Category: Remedial Law

121 SCRA 472

Criminal Procedure

Topic: Bail

Facts:

Charged with rebellion, Nine (9) of the fourteen (14) detainees herein were arrested on July 6, 1982 at about 1:45 p.m. by three (3) teams of the PC/INP of Bayombong, Nueva Viscaya. The other four (4) detainees were arrested on the following day. President Marcos. Sr. issued a Presidential Commitment Order on July 12, 1982 for their continued detention.

Issue: whether bail can be availed when the privilege of habeas corpus is suspended and Presidential Commitment Order (PCO) was issued.

Held: NO.

The constitutional right to bail is unavailing when the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is suspended. The right to bail cannot just be cancelled out summarily because of the issuance of a PCO. Persons engaged in rebellion or insurrection may not claim the right to be released on bail when similarly captured or arrested during the continuance of the aforesaid contingency.

345 SCRA 301

Topic: Criminal Procedure (Bail)

Facts:

Bangayan filed a charge for grave threats against Cauilan Sr and Jr. The latter orally requested for bail as well as reduction of the amount of bail from Judge Butacan. The judge granted the bail as well as the reduction of the amount, and he also ordered the release on the same day.

Issue:

Whether motion for bail as well as the reduction of its amount can be done without a hearing.

Held: NO.

A hearing is required in granting bail whether it is a matter of right or discretion. A motion to reduce the amount of bail likewise requires a hearing before it is granted in order to afford the prosecution the chance to oppose it.

G.R. No. 88232. February 26, 1990

Topic: Criminal Procedure (Jurisdiction)

Facts:

Upon complaint by Alma T. Aggabao, the Office of the Provincial Fiscal of Cabagan, Isabela filed with the RTC of Cabagan, Isabela, Branch 22, an information against private respondents Elvino Aggabao and Villa Suratos for the crime of concubinage. During the trial, private respondents filed a motion to dismiss on the ground of lack of jurisdiction. They argue that concubinage, under Art. 334 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC) is punishable with prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods, which is equivalent to imprisonment of six (6) months and one (1) day to four (4) years and two (2) months, and thus cognizable by the MTC. 

Issue:

whether or not the Regional Trial Court has original jurisdiction over the crime of concubinage

Held:

According to Sec. 32 of B.P. Blg. 129, otherwise known as the Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980 “Regional Trial Courts shall exercise exclusive original jurisdiction in all criminal cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, or body.

As regards the husband, there is no question that concubinage is within the exclusive original jurisdiction of the inferior courts. The crime of concubinage is within the exclusive original jurisdiction of the inferior courts. The Regional Trial Courts have no original jurisdiction over the said crime.

86 SCRA 38

Criminal Procedure

Topic: Sec. 1, Rule 114 (Bail Defined)

Facts:

Leonardo Almeda (alias Nardong Paa) was charged, together with five others, with the crime of qualified theft of a motor vehicle. Almeda asked the trial court to allow him to post a surety bond in lieu of the cash bond required of him, but was denied. On the other hand, the fiscal moved to amend information adding habitual delinquency and recidivism.

Issues:

1. whether the respondent judge has the authority to require a strictly cash bond instead of a surety bond

2. whether the amendment to the information, after a plea of not guilty thereto, was properly allowed in both substance and procedure

Held:

1. No. 

The trial court may not reject otherwise acceptable sureties and insist that the accused obtain his provisional liberty only thru a cash bond. But trial courts should be cautious in considering the reputation of sureties.

2. Yes.

The amendments were allowed because the new allegations do not alter the prosecution’s theory of the case nor possibly prejudice the form of defense the accused has or will assume.