This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2004-06-08 |
PANGANIBAN, J. |
||||
| "Based on the above-stated reasons, the summary should necessarily be a complete compilation or restatement of all the pieces of evidence presented during the hearing proper."[26] The assailed September 26, 2001 Order was sorely defective in both form and substance. It had no summary of the evidence, but merely a curt one-sentence description of the evidence for the prosecution. Neither did the Order have a conclusion on whether the evidence of guilt was strong. Without such conclusion, there was no basis for granting bail. Thus, the Order cannot be sustained, allowed to stand, or given any semblance of validity.[27] It was patently a product of whim, caprice, and outright arbitrariness.[28] For the same reasons, we cannot also sustain the September 27, 2001 and the November 7, 2001 Orders, which are rooted in the invalid September 26, 2001 Order. | |||||