Whatever Infos

Govt. of the United States v. Purganan GR No. 148571, Sept. 24, 2002 FACTS: In accordance to the existing RP-US Extradition Treaty, the United States Government, through diplomatic channels, sent to the Philippine Government Note Verbale an extradition request of Mark B. Jimenez, also known as Mario Batacan Crespo. Upon receipt of the Notes and documents, the secretary of foreign affairs (SFA) transmitted them to the secretary of justice (SOJ) for appropriate action, pursuant to Section 5 of Presidential Decree (PD) No. 1069, also known as the Extradition Law.  Govt. of the United States v. Purganan Jimenez then sought and was granted a TRO to prohibit the DOJ from filing with the RTC a petition for his extradition which was later on assailed by the SOJ. The Court initially dismissed the petition, but later on reverse its decision when it filed its Motion for Reconsideration and held that private respondent was bereft of the right to notice and hearing during the evaluation...

Almeda vs. Villaluz GR No. L-31665, August 6, 1975 FACTS: Petitioner Leonardo Almeda (alias Nardong Paa) was charged, together with five others, with the crime of qualified theft of a motor vehicle. The amount of the bond recommended for the provisional release of Almeda was P15,000, and this was approved by the respondent judge with a direction that it be posted entirely in cash. Almeda vs. Villaluz Almeda asked the trial court to allow him to post a surety bond in lieu of the cash bond required of him. This request was denied, and so was an oral motion for reconsideration, on the ground that the amended information imputed habitual delinquency and recidivism on the part of Almeda. Almeda vs. Villaluz At the same hearing, the respondent city fiscal, thru his assistant, reiterated his oral motion made at a previous hearing for amendment of the information so as to include allegations of recidivism and habitual delinquency in the particular case of Almeda. Th...

Concerned Citizens vs. Judge Elma AM No. RTJ-94-1183, February 6, 1995 FACTS: This administrative case arose from an anonymous letter-complaint. Alfredo Gatus y Tiamzon was charged with illegal recruitment in large scale and estafa in five (5) separate Information, before the sala of respondent Judge Elma. Concerned Citizens vs. Judge Elma In the Information for Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale, no bail bond was recommended.  Accused Gatus filed a motion to fix his bail at P60,000.00. Respondent judge, instead of setting the application for hearing, directed the prosecution to file its Comment or Opposition to accused's Motion to Fix Bail. Concerned Citizens vs. Judge Elma The prosecution submitted its Comment, to wit: That based on the record of this case, it appears that a preliminary investigation was conducted; That the investigating prosecutor who conducted the preliminary investigation (did not) recommend (any) bail for said offense; That unders...

Feliciano vs. Pasicolan GR No. L-14657, July 31, 1961 FACTS: Pablo Feliciano, was one of the eighteen persons charged with the crime of kidnapping with murder. Upon learning of the filing of said information and that a warrant for his arrest had been issued, the petitioner went into hiding. However, Attorney Filemon Cajator, at the instance of the petitioner's wife, filed in the case a motion asking that the Court fix at P10,000.00 the amount of the bond for petitioner's release pending trial. Feliciano vs. Pasicolan The Provincial Fiscal of Pampanga opposed this motion, on the ground that the filing thereof was premature as the petitioner had not yet been arrested. the respondent Judge dismissed petitioner's motion, on the ground that "pending his arrest or surrender, Pablo Feliciano has not the right to ask this court to admit him to bail." Hence, the instant proceeding. Read: Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region vs. ...

Tucay vs. Domagas AM No. RTJ-95-1286, March 2 1995 FACTS: Ludovico Ellamil, Bernardo Ellamil and Melchor Ellamil are accused of murder. Teresita Tucay, the wife of the victim, is the complainant. A petition for bail was filed on behalf of the accused Bernardo Ellamil.  Tucay vs. Domagas The petition was denied by respondent judge on the ground that it did not bear the conformity of the provincial prosecutor. A second petition for bail was filed by the accused with the prayer that he be allowed to post bail in the amount of P50,000.00.  Tucay vs. Domagas This time, the petition contained the notation "No objection" of Provincial Prosecutor Jose Antonio Guillermo. Without holding a hearing to determine whether the evidence of the prosecution was strong, respondent judge issued an order on the same day, in which he granted bail and directed the release of accused from detention.  Tucay vs. Domagas Read: Government of Hong Kong Special Administ...