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

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 2K views

    Daan vs. Sandiganbayan

    Uploaded by

    Dany
    The Sandiganbayan denied Joselito Daan's motion to plea bargain to lesser offenses despite the prosecution recommending approval. Daan was charged with malversation of public funds and falsification of public documents. He offered to plead guilty to lesser included offenses of failure to render accounts and falsification by a private individual. The Supreme Court ruled the plea bargain should have been accepted. While the Sandiganbayan initially rejected it, the interests of justice and that the lesser offenses were included in the original charges dictated that the plea bargain be approved.

    Copyright:

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

    Daan vs. Sandiganbayan

    Uploaded by

    Dany
    2K views2 pages
    The Sandiganbayan denied Joselito Daan's motion to plea bargain to lesser offenses despite the prosecution recommending approval. Daan was charged with malversation of public funds and falsification of public documents. He offered to plead guilty to lesser included offenses of failure to render accounts and falsification by a private individual. The Supreme Court ruled the plea bargain should have been accepted. While the Sandiganbayan initially rejected it, the interests of justice and that the lesser offenses were included in the original charges dictated that the plea bargain be approved.

    Original Description:

    Criminal Procedure

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Sandiganbayan denied Joselito Daan's motion to plea bargain to lesser offenses despite the prosecution recommending approval. Daan was charged with malversation of public funds and falsification of public documents. He offered to plead guilty to lesser included offenses of failure to render accounts and falsification by a private individual. The Supreme Court ruled the plea bargain should have been accepted. While the Sandiganbayan initially rejected it, the interests of justice and that the lesser offenses were included in the original charges dictated that the plea bargain be approved.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    2K views2 pages

    Daan vs. Sandiganbayan

    Uploaded by

    Dany
    The Sandiganbayan denied Joselito Daan's motion to plea bargain to lesser offenses despite the prosecution recommending approval. Daan was charged with malversation of public funds and falsification of public documents. He offered to plead guilty to lesser included offenses of failure to render accounts and falsification by a private individual. The Supreme Court ruled the plea bargain should have been accepted. While the Sandiganbayan initially rejected it, the interests of justice and that the lesser offenses were included in the original charges dictated that the plea bargain be approved.

    Copyright:

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

    G.R. Nos. 163972-77.

    March 28, 2008


    JOSELITO RANIERO J. DAAN vs. THE HON. SANDIGANBAYAN (Fourth
    Division)

    Doctrine: Section 2, Rule 116 of the Rules of Court presents the basic requisites
    upon which plea bargaining may be made, i.e., that it should be with the consent
    of the offended party and the prosecutor, and that the plea of guilt should be to
    a lesser offense which is necessarily included in the offense charged. As regards
    plea bargaining during the pre-trial stage, as in the present case, the
    trial court's exercise of its discretion should neither be arbitrary nor should it
    amount to a capricious and whimsical exercise of discretion.

    Facts:
    Joselito Daan and Benedicto Kuizon were charged before Sandiganbayan for
    three counts of malversation of public funds which they purportedly tried to
    conceal by falsifying the time book and payrolls for given period making it appear
    that some laborers worked on the construction of the new municipal hall and
    collected their respective salaries when they did not. In addition, they were also
    charged for three counts of falsification of public document by a public officer or
    employee.

    In the falsification cases, the accused offered to withdraw their plea of not guilty
    and substitute the same with a plea of guilty, provided, the mitigating
    circumstances of confession or plea of guilt and voluntary surrender will be
    appreciated in their favor. In the alternative, if such proposal is not acceptable,
    said accused proposed instead to substitute their plea of not guilty to the crime
    of falsification of public document by a public officer or employee with a plea of
    guilty, but to the lesser crime of falsification of a public document by a private
    individual. On the other hand, in the malversation cases, the accused offered to
    substitute their plea of not guilty thereto with a plea of guilty, but to the lesser
    crime of failure of an accountable officer to render accounts.

    Insofar as the falsification cases are concerned, the prosecution found as


    acceptable the proposal of the accused to plead guilty to the lesser crime of
    falsification of public document by a private individual for it will strengthen the
    cases against the principal accused, Municipal Mayor Kuizon who appears to be
    the mastermind of these criminal acts. As to the malversation cases, the
    prosecution was likewise amenable to the offer of Daan to plead guilty to the
    lesser crime of failure of an accountable officer to render accounts because he
    has already restituted the amount involved.

    However, the Sandiganbayan denied Daan’s Motion to Plea Bargain, despite


    favorable recommendation by the prosecution, on the main ground that no
    cogent reason was presented to justify its approval. Likewise, it denied Daan’s
    Motion for Reconsideration.

    Issue: Whether or not the plea of guilty to a lesser offense is proper in this case

    Held: YES. In the present case, the Sandiganbayan rejected petitioner's plea
    offer on the ground that petitioner and the prosecution failed to demonstrate
    that the proposal would redound to the benefit of the public.

    Apparently, the Sandiganbayan has proffered valid reasons in rejecting


    petitioner's plea offer. However, subsequent events and higher interests of
    justice and fair play dictate that petitioner's plea offer should be accepted. The
    present case calls for the judicious exercise of this Court's equity jurisdiction
    and of its power of control and supervision over the proceedings of lower
    courts, in order to afford equal justice to petitioner.

    Moreover, the lesser offenses of Falsification by Private Individuals and Failure


    to Render Account by an Accountable Officer are necessarily included in the
    crimes of Falsification of Public Documents and Malversation of Public Funds,
    respectively, with which petitioner was originally charged. Given, therefore, that
    some of the essential elements of offenses charged in this case likewise
    constitute the lesser offenses, then petitioner may plead guilty to such lesser
    offenses.

    You might also like