“trial in absentia not allowed when it is necessary to establish the identity of accused by the witness”
Facts: Accused after arraignment waives his right to appear in court during the trial while under a bond. At the presentation of the principal witness the court issued a subpoena to the accused to appear on trial for the purpose of meeting the witness face to face, however he did not appear with the justification of his waiver. Subsequently the municipal judge issued order of arrest of the accused with confiscation of his cash bond and ordering the bondsman to show cause why no judgment shall be rendered against him.
Issue: Whether or not an accused may be compelled by the court to appear before the court despite waiver in favor of trail by absentia.
Held: The court held that such waiver only constitutes a waiver of the right of the accused to meet the witness face to face. It does not in effect deprive the prosecution of its right to require the presence of the accused for the purpose of identification by its witnesses which is vital in the conviction of the accused. It does not further release the accused from his obligation under the bond to appear in court whenever so required. The accused is accorded with the right to waive his own personal right but not his duty and obligation to the court.
An online portal of compilations on jurisprudence, law notes, case digests, case doctrines, and Philippine law updates.
Carredo v People 183 SCRA 273 (1990)
case digest, Philippine law, jurisprudence, SCRA
Carredo v People 183 SCRA 273 (1990),
case digest,
constitutional law,
trial in absentia
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Popular Posts
-
CONFLICT OF LAWS NOTES By: Evelyn De Matias PRINCIPLES AND DOCTRINES Extraterritoriality - General rule: Philippin...
-
OBLIGATION AND CONTRACTS Prepared by : Evelyn Chua Bergantinos-De Matias Essential elements in the principle of latches: (1) conduc...
-
Facts: Edward Christensen is a citizen of the State of California and domiciled in the Philippines . He executed in his...
-
Prepared by: Evelyn B. De Matias Pepsi Cola vs Court of Appeals, 299 SCRA 518 (1998) Facts: The case is ...
-
Facts: In the latter part of 1915, numerous citizens of the Province of Pampanga assembled, and prepared and signed a petition to the Exe...
-
“Borrowing Statute” – Ex: Sec. 48, Rule on Civil Procedure – “ if by the laws of the State or country where the cause of action arose ...
-
Article IX (B), Section 7. No elective official shall be eligible for appointment or designation in any capacity to any public office or p...
-
By: Evelyn Chua Bergantinos-De Matias Section 2 – Searches and Seizures People v Marti 193 SCRA57 (1991) “ marijuana leaves on ...
-
Facts: This case involves a petition of mandamus and prohibition asking the court to order the respondents Secretary of Foreign Affairs, et...
-
Facts: Petitioner sought a permit from the City of Manila to hold a peaceful march and rally on October 26, 1983 from 2:00 to 5:00 in the ...
No comments:
Post a Comment