This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2015-10-21 |
PERLAS-BERNABE, J. |
||||
| Finally, it was error for the Ombudsman to simply discredit the TWG's findings contained in the Executive Summary which were adopted by the Ad Hoc Committee for being hearsay, self-serving, and of little probative value. It is noteworthy to point out that owing to the initiatory nature of preliminary investigations, the technical rules of evidence should not be applied in the course of its proceedings.[63] In the recent case of Estrada v. Ombudsman,[64] the Court declared that hearsay evidence is admissible in determining probable cause in preliminary investigations because such investigation is merely preliminary, and does not finally adjudicate rights and obligations of parties. Citing a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States, it was held that probable cause can be established with hearsay evidence, as long as there is substantial basis for crediting the hearsay, viz.: Justice Brion's pronouncement in Unilever that "the determination of probable cause does not depend on the validity or merits of a party's accusation or defense or on the admissibility or veracity of testimonies presented" correctly recognizes the doctrine in the United States that the determination of probable cause can rest partially, or even entirely, on hearsay evidence, as long as the person making the hearsay statement is credible. In United States v. Ventresca, the United States Supreme Court held: | |||||
|
2015-08-11 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| Although the application for the bill of particulars is one addressed to the sound discretion of the court[67] it should nonetheless exercise its discretion within the context of the facts and the nature of the crime charged in each case and the right of the accused to be informed of the nature and cause of accusation against him. As articulated in the case of People v. Iannone:[68] | |||||
|
2015-03-11 |
LEONEN, J. |
||||
| In the recent case of Estrada v. Office of the Ombudsman, et al,[73] we reiterated Webb on the determination of probable cause during preliminary investigation and traced the history of probable cause as borrowed from American jurisprudence:The purpose in determining probable cause is to make sure that the courts are not clogged with weak cases that will only be dismissed, as well as to spare a person from the travails of a needless prosecution. | |||||