Category Archives: Right Against Double Jeopardy

Motion to quash is proper even after the accused had been arraigned if the same is grounded on failure to charge an offense and lack of jurisdiction of the offense charged, extinction of the offense or penalty and jeopardy.

Posted on May 6, 2011 by Erineus

At issue is whether or not the Sandiganbayan acted with grave abuse of discretion in denying petitioner’s motion to quash the informations filed after she had pleaded thereto. Rule 117, Section 8 of the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure, as … Continue reading →

Posted in Double Jeopardy, Jurisdiction, Motion to Quash, Right Against Double Jeopardy | Tagged , | Leave a comment

An appeal by the government seeking to increase the penalty imposed by the trial court places the accused in double jeopardy and should therefore be dismissed

Posted on May 4, 2011 by Erineus

Propriety of Appeal by the Prosecution The prosecution asks this Court to modify the RTC Decision by imposing the supreme penalty of death on the accused.  It argues that it has proven that the victim is the daughter of the … Continue reading →

Posted in Appeal, Bill of Rights, Constitutional Rights, Remedial Law, Right Against Double Jeopardy | Tagged , , | 1 Comment