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
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
Mag-post ng isang Komento