Wednesday, March 25, 2009

A Keeper From Baycas

Below follows a comment from contributor Baycas on the Filipino Voices post The Presumption of Innocence: which deserves archiving and prominence here at Philippine Commentary:
This will certainly go in your favor (and JCC's too). I am sick and not busy at the moment…my legal department, aka Google, was able to come up with the solution to my puzzle (based on your perspective):

Presumption of innocence – continued
Conviction – ?
Sentence – stayed (during pendency of appeal)
Appellant – confined
Outcome of trial – being reviewed


It was spelled out in Mangubat vs Sandiganbayan G.R. No. L-60613-20 August 29, 1986:

…it cannot be said that said Court acted with grave abuse of discretion, correctible by certiorari, in ruling that despite her convictions, "Preagido has still in her favor the constitutional presumption of innocence ... (and until) a promulgation of final conviction is made, this constitutional mandate prevails."


This ruling was reverberated here…

A.M. No. 06-9-545-RTC, January 31, 2008 penned by J. Nachura:

We agree with respondent's argument that since her conviction of the crime of child abuse is currently on appeal before the CA, the same has not yet attained finality. As such, she still enjoys the constitutional presumption of innocence. It must be remembered that the existence of a presumption indicating the guilt of the accused does not in itself destroy the constitutional presumption of innocence unless the inculpating presumption, together with all the evidence, or the lack of any evidence or explanation, proves the accused's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Until the accused's guilt is shown in this manner, the presumption of innocence continues.
And, recently, here (as you’ve mentioned the Jalosjos case)…

ANTONIO F. TRILLANES IV vs HON. OSCAR PIMENTEL, SR., IN HIS CAPACITY AS PRESIDING JUDGE, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT- BRANCH 148, MAKATI CITY; GEN. HERMOGENES ESPERON, VICE ADM. ROGELIO I. CALUNSAG, MGEN. BENJAMIN DOLORFINO, AND LT. COL. LUCIARDO OBEÑA, G.R. No. 179817 (promulgated June 27, 2008), decision made by Associate Justice CONCHITA CARPIO MORALES:

The Court in Jalosjos did not mention that the presumption of innocence no longer operates in favor of the accused pending the review on appeal of the judgment of conviction. The rule stands that until a promulgation of final conviction is made, the constitutional mandate of presumption of innocence prevails.
In effect, you are right and I can now fill in the blank:

Presumption of innocence – continued
Conviction – NOT YET FINAL AND EXECUTORY
Sentence – stayed (during pendency of appeal)
Appellant – confined
Outcome of trial – being reviewed

3 comments:

ricelander said...

I think you have made a very convincing argument there at FV.

Alam mo naman ang mga lawyers. They are also trained never to give up an argument. Intellectual curiosity is never their cup of tea until hypertension, liver disease, and arthritis set in to force them into self reflection hehehe.

ellumbra said...

Surely it is not "the presumption" of either guilt or innocence which is critical to any degree other than to steer away a public contempt - which should in any case be protected - because guilt and innocence are obviously just opposite ends of the same measuring rod.

The most important component of the phrase is "beyond reasonable doubt" - which, if investigated sincerely and thoroughtly, will illuminate both presumptions simultaneously.

baycas2 said...

djb,

what ever happened to Jaxius, the Quixotic Kibitzer?

how i wish he reads this blog post so he'll know that i didn't migrate to India as he suggested back in August 2007.

i had a good time being a blawger then...

again, you were both right in your analysis of Jalosjos. kudos!

-----
Ref: quezondotphslash1466 and 1467