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
 

   
May-1950 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-1597 May 5, 1950 - SANTIAGO SYJUCO, INC. v. PNB, ET AL

    086 Phil 320

  • G.R. No. L-2029 May 6, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUAN MONES

    086 Phil 331

  • G.R. No. L-2628 May 6, 1950 - ROQUE PARADO v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    086 Phil 340

  • G.R. No. L-2124 May 10, 1950 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. JOSE O. DEMETRIO, ET AL

    086 Phil 344

  • G.R. No. L-2860 May 11, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FRANCISCO PALMON

    086 Phil 350

  • G.R. No. L-2640 May 12, 1950 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. LEON O. DE LOS REYES

    086 Phil 355

  • G.R. No. L-2400 May 18, 1950 - MARIA MACAPINLAC, ET AL v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL

    086 Phil 359

  • G.R. No. L-2487 May 18, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RICO ELIZAGA, ET AL

    086 Phil 364

  • G.R. No. L-1721 May 19, 1950 - JUAN D. EVANGELISTA ET AL. v. RAFAEL SANTOS

    086 Phil 387

  • G.R. No. L-2188 May 19, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANTONIO GUILLERMO, ET AL.

    086 Phil 395

  • G.R. No. L-2231 May 19, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. INOCENCIO BERNARDO

    086 Phil 400

  • G.R. Nos. L-2731-32 May 19, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RUBEN VICTORIANO, ET AL.

    086 Phil 405

  • G.R. No. L-2777 May 19, 1950 - FERNANDO HERNANDEZ, ET v. EMILIO PEÑA, ET AL

    086 Phil 411

  • G.R. No. L-2798 May 19, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GABRIEL GASPAR

    086 Phil 413

  • G.R. No. L-2823 May 19, 1950 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. CLEMENTE MACUL Y OTROS

    086 Phil 423

  • G.R. No. L-2835 May 19, 1950 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. GRACIANO TENORIO Y BRUNO TENORIO

    086 Phil 427

  • G.R. No. L-3066 May 22, 1950 - RADIOWEALTH, INC. v. MANUEL AGREGADO, ET AL

    086 Phil 429

  • G.R. No. L-3103 May 22, 1950 - YU PHI KHIM, ET AL v. RAFAEL AMPARO, ET AL

    086 Phil 441

  • G.R. No. L-3595 May 22, 1950 - ANG LAM v. POTENCIANO ROSILLOSA, ET AL

    086 Phil 447

  • G.R. No. L-2792 May 23, 1950 - ROMEO JACA v. MANUEL BLANCO

    086 Phil 452

  • G.R. No. L-3049 May 24, 1950 - JULIANA VIVO v. JOSE S. BAUTISTA

    086 Phil 456

  • G.R. No. L-2181 May 25, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CONRADO SANTIAGO, ET AL.

    086 Phil 459

  • G.R. No. L-3443 May 26, 1950 - FELIPE LUNA v. GAVINO S. ABAYA, ET AL

    086 Phil 472

  • G.R. No. L-1601 May 29, 1950 - CENON ALBEA v. CARLOS INQUIMBOY, ET AL

    086 Phil 477

  • G.R. No. L-2365 May 29, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALBERTO SAN LUIS, ET AL

    086 Phil 485

  • G.R. No. L-3071 May 29, 1950 - SALVACION LOPEZ v. JOSE TEODORO, ET AL

    086 Phil 499

  • G.R. No. L-3271 May 29, 1950 - QUIRINO RICAFRENTE, ET AL v. GUILLERMO CABRERA, ET AL

    086 Phil 502

  • G.R. No. L-3451 May 29, 1950 - RODOLFO GERARDO v. JUDGE OF FIRST INSTANCE OF ILOCOS NORTE

    086 Phil 504

  • G.R. No. L-2660 May 30, 1950 - LUZON MARINE DEPARTMENT UNION v. ARSENIO C. ROLDAN, ET AL

    086 Phil 507

  • G.R. No. L-2744 May 30, 1950 - GAUDENCIO D. DEMAISIP, ET AL v. QUERUBE C. MAKALINTAL, ET AL

    086 Phil 515

  • G.R. No. L-2800 May 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TEOPISTA CANJA

    086 Phil 518

  • G.R. No. L-3211 May 30, 1950 - A. SORIANO Y CIA. v. GONZALO M. JOSE, ET AL

    086 Phil 523

  • G.R. No. L-2408 May 31, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALFREDO RIPARIP ET AL.

    086 Phil 526

  • G.R. No. L-2816 May 31, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FELIPE YTURRIAGA

    086 Phil 534

  • G.R. No. L-3343 May 31, 1950 - REGINO EUSTAQUIO v. JUAN R. LIWAG, ET AL

    086 Phil 540

  • G.R. No. L-3541 May 31, 1950 - TOMAS T. FABELLA v. TIBURCIO TANCINCO ETC.

    086 Phil 543

  •  





     
     

    G.R. No. L-3451   May 29, 1950 - RODOLFO GERARDO v. JUDGE OF FIRST INSTANCE OF ILOCOS NORTE<br /><br />086 Phil 504

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    SECOND DIVISION

    [G.R. No. L-3451. May 29, 1950.]

    RODOLFO GERARDO (alias MAGELLAN GERARDO), Petitioner, v. JUDGE OF FIRST INSTANCE OF ILOCOS NORTE, Respondent.

    Antonio V. Raquiza for Petitioner.

    Respondent judge in his own behalf.

    SYLLABUS


    1. BAIL; SEPARATE PROCEEDING FOR BAIL NOT OBLIGATORY. — The court is not obliged to conduct a separate proceeding to determine the right of an accused to be admitted to bail.


    D E C I S I O N


    TUASON, J.:


    The petitioner, Accused of murder in criminal case No. 938 of the Court of First Instance of Ilocos Norte, files this petition for certiorari to set aside certain orders of that court, to revoke an order of the Justice of the Peace of Laoag, to order his release on bail for P20,000 so that he can prepare for his trial, and to issue a preliminary injunction to restrain the respondent Judge from hearing his case until after this petition shall have been decided. The prayer for preliminary injunction was granted.

    It appears that the Justice of the Peace of Laoag, after conducting a preliminary investigation set the defendant’s bail at P40,000 for his temporary release. Having failed to put up a bond and having been bound over to the court of first instance for trial, the defendant asked the latter court to reduce the amount required by the justice of the peace to P20,000. The provincial fiscal not only objected to the requested reduction but moved that the accused’s application for bail be totally denied. Thereupon Judge Manuel P. Barcelona directed the prosecution "to introduce such of its witnesses on the witness stand as he may deem sufficient so as to give a chance to the defense to cross examine them," and authorized the defense to present counter evidence.

    But such hearing was postponed four times and trial on the merits twice, all at the instance of the accused. Impatient at these repeated continuances, Judge Belmonte (Judge Barcelona having been detailed to another court) set the case for trial on the merits for November 14, 1949 apparently with a warning that no further request for postponement would be entertained.

    It was that trial which the defendant succeeded in preventing, thanks to this Court’s issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction. And he would not under any circumstances go to trial, if he could have his way, unless he was first set free on bail at the amount fixed by him.In Ocampo v. Bernabe (43 Off. Gaz., 1632 August), 1 this Court held that, since the discretion to grant bail in capital offenses depends on the weight of evidence, such evidence should be exhibited before the court. This Court added that the hearing of an application for bail may be summary or otherwise, in the court’s discretion.

    This ruling implies that the court is not obliged to conduct a separate proceeding to determine the right of an accused to be admitted to bail.It appearing that the trial which the defendant has succeeded in having suspended had for one of its purposes, as the respondent Judge alleges, precisely to determine whether bail should be allowed, it is clear that His Honor did not exceed his jurisdiction or abused his discretion. In a way, a regular trial has advantage over a summary one as a means of reaching a decision on an application for bail, in that "new presumptions as to the prisoner’s guilt or innocence are raised with each step of the prosecution." At any rate, the court has the choice of method to attain this end.

    This Court cannot pass upon the question of the petitioner’s right to bail as there is nothing before us showing the character and extent of the proof the prosecution has against him. Not even a copy of the information is attached to the petition, nor are there allegations touching upon such evidence.

    The most the defendant could ask for would be an order issued to the Court of First Instance to grant him an opportunity to show that he is entitled to bail. But such opportunity was offered to or even pressed upon him and he refused to take advantage of it for reasons which we do not think were meritorious a$ all.

    The petition is denied and the preliminary injunction heretofore issued is dissolved, with costs against the petitioner. .

    Ozaeta, Pablo, Bengzon, Montemayor, and Reyes, JJ., concur.

    Petition denied.

    Endnotes:



    1. 77 Phil., p. 55.

    G.R. No. L-3451   May 29, 1950 - RODOLFO GERARDO v. JUDGE OF FIRST INSTANCE OF ILOCOS NORTE<br /><br />086 Phil 504


    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