This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2013-07-31 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Given the findings of the Court of Appeals that the RTC Orders were in contravention of law and settled jurisprudence and were, therefore, issued with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, the appellate court held that its reversal of the grant of Demurrer to Evidence did not violate Prieto's right against double jeopardy, citing People v. Hon. Laguio, Jr.[8] and Dayap v. Sendiong.[9] | |||||
|
2011-10-19 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| A demurrer to evidence is filed after the prosecution has rested its case and the trial court is required to evaluate whether the evidence presented by the prosecution is sufficient enough to warrant the conviction of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. If the court finds that the evidence is not sufficient and grants the demurrer to evidence, such dismissal of the case is one on the merits, which is equivalent to the acquittal of the accused.[35] Well-established is the rule that the Court cannot review an order granting the demurrer to evidence and acquitting the accused on the ground of insufficiency of evidence because to do so will place the accused in double jeopardy.[36] | |||||
|
2011-03-21 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| In criminal cases, the grant of a demurrer[9] is tantamount to an acquittal and the dismissal order may not be appealed because this would place the accused in double jeopardy.[10] Although the dismissal order is not subject to appeal, it is still reviewable but only through certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court.[11] For the writ to issue, the trial court must be shown to have acted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction such as where the prosecution was denied the opportunity to present its case or where the trial was a sham thus rendering the assailed judgment void.[12] The burden is on the petitioner to clearly demonstrate that the trial court blatantly abused its authority to a point so grave as to deprive it of its very power to dispense justice.[13] | |||||
|
2010-07-05 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| Stated differently, although the dismissal order consequent to a demurrer to evidence is not subject to appeal, it is still reviewable but only by certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court. In such a case, the factual findings of the trial court are conclusive upon the reviewing court, and the only legal basis to reverse and set aside the order of dismissal upon demurrer to evidence is by a clear showing that the trial court, in acquitting the accused, committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction or a denial of due process, thus, rendering the assailed judgment void.[15] | |||||