ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™  
Main Index Law Library Philippine Laws, Statutes & Codes Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Jurisprudence
Prof. Joselito Guianan Chan's The Labor Code of the Philippines, Annotated Labor Standards & Social Legislation Volume I of a 3-Volume Series 2019 Edition (3rd Revised Edition)
 

 
Chan Robles Virtual Law Library
 
 

 
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

 
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

   
March-1950 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-1720 March 4, 1950 - SIA SUAN, ET AL. v. RAMON ALCANTARA

    085 Phil 669

  • G.R. No. L-2038 March 4, 1950 - LUIS DEL CASTILLO v. METROPOLITAN INSURANCE COMPANY

    085 Phil 678

  • G.R. No. L-2171 March, 4, 1950 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. IDE LAGON RAMOS

    085 Phil 683

  • G.R. No. L-2407 March 4, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MATIAS ALUPAY

    085 Phil 688

  • G.R. No. L-2447 March 4, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO PULIDO, ET AL

    085 Phil 695

  • G.R. No. L-1296 March 6, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOSE PALICTE

    085 Phil 711

  • G.R. No. L-1546 March 6, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILS. v. RUFINO SURALTA

    085 Phil 714

  • G.R. No. L-2462 March 6, 1950 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. GO LEE

    085 Phil 718

  • G.R. No. L-2665 March 6, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FLORENTINO PATERNO, ET AL

    085 Phil 722

  • G.R. No. L-2996 March 6, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PRECIANO MEJARES, ET AL.

    085 Phil 727

  • G.R. No. L-3463 March 6, 1950 - LEONCIO ROSARES v. DIRECTOR OF PRISONS

    085 Phil 730

  • G.R. No. L-2335 March 7, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FRANCISCO MORENO

    085 Phil 731

  • G.R. No. L-3643 March 7, 950

    CARLOS C. ASPRA v. DIRECTOR OF PRISONS

    085 Phil 737

  • G.R. No. L-2269 March 14, 1950 - FABIAN B. S. ABELLERA v. NARCISO DE GUZMAN

    085 Phil 738

  • G.R. No. L-1990 March 15, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LEONILO GANAL, ET AL.

    085 Phil 743

  • G.R. No. L-2809 March 22, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FRISCO HOLGADO

    085 Phil 752

  • G.R. No. L-3022 March 22, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO CABASA, ET AL

    085 Phil 758

  • G.R. No. L-3580 March 22, 1950 - CONRADO MELO v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL., ET AL

    085 Phil 766

  • G.R. No. L-2217 March 23, 1950 - MIGUEL R. CORNEJO v. BIENVENIDO A. TAN

    085 Phil 772

  • G.R. No. L-2582 March 23, 1950 - TRINIDAD SEMIRA, ET AL v. JUAN ENRIQUEZ

    085 Phil 776

  • G.R. No. L-2981 March 23, 1950 - VISAYAN SURETY & INSURANCE CORP. v. VICTORIA PASCUAL, ET AL

    085 Phil 779

  • G.R. No. L-2434 March 25, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MACABANTUG RANGON ET AL.

    085 Phil 786

  • G.R. No. L-2584 March 25, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TEODORO BARRAMEDA

    085 Phil 789

  • G.R. No. L-2636 March 25, 1950 - YU SIP v. COURT OF APPEALS

    085 Phil 795

  • G.R. No. L-2784 March 25, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GERARDO NARSOLIS ET AL.

    085 Phil 798

  • G.R. No. L-2856 March 27, 1950 - GO CAM v. Hon. MAGNO S. GATMAITAN, ET AL

    085 Phil 802

  • G.R. No. L-2743 March 29, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SIXTO CANDELARIA

    085 Phil 805

  • G.R. No. L-836 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANACLETO MAGDANG, ET AL

    085 Phil 807

  • G.R. No. L-1912 March 30, 1950 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. ANATOLIO LLENARIZAS

    085 Phil 809

  • G.R. No. L-2239 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. AURELIO SANTIAGO

    085 Phil 813

  • G.R. No. L-2275 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SIMPLICIO MACASO, ET ALS.

    085 Phil 819

  • G.R. No. L-2288 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MAXIMO MANOLONG

    085 Phil 829

  • G.R. No. L-2600 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO MARAPAO

    085 Phil 832

  • G.R. No. L-2647 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DIONISIO S. SERRANO

    085 Phil 835

  • G.R. No. L-2681 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DARIO MARGEN, ET AL.

    085 Phil 839

  • G.R. No. L-2175 March 31, 1950 - NG GIOC LIU v. SECRETARY OF THE DFA

    085 Phil 842

  • G.R. No. L-2189 March 31, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CILDO, ET AL

    085 Phil 845

  • G.R. No. L-2318 March 31, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TEOFILO PAAR

    085 Phil 864

  • G.R. No. L-2405 March 31, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUAN DE LOS SANTOS

    085 Phil 870

  • G.R. No. L-2801 March 31, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO BELANDRES, ET AL.

    085 Phil 874

  • G.R. No. L-2880 March 31, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DEMETRIO MOSTOLES, ET AL.

    085 Phil 883

  •  




     
     

    G.R. No. L-836   March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANACLETO MAGDANG, ET AL<br /><br />085 Phil 807

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    FIRST DIVISION

    [G.R. No. L-836. March 30, 1950.]

    THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ANACLETO MAGDANG, JOSE CADUNGON and AMPARO SUMUGAT, Defendants-Appellees.

    Assistant Solicitor General Carmelino G. Alvendia and Solicitor Florencio Villamor for Appellant.

    SYLLABUS


    1. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE., RULES OF; ABSENCE OF NOTICE OF DATE OF HEARING. — In case of absence of notice of hearing the fiscal or the party affected should first make representations in the court below (in a motion for reconsideration or new trial) as to the alleged non-receipt of notice, so that the trial judge may have an opportunity to make an official statement on the point or see to it that the records are completed.


    D E C I S I O N


    BENGZON, J.:


    In December, 1942, the defendants-appellees were charged with malicious mischief in the justice of the peace court of Culasi, Antique. The complaint alleged that they had plowed land planted with mongo thereby damaging the owner in the sum of fifteen pesos. They asserted the right to cultivate the land. Found guilty by the justice of the peace, they appealed to the court of first instance.

    There the trial was postponed several times. On March 10, 1944, the case was called for hearing. The provincial fiscal was absent. Counsel for defendants moved for dismissal. Whereupon the judge made this order:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "The record of this case shows that the information filed by the Acting Provincial Fiscal is dated October 25, 1943, and that the original complaint in the court below was filed on December 31, 1942. This case, therefore, has been pending in court for quite a long period of time, and the hearing of this case has been postponed a number of times. The Acting Provincial Fiscal has failed to appear in court this morning without any reason, but the accused have signified their readiness to have an immediate trial of the case. Their counsel verbally moved for the dismissal of the case, for the reason that they have come to the court a number of times, and that the case should be heard with the least possible delay. Finding their motion justified, the case is hereby dismissed, with costs de oficio."cralaw virtua1aw library

    The fiscal filed a notice of appeal on March 20, 1944.

    The Solicitor General contends in this Court that the order should be revoked, because it does not appear that the provincial fiscal had been officially notified of the actual date of hearing.

    The records of the case now before us demonstrate how incomplete and informal the proceedings were — obviously due to the emergency caused by the war. We find therein that the fiscal never asserted in writing that he had not been notified. On the other hand the judge says that said officer "failed to appear in court this morning without any reason" which fairly implies that the fiscal had been notified, notice being a fundamental requirement which must be presumed to have been complied with.

    In situations similar to the one asserted here by the prosecution, the fiscal or the party affected should first make representations in the court below (in a motion for reconsideration or new trial) as to the alleged non-receipt of notice, so that the trial judge may have an opportunity to make an official statement on the point or see to it that the records are completed.

    Considering that the question involves a petty offense possibly mixed up with a civil litigation, we see no justification in letting it clutter court records for a long time, especially in the absence of a clear case.

    The order of dismissal is affirmed. So ordered.

    Moran, C.J., Ozaeta, Pablo, Padilla, Tuason and Reyes, JJ., concur.

    BENGZON, J.:


    Mr. Justice Montemayor voted to affirm.

    G.R. No. L-836   March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANACLETO MAGDANG, ET AL<br /><br />085 Phil 807




    Back to Home | Back to Main

     

    QUICK SEARCH

    cralaw

       

    cralaw



     
      Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
    ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
     
    RED