CONSTITUTIONAL LAW By Dean Mariano F. Magsalin Jr.

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

Concept and Origin of the Bill of RightsClassification

1. Civil Rights2. Political Rights3. Social and Economic Rights

Doctrine of Preferred Freedom (Hierarchy of Rights)PBM Employees Org. vs. PBM Co., Inc., 51 SCRA 189 (1973)

The Fundamental Powers of the StateSimilarities, Differences and Limitations

POLICE POWER

Definition, Scope & BasisCharacteristicsWho exercises said power?Tests of Police PowerLaws:

Balacuit v. CFI, G.R. No. L-38429, June 30, 1988 Lozano vs. Matinez, 146 SCRA 323 (1986)

Del Rosario vs. Bengzon, 180 SCRA 521 (1989)Tablarin vs. Judge Gutierrez, 152 SCRA 730 (1987)

Zoning and Regulatory Ordinances Ermita – Malate Hotel & Motel Operators v. City Mayor, 20 SCRA 849 (1967)Cruz vs. Paras, 123 SCRA 569 (1983)Velasco vs. Villegas, 120 SCRA 568 (1983)Magtajas vs. Pryce Properties, 234 SCRA 255 (1994) Tano v. Socrates, G.R. 110249, August 27, 1997City of Manila v. Judge Laguio, G. R. No. 118127, april 12, 2005

Administrative Rules and RegulationsBautista vs. Junio, 127 SCRA 329 (1984)Taxicab Operators of Metro Manila vs. BOT, 119 SCRA 597 (1982)Mirasol v. DPWH, G.R. No. 158793, June 8, 2006Anglo-Fil Trading vs. Lazaro, 124 SCRA 494 (1983)PPA v. Cipres Stevedoring, G.R. No. 145742, July 14, 2005Chavez v. Romulo, G.R. No. 157036, June 9, 2004

EMINENT DOMAIN

Definition Who exercises the power?

City of Manila vs. Chinese Cemetery of Manila, 40 Phil 349 (1919)Moday v. Court of Appeals, 268 SCRA 368 (1997)

Constitutional limitation – Art. II. Sec. 9 Distinguished from destruction due to necessityObjects of Expropriation

RP. v. PLDT, 26 SCRA 620 (1969)Where Expropriation Suit is Filed

Barangay San Roque v. Heirs of Pastor, GR 13896, June 20, 2000Taking

Definition and ScopeRequisites of Taking

Republic vs. Castelvi, 58 SCRA 336 (1974)City Govt. of Quezon City vs. Ericta, 122 SCRA 759 (1983)

Deprivation of UseRepublic vs. Fajardo, 104 Phil. 443 (1958)

1

Napocor vs. Gutierrez, 193 SCRA 1 (1991)Napocor v. San Pedro, G.R. No. 170945, September 26, 2006U.S. v. Causby, 328 U.S. 256 (1946)PPI v. Comelec, 244 SCRA 272 (1995)

Priority in ExpropriationFilstream International v. CA, 284 SCRA 716 (1998)City of Mandaluyong v. Francisco, G.R. No. 137152, January 29, 2001Lagcao v. Judge Labra, G.R. No. 155746, October 13, 2004JIL. v. Mun. of Pasig, G.R. 152230, August 9, 2005

Public useHeirs of Juancho Ardona vs. Reyes, 125 SCRA 220 (1983)Sumulong vs. Guerrero, 154 SCRA (1987)Province of Camarines Sur vs. CA, 222 SCRA 170 (1993)Manosca v. Court of Appeals, 252 SCRA 412 (1996)Estate of Jimenez v. PEZA, G.R. No. 137285, January 16, 2001

Government WithdrawalNHA v. Heirs of Isidro Guivelondo, G.R. No. 154411, June 19, 2003NPC & Pobre v. CA. G.R. No. 106804, August 12, 2004

Recovery of Expropriated LandATO v. Gopuco, G.R. No. 158563, June 30, 2005Republic v. Lim, G.R. 161656, June 29, 2005

Genuine NecessityMun. of Meycayauan vs. IAC, 157 SCRA 640 (1988)De Knecht vs. Bautista, 100 SCRA 660 (1980)Republic vs. De Knecht, G.R. 87351, February 12, 1990De la Paz Masikip v. Judge Legaspi, G.R. No. 136349, January 23, 2006

Just CompensationDefined

Eslaban v. De Onorio, G.R. No. 146062, June 28, 2001RP vs. IAC, et al., G.R. No. 71176, May 21, 1990

Determination of Just CompensationEPZA vs. Dulay, 149 SCRA 305 (1987)

When DeterminedAnsaldo vs. Tantuico, G.R. 50147, August 3, 1990NAPOCOR v. Tiangco, G>R> No. 170846, February 6, 2007City of Cebu v. Spouses Dedamo, G.R. No. 142 971, May 07, 2002

Manner of PaymentAssoc. of Small Landowners v. DAR, 175 SCRA 343 (1988)DAR v. CA, 249 SCRA 149 (1995)

Trial with CommissionersMeralco v. Pineda, 206 SCRA 196 (1992)NPC v. Henson, G.R. No. 129998, December 29, 1998Napocor v. Sps. De la Cruz, G.R. No. 156093, February 2, 2007Leca Realty v. Republic, G.R. No. 155605, Sep tember 27, 2006

Legal Interest for Expropriation CasesNPC v. Angas, 208 SCRA 196 (1992)Wycoco v. Judge Caspillo, G.R. No. 146733, January 13, 2004

Writ of PossessionCity of Manila v. Oscar Serrano, G.R. No. 142304, June 20, 2001Republic v. Gingoyon, G.R. No. 166429, December 19, 2005

Expropriation of Utilities, Landed Estate and Municipal PropertyArt. XII, Sec. 18Art. XIII, Sec. 4Art. XIII, Sec. 9City of Baguio vs. Nawasa, 106 Phil. 144 (1959)Zamboanga del Norte vs. City of Zamboanga, 22 SCRA 1334 (1968)

TAXATION

Definition and NaturePurpose

2

CIR vs. Algue, Inc., 158 SCRA 9 (1988)Commissioner vs. Makasiar, 177 SCRA 27 (1989)

Scope (The power to tax is the power to destroy)Who exercises the power?

Art. VI Sec. 28Art. XIV, Sec 4 (3)Art. X, Sec. 5

Tax Exemptions YMCA vs. CIR, 33 Phil. 217 (1916)Bishop of Nueva Segovia vs. Provincial Board, 51 Phil. 352 (1927)Lladoc vs. CIR, 14 SCRA 292 (1965)Province of Abra vs. Hernando, 107 SCRA 104 (1981)Abra Valley College vs. Aquino, 162 SCRA 106 (1988)American Bible Society vs. City of Manila 101 Phil. 386 (1957)

Double TaxationPunzalan vs. municipal Board of Manila, 95 Phil. 46 (1954)

License FeesPhysical Therapy Org. vs. Municipal Board, G.R. 10448, August 30, 1957

DUE PROCESS Art. III, Sec. 1 Art. III, Sec. 14 (1)

Definition, Nature and ScopePurpose of the guaranty

Hurtado v. California, 110 U.S. 516 (1884)Meaning of Life, Liberty, and PropertySubstantive Due Process

Villegas vs. Hu Chong Tsai Pao Ho, 86 SCRA 275 (1978)Rubi vs. Prov. Board of Mindanao, 39 Phil. 660 (1919)

Void for Vagueness/Over breadthOple v. Torres, 292 SCRA 141. (1998)Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560, November 19, 2001David v. Arroyo, G.R. No. 171390, May 3, 2006Ong v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 126858, September 16, 2005

Procedural Due ProcessPublication Requirement

Tanada v. Tuvera, 146 SCRA 446 (1986)PITC v. Angeles, 263 SCRA 421 (1996)Republic v. Extelcom, G.R. 147096, January 15, 2002

Impartial Court or TribunalTanada vs. PAEC, 141 SCRA 307 (1986)Anzaldo vs. Clave, 119 SCRA 353 (1982)Tejano v. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 159190, June 30, 2005Tumey vs. Ohio, 273 U.S. 510 (1997)People v. Court of Appeals, 262 SCRA 452 (1996)Tabuena v. Sandiganbayan, 268 SCRA 332 (1997)

Prejudicial PublicitySheppard v. Maxwell, 384 U.S. 333 (1966)Webb v. De Leon, 247 SCRA 652 (1995)People v. Sanchez, G.R. No. 121039, October 18, 2001

Notice and Hearing:Summary Dismissal Board v. Torcita, 330 SCRA 153 (2000)Secretary of Justice v. Lantion, G.R. No. 139466, October 17, 2000People vs. Estrada G.R. No. 130487, June 19, 2000Lim v. Court of Appeals, G.R. 111397, August 12, 2002

Opportunity to be HeardBudiongan v. De la Cruz, G.R. No. 170288, September 22, 2006Roxas v. Vasquez, G.R. 114944, June 19, 2001Marohombsar v. Judge Adiong, A.M. RTJ-02-1674, January 22, 2004

Exceptions to notice and hearing requirementsPhilcomsat vs. Alcuaz, 180 SCRA 218 (1989)

3

Suntay vs. People, 101 Phil. 833 (1957)De Bisshop vs. Galang, 8 SCRA 244 (1963)Var Orient Shipping Co., Inc. vs. Achacoso, 161 SCRA 232 (1988)

Administrative Due ProcessAng Tibay vs. CIR, 69 Phil. 635 (1940)Montemayor vs. Araneta University Foundation, 77 SCRA 321 (1977)Meralco vs. PSC, 11 SCRA 317 (1964)Ateneo vs. CA, 145 SCRA 100 (1986)Alcuaz vs. PSBA, 161 SCRA 7 (1988)Non vs. Hon. Dames, G.R. No. 89317, May 30, 1990

EQUAL PROTECTION

Political, Economic and Social EqualityArt. XIII, Sec. 1 and 2 (social justice)Id., Sec. 3 (protection to labor)Art. XII, Sec. 10 (nationalization of business)ID., Sec. 2, par. 2 (reservation of marine resources) Art. II, Sec. 11 (free access to the courts)Art. VIII, Sec. 5(5) (legal aid to poor)Art. IX-C, Sec. 10 (protection of candidates)Art. II, Sec. 26 (public service)Art. II, Sec. 14 (equality of women and men)

Sexual DiscriminationPhil. Association of Service Exporters vs. Drilon, 163 SCRA 386 (1988)

Administration of JusticePeople vs. Hernandez, 99 Phil. 515 (1956)People vs. Isinain, 85 Phil. 648 (1950)Chavez v. PCGG, G.R. 130716, December 9, 1998Nunez vs. Sandiganbayan, 111 SCRA 433 (1982)Gallardo v. People, G.R. 142030, April 21, 2005

Public PolicyCentral Bank Employees Assoc. v. BSP, G.R. No. 148208, Dec. 15, 2004PNB v. Palma, G.R. 157279, August 9, 2005Unido vs. COMELEC, 104 SCRA 17 (1981)PJA vs. Prado, 227 SCRA 703 (1993)Olivarez v. Sandiganbayan, 248 SCRA 700 (1995)Tiu v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 127410, January 20, 1999Coconut Oil Refiners v. Torres, G.R. 132527, July 29, 2005ISAE v. Quisumbing, G.R. No. 128845, June 1, 2000PHILRECA vs. DILG, G.R. No. 143076, June 10, 2003Beltran v. Secretary of Health , G.R. No. 133640, November 25, 2005

THE NON-IMPAIRMENT CLAUSEArt. III, Sec. 10PurposeWhen impairment occursWhen Allowed

Emergency PowersRutter vs. Esteban, 93 Phil. 68 (1953)

Zoning and Regulatory OrdinancesVillanueva vs. Castaneda, 154 SCRA 142 (1987)Sangalang vs. IAC, 168 SCRA 634 (1988)Ortigas & Co. v. CA, G.R. No. 126102, December 4, 2000

Administration RegulationsTiro vs. Hontanosas, 125 SCRA 697 (1983)

Rental LawsCaleon vs. Agus Development Corp., 207 SCRA 748 (1992)

Tax Exemptions

4

Meralco v. Province of Laguna, 306 SCRA 750 (1999)

ARRESTS, SEARCHES AND SEIZURESArt. III, Sec. 2 and 3

Purpose and Importance of the guarantyAlvero v. Dizon, 76 Phil. 637 (1946)

To Whom DirectedPeople vs. Andre Marti, 193 SCRA 57 (1991)

Who May Invoke the Right? Bache and Co., vs. Ruiz, 37 SCRA 323 (1971)Stonehill v. Diokno, 20 SCRA 383 (1967)Zurcher vs. Stanford Daily, 436 U.S. 54 (1978)Wilson v. Layne, 98-0083, May 24, 1999

Conditions for a valid warrantExistence of Probable Cause

Burgos vs. Chief of Staff, 133 SCRA 800 (1984)Chandler v. Miller, April 15, 1997, D-96-126People v. Chua Ho San, 308 SCRA 432 (1999)People v. Molina, G.R. No. 133917, February 19, 2001

Partially Valid WarrantPeople v. Salanguit, G.R. 133254, April 18, 2001Microsoft Corp. v. Maxicorp., G.R. 140946, September 13, 2004

Personal determination by judgeSta. Rosa Mining Co., vs. Fiscal Zabala, 153 SCRA 367 (1987)Paderanga vs. Drilon, G.R. 96080, April 19, 1991Pita vs. CA, 178 SCRA 362 (1987)Abdula v. Guiani, 326 SCRA 1 (2000)People v. Mamaril, G.R. 147607, January 22, 2004

Examination of witnessesPasion Vda. De Garcia vs. Locsin, 65 Phil 68 (1938)Yee Sue kuy vs. Almeda, 70 Phil. 141, (1940)Alvarez vs. CFI, 64 Phil. 33 (1937)Mata vs. Bayona, 128 SCRA 388 (1984)

Particularity of descriptionOlaes vs. People, 155 SCRA 486 (1987)Prudente vs. Judge Dayrit, 180 SCRA 69 (1989)Chia vs. Coll. Of Customs, 177 SCRA 755 (1989)20th Century Fox Film Corp. vs. CA, 164 SCRA 655 (1988)People v. Choi, G.R. No. 152950, August 3, 2006Nolasco vs. Cruz Pano, 132 SCRA 152 (1985)PICOP v. Asuncion, 307 SCRA 253 (1999)Yousef Al Ghoul vs. CA, G.R. No. 126859, September 4, 2009Del Rosario V. People, G.R. No. 142295, May 31, 2001

Objects of SeizureRule 126, Sec. 3, Rules of Court (ROC)Unilab vs. Isip, G.R. No. 163858, June 28, 2005

Warrantless searchesValid Waiver

People vs. Omaweng, 213 SCRA 462 (1992)People v. Correa, 285 SCRA 679 (1998)People vs. Ramos, G.R. 85401-02, June 4, 1990People v. Barros, 231 SCRA 557 (1994)Veroy vs. Layague, 210 SCRA 97 (1992)People vs. Damaso, 212 SCRA 457 (1992)Lopez vs. Comm. of Customs, 68 SCRA 320 (1975)Caballes v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 136292, January 5, 2002People vs. Asis, et. al., G.R. No. 142531, October 15, 2002

People vs. Tudtud, et. al., G.R. No. 144037, September 26, 2003Incident to lawful arrest

Rule 126, Section 13, Rules of CourtChimel vs. California, 395 U.S. 752 (1964)People vs. de la Cruz, G.R. 83988, April 18, 1990

5

People v. Kalubiran, 196 SCRA 645 (1991)People v. Malmstedt, 198 SCRA 401 (1991)Espano v. Court of Appeals, 288 SCRA 558 (1998)People vs. Tangliben, 184 SCRA 220 (1990)People v. Che Chun Ting, 328 SCRA 592 (2000)People vs. Estrella, G.R. Nos. 138539-40, January 21, 2003People vs. Libnao, et. al., G.R. No. 136860, January 20, 2003

Plain view doctrinePeople v. Musa, 217 SCRA 597 (1993)Padilla v. CA, 269 SCRA 402 (1997)People v. Valdez, G.R. No. 129296, September 25, 2000Arizona v. Hicks, 480 U.S. 321 (1987)People v. Compacion, G.R. No. 124442, July 20, 2001People v. Huang Zhen Hua, G.R. 139301, September 9, 2004

Enforcement of fishing, customs and immigration lawsRoldan vs. Area, 65 SCRA 320 (1975)People v. Gatward, 267 SCRA 785 (1997)People v. Johnson, G.R. No. 138881, December 18, 2000People vs. Suzuki, G.R. No. 120670, October 23, 2003

“Stop and frisk”Terry vs. Ohio, 392 US 1 (1968)People v. Solayao, 262 SCRA 255 (1996)Manalili v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 113447, October 7, 1997Malacat v. Court of Appeals, 283 SCRA 159 (1997)Florida v. J.L., 98-1993, March 28, 2000

Search of moving vehiclesPapa vs. Mago, 22 SCRA 857 (1968)People vs. CFI of Rizal, 101 SCRA 86 (1980)Salvador v. People, G.R. No. 146706, July 15, 2005Whren v. United States, 95-5841, January 10, 1996

Emergency circumstancesPeople vs. De Gracia, 233 SCRA 716 (1994)

CheckpointsGen. De Villa vs. Valmonte, G.R. No. 83988, May 24, 1990Aniag vs. Comelec, 237 SCRA 424 (1994)People v. Usana, 323 SCRA 754 (2000)People v. Vinecario, G.R. No. 141137, January 20, 2004

Inspection of buildingCamara vs. Municipal Court, 387 U.S. 523 (1967)

Warrantless arrestsRule 113, Sec. 5 Art. 125, Revised Penal Code

Rebellion as Continuing OffenseUmil vs. Ramos, G.R. 81567, July 9, 1990

Committed in the Presence of Police OfficersPeople v. Sucro, 195 SCRA 388 (1991)People v. Luisito Go, G.R. No. 116001, March 14, 2001

Personal Knowledge of the OffensePeople vs. Gerente, 219 SCRA 756 (1993) People v. Sinoc, 275 SCRA 357 (1997)People v. Baula, G.R. No. 132671, November 15, 2000 People v. Cubcubin, G.R. No. 136267, July 10, 2001

Time of ArrestPeople vs. Rodrigueza, 205 SCRA 791 (1992)Go vs. Court of Appeals, 206 SCRA 586 (1992)People v. Calimlim, G.R. No. 123980, August 30, 2001

Marked MoneyPeople vs. Enrile, 222 SCRA 586 (1993)

Lack of UrgencyPeople v. Pasudag, G.R. No. 128822, May 4, 2001People vs. Aminnudin, 163 SCRA 402 (1988)

Effect of Bail

6

Rule 114, Section 26Effect of Entry of Plea

People v. Plana G.R. No. 128285, November 27, 2001Validity of Conviction

People v. Conde, G.R. No. 113269, April 10, 2001

PRIVACY OF COMMUNICATION AND CORRESPONDENCE R.A. No. 4200 (Anti-Wire Tapping Law) (1965)Arts, 290, 291, 292 and 299. Revised Penal Code.Gaanan vs. IAC, 145 SCRA 113 (1986)Katz vs. U.S., 389 U.S. 347 (1967)Ramirez vs. Ca, G.R. No. 93833, September 28, 1995Salcedo-Ortanez v. CA, 235 SCRA 111 (1994)Alejano v. Cabuay, G.R. No. 160792, August 25, 2005

Privileged CommunicationsIn Re Laureta, 148 SCRA 382 (1987)People vs. Albofera, 152 SCRA 123 (1987)Zulueta v. Court of Appeals, 253 SCRA 699 (1996)Deano v. Godinez, 12 SCRA 483 (1964)Waterhouse Drug Corporation v. NLRC, G.R. No. 113271. October 16, 1997

Exclusionary RuleArt. III, Sec. 3(2)Silverthorne Lumber vs. US, 251 US 385 (1920)People v. Aruta, G.R. 120915, April 3, 1998People v. Rondero, G.R. 125687, December 9, 1999

Liability for damagesAberca vs. Ver, 160 SCRA 590 (1989)

RIGHTS OF PERSONS UNDER CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATIONArt. III, Sec. 12Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 US 436 (1966)

Custodial Investigation People v. Lugod, G.R. 136253, February 21, 2001 People v. Del Rosario G.R. 127755, April 14, 1999People v. Bolanos, 211 SCRA 262 (1992)Rhode Island v. Innis, 446 U.S. 291 (1980) People v. Mahinay, 302 SCRA 455 (1999)

Administrative InvestigationsPeople vs. Judge Ayson, 175 SCRA 216 (1989)Office of the Court Administrator v. Sumiling, 271 SCRA 316 (1997)People v. Uy, G.R. No. 157399, November 17, 2005

Police LineupGamboa vs. Cruz, 162 SCRA 642 (1988)United States v. Wade, 388 U.A. 218 (1967)People v. Escordial, G.R. 138934, January 16, 2002People vs. Piedad, et al., G.R. No. 131923, December 5, 2002

Cases before January 17, 1973 not applicableMagtoto vs. Manguera, 63 SCRA 4 (1975)

Rule under the 1973 Constitution (Voluntary, knowing & intelligent waiver)People vs. Caguioa, 95 SCRA 2 (1980)People vs. Tampus, 90 SCRA 624 (1980)People v. Sayaboc, G.R. 147201, January 15, 2004

The Galit RulePeople vs. Galit, 135 SCRA 465 (1985)

Rule under the 1987 Constitution Requirement of Competent and Independent Counsel

People vs. Bandula, 232 SCRA 566 (1994)

7

People v. Quidato, G.R. 117401, October 1, 1998People v. Januario, 267 SCRA 608 (1997) People v. Labtan, G.R. No. 12793, December 8, 1999People vs. Samus, G.R. 135957-58, September 17, 2002 People v. Tomaquin, G.R. No. 133138, July 23, 2004People v. Bagnate, G.R. No. 133685-68 May 20, 2004

Counsel of ChoicePeople vs. Gallardo, G.R. No. 113684, January 25, 2000 People vs. Barasina, 229 SCRA 450 (1994)

Counsel’s presence required in entire proceedingsPeople v. Morial, G.R. 129295, August 15, 2001

Seized ArticlesPeople v. Castro, 274 SCRA 115 (1997)People v. Wong Chuen Ming, 256 SCRA 182 (1996)Marcelo v. Sandiganbayan, 302 SCRA 102 (1999)People v. Macabalang, G.R. 168694, November 27, 2006

Confession to NewsmenPeople v. Andan, 269 SCRA 95 (1997) People v. Endino, G.R. 133026, February 20, 2001People vs. Ordono, G.R. No. 132154, June 29, 2000 People vs. Guillermo, G.R. No. 147786, January 20, 2004

Other ConfessionsPeople v. Malngan, G.R. No. 170470, September 26, 2006People v. Gomez, 270 SCRA 432 (1997)Illinois v. Perkins, 496 U.S. 292 (1990)People v. Lugod, G.R. 136253, February 21, 2001

Re-enactmentPeople v. Luvendino, 211 SCRA 36 (1992)

Exclusionary ruleArt. III, Sec. 12 (3)

Fruit of the Poisonous Tree DoctrinePeople v. Alicano 251 SCRA 293 (1995)Harris vs. New York, 401 U.S. 222 (1971)New York vs. Quaries, 104 U.S. 2626 (1984)

RIGHT TO BAILArt. III, Sec. 13

Bail DefinedRule 114, Section 1, ROC

Kinds of BailRule 114, Sections 10, 11, 14 & 15

When right may be invokedHerras Teehankee vs. Rovira, 75 Phil. 634 (1945)People vs. San Diego, 26 SCRA 522 (1968)Cortes v. Judge Catral, A.M. No. RTJ-97-1387, September 10, 1997Lavides v. CA, G.R. No. 129670, February 1, 2000Government v. Judge Puruganan, G.R. 148571, December 17, 2002

Procedure for bailPaderanga v. Drilon, 247 SCRA 741, (1995)Go v. Bongolan, A.M. 99-1464, July 26, 1999People v. Gako, G.R. 135045, December 15, 2000

Bail and Habeas CorpusEnrile vs. Salazar, 186 SCRA 217 (1990)People vs. Judge Donato, 198 SCRA 130 (1991)

Bail on appealPeople vs. Fortes, 223 SCRA 619 (1993)Maguddatu v. CA, G.R. No. 139599, February 23, 2000Obosa v. Court of Appeals, G.R. 114350, January 16, 1997

Standards for fixing bailRule 114, Sec. 9

8

Villasenor vs. Abano, 21 SCRA 312 (1967)De la Camara vs. Enage, 41 SCRA 1 (1971)Almeda vs. Villaluz, 66 SCRA 38 (1975)Yap v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 141529, June 6, 2001Cabañero v. Cañon, A.M. No. MTJ-01-369, September 20, 2001Victory Liner v. Belosillo, G.R. 425 SCRA 79 (2004)

Bail and the Right to Travel AbroadManotoc vs. Court of Appeals, 142 SCRA 149 (1980)

RIGHTS OF AN ACCUSEDArt. III, Sec. 14

Presumption of Innocence

Proof beyond reasonable doubt People vs. Dramayo, 42 SCRA 59 (1971)

Order of TrialAlejandro vs. Pepito, 96 SCRA 322 (1988) (modified by Rule 119 Sec. 3 (e)

Presumption of GuiltDumlao vs. Comelec, 95 SCRA 392 (1980)People vs. Mingoa, 92 Phil. 857 (1953)

Applicability to Juridical PersonsFeeder Int’l Line vs. Ca CR 942 62, May 31, 1991

Official DutyPeople vs. Martos, 211 SCRA 805 (1992)

Equipoise RuleCorpuz vs. People, 194 SCRA 73 (1991)Dizon Paminatuan v. People, July 11, 1994

Right to be heard personally or by counselImportance of Counsel

People vs. Holgado, 85 Phil. 752 (1950)Delgado vs. CA, 145 SCRA 357 (1986)

Improvident Plea of guilt People vs. Baluyot, 75 SCRA 148 (1977)People vs. Magsi, 124 SCRA 69 (1983) People v. Besonia, G.R. No. 151284-85, February 5, 2004People v. Murillo, G.R. No. 134583, July 14, 2004

Right to Lawyer of ChoicePeople vs. Malunsing, 63 SCRA 493 (1975)Libuit v. People, G.R. No. 154363, September 13, 2005

Deprivation of Right to be HeardMoslares v. CA, 291 SCRA 440 (1998)

Right to be informed of nature and cause of accusationLack of Arraignment

Borja vs. Mendoza, 77 SCRA 422 (1977) People v. Alcalde, G.R. 139225, May 29, 2002People v. Dy, G.R. No. 154363, September 13, 2005

Sufficiency of the InformationPeople v. Sadiosa, 290 SCRA 82 (1998)People v. Perez, G.R. No. 122764, September 24, 1998People v. Lozano, G.R. 125080, September 25, 1998 People v. Ladrillo, G.R. No. 124342, December 8, 1999 People v. Valdesancho, G.R. 137051, May 30, 2001 People v. Alcaide, G.R. Nos. 139225-28, May 29, 2002People vs. Ostia, G.R. No. 131804. February 26, 2003People vs. Flores Jr., G.R. No. 128823-24, December 27, 2002 People v. Cachapero, G.R. No. 153008, May 20, 2004

9

Right to speedy, impartial and public trial Speedy trial

Acevedo vs. Sarmiento, 36 SCRA 247 (1970)People vs. Judge Laya, 161 SCRA 327 (1988)Conde vs. Rivera, 45 Phil. 650 (1924)Dacanay vs. People, 240 SCRA 490 (1995)People v. Rivera, G.R. No. 139180, July 31, 2001Solar Team Entertainment v. How, G.R. No. 140863, August 22, 2000Valencia v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 165996, October 17, 229, 2005Domondon v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 166606, November 29, 2005

Public trialGarcia vs. Domingo, 52 SCRA 143 (1970)Perez v. Estrada, A.M. No. 01-4-03-SC, June 29, 2001

Impartial trialTumey vs. Ohio, 273 U.S. 510 (1927) Soriano vs. Angeles, G.R. No. 109920, August 31, 2000

Right to confront witnessesU.S. v. Javier, 37 Phil. 449 (1918)

Right to secure attendance of witnesses

U.S. vs. Garcia, 10 Phil. 384 (1908)People vs. Sandal, 54 Phil. 883 (1938)People vs. De Luna, 174 SCRA 204 (1989)

Right to be present during trialTrial in absentia

Rule 115, Sec. 1 (c)People vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 140285, September 27, 2006

When presence of the accused is a duty:Arraignment and plea

Rule 116, Sec. 1 (b) During trial for identification

Aquino vs. Military Commission No. 63 SCRA 546 (1975) People vs. Salas, 143 SCRA 163 (1986)

Promulgation of sentenceRule 120, Sec. 6Exception: Light offenses

PRIVILEGE AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATIONArt. III, Sec. 17

Scope covers compulsory testimonial incriminationUnited States vs. Tan Teh, 23 Phil. 145 (1912)United States vs. Ong Siu Hong, 36 Phil. 735 (1917)People vs. Otadura, 86 Phil. 244 (1950)Villaflor vs. Summers, 41 Phil. 62 (1920)Bermudez vs. Castillo, 64 Phil. 485 (1937)Beltran v. Samson, 53 Phil. 570 (1929)People vs. Tranca, 235 SCRA 455 (1994)South Dakota v. Neville, 459 U.S. 553 (1983)Schemerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (1966)People v. Rondero, G.R. No. 125687, December 9, 1999People vs. Gallarde, G.R. No. 133025, February 17, 2000

In what proceedings availablePascual vs. Board of Medical Examiners, 28 SCRA 344 (1969)Galman vs. Pamaran, 138 SCRA 274 (1985)

Use Immunity v. Transactional Immunity.Art. XIII, Sec. 18 (8)R.A. No. 1379, Section 8Galman vs. Pamaran, 138 SCRA 274 (1985)

10

Brown v. Walker, 161 U.S. 591 Exclusionary rule

Art. II, Sec. 12 (3)Effect of denial of privilege by court

Chavez vs. Court of Appeals, 24 SCRA 663 (1968)

RIGHT TO SPEEDY DISPOSITION OF CASESArt. III, Sec. 16Art. VIII, Sec. 15Art. VII, Sec. 19 par. 3Art. IX, A, Sec. 17Duterte v. Sandiganbayan, 289 SCRA 721 (1998)Tatad vs. Sandiganbayan, 159 SCRA 70 (1988)Licaros v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. 145851, November 22, 2001Dimayacyac v. Judge Roxas, G.R. No. 136264, May 28, 2004Bernat v. Sandiganbayan, G.R> No. 158018, May 20, 2004

PUNISHMENTS

Excessive fines and cruel, degrading and inhuman punishmentsPeople vs. Dela Cruz, 92 Phil. 906 (1953)People vs. Borja, 91 SCRA 340 (1978)People vs. Dacuycuy, 173 SCRA 90 (1989)Loiusiana v. Resweber, 329 U.S. 459 (1974)Ford v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 399 (1986)Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002)

The death penaltyEchegaray v. Secretary of Justice, G.R. No. 132601 January 19, 1999

Involuntary servitudeArt. III, Sec. 18Aclaracion vs. Gatmaitan, 64 SCRA 131 (1979)

Imprisonment for debtArt. III, Sec. 20Sura vs. Martin, 26 SCRA 286 (1969)People vs. Nitafan, 207 SCRA 726 (1992)In Re: Habeas Corpus of Benjamin Vergara, G.R. No. 154037, April 30, 2003

Ex post facto laws and bills of attainderArt. III, Sec. 22Kay Villegas Kami, 35 SCRA 429 (1970)People vs. Ferrer, 48 SCRA 382 (1972)People vs. Sandiganbayan, 211 SCRA 241 (1992)Wright vs. CA, 235 SCRA 341 (1994)

Double JeopardyArt. III, Sec. 21Rule 117, Sec. 7Rule 120, Sec. 5Elements

People vs. Obsania, 23 SCRA 1249 (1968)Subsequent prosecution barred; Exceptions

Melo vs. People, 85 Phil. 766 (1959)People vs. Yorac, 42 SCRA 230 (1971) (overruled)PSB v. Bermoy, G.R. No. 151912, September 26, 2005Heirs of Rillorta vs. Firme, 157 SCRA 518 (1988)

11

People vs. Miraflores, 115 SCRA 586 (1982)People vs. Judge Vergara, 221 SCRA 560 (1993)Tupaz v. Ulep, G.R. No. 127777, October 1, 1999Argel v. Judge Pascua, A.M. No. RTJ-94-1131, August 20, 2001

Jurisdiction of CourtsPeople v. Bocar , 138 SCRA 166 (1985)Galman vs. Sandiganbayan, 144 SCRA 43 (1986)People vs. Grospe, 157 SCRA 154 (1988)People vs. Judge Santiago, 174 SCRA 143 (1989)

Identity of ActsPeople vs . Relova, 148 SCRA 292 (1987)

Identity of OffensesPeople vs. City Court, 154 SCRA 175 (1987)Nierras vs. acuycuy, 181 SCRA 1 (1990)

Military Court ProceedingsCruz vs. Enrile, 160 SCRA 702 (1988)Tan v. Barrios, October 18, 1990

Right to Speedy TrialQue vs. Cosico, 177 SCRA 410 (1989)Caes vs. IAC, 179 SCRA 54 (1989)

Administrative & Criminal Proceedings Icasiano vs. Sandiganbayan, 209 SCRA 377 (1992)Vincoy v CA, G.R. No. 156558, June 14, 2004People v. Larannaga, G.R. No. 138874, July 25, 2005

Plea of Guilt to Lesser OffensePeople vs. Judge Villarama, 210 SCRA 246 (1992)

PRIVILEGE OF THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUSArt. II, Sec. 15Art. VII, Sec. 18Villavicencio vs. Lukban, 39 Phil. 778 (1919)Moncupa vs. Ponce Enrile, 141 SCRA 223 (1986)Lansang vs. Garcia, 42 SCRA 448 (1971)Chavez vs. Court of Appeals, 24 SCRA 420 (1971)Gumabon vs. Director of Prisons, 37 SCRA 663 (1968)In re Abadilla, 156 SCRA 92 (1987)Norberto Feria vs. CA, et al. G.R. 122954, Feb. 15, 2000Illusorio v. Bildner, G.R. 139789, May 12, 2000

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSIONArt. III, Sec. 4I d., Sec. 18 (1)

PurposeUnited States vs. Bustos, 37 Phil. 731 (1918)Burgos vs. Chief Of Staff, 133 SCRA 800 (1984)New York Times vs. Sulliven, 380 U.S. 51 (1964)

RestrictionsGonzales vs. COMELEC, 27 SCRA 835 (1969)Social Weather Station v. Comelec, G.R. 147571, May 5, 2001

Balancing of Interest TestDangerous Tendency TestClear and Present Danger Test

Zaldivar vs. Sandiganbayan, 170 SCRA 1 (1989)Sanidad vs. COMELEC, G.R. 90878, January 29, 1990Reno v. ACLU, D-96-511, June 26, 1997 Miriam College v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 127930, December 15, 2000ABS-CBN Broadcasting c\Corp. v. Comelec, G.R. No. 133486, January 28, 2000Chavez vs. Comelec

12

Freedom of Expression, Libel and National SecurityBabst vs. NBI, 132 SCRA 316 (1984)Espuelas vs. NBI, 132 SCRA 316 (1984)Elizalde vs. CFI, 116 SCRA 93 (1982)Lopez vs. Court of Appeals, 34 SCRA 116 (1970)PJI v. Thoenen, G.R. No. 143372, December 13, 2005Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989)Borjal v. CA., 301 SCRA 1 (1999)Baguio Midland Courier v. CA, G.R. No. 107566, November 25, 2004

Freedom of Expression and the Administration of JusticeCabansag vs. Fernandez, 102 Phil. 152People vs. Alarcon, 69 Phil. 265 (1939)In Re Ramon Tulfo, AM 90-4-1545-0, April 17, 1990Nestle Phils. Vs. Sanchez, 154 SCRA 542 (1987)In Re Atty. Emil Jurado AM 90-5-2373 July 12, 1990

Freedom of Expression, Movie Censorship, Obscenity and the Right to PrivacyGonzales vs. Kalaw Katikbak, 137 SCRA 356 (1985)Lagunzad vs. Sotto, Vda. De Gonzales 92 SCRA 476 (1979)Ayer Productions vs. Judge Capulong, 160 SCRA 861 (1988)KMU v. Director General, G.R. No. 167798, April 19, 2006TRCB v. ABS-CBN, G.R. No. 155282, January 17, 2005Reno v. ACLU, June 26, 1997, D-96-511Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973)Ernando v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 159751, December 6, 2006

Radio BroadcastsEastern Broadcasting Corp. (DYRE) vs. Dans, 137 SCRA 247 (1985)

FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLYBP Blg. 880 (Public Assembly Act of 1985)Primicias vs. Fugoso, 80 Phil. 71 (1948)Navarro vs. Villegas, 31 SCRA 730 (1970)Ignacio vs. Ela, 99 Phil. 346 (1956)J.B.I. Reyes vs. Bagatsing, 125 SCRA 553 (1983)Ruiz vs. Gordon, 126 SCRA 233 (1983)Malabanan vs. Ramento, 129 SCRA 359 (1984)Arreza vs. GAUF, 137 SCRA 94 (1985)German vs. Barangan, 135 SCRA 514 (1985)Acosta v. CA and CSC GR 132088 Jun 28, 2000Bayan v. Ermita, G.R. No. 169848, April 25, 2006

FREEDOM OF INFORMATIONArt. III, Sec. 7Baldoza vs. Dimaano, 71 SCRA 14 (1976)Tanada vs. Tuvera, supraValmonte vs. Belmonte, 170 SCRA 256 (1989)Legaspi vs. CSC, 150 SCRA 530 (1987)Garcia vs. BOI, 177 SCRA 374 (1989)

FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATIONArt. III, Sec. 8Art. IX, Sec. 2 (5)Art. XIII, Sec. 3, par. 2Occena vs. COMELEC, 127 SCRA 404 (1985)In re Edillon, 84 SCRA (1979)Rotary Int’l v. Rotary Club, 481 U.S. 537 (1987)

FREEDOM OF RELIGION

13

Art. III, Sec. 5Nonstablishment ClauseOperation of Secretarian schools

Art. XIV, Sec. 4(2)Religions instruction in Public schools

Art. XIV, Sec. 3(3)Civil Code, Art. 359(1)

Anti-evolution lawsEpperson vs. Arkansas, 33 U.S. 27 (1968)

Prayer and Bible reading in public schoolsEngel vs. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962)Abington Schools Dist. vs. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 (1973)Stone v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39 (1980)

Tax exemptionArt. VI, Sec. 28 (3)

Pubic aid to religionArt. VI, Sec. 29 (2)Aglipay vs. Ruiz, 64 Phil. 201 (1937)Mueller v. Allen, 463 U.S. 388 (1983)Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971)Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 U.S. 38 (1985)Islamic Da ‘wah Counsil v. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 153888, July 9, 2003

Intramural religious disputesFonacier vs. CA, 96 Phil. 417 (1955)

Free Exercise ClauseEstrada v. Escritor, A.M. No. P-02-1651, June 22, 2006

Flag saluteWest Va Board of Education vs. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943)Ebralinag v. Division Superintended (March 1, 1993)

Freedom to propagate religious doctrinesAmerican Bible Society vs. City of Manila, 181 Phil. 386 (1957)Swaggart Ministries v. Cal Bd. Of Equalization, 493 U.S. 378 (1990)

Exemption from Union shopVictoriano vs. Elizalde Rope Workers Union, 59 SCRA 54 (1974)

Disqualification for local government officialsPamil vs. Watkins 367 U.S. 488 (1961)

Religious TestTorcaso vs. Watkins 367 U.S. 488 (1961)

LIBERTY OF ABODE AND TRAVELArt. III, Sec. 6Salonga vs. Hermosa, 97 SCRA 121 (1989)Caunca vs. Salazar, 82 Phil. 851 (1940)Manotok vs. CA. 142 SCRA 149 (1986)Marcos vs. Manglapus, 177 SCRA 668 (1989)Silverio vs. CA, G.R . no. 94284 April 8, 1991Lorenzo v. Director of Health, 50 Phil. 595 end.

14