Pointers in Constitutional II (Finals)

Custodial Investigation:
Any questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way. Brothers or sisters Grandparents Grandchildren Nephews, nieces, guardians and wards

Section 12, Article 3: a. Miranda Rights b. No torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation or any other means which will vitiate the free will shall be used against him c. Secret detention places, solitary, incommunicado, or other similar forms of detention are prohibited. d. Any confession or admission obtained in violation of this section shall be inadmissible in evidence against him. e. The law shall provide for penal and civil sanctions for violations of this section as well as compensation to and rehabilitation of victims of torture or similar practices and their families. Miranda Rights:
(Will start to be attached when the accused is in interrogated of the crime)

Requisites for Extrajudicial Confession to be admissible: 1. Voluntary 2. With assistance of a counsel 3. In writing 4. Express 5. Should be witnessed and signed by: o Parents of the accused o Elder brother or sister o Municipal mayor o Municipal Judge o Priest or any gospel minister o School district supervisor Instances when confessions by person under arrest are admissible as evidence: 1. Extrajudicial confession done thru a media practitioner 2. Extrajudicial confessions done thru private persons or individual Police Line-Up in Identification by witness without counsel: All police line-up are admissible as evidence since this is apart in the custodial investigation process even if the accused is not assisted by a counsel. The right to counsel is not available during a police line-up as this is not considered part of the custodial investigation Except: When the police officers has already had a suspect in mind When the stage already shifted from investigatory to accusatory Reenactment by the accused must always be assisted by a counsel for it to be admissible. The Operative Act: Is when the police investigation is no longer a general inquiry into an unsolved crime but has begun to focus on a particular suspect who has been taken into custody by the police. Line-Up many accused shown to the witness Show-up Only one shown to the witness

Any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall have the right to be informed of his right to remain silent.
Could be applied in any modes of communication
Anything he will say will be used against him

The right to have competent and independent counsel, preferably of his own choice, if the accused cannot afford one, the State will provide one for him.
To prevent any force or intimidation that will be inflicted against him to own up in the crime filed against him

The right to be informed that he has the right to remain silent and he has a right to have a competent and independent counsel.
This right cannot be waived. Mere invitation letters is already considered part of the custodial investigation Waiver must be in writing, signed by the accused in the presence of a counsel and signed or executed by the same, signed and witnessed by specific person. Miranda Rights are only available in in investigation conducted by the police for a criminal offense. This right is not applicable to administrative cases. When Miranda Rights are violated then any confession is not admissible as evidence only if it is timely objected.

Roles of Counsel: 1. To secure the right of the accused 2. To make sure that the things that the accused will say is voluntarily done. Republic Act No. 7438:

What will happen if the rights are violated? For the extrajudicial confession to be inadmissible the accused will have to object The Log Book in the Police Station presented as evidence without counsel: This admissible since this is only an evidence of the arrest and not the guilt of the accused Mug Shot as evidence without counsel: This is admissible since this is merely a physical examination

Custodial investigation shall include the practice of issuing an invitation to a person who is investigated with an offense he is suspected to have committed. The accused has the right to a conference of his family, priest or doctor

Bail
It is the security given for the release of a person in custody of the law, furnished by him or a bondsman conditioned upon this appearance before any court as may be required. Only persons under detention may petition for bail

Family Members: Spouse Fianc Parents Children of the accused

1

Rule 114 of the Rules of Court -Any person in custody who is not yet charged may apply for bail in any court in the province, city or municipality -Even if the crime imputed to the accused is punishable by Reclusion Perpetua, he is still entitled to bail if the evidence of guilt is not strong

Except: Those charged with a capital offense An offense which under the law at the time of its commission and the at the time of the application for bail is punishable by Reclusion Perpetua, when the evidence of guilt is strong The accused can FILE FOR PETITION OF BAIL The judge is directed to show evidence. Factors for a judge to consider in fixing the amount of bail (Rule 114, Section 6 of the Rules of Court) 1. Financial ability of the accused to give bail 2. The nature and circumstances of the offense 3. Penalty of the offense charged 4. The character and reputation of the accused 5. The accuseds age and health 6. The weight of the evidence against him 7. The probability of his appearing at the trial 8. The forfeiture of other bonds by him 9. The fact that he was a fugitive from justice when arrested 10. The pendency of other cases against him
These guidelines are to be observed so as not to violate the prohibition against excessive bail. If the court while recognizing his right to bail, nevertheless frustrates it by requiring such amount as to be beyond his reach then it becomes a clear manifestation of giving with one and taking with the other, for the defendant does not have enough funds for the excessive bail required. The right of bail is only for criminal proceedings

Presumption of Innocence
Section 14 (a), Article 3: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until contrary is proven Accusation is not synonymous of guilt thus the accused is presumed innocent until proven otherwise. There should be a moral certainty that the accused is guilty It is the responsibility of the prosecution to establish he defendants guilt beyond reasonable doubt, otherwise he is entitled to acquittal. Conviction will depend not on the weakness of his defense but on the strength of the prosecution. The burden of proof is shifted to the accused if they assail self-defense

Constitutional presumptions of innocence may be overcome by contrary presumptions based on the experience of human conduct: a. Unexplained flight may lead to the inference of guilt:
The wicked flee when no man pursueth, but the righteous are as bold as a lion

b.

Failure of the accused to explain his possession of a stolen property may give rise to the reasonable presumption that it was he himself who had stolen it
The constitutional presumption will not apply as long as there is some rational connection between the fact proved and the ultimate fact presumed, and the inference of one fact from proof of another shall not be so unreasonable as to be a purely arbitrary mandate.

If a person convicted and was appealed in the RTC, can he continue to enjoy his bail? In the onset of the trial at the RTC, the accused can still enjoy his bail however after he is convicted in the RTC it is a matter of the judges discretion. The accused may be denied of bail if there is a risk of his absconding Can you travel abroad while in bail? No, since the provisional liberty granted to a person because of his bail is conditioned upon his appearance in the court when it is required and if he is in another country, he may be placed beyond the reach of the court

The Right to be heard

Section 14 (2), Article 3: And he shall enjoy the right to be heard by himself and a counsel

Criminal Due Process

Section 14, Article 3: No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law Requirements of Procedural Due Process in Judicial Proceedings 1. There must be an impartial court or tribunal clothed with judicial power to hear and determine the matter before it. 2. Jurisdiction must be lawfully acquired over the person of the defendant and over the property which is the subject matter of the proceeding. 3. The defendant must be given an opportunity to be heard. 4. Judgment must be rendered upon lawful hearing.
The right for preliminary investigation is not among the rights granted to the accused in the Bill of Rights. It is purely statutory. Even so, denial of this right in the absence of a valid waiver will violate due process. The citizens to be free not only from arbitrary arrest and punishment but also from unwarranted and vexatious prosecution. The basic ingredient of criminal due process is a trial conducted in accordance to the rudiments of fair play.

The accused is entitled to be heard in his defense not only by himself but also with the assistance of his counsel. The intricacies of the courtroom procedure are not within the knowledge of the ordinary layman, let alone one who is ignorant and unlettered. The right of the accused to a counsel in a criminal proceeding has never been considered subject to waiver In criminal case there can be no fair hearing unless the accused is given an opportunity to be heard by a counsel The duty of the court is not ended with such appointment, as it should also see to it that the counsel does his duty to the defendant The counsel de oficio should not merely make the motions of defending the accused but exert his utmost efforts as if he were representing a paying client. The judge, in cases where the accused pleads guilty, should exercise extra care in informing the accused of his rights and the consequence of his plea of guilty and in ascertaining the presence of the different circumstances should also be taken into account in the imposition of the proper penalty When the accuse pleads guilty in a capital offense, the court is mandated to ask probing questions to determine the voluntariness of the plea. The right to counsel does not cease after trial, but continues even where the case is appealed.

When can a Mistrial be declared? If it is shown that the trial were held under such circumstances as would prevent the accused from freely making his defense or the judge from free arriving in his decisions
2

Nature and Cause of Accusation

To be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him. The defendant is entitled to know the nature and cause of the accusation against him so he can adequately prepare for his defense. The description and not the designation of the offense is controlling. Hence, even if there be an erroneous designation the accused may be validly convicted for the crime described in the information. The defendant is also denied the right to be informed of the charge against him and to due process if the stature itself is couched in such indefinite language that it is not possible for men of ordinary intelligence to determine what acts or omissions are punished and hence should be avoided. The vagueness of the doctrine merely requires a reasonable degree of certainty for the statute to be upheld and not absolute precision or mathematical exactitude. Flexibility, rather than meticulous specificity is permissible as long as the boundaries of the statute are clearly defined.

Right against Self-Incrimination

Section 17, Article 3: No person shall be compelled to a witness against himself. Criminal Cases: This right assumes greater importance because accused can refuse to take the witness stand invoking his right against self- incrimination. The accused cannot be compelled to produce documentary exhibit which could prove his guilt except if what is meant to be proved is a document which is required to be prepared by the accused

Ordinary Witnesses: The right is applicable but unlike the accused, ordinary witnesses can only invoke this right as soon as the incriminating question is already being asked or profounded Otherwise, the witness will be cited in contempt of court Cannot altogether refuse from taking the stand, only the accuse in a criminal proceeding can

Speedy Trial: Justice Delayed is Justice Denied

The accused has a right to have a speedy, impartial and public trial: This requires not only the cold neutrality and impartiality of the court but also the appearance of impartiality. Section 16 of the Bill of Rights: All persons shall the right to a speedy disposition of their cases before all judicial, quasi-judicial or administrative bodies. Section 5 (3); Article 8: The Supreme Court not expressly permits to temporarily assign a judge from one station to another when the public interest so requires. As when there is a necessity to for a less occupied judge to help a busier colleague in another district Section 5 (5); Article 8: The Supreme Court shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases. Section 15 (1); Article 8: Maximum periods for the decision or resolution of cases: a. Supreme Court 24 months b. Court of Appeals 12 moths c. Lower Courts 3 months Civil Cases: The right is available to the defendant If this right is invoked in civil cases, this right can only be assailed as soon as the incriminating question as already profounded Administrative Proceedings: Similar as to the invocation by an ordinary witness in a criminal case Respondent cant invoke is right against self-incrimination Except: When the administrative proceeding partakes of the nature the same as of a criminal proceeding or where the administrative proceedings would involve forfeiture of his office, employment or property rights Then the right against self-incrimination may be invoked similar to the a criminal proceeding If it is just an ordinary administrative proceeding including forfeiture of office and property rights, rights may be invoked similarly in a civil case Malversation of Public Funds Can be invoked similar to a criminal proceeding Legislative Proceeding: Invocation is similar to the invocation of the right against selincrimination in civil cases Transactional Testimony: Right against self-incrimination is geared mainly on testimonial compulsion Allowable Compulsion: 1. Examination of a victim for gonorrhea 2. Giving of hair 3. DNA Testing Not Allowable Compulsion: 1. Taking out an evidence from the body of the accused Invalid since although it is only a physical compulsion, it is already considered inductive. there is was already force applied by the police officers 2. Falsification of public documents where the accused was compelled to give a sample of his signature Not allowed since according to the Supreme Court, the act requires an exercise of mental faculties or process, it is not a simple physical act.

Public Trial Necessary to prevent abuses that may committed by the court to the prejudice of the defendant The people have a right to attend the proceeding not only because of their interest but also so that they can see whether or not the constitutional safeguards are being observed. The accused is also entitled to the company of his relatives and friends to give him moral support. Speedy Trial One free from vexations, capricious and oppressive delays and it is intended to relieve the accused of needless anxieties

Where the prosecuting officer, without good cause, secures postponements of the trial of a defendant against his protest beyond reasonable period of time, the accused is entitled to relief by proceeding in mandamus to compel a dismissal of the information, of if he be restrained of his liberty by habeas corpus to obtain his freedom. 3

Trial in Absentia
Requisites for Trial in Absentia: 1. The accused has already been arraigned 2. He has been duly notified of the trial 3. His failure to appear is unjustified Trial in absentia does not abrogate the provisions of the Rules of Court regarding the forfeiture of his bail bond if the accused fails to appear at his trial.

face at the trial, who give their testimony in his presence and give the accused an opportunity of cross-examination It may be added that normally there is less propensity to lie on the part of a witness when actually confronted by the accused than when the testimony is given behind his back. The presence of the case in the trial will enable the court to observe his demeanor and weigh the credibility of his testimony

Compulsory Process
The accused is entitled under the Constitution to the issuance of subpoena and subpoena duces tecum For the purpose of compelling the attendance of a witness and the production of evidence that they may need for his defense Failure to obey the subpoena will result to contempt of court

Double Jeopardy
Section 21, Article 3: No person shall be twice put in jeopardy for the same offense. If an act is punishable by law and an ordinance, conviction or acquittal under shall constitute a bar to another prosecution for the same act. Res Judicata in person grey The right against double jeopardy prohibits the prosecution again of any person for a crime of which he has previously been acquitted or convicted. Requisites for Double Jeopardy to be invoked: 1. Valid complaint or information A prosecution based on an invalid complaint or information cannot lead to a valid judgment and hence will not place the accused under jeopardy 2. Filed before a competent court A court without jurisdiction cannot render a valid judgment To which the defendant had pleaded A defendant is never placed under jeopardy until after he shall have pleaded to the charge against him during the arraignment It is only after the accused has pleaded guilty that he is exposed to the danger under the punishment of the crime. Testifying to prove mitigating circumstances is in effect vacating his plea of guilty therefore double jeopardy cannot set in. Of which he had been previously acquitted or convicted or which dismissed or otherwise terminated without his express consent The judgment of the conviction is appealable within fifteen days but becomes final if the convict starts serving his sentence even before the expiration of this period. A dismissal with the express consent of the accused will not bar another prosecution for the same offense, as the said consent is a waiver of his right against double jeopardy The consent must be express and this does not include a mere silence or failure of the accused to object to the dismissal. The moment a person is acquitted on a criminal charge he can no longer be detained or re-arrested for the same offense.

Exceptional Circumstances: a. Any witness who is sick or infirm as to afford the ground for believing that he will not be able to attend the trial. b. The witness resides more than 100km from the place of trial and has no means to attend the same c. Or other similar circumstances that would make him unavailable or prevent him from attending the trial The accused is also entitled to employ the various methods of discovery allowed under the Rules of Court like letters rogatory and written interrogatories. The right to compulsory process must be invoked during the trial. Failure to do so constitutes a waiver that cannot be rectified or undone on appeal.

3.

Prohibited Punishments
Section 19 (1); Article 3: Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall the death penalty be imposed, unless, for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty already disposed shall be reduced to Reclusion Perpetua. 4. Section 19 (2); Article 3: The employment of physical, psychological or degrading punishment against any prisoner or detainee or the use of substandard or inadequate penal facilities under subhuman conditions shall be dealt with by law.

Mere fines and imprisonment are not violative of the Constitution. To be so, the penalty must be inhuman and barbarous and shocking to the conscience. It takes more than merely harsh, excessive, out of proportion or severe for a penalty to be obnoxious to the Constitution, to come under a ban, the punishment must be flagrantly and plainly oppressive, wholly disproportionate to the nature of the offense as to shock the moral sense of the community. Where unforeseeable accident occurs that adds up to the suffering of the convict, a penalty otherwise valid does not become cruel or unusual.

Appeal of Prosecution The prosecution can appeal where the accused is deemed to have waived or is estopped from invoking his right against double jeopardy The defense of double jeopardy will be available to the accused where the dismissal of the prosecution against, even with his express consent was based on the following:

The Right of Confrontation

Intends to secure the accused in the right to be tried, so far as facts provable by witnesses are concerned, only by witnesses as meet him face to
4

a. b.

Insufficiency of the evidence of the prosecution Denial to his right for a speedy trial Since these dismissals are considered in the nature of an acquittal. This is true even if the dismissal are erroneous.

2.

These acts may be done only upon previous written authorization by the court, to be issued in compliance with the requirements for the issuance of a warrant. The authorization to wire-tap will only be valid for 60days. Any evidence obtained in violation of the law is also not admissible in evidence.
The letters and sealed packages in the mails may be examined only as to their external appearance and weight and may not be opened except in accordance with the constitutional requirements of a lawful search and seizures.

3. 4.

Crimes Covered

The accused may not be prosecuted again for the original offense charged or for any attempt to commit the same or frustration thereof Or for any offense which necessarily includes or is necessarily included in the offense charged in the original complaint or information

The effect of prosecuting first the lesser offense where a larger offense has been committed and could be prosecuted would be to split the larger offense into its lesser parts, thus bringing the man into jeopardy for each such part. This is unthinkable under a civilized system of criminal justice.

Remedy is someone is trying to intercept your communication: Apply for the issuance of Writ for Habeas Data Under Circular No. 8-1-16, Jan, 22, 2008

Doctrine of Supervening Event The accused may be prosecuted for another offense if a subsequent development changes the character of the first indictment under which he may have already been charged or convicted. The Supervening Event occurred after prosecution: The Supreme Court held there was not double jeopardy as the deformity did not exist and could not have been apprehended at the time the first information was filed. Rule 117, Section 7 of the Rules of Court: The conviction of the accused shall not be a bar to another prosecution for an offense which necessarily includes the offense charged in the former complaint or information under the following circumstances: 1. The graver offense developed due to supervening facts arising from the same act or omission constituting the former charge 2. The facts constituting the graver charge became known or were discovered only after the filing of the former complaint or information 3. The plea of guilty to the lesser offense was made without the consent of the prosecutor and of the offended part except provided for in Section (f) of Rule 116 of the ROC Inseparable Offenses Where one offense is inseparable from another and proceeds from the same act, they cannot be the subject of separate prosecutions

Liberty of Abode and Travel

Section 6 of the Bill of Rights: The liberty of abode and changing of the same within the limits prescribed by la shall not be impaired except upon lawful order of the court. Neither shall the right to travel be impaired except in the interest of national security, public safety or public health, as may be provided by law. Purpose: Liberty under the Constitution includes the right to choose ones residence, to leave it whenever he pleases and to travel wherever he wills. Limitation: Upon lawful order of the court Interest of national security, public safety or public health The person is convicted Ejectment cases Person accused and puts up bail Extradition proceedings Evacuation

Freedom of Religion
Section 5, Article 3: No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. Section, Article 2: The separation shall be inviolable
The idea is to delineate the boundaries between the two institutions and thus avoid encroachments by one against the other because of a misunderstanding of the limits of their respective exclusive jurisdictions Render therefore unto Caesar the things that are Caesars and unto God the things that are Gods

Privacy of Communications & Correspondence

Section 3 (1); Article 3: The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable except upon lawful order of the court or when public safety or order requires otherwise as prescribed by the law. Anti-Wire-Tapping Act Prohibits any person, not being authorized by all the parties to any private communication or spoken word, to tap any wire or cable, or hear using any other device or arrangement, to secretly overhear, intercept or record the same, or to communicate the content thereof to any other person. When Wire-Tapping is accepted: 1. Permitted only in criminal and civil proceedings involving certain specified offenses, main those affecting national security.

The Supreme Court held in Aglipay vs Ruiz Ruling: Where it was held that any benefit indirectly enjoyed by a religious institution would not violate the prohibition, as long as such benefit was only incidental to a legitimate secular objective. The provision does not inhibit the use of public property for religious purposes when the religious character of such is merely incidental to a temporary use which is available indiscriminately to the public in general. Payment of public funds is not prohibited to ecclesiastics when they serve the government in a non-ecclesiastical capacity. The Constitution itself also provides for the exemption from property taxes of religious institutions and all lands, buildings, and improvements actually, directly and exclusively devoted to religious purposes.

Two Aspect of Freedom of Religion Freedom to Believe The freedom to act ones belief This is absolute as long as the belief is confined in the realms of thought Freedom to Act on Ones Belief Subject to regulation since the belief is translated into external acts that affect the public welfare.

Freedom of Expression
Section 4, Article 3: No law shall be pass abridging the freedom of speech, of expression or the press or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the Government for redress of grievances. Section 18 (1); Bill of Rights: No person shall be detained solely by reason of his political beliefs or aspirations. The Elements of Freedom of Expression: 1. Freedom from Censorship 2. Freedom from Subsequent Punishment Censorship: Conditions the exercise of freedom of expression upon the prior approval of the government. Only those ideas acceptable to it are allowed to be disseminated

Criticism of Official Conduct: The official acts, and even the private life of a public servant are legitimate subjects of public comment The people have the right to scrutinize and comment or condemn the conduct of their chosen representatives in the government. As long as their comments are made in good faith and with justifiable ends, even if such comments are found to be inaccurate or erroneous. The right of privacy of a public figure is narrower than that of an
ordinary citizen.

Alarcon Doctrine: Newspaper publications tending to impede, obstruct, embarrass or influence the courts administration of justice in a pending suit or proceeding constitutes criminal contempt which is summarily punishable by the courts.

Non-Impairment of Contracts:
Section 10, Article 3: No law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be passed It refers to laws enacted by congress and Executive Orders and administrative legislation Exceptions: 1. If the law is implemented as an exercise of police power 2. If curative in nature, retroactive effect is allowed 3. If the law introduces a substantive right Conditions of the Laws Abridging Contracts: a. If the law enacted by Congress pertains to criminal matters and it is prejudicial to the accused then it is in violation of Section 22, Article 3. b. If the law is not criminal in nature and has been given a retroactive effect, it may be assailed under Section 10, Article 3

Freedom from Punishment: Without this assurance, the citizen would hesitate to speak for fear he might be provoking the vengeance of the officials he has criticized
Freedom of Expression is not absolute since it is subject to police power of the state and may be properly regulated in the interest of the public. Limitation:

It has been held that freedom of expression does not cover ideas offensive to public order or decency or the reputation of persons, which are all entitled to protection by the State.

Ex Post Facto Law & Bill of Attainder

Section 22; Article 3: No Ex Post Facto Law or Bill of Attainder shall be imposed. Ex Post Facto Law One that would make a previous act criminal although it was not so at the time it was committed Characteristics: 1. Refer to criminal matters 2. Retroactive in its application 3. To the prejudiced of the accused Exceptions:
1. The law is merely procedural in nature

Criteria for Determining the Liability of an Individual for Ideas Expressed by Him: 1. The clear and present danger rule 2. The dangerous tendency doctrine 3. The balancing test I. The Clear and Present Danger Rule: Whether the use of words are in such manner that by nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will about the substantive evils that the State has a right to prevent. If they do, the speaker
will be punished

2.

Doesnt affect substantive right to the accused

When the law is favorable to the accused

As a rule, the danger created must not only be clear and present but also traceable to the ideas expressed.

II.

The Dangerous Tendency Doctrine: A person could be punished for his ideas even if they only tended to create the evil sought to be prevented. It was not necessary to actually necessary to create the evil; a mere tendency toward the evil sought is enough. The Balance-of-Interest Test If in a given situation it appears that there is an urgent necessity for protecting the national security against violation of the exercise of the freedom of speech, then the right must yield.
6

Bill of Attainder A legislative act that inflicts punishment without trial Violative of procedural due process

Right against Involuntary Servitude: Section 8, Article 3

Exceptions: 1. Persons sentenced in jail 2. Personal military service 3. Merchant marine 4. Person commissioned by the Police to help arrest robbers 5. Labor dispute 6. Parental authority over guardians or wards

III.