Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1K views

    People v. Vera, 65 Phil. 56 Digest

    Uploaded by

    reiner
    The Supreme Court ruled Act 4221, also known as the Probation Act, to be unconstitutional. The Act was challenged on the grounds that it encroaches on the pardoning power of the executive, constitutes an improper delegation of legislative authority to provincial boards, and denies equal protection under the law. The Court found that while probation and pardon differ in effect, pardon is solely an executive power. The Act was also found to violate the prohibition against unequal treatment and to delegate legislative authority without proper standards, giving provincial boards absolute discretion. The Act was declared unconstitutional and void.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    People v. Vera, 65 Phil. 56 Digest

    Uploaded by

    reiner
    1K views2 pages
    The Supreme Court ruled Act 4221, also known as the Probation Act, to be unconstitutional. The Act was challenged on the grounds that it encroaches on the pardoning power of the executive, constitutes an improper delegation of legislative authority to provincial boards, and denies equal protection under the law. The Court found that while probation and pardon differ in effect, pardon is solely an executive power. The Act was also found to violate the prohibition against unequal treatment and to delegate legislative authority without proper standards, giving provincial boards absolute discretion. The Act was declared unconstitutional and void.

    Original Description:

    consti digest

    Original Title

    (063) People v. Vera, 65 Phil. 56 Digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court ruled Act 4221, also known as the Probation Act, to be unconstitutional. The Act was challenged on the grounds that it encroaches on the pardoning power of the executive, constitutes an improper delegation of legislative authority to provincial boards, and denies equal protection under the law. The Court found that while probation and pardon differ in effect, pardon is solely an executive power. The Act was also found to violate the prohibition against unequal treatment and to delegate legislative authority without proper standards, giving provincial boards absolute discretion. The Act was declared unconstitutional and void.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    1K views2 pages

    People v. Vera, 65 Phil. 56 Digest

    Uploaded by

    reiner
    The Supreme Court ruled Act 4221, also known as the Probation Act, to be unconstitutional. The Act was challenged on the grounds that it encroaches on the pardoning power of the executive, constitutes an improper delegation of legislative authority to provincial boards, and denies equal protection under the law. The Court found that while probation and pardon differ in effect, pardon is solely an executive power. The Act was also found to violate the prohibition against unequal treatment and to delegate legislative authority without proper standards, giving provincial boards absolute discretion. The Act was declared unconstitutional and void.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    The People of the Philippine Islands and Hong Kong & Shanghai Banking Corporation vs.

    Jose
    Vera and Mariano Cu Unjieng
    65 Phil. 56
    November 16, 1937

    Petitioners: The People of the Philippine Islands and Hong Kong & Shanghai Banking
    Corporation
    Respondents: Jose Vera and Mariano Cu Unjieng
    Nature of the Action: Issuance of the writ of certiorari and of prohibition to the Court of First
    Instance

    Ponente: Laurel, J.

    Facts:
    Respondent Jose O. Vera is the Judge ad interim of the seventh branch of the Court of
    First Instance of Manila, who heard the application of the Mariano Cu Unjieng for
    probation under the provisions of Act No. 4221 in his criminal case entitled "The People
    of the Philippine Islands vs. Mariano Cu Unjieng, et al."
    HSBC questioned the authority of Vera to hold such hearings and assailed the
    constitutionality of the act since it violates the equal protection of laws and gives
    unlawful and improper delegation to provincial boards.
    Section 11 of Art 4221 states that the act shall only be applied in those provinces
    wherein the probationary officer is granted salary not lower than provincial fiscals by
    respective provincial boards.
    The City Fiscal of Manila files a supplementary petition affirming issues raised by
    HSBC, arguing that probation is a form of reprieve. Thus, the Act 4221 bypasses this
    exclusive power of the Chief Executive. Hence this petition in the Supreme Court

    Issue:
    Whether or not Act 4221 (Probation Act) is constitutional based on the grounds that it
    encroaches upon the pardoning power of the executive, it constitutes an undue delegation of
    legislative power; and it denies the equal protection of the laws.

    Ruling:

    There is a fine line between pardon and probation. Pardoning power is solely within the
    power of the Executive. Pardon is an act of grace, proceeding from the power intrusted with
    the execution of the laws which exempts the individual on whom it is bestowed from the
    punishment the law inflicts for a crime he has committed. It is a remission of guilt or a
    forgiveness of the offense. Probation has an effect of temporary suspension and the
    probationer is still not exempt from the entire punishment which the law inflicts upon him as
    he remains to be in legal custody for the time being.

    Probation Act violates the provision of our Bill of Rights which prohibits the denial to
    any person of the equal protection of the laws. It also constitutes an improper and unlawful
    delegation of legislative authority to the provincial boards because the Congress did not set any
    standards on how provincial boards must act in carrying out a system of probation. The
    provincial boards are given absolute discretion. Thus, Art 4221 is unconstitutional and void.

    You might also like