Scribd
Upload
120 views2 pages

Bail Matter of Right vs. Matter of Discretion (2006)

This document discusses several topics related to criminal procedure in the Philippines: 1) When bail is a matter of right versus discretion, such as before conviction for certain crimes where evidence is not strong. 2) That courts may require material witnesses to post bail to secure their appearance in court. 3) The distinction between a complaint and an information as forms of criminal accusations. 4) That in a case for breach of contract of carriage, the plaintiff does not need to prove the defendant's negligence caused the incident. 5) Issues around filing a demurrer to evidence without leave of court, and the effects on presenting a defense.

Uploaded by

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

Bail Matter of Right vs. Matter of Discretion (2006)

This document discusses several topics related to criminal procedure in the Philippines: 1) When bail is a matter of right versus discretion, such as before conviction for certain crimes where evidence is not strong. 2) That courts may require material witnesses to post bail to secure their appearance in court. 3) The distinction between a complaint and an information as forms of criminal accusations. 4) That in a case for breach of contract of carriage, the plaintiff does not need to prove the defendant's negligence caused the incident. 5) Issues around filing a demurrer to evidence without leave of court, and the effects on presenting a defense.

Uploaded by

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

Bail; Matter of Right vs.

Matter of Discretion (2006)


When is bail a matter of right and when is it a matter of discretion? (5%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Bail is a matter of right (a) before or after conviction by the inferior courts; (b) before conviction by the RTC
of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment., when the evidence of guilt is
not strong (Sec. 4, Rule 114, 2000 Rules of Criminal Procedure).

Bail is discretionary: Upon conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or
life imprisonment (Sec. 5, Rule 114, 2000 Rules of Criminal Procedure).

Bail; Witness Posting Bail (1999)


May the Court require a witness to post bail? Explain your answer. (2%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes. The court may require a witness to post bail if he is a material witness and bail is needed to secure his
appearance. The rules provide that when the court is satisfied, upon proof or oath, that a material witness will
not testify when required, it may, upon motion of either party, order the witness to post bail in such sum as may
be deemed proper. Upon refusal to post bail, the court shall commit him to prison until he complies or is legally
discharged after his testimony is taken. (Sec. 14, Rule 119)

Complaint vs. Information (1999)


Distinguish a Complaint from Information. (2%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
In criminal procedure, a complaint is a sworn written statement charging a person with an offense, subscribed
by the offended party, any peace officer or other peace officer charged with the enforcement of the law violated.
(Sec. 3, Rule 110, Rules of Criminal Procedure); while an information is an accusation in writing charging a
person with an offense subscribed by the prosecutor and filed with the court. (Sec. 4, Id.)

Demurrer to Evidence; Contract of Carriage (2004)


AX, a Makati-bound paying passenger of PBU, a public utility bus, died instantly on board the bus on account
of the fatal head wounds he sustained as a result of the strong impact of the collision between the bus and a
dump truck that happened while the bus was still travelling on EDSA towards Makati. The foregoing facts,
among others, were duly established on evidence-in-chief by the plaintiff TY, sole heir of AX, in TY’s action
against the subject common carrier for breach of contract of carriage. After TY had rested his case, the
common carrier filed a demurrer to evidence, contending that plaintiff’s evidence is insufficient because
it did not show (1) that defendant was negligent and (2) that such negligence was the proximate cause of the
collision. Should the court grant or deny defendant's demurrer to evidence? Reason briefly. (5%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No. The court should not grant defendant's demurrer to evidence because the case is for breach of contract of
carriage. Proof that the defendant was negligent and that such negligence was the proximate cause of the
collision is not required. (Articles 1170 and 2201, Civil Code; (Mendoza v. Phil. Airlines, Inc., 90 Phil. 836
[1952]; Batangas Transportation Co. v. Caguimbal, 22 SCRA171 U 968]; Abeto v. PAL, 115 SCRA 489
[1982]; Aboitiz v. Court of Appeals, 129 SCRA 95 [1984]).

Demurrer to Evidence; w/o Leave of Court (1998)


Facing a charge of Murder, X filed a petition for bail. The petition was opposed by the prosecution but after
hearing the court granted bail to X. On the first scheduled hearing on the merits, the prosecution manifested that
it was not adducing additional evidence and that it was resting its case. X filed a demurrer to evidence without
leave of court but it was denied by the court.
1. Did the court have the discretion to deny the demurrer to evidence under the circumstances
mentioned above? (2%)
2. If the answer to the preceding question is in the affirmative, can X adduce evidence in his defense
after the denial of his demurrer to evidence? [1%]
3. Without further proceeding and on the sole basis of the evidence of the prosecution, can the court
legally convict X for Murder? (2%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
1. Yes. The Court had the discretion to deny the demurrer to the evidence, because although the evidence
presented by the prosecution at the hearing for bail was not strong, without any evidence for the defense, it
could be sufficient for conviction.

1. No. Because he filed the demurrer to the evidence without leave. (Sec. 23, Rule 119, Rules of
Criminal Procedure.) However, the trial court should inquire as to why the accused filed the demurrer
without leave and whether his lawyer knew that the effect of filing it without leave is to waive the presentation
of the evidence for the accused. (People vs. Fores, 269 SCRA 62.)

 Section 23 Rule 119 When the demurrer to evidence is filed without leave of court, the accused waives the
right to present evidence and submits the case for judgment on the basis of the evidence for the
prosecution

2. Yes. Without any evidence from the accused, the prima facie evidence of the prosecution has been
converted to proof beyond reasonable doubt.

ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
If the evidence of guilt is not strong and beyond reasonable doubt then the court cannot legally convict X for
murder.

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