Scribd
Upload
43 views2 pages

Alcantara V Director-Digest

The petitioner questioned the validity of the Court of Appeals of Northern Luzon's decision modifying his sentence for illegal discharge of firearms. He argued the court lacked jurisdiction as it was created during the Japanese occupation and was not authorized to hold sessions in Baguio. However, the Supreme Court denied the petition, finding that judgments from courts operated during the occupation remain valid, except those with political complexion, as the offense had no such complexion and was a municipal crime. The Court of Appeals' nature and jurisdiction were not substantially changed during the occupation.

Uploaded by

Janine Oliva
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
43 views2 pages

Alcantara V Director-Digest

The petitioner questioned the validity of the Court of Appeals of Northern Luzon's decision modifying his sentence for illegal discharge of firearms. He argued the court lacked jurisdiction as it was created during the Japanese occupation and was not authorized to hold sessions in Baguio. However, the Supreme Court denied the petition, finding that judgments from courts operated during the occupation remain valid, except those with political complexion, as the offense had no such complexion and was a municipal crime. The Court of Appeals' nature and jurisdiction were not substantially changed during the occupation.

Uploaded by

Janine Oliva
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

24.

ALCANTARA V DIRECTOR (De Jure v De Facto)

This is a petition for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus and for the release of the petitioner on the
ground that he was unlawfully imprisoned and restrained of his liberty by the respondent.

Petitioner was convicted of the crime of illegal discharge of firearms with less serious physical injuries.
Upon appeal, the CA of Northern Luzon at Baguio modified the sentence to indeterminate penalty of
4mos and 21 days of Arresto Mayor to 3yrs, 9mos and 3days of Prission Correccional.

The petitioner now questions the validity of the decision on the ground that said court was only a
creation of the so-called Republic of the Philippines during the Japanese military occupation of the
Islands; that the Court of Appeals was not authorized by Commonwealth Act No. 3 to hold sessions in
Baguio, and that only the two Justices constituted the majority which promulgated the decision in
question

ISSUE: WON the court had jurisdiction over the case on the ground that said court was created during
the Japanese Occupation; and WON it has authority to hold sessions in Baguio pursuant to
Commonwealth Act No. 3.

RULING: the court denied the petitioner’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus and held that the
sentence served by petitioner has no political complexion (Political Complexion is an act punished as a
crime against the government). The court cited the case of Cham vs. Valdez wherein it ruled “that the
so-called Republic of the Philippines and the Philippine Executive Commission established in the
Philippines during the Japanese regime were governments de facto organized by the belligerent
occupant by the judicial acts thereof were good and valid and remained good and valid after the
restoration of the Commonwealth Government, except those with political complexion.”

This Court held that the Court of Appeals which was continued throughout the Japanese occupation,
was the same Court of Appeals existed prior to the Japanese occupation and was lately abolished by
Executive Order No. 37. The division of the Court of Appeals into several District Court of Appeals, and
the reduction of the number of Justices sitting in each division, the regime of the so-called Republic
effected no substantial change in its nature and jurisdiction.

Even assuming that the Court of Appeals of Northern Luzon was a new court created by the belligerent
occupant or the de facto governments, the judgments of such court, like those of the court which were
continued during the Japanese occupation, remain good and valid, and therefore enforceable now after

Janine Oliva
UC Law – M4
the liberation or occupation of the Philippines, provided that such judgments do not have a political
complexion.

Obviously, the sentence which petitioner is now serving has no political complexion. He was charged
with and convicted of an offense punishable under the municipal law of the Commonwealth, the
Revised Penal Code. Therefore, the sentence that he was serving is valid and enforceable.

Janine Oliva
UC Law – M4

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy