Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. DIR. GEN. CESAR P. NAZARENO

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	GR No. 151258 2014-12-01	ARTEMIO VILLAREAL v. PEOPLE SERENO, C.J.
Coupled with Section 7 of Rule 117[25] and Section 1 of Rule 122,[26] it can be culled from the foregoing provisions that only the accused may appeal the criminal aspect of a criminal case, especially if the relief being sought is the correction or review of the judgment therein. This rule was instituted in order to give life to the constitutional edict[27] against putting a person twice in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense. It is beyond contention that the accused would be exposed to double jeopardy if the state appeals the criminal judgment in order to reverse an acquittal or even to increase criminal liability. Thus, the accused's waiver of the right to appeal as when applying for probation makes the criminal judgment immediately final and executory. Our explanation in People v. Nazareno is worth reiterating:[28]
	GR No. 185267 2014-09-17	CESAR T. QUIAMBAO v. PEOPLE BRION, J.
Thus, double jeopardy exists when the following requisites are present: (1) a first jeopardy attached prior to the second; (2) the first jeopardy has been validly terminated; and (3) a second jeopardy is for the same offense as in the first. A first jeopardy attaches only (a) after a valid indictment; (b) before a competent court; (c) after arraignment; (d) when a valid plea has been entered; and (e) when the accused has been acquitted or convicted, or the case dismissed or otherwise terminated without his express consent.[18]
	GR No. 171513 2012-02-06	ARNOLD JAMES M. YSIDORO v. TERESITA J. LEONARDO- DE CASTRO BRION, J.
As applied to judgments rendered in criminal cases, unlike a review via a Rule 65 petition, only judgments of conviction can be reviewed in an ordinary appeal or a Rule 45 petition. As we explained in People v. Nazareno,[18] the constitutional right of the accused against double jeopardy proscribes appeals of judgments of acquittal through the remedies of ordinary appeal and a Rule 45 petition, thus: The Constitution has expressly adopted the double jeopardy policy and thus bars multiple criminal trials, thereby conclusively presuming that a second trial would be unfair if the innocence of the accused has been confirmed by a previous final judgment. Further prosecution via an appeal from a judgment of acquittal is likewise barred because the government has already been afforded a complete opportunity to prove the criminal defendant's culpability; after failing to persuade the court to enter a final judgment of conviction, the underlying reasons supporting the constitutional ban on multiple trials applies and becomes compelling. The reason is not only the defendant's already established innocence at the first trial where he had been placed in peril of conviction, but also the same untoward and prejudicial consequences of a second trial initiated by a government who has at its disposal all the powers and resources of the State. Unfairness and prejudice would necessarily result, as the government would then be allowed another opportunity to persuade a second trier of the defendant's guilt while strengthening any weaknesses that had attended the first trial, all in a process where the government's power and resources are once again employed against the defendant's individual means. That the second opportunity comes via an appeal does not make the effects any less prejudicial by the standards of reason, justice and conscience.[19] (emphases supplied)
	GR No. 151258 2012-02-01	ARTEMIO VILLAREAL v. PEOPLE SERENO, J.
Rule 117, Section 7 of the Rules of Court, which implements this particular constitutional right, provides as follows:[73]
	GR No. 182651 2010-08-25	HEIRS OF JANE HONRALES v. JONATHAN HONRALES VILLARAMA, JR., J.
Thus, double jeopardy exists when the following requisites are present: (1) a first jeopardy attached prior to the second; (2) the first jeopardy has been validly terminated; and (3) a second jeopardy is for the same offense as in the first. A first jeopardy attaches only (a) after a valid indictment; (b) before a competent court; (c) after arraignment; (d) when a valid plea has been entered; and (e) when the accused has been acquitted or convicted, or the case dismissed or otherwise terminated without his express consent.[49]