This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2015-01-21 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| Justice J.B.L. Reyes, writing for the Court, emphatically declared in Lozada v. Hernandez,[28] that the "rights conferred upon accused persons to participate in preliminary investigations concerning themselves depend upon the provisions of law by which such rights are specifically secured, rather than upon the phrase 'due process of law'." This reiterates Justice Jose P. Laurel's oft-quoted pronouncement in Hashim v. Boncan[29] that "the right to a preliminary investigation is statutory, not constitutional." In short, the rights of a respondent in a preliminary investigation are merely statutory rights, not constitutional due process rights. An investigation to determine probable cause for the filing of an information does not initiate a criminal action so as to trigger into operation Section 14(2), Article III of the Constitution.[30] It is the filing of a complaint or information in court that initiates a criminal action.[31] | |||||
|
2001-09-04 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| Preliminary investigation is not part of the due process guaranteed by the Constitution.[15] It is an inquiry to determine whether there is sufficient ground to engender a well-founded belief that a crime has been committed and the respondent is probably guilty thereof.[16] Instead, the right to a preliminary investigation is personal. It is afforded to the accused by statute, and can be waived, either expressly or by implication.[17] The waiver extends to any irregularity in the preliminary investigation, where one was conducted. | |||||