This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2012-06-18 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| Moreover, contrary to petitioner's contention, the prosecution was not denied due process. It is to be noted that the prosecution participated in all the proceedings before the court a quo and has filed numerous pleadings and oppositions to the motions filed by respondent. In fact, the prosecution has already rested its case and submitted its evidence when the demurrer was filed. Where the opportunity to be heard, either through verbal arguments or pleadings, is accorded, and the party can present its side or defend its interests in due course, there is no denial of procedural due process.[25] What is repugnant to due process is the denial of the opportunity to be heard,[26] which is not present here. | |||||