, therefore, not prohibited for
its temporary operation in order to address the problem of thousands of passengers
who were stranded in many piers and terminals.
Article 6, Section 23(2) will apply- there must be a valid GRANT by the
Congress for the President to exercise this emergency power.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2- MIDTERM
1. Mr. SHAOLI- no denial of due process. (Wrong)------- The court order is NOT VALID!
There is a full blown trial that was conducted in compliance with DP.
(Opportunity to be heard)
APPEAL the court order to leave the barangay the same day. (not lawful order)
Liberty of abode and of changing the same shall not be impaired except
upon lawful order of the court (Art. 3, Section 6)
2. The action of the Commissioner is valid. There is no violation of her right to travel.
Atty. Masipag was under investigation by the DOJ for alleged misappropriation
of public funds. Hence, her right to travel may be limited by the police power of
the state.
There is a valid exercise of police power to order the limitation since the DOJ seeks
only to implement its jurisdiction over the person of Atty. Masipag WHO IS
UNDER INVESTIGATION.
The right to travel of a person shall not be impaired except in the interest
of national security, public safety or public health as may be prescribed by
law. (Art. 3, Section 6)
3. The order of the Ombudsman to have an in camera inspection of the questioned account
is valid. All the requisites are present:
4. The .45 pistol is admissible in evidence (satisfies the requirement of the rule on
particularity of warrant)
The .50 grams of shabu is inadmissible in evidence for any purpose in any proceeding
being a fruit of the poisonous tree. (Product of an unlawful search)
The police searched the car of PEDRO which is NOT SPECIFICALLY
DESCRIBED in the search warrant. Thus, there is a violation of his right
against USS. (Art. 3, Section 2)
The state has the power of eminent domain to take private property but the
same must be devoted to public purpose and there must also be payment
of just compensation.
It is not a law which impairs the obligations of contract as prohibited under Art. 3,
Section 10. It does not diminish the efficacy of the documents and it was given a
prospective application, not a retroactive one.
7. A. The arrest of DANILO was illegal. The police officers were not clothed by a warrant of
arrest during the arrest, hence violative of constitutional right.
The confession of Danilo is admissible against Angie to prosecute the latter for the
commission of the offense and also to build up conspiracy. The confession can be
used in a case that will be filed against her.
However, Danilo’s confession violates his right under Art. 3, Section 12 which
rendered it inadmissible in evidence.
This right is a PERSONAL one which cannot be used against the accused,
himself.
If the case be heard again because of the alleged irregularities, then there is violation of
the right of Baskog against DJ.
II. Motion should be granted. There is violation of the right of the victim to due process (to
present its evidence)
III. Argument of the accused is valid. He is still presumed innocent since the crime was not
proven.
Presumption of regularity is accorded great weight in favor of the police officers who
fulfill their duties. Here, they were remiss in their duties when they were not able to prove
the delicti of the crime (SHABU) during the arrest.
Since the police officers did not comply with the mandatory provisions under R.A. 9165
because the seized items were mot marked immediately after the arrest, hence, does not
constitute PBRD. (Moral certainty for the commission of the crime)
The citizenship that was lost by the person is what he can recover.
Thus, if the former status is a natural born Filipino then, after effecting
the repatriation process, he can recover such status as a NBF without
requiring him of losing the other acquired citizenship by way of
naturalization.
PROVIDED that such person possessed all the qualifications and none
of the disqualifications.
C. ACT OF CONGRESS- Congress will enact a law tailored made to a person in order
to grant him or her a Philippine Citizenship.
V. WARLITO- natural born Filipino citizen. (not being a naturalized Filipino citizen)
RA 9225- His reacquisition in accordance with the said law restores him of his NBF
citizenship status.
Before his naturalization he was formerly a NBF, hence, he recovers his former
status (NBF) by way of repatriation.
Repatriation process does not mean that he had performed an act in order to
perfect his citizenship.
Under the Constitution, there are only naturalized and NBF citizens- nothing
mentions about repatriated citizens.
NATURAL BORN. Reacquisition of Philippine Citizenship under RA no. 9225 will restore
him back of his former status as a natural-born citizen
Hair strands of the accused is admissible as physical evidence. This will not violate
his right against self-incrimination, although the same was taken during C.I.
The right of the accused against self-incrimination does not extend to PHYSICAL
EVIDENCE. The right is limited only to TESTIMONIAL COMPULSION.
VII. The warrantless arrest is not valid, as it does not fall under the exceptions to be valid.
Policeman must have personal knowledge of the facts that the person to be arrested has
committed, is actually committing, or will commit an offense in his presence.
Here, despite the fact that the accused was previously arrested by PO1 HULI for
illegal possession, would not constitute a PC that the former had committed a
crime. He was just standing along the road and holding a plastic sachet.
The arrest is also not valid on the ground that the police officer immediately arrested
TUSOK. He must first identify himself as a policeman. Hence, the .30 caliber handgun
being a product of an illegal search is an inadmissible in evidence for any purpose in any
proceeding.
VIII. The contention of the accused is not correct.
The filing of the MR by the prosecutors to reinstate the case will not violate the
right of the accused against DJ.
The delay was justified on the ground of lack of notice and the fact that the lawyer
was brought to the hospital.
The resetting of the case was not due to the fault or delay by the prosecution.
In order that there will be a valid violation of the right against DJ, there must be a VALID
VIOLATION OF THE RIGHT TO SPEEDY TRIAL. The same is absent in the instant case.
All the requisites for invocation of DJ was present. The case was dismissed by the
prosecutor when he issued a resolution to effect such dismissal and it is without the
express consent of the accused
In order that right against DJ may be invoked, the following must concur:
The first jeopardy has already attached
Valid information in a court of competent jurisdiction
The accused plead
There must be conviction, acquittal or termination or dismissal of the case
without the express consent of the accused.
The first jeopardy has already attached when the case was dismissed WITHOUT THE
EXPRESS CONSENT OF THE ACCUSED.
X. The contention is not valid. it is violative of the right of the accused against to be informed
of the nature and cause of the accusation against him.
(Homicide was alleged in the information but he was convicted for Murder)
Also, the crime of M, crime proven, has more elements that the crime charged of
H.
The accused cannot be convicted of a crime that was NOT CHARGED IN THE
INFORMATION.
The extrajudicial confession should not limit his RASI, but his credibility will somehow
suffer. It is his privilege to give up his confession.
The accused is afforded DOUBLE PROTECTION in a case involving the RASI. First, he
can refuse to take the witness box and second, once in the witness box, he can refuse again
to answer incriminating questions.
See: Requisites
The law will be considered an EPFL if it will be given retroactive application it will
deprive the lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transsexual relations (LGBT) of their right to life,
liberty or any right which is imbued with public interest and which they enjoy at the time
of the commission of the offense.
XIII. The action of the judge is not valid in declaring that the case will be tried in absentia.
There is SUBTANTIAL COMPLIANCE when the notice was given to the wife and the
absence of the accused was not justified. However, the third requisite was lacking,
hence, he must be already in arraignment.
XIV. VARIANCE DOCTRINE, under the right of the accused to be informed, presupposes
that if the crime for which the accused was charged necessarily includes the crime for which he was
convicted, then there can be no violation of the right against DJ, even if the crime proven was
not the crime charged in the information.
Moreover, the crime proven should not have more elements than the crime charged. Thus, the
elements of the crime for which he was convicted should not expand, otherwise, it will constitute
a violation.
III. DPWH- contract for the construction of roads pursuant to governmental function-
immunity from suit.
Is he an impeachable officer?
VI. L-D entitled to represent under the PLS even though it does not represent any
marginalized and underprivileged sectors --- if it has TRACK RECORD OF
ADVOCACY with regards to the sector it seeks to represent.
SECOND ROUND- ranking if there are seats still available. If eligible in one seat after
the ranking then, he is eligible to it regardless if it did not obtain the 2% votes during
the first round.
3 maximum seats regardless of the result of the second round- (1 GS and 2 AS)
VII. President action in the issuance of EO 777 is not valid. No valid grant of EP by
Congress.
VIII. The action of Wigeree (under the instruction of the President) in reversing PB’s
dismissal of the case is valid.
IX. The contention of ODONG and his neighbor are not correct.
The notices of eviction and demolition sent by the LGU are enough to compel them to
change their residence, even though there is no lawful order of the court.
Why?
B. The period of 60 days has lapsed, meaning it terminates the declaration of martial
law and suspension of the privilege of the writ of HC.
Rebellion or invasion…..
WHY?
XII. The President cannot validly exercise his power to transfer funds from the Office of
the President to COMELEC. The latter is not under Executive Department.
The President has the power to transfer funds WITHIN THEIR RESPECTIVE
DEPARTMENTS.
"No law shall be passed authorizing any transfer of appropriations; however, the
President, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives,
the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the heads of Constitutional
Commissions may, by law, be authorized to augment any item in the general
appropriation law FOR THEIR RESPECTIVE OFFICES from SAVINGS in other
Items of their respective appropriations."
XIV. There was a violation of the 40% limitation of foreign ownership. It will increase the
common shares of AT.
In the latest ruling of the Supreme Court in Narra Nickel Mining v. Redmont
Consolidated Mines (G.R. No. 195580 January 28, 2015), the computation of the total
percentage of the Filipino ownership in a corporation is applied to BOTH
(a) the total outstanding shares of stock entitled to vote in the election of
directors; AND
The application of the Control Test and the Grandfather Rule must be applied
where doubts or various indicia that the "BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP" AND
"CONTROL" of the corporation do not in fact reside in Filipino shareholders but in
foreign stakeholders.
Hence, AT cannot claim that PTC is Filipino-owned based only on the apparent
number of stocks belonging to Filipinos.
The position of the public official charged is not within the jurisdiction of the
Sandiganbayan, but the crime charged is subject to its jurisdiction.
RA 3019- committed by public officials in relation to the functions of their office under the
jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan.