Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 50 views

    Paredes v. Sandigan Bayan

    Uploaded by

    DenDen Gaurana
    This case involves a criminal complaint filed against Paredes, a former provincial attorney of Agusan del Sur, for allegedly using his position to improperly influence the approval of his land patent application. The preliminary investigation was conducted without Paredes present because the summons was erroneously served. Paredes argued the warrant for his arrest was void because the preliminary investigation was invalid without notice. The court ruled the warrant was not void because defects in the preliminary investigation do not invalidate the information or warrant. The court also ruled habeas corpus was not appropriate because Paredes was detained under a warrant issued by a court with proper jurisdiction.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Paredes v. Sandigan Bayan

    Uploaded by

    DenDen Gaurana
    50 views1 page
    This case involves a criminal complaint filed against Paredes, a former provincial attorney of Agusan del Sur, for allegedly using his position to improperly influence the approval of his land patent application. The preliminary investigation was conducted without Paredes present because the summons was erroneously served. Paredes argued the warrant for his arrest was void because the preliminary investigation was invalid without notice. The court ruled the warrant was not void because defects in the preliminary investigation do not invalidate the information or warrant. The court also ruled habeas corpus was not appropriate because Paredes was detained under a warrant issued by a court with proper jurisdiction.

    Original Description:

    consti 1

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves a criminal complaint filed against Paredes, a former provincial attorney of Agusan del Sur, for allegedly using his position to improperly influence the approval of his land patent application. The preliminary investigation was conducted without Paredes present because the summons was erroneously served. Paredes argued the warrant for his arrest was void because the preliminary investigation was invalid without notice. The court ruled the warrant was not void because defects in the preliminary investigation do not invalidate the information or warrant. The court also ruled habeas corpus was not appropriate because Paredes was detained under a warrant issued by a court with proper jurisdiction.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    50 views1 page

    Paredes v. Sandigan Bayan

    Uploaded by

    DenDen Gaurana
    This case involves a criminal complaint filed against Paredes, a former provincial attorney of Agusan del Sur, for allegedly using his position to improperly influence the approval of his land patent application. The preliminary investigation was conducted without Paredes present because the summons was erroneously served. Paredes argued the warrant for his arrest was void because the preliminary investigation was invalid without notice. The court ruled the warrant was not void because defects in the preliminary investigation do not invalidate the information or warrant. The court also ruled habeas corpus was not appropriate because Paredes was detained under a warrant issued by a court with proper jurisdiction.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Paredes v.

    Sandiganbayan

    Facts: In January 1976, Paredes, provincial attorney of Agusan del Sur was granted
    landthrough free patent. Eight years later, Paredes was charged with perjury by the
    provincialfiscal requested by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Agusan del Sur. A
    former Mayor ofAgusan filed a criminal complaint charging Attorney Paredes with
    having violated section3(a) of the Anti-Graft & Corrupt Practices Act (R.A. 3019)
    because he allegedly used hisoffice as Provincial Attorney to influence, persuade,
    and induce Armando Luison, LandInspector of the District Land Office in Agusan
    del Sur, to favorably indorse his free patentapplication. Fiscal Brocoy proceeded to
    conduct the preliminary examination of thecomplainant and his witnesses without
    the presence of accused because the summon waserroneously served. Fiscal found a
    prima facie case against Paredes. His motion forreconsideration was denied,
    assailing validity of the preliminary investigation that it wasconducted without his
    notice. In the meantime, Paredes was elected Governor of Agusandel Sur and the
    free patent was reverted back to public domain. Information was filed andwarrant of
    arrest was issued against Paredes. He refused to post bail in "protest against
    theinjustice to him as Governor". A petition for habeas corpus was filed by the wife
    ofParedes, alleging that the warrant for her husband's arrest was void because the
    preliminaryinvestigation was void, and, that the crime charged in the information
    against him hadalready prescribed.

    Issue: 1. WON the warrant of arrest was void because the preliminary investigation
    wasconducted w/o notice to the accused.
    2. WON the crime had already prescribed.

    Ruling: 1. Not void. The absence of a preliminary investigation does not affect the
    court's jurisdiction over the case nor impair the validity of the information or
    otherwise render it defective. The remedy is to demand that PI be conducted before
    entering his plea, the court should then suspend the trial and order the fiscal to
    conduct a PI, that is, to file a Motion before the trial court to quash the
    Warrant of Arrest, and/or the Information on grounds provided by the Rules, or to as
    k for an investigation/reinvestigation of the case. Habeascorpus would not lie after
    the Warrant of commitment was issued by the Court on the basisof the Information
    filed against the accused. So it is explicitly provided for by Section 14,Rule 102 of
    the Rules of Court . . ." . The settled rule is that the writ of habeas corpus willnot
    issue where the person alleged to be restrained of his liberty is in custody of an
    officerunder a process issued by the court which has jurisdiction to do so

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy