This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2010-08-03 |
CARPIO MORALES, J. |
||||
| Any remedial measure springing from the reinvestigation - be it a complete disposition or an intermediate modification[53] of the charge - is eventually addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court, which must make an independent evaluation or assessment of the merits of the case. Since the trial court would ultimately make the determination on the proposed course of action, it is for the prosecution to consider whether a reinvestigation is necessary to adduce and review the evidence for purposes of buttressing the appropriate motion to be filed in court. | |||||
|
2010-01-15 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| In Baltazar v. Chua,[31] the Court held that: Considering that the trial court has the power and duty to look into the propriety of the prosecution's motion to dismiss, with much more reason is it for the trial court to evaluate and to make its own appreciation and conclusion, whether the modification of the charges and the dropping of one of the accused in the information, as recommended by the Justice Secretary, is substantiated by evidence. This should be the state of affairs, since the disposition of the case -- such as its continuation or dismissal or exclusion of an accused -- is reposed in the sound discretion of the trial court. | |||||