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

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 36 views

    Reviewer Criminal Procedure

    Uploaded by

    Densel James Abua Silvania
    This document discusses several motions filed by respondent Panfilo Lacson before the Supreme Court regarding criminal procedure rules. It notes that the Court has the power under the Constitution to promulgate rules of procedure, as long as those rules do not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights. The Court may also make new rules of criminal procedure prospective rather than retroactive depending on the situation and impact on the administration of justice.

    Copyright:

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

    Reviewer Criminal Procedure

    Uploaded by

    Densel James Abua Silvania
    36 views2 pages
    This document discusses several motions filed by respondent Panfilo Lacson before the Supreme Court regarding criminal procedure rules. It notes that the Court has the power under the Constitution to promulgate rules of procedure, as long as those rules do not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights. The Court may also make new rules of criminal procedure prospective rather than retroactive depending on the situation and impact on the administration of justice.

    Original Description:

    123123123123

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document discusses several motions filed by respondent Panfilo Lacson before the Supreme Court regarding criminal procedure rules. It notes that the Court has the power under the Constitution to promulgate rules of procedure, as long as those rules do not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights. The Court may also make new rules of criminal procedure prospective rather than retroactive depending on the situation and impact on the administration of justice.

    Copyright:

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

    Reviewer Criminal Procedure

    Uploaded by

    Densel James Abua Silvania
    This document discusses several motions filed by respondent Panfilo Lacson before the Supreme Court regarding criminal procedure rules. It notes that the Court has the power under the Constitution to promulgate rules of procedure, as long as those rules do not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights. The Court may also make new rules of criminal procedure prospective rather than retroactive depending on the situation and impact on the administration of justice.

    Copyright:

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

    Reviewer Criminal Procedure

    EN BANC

    G.R. No. 149453             October 7, 2003

    PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, THE SECRETARY OF JUSTICE, DIRECTOR GENERAL OF THE


    PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE, CHIEF STATE PROSECUTOR JOVENCITO ZUÑO, STATE
    PROSECUTORS PETER L. ONG and RUBEN A. ZACARIAS; 2ND ASSISTANT CITY
    PROSECUTOR CONRADO M. JAMOLIN and CITY PROSECUTOR OF QUEZON CITY CLARO
    ARELLANO, petitioners,
    vs.
    PANFILO M. LACSON, respondent.

    Before the Court are the following motions of the respondent, to wit: (a) Omnibus Motion; (b) Motion
    1 

    for Reconsideration; (c) Supplement to Motion for Reconsideration; (d) Motion To Set for Oral
    2  3 

    Arguments. 4

    Section 5(5), Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution, which provides in part that the
    rules of procedure which the Court may promulgate shall not diminish, increase or
    modify substantial rights.

    First. The Court approved the RRCP pursuant to its power under Article VIII, Section
    5, paragraph 5 of the Constitution which reads:

    (5) Promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights,
    pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the
    Integrated Bar, and legal assistance to the underprivileged. Such rules shall provide a
    simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases, shall be
    uniform for all courts of the same grade, and shall not diminish, increase, or modify
    substantive rights. Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall
    remain effective unless disapproved by the Supreme Court.

    In criminal litigations concerning constitutional issue claims, the Court, in the


    interest of justice, may make the rule prospective where the exigencies of the situation
    make the rule prospective. The retroactivity or non-retroactivity of a rule is not
    automatically determined by the provision of the Constitution on which the dictate is
    based. Each constitutional rule of criminal procedure has its own distinct functions, its
    own background or precedent, and its own impact on the administration of justice, and
    the way in which these factors combine must inevitably vary with the dictate involved.

    You might also like