article 36

ARTICLE 36


PREJUDICIAL QUESTIONS which must be decided before any criminal prosecution mich shall not aybe instituted or may proceed, shall be governed by the Rules of the Court which the Supreme Court shall promulgate and which shall not be in conflict with  the provision of this code.


CONCEPT OF PREJUDICIAL QUESTIONS


 PREJUDICIAL QUESTION- It is a question which arises in a case, the resolution of which is a logical antecedent of the issue involve

The Rules of Court provide for the elements of prejudicial questions, to wit; (a) the previously instituted civil action involves an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the subsequent criminal action; and
(b) Rule III, Sec 7,Rules of Court).
  A civil case, to be considered prejudicial to a criminal action as to cause the suspension of the latter, pending it determination ,must not only involve the same facts upon which the criminal prosecution would be based, but also that the resolution of the of the issue or issue in the civil case would necessarily be determine of the guilt or innocence of the accused. (Mendiola v. Macadaeg, 1 SCRA 593; Benitez v. Concepcion, Jr., 2 SCRA 178).

Sample cases related to article 36

G.R. No. L-14534, February 28, 1962
Facts:   While the marriage between A and B was still eke out a living, A got married to C.  B filed a criminal action for bigamy against A.  in the meantime, A filed an action for annulment of marriage on the estates of  force, intimidation, fraud, etc.  He further moved for the suspension of the criminal action on the ground of detrimental.
Held:   There was really a prejudicial question, as the resolution of the action for annulment of marriage with B was determine of the guilt or innocence of the accused in the criminal case.
Case:
People v. Aragon
94 Phil. 357
Facts:   A force B to marry him.  B filed an action for annulment of marriage on the ground of force or intimidation.  During the pendency of the annulment case, A married C; hence, A was charged with bigamy.  A filed a motion to suspend the criminal action on the ground of prejudicial question.

Held: A should not decide the validity of marriage let the court decide if it is not declared void or annulled , the presumption is that it is valid. Anyone who contracts marriage runs the risk of being prosecuted for BIGAMY.




Prepared by:
              IRISH V. DE RAMA.Ed. D.


Reference: Judge Ed Vincent S. Albano, et . al. FAMILY CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES. 2017 EDITION.Central bookstore supply INC.






Mga Komento

Mga sikat na post sa blog na ito

Gelano vs. Court of Appeals [GR L-39050, 24 February 1981Case digest article 88

marriage and cases