PHILIPPINE LAW SCHOOL

Pasay City, Metro Manila

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
Course Outline
Atty. J.A.P. GALVEZ

Google Meet LINK: meet.google.com/bhp-vqih-mic

I. INTRODUCTION

a. Basic Principles of the Constitution

b. Doctrine of Constitutional Supremacy
c. Essential Qualities of the Written Constitution
d. Essential Parts of the Written Constitution
e. Amendment and Revision
f. Judicial Review of Amendments

CASES:

1. Manila Prince Hotel vs. GSIS

II. CONSTITUTION and the COURTS

a. Voting
b. Requisites of a Judicial Inquiry
1. Actual Case
2. Proper Party
3. Earliest Opportunity
4. Necessity of Deciding Constitutional Question
c. Effect of Declaration of Unconstitutionality
d. Partial Unconstitutionality

CASES:

1. Dumalao vs. COMELEC 95 SCRA 392

2. Philconsa vs. Villareal 56 SCRA 477
3. Tijam vs. Sibonghanoy 33 SCRA 29
4. Zandueta vs. De la Costa 66 Phil 738
5. Manila Motor Co vs. Flores 99 Phil 738
6. Lozada vs. Comelec 120 SCRA 337
7. De Agbayani vs. PNB 38 SCRA vs. 429
8. Oposa vs. Factoran 224 SCRA 792
III. FUNDAMENTAL POWERS OF THE STATE

a. Kinds
b. Similarities
c. Differences
d. Limitations

IV. POLICE POWER

a. Concept/ Basic Principles

b. Sources of the Power
c. Test of Valid Exercise
i. Lawful Subject
ii. Lawful Means
d. Police Power using Power of Taxation as an Implement
e. Police Power exercised as a Complement of Eminent
Domain
f. Regulation vs. Taking
g. Police Power of Local Governments

CASES:

1. Phil. Assoc. of Service Exporters vs. Drilon, G.R. L-

81958, 30 June 1998
2. Inchong vs. Hernandez, G.R. No. L-7995, 31 May 1957
3. Lozano vs. Martinez, G.R. No. L-63419, 18 December
1986
4. DECS vs. San Diego, G.R. No. 89572, 21 December
1989
5. Ynot vs. IAC, G.R. No. 74457, 20 March 1987
6. Assoc. of Small Landowners vs Sec. of Agrarian
Reform, G.R. No. 78742
7. City Government of QC vs. Ericta, G.R. No. L-34915,
24 June 1983
8. Manila Memorial Park vs. Secretary of DSWD G.R. No.
175356
9. Mosqueda vs. Pilipino Banana Growers & Exporters
Association, G.R. Nos. 189185 & 189305, August 16,
2016

V. EMINENT DOMAIN

a. Concept/Basic Principles
b. Basis of the Inherent Exercise
c. What may be expropriated
d. Requisites for a Valid Exercise
1. Necessity of Expropriation
 2. Taking in Eminent Domain
3. Public Use
4. Just Compensation
e. Eminent Domain and State Immunity
f. Requisites for the Exercise by Local Government Units
Government Code

CASES:

1. City of Manila vs. Chinese Community of Manila

[G.R. No. 14355, October 31, 1919]
2. Republic vs. Philippine Long Distance Telephone Co.
[G.R. No. L-18841, January 27, 1969]
3. People vs. Fajardo [G.R. No. L-12172, August 29,
1958]
4. Republic vs. Vda. De Castellvi [G.R. No. L20620,
August 15, 1974]
5. Sumulong vs. Guerrero [G.R. No. L-48685,
September 30, 1987]
6. EPZA vs. Dulay [G.R. No. L-59603, April 29, 1987]
7. Republic vs. Lim, [G.R. No. 161656, June 29, 2005]
8. Amigable vs. Cuenca [G.R. No. L-26400, February
29, 1972]
9. Municipality of Parañaque vs. V.M. Realty Corp.
[G.R. No. 127820, July 20, 1998]

VI. POWER OF TAXATION

a. Concept/Basic Principles
b. Uniformity or Equality in Taxation
c. Equitable Taxation
d. Progressive vs Regressive
e. Public Purpose in Taxation
f. Double Taxation
g. Tax Exemption
1. Voting Requirement
2. Real Property Tax
3.Non Stock Non Profit Educational Institutions

CASES

1. Sison vs. Ancheta G.R. L- 59431; 1984

2. Pascual vs. Secretary of Public Works [G.R. No. L-
10405, December 29, 1960]
3. Punsalan vs. Municipal Board of Manila [G.R. No. L-
4817, May 26, 1954]
4. Lladoc vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue [G.R.
No. L-19201, June 16, 1965]
 5. Abra Valley College vs. Aquino [G.R. No. L39086,
June 15, 1988
6.
VII. BIIL OF RIGHTS

a. Article III of the 1987 Constitution

VIII. DUE PROCESS OF LAW

a) Concept
b) Origin
c) Essence of Due Process
d) Two Aspects of Due Process
(1) Substantive
(2) Procedural
e) Minimum Requirements
(1) Prior Notice
(2) Hearing
f) Judicial Due Process
g) Administrative Due Process
h) Due Process in School Disciplinary Proceedings
i) Void for Vagueness Doctrine
j) Overbreadth Doctrine

CASES

1) Ichong vs. Hernandez [G.R. No. L-7995, May 31, 1957]

2) Philippine Phosphate Fertilizer Corp. vs. Torres [G.R. No.
98050, March 17, 1994]
3) Ynot vs. Intermediate Appellate Court [G.R. No. 74457,
March 20, 1987]
4) Alonte vs. Savellano [G.R. No. 131652, March 9, 1998]
5) Aniag vs. COMELEC [G.R. No. 104961, October 7, 1994]
6) Philippine Communications Satellite Corp. vs. Alcuaz [G.R.
No. 84818, December 18, 1989]
7) Ang Tibay vs. Court Industrial Relations [G.R. No. 46496,
February 27, 1940]
8) Ateneo de Manila vs. Capulong [G.R. No. 99327, May 27,
1993]
9) Southern Hemisphere Engagement Network, Inc. vs. Anti-
Terrorism Council [G.R. No. 178552, October 5, 2010]
10) Mosqueda vs. Pilipino Banana Growers & Exporters
Association [G.R. Nos. 189185 & 189305, August 16, 2016]

IX. EQUAL PROTECTION

1) Concept
2) Classification
3) Requisites of a Valid Classification
i) Substantial Distinction
ii) Classification must be Germane to the Purpose of the
Law
iii) The reasonableness of the classification must not be
limited to existing conditions only
iv) The law must apply to all of the same class
4) Analytical Tool in Determining Reasonableness of
Classification
i) Strict Scrutiny Test
ii) Intermediate Test
iii) Rational Relationship Test

Cases:

1) People vs. Vera [G.R. No. 45685, November 16, 1937]

2) Ichong vs. Hernandez [G.R. No. L-7995, May 31, 1957]
3) Villegas vs. Hiu Chiong Tsai Pao Ho [G.R. No. L-29646,
November 10, 1978]
4) People vs. Cayat [G.R. No. L-45987, May 5, 1939]
5) Dumlao vs. COMELEC [G.R. No. L-52245, January 22,
1980]
6) Philippine Association of Service Exporters vs. Drilon [G.R.
No. L81958, June 30, 1988]
7) Himagan vs. People [G.R. No. 113811, October 7, 1994]
8) Quinto vs. COMELEC [G.R. No. 189698, February 22, 2010]
9) Biraogo vs. The Philippine Truth Commission [G.R. No.
192935, December 7, 2010]
10) Ormoc Sugar Co., Inc. vs. Treasurer of Ormoc City [G.R.
No. L-23794, February 17, 1968]

X. RIGHTS AGAINST UNREASONABLE SEARCHES AND

SEIZURES

1) Meaning/Extent
2) Private Intrusion
3) Search Warrant
4) Warrant of Arrest
5) Administrative Warrant
6) Requisites of a Valid Warrant
i) Probable Cause
ii) Personally Determined by a Judge
iii) Under oath or affirmation of the Complainant
iv) Particularity in the Description
7) Warrantless Arrest
i) In Flagrante Delicto
ii) Hot Pursuit
iii) Arrest of Prisoner or Detainee
iv) Arrest after escape or rescue
v) Arrest of Accused on Bail
8) Warrantless Search
i) Search incidental to a lawful arrest
ii) Stop and Frisk
iii) Seizure of evidence in plain view
iv) Consented Search
v) Customs Search
vi) Airport Search
vii) Checkpoint Search
viii) Exclusionary Principle
ix) Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine

CASES

1) People vs. Marti [G.R. No. 81561, January 18, 1991]

2) Stonehill vs. Diokno [G.R. No. L-19550, June 19, 1967]
3) Mantaring vs. Judge Roman, A.M. No. RTJ-93-964,
February 28, 1996
4) Soliven vs. Makasiar [G.R. No. 82585, November 14, 1988]
5) Silva vs. Presiding Judge of RTC, Negros Oriental [G.R. No.
81756, October 21, 1991]
6) Harvey vs. Santiago [G.R. No. 82544, June 28, 1988]
7) Salazar vs. Achacoso, G.R. No. 81510,) March 14, 1990
8) Alvarez vs. CFI [G.R. No. 45358, January 29, 1937]
9) People vs. Del Rosario [G.R. No. 109633, July 20, 1994]
10) People vs. Sucro [G.R. No. 93239, March 18, 1991]
11) Macad vs. People, [G.R. No. 227366, August 1, 2018]
12) People vs. Gerente, [G.R. No. 95847-48. March 10, 1993]
13) People vs. Rodrigueza [G.R. No. 95902, February 4, 1992]
14) Go Vs. Court of Appeals [G.R. No. 101837, February 11,
1992]
15) Posadas vs. Court of Appeals [G.R. No. 89139, August 2,
1990]
16) Malacat vs. Court of Appeals [G.R. No. 123595,
December 12, 1997]
17) People vs. Aminnudin [G.R. No. L-74869, July 6, 1988]
18) People vs. Malmstedt [G.R. No. 91107, June 19, 1991]
19) Luz vs. People [G.R. No. 197788, February 29, 2012]
20) People vs. Musa [G.R. No. 96177, January 27, 1993]
21) United Laboratories vs. Isip, [G.R. No. 163958, June 28,
2005]
22) People vs. O’Cochlain [G.R. No. 229071, December 10,
2018]
23) Papa vs. Mago [G.R. No. L-27360, February 28, 1968]
Valmonte vs. De Villa [G.R. No. 83988, September 29, 1989]

XI. RIGHT TO PRIVACY

1) Concept
2) Two Categories of Privacy
3) Zones of Privacy
4) Test of Reasonable Expectation of Privacy
i) Objective
ii) Subjective
5) Requirements in order that personal information may be
compelled to be disclosed
6) Privacy of Communications
7) Statutes Creating Zones of Privacy

CASES

1) Ople vs. Torres [G.R. No. 127685, July 23, 1998]

2) Disini vs. Secretary of Justice [G.R. No. 203335, February
11, 2014]
3) Vivares vs. St. Theresa’s College, G.R. No. 202666,
September 29, 2014
4) Zulueta vs. Court of Appeals [G.R. No. 107383, February
20, 1996]
5) Ramirez vs. Court of Appeals [G.R. No. 93833, September
28, 1995]
6) Navarro vs. Court of Appeals [G.R. No. 121087, August 26,
1999]

XII. FREE SPEECH, EXPRESSION, PRESS, ASSEMBLY AND

PETITION

1. Extent of Protection
2. Theory of Deliberative Democracy
3. Concept of Market Place of Ideas
4. Safety Valve Theory
5. Concept of Privilege Speech
a. Absolute
b. Qualified
6. Kinds of Speeches
a. Political
b. Commercial
7. Types of Regulations
a. Content-Based
b. Content Neutral
8. Tests to Determine the Validity of Governmental
regulation
a. Clear and Present Danger
b. O’Brien Test
9. Assembly vs. Strike
10. Free Speech in Campus

CASES:

1. Diocese of Bacolod vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 205728,

January 21, 2015
 2. United States vs. Bustos [G.R. No. L-12592, March 8,
1918]
3. People vs. Alarcon [G.R. No. 46551, December 12, 1939]
4. Ayer Productions PTY Ltd. vs. Capulong [G.R. No. L-
82380, April 29, 1988]
5. Borjal vs. Court of Appeals [G.R. No. 126466, January
14, 1999]
6. Reyes vs. Bagatsing [G.R. No. L-65366, November 9,
1983]
7. Pita vs. Court of Appeals [G.R. No. 80806, October 5,
1989
8. Social Weather Stations, Inc. vs. COMELEC [G.R. No.
147571, May 5, 2001]
9. Primicias vs. Fugoso [G.R. No. L-1800, January 27, 1948]
10. Malabanan vs. Ramento [G.R. No. 62270, May 21,
1984]
11. De la Cruz vs. Court Appeals [G.R. No. 126183,
March 25, 1999]
12. PBM Employees Association vs. Philippine Blooming
Mills [G.R. No. L31195, June 5, 1973]
13. Bayan vs. Ermita [G.R. No. 169838, April 25, 2006]

XIII. RELIGIOUS FREEDOM AND NON-ESTABLISHMENT

OF RELIGION

1. Concept/Meaning
2. Separation of Church and State
3. Requisites to Make a Philosophy a Religion
4. Types of Wall of Separation
a. Strict Separationist
b. Strict Neutrality
c. Benevolent Neutrality
5. Aspects of Religion outside governmental interference
a. Doctrinal
b. Disciplinary
c. Internal Matters
6. Test for a valid governmental regulation
a. Clear and Present Danger Test
b. Compelling State Interest Test
c. Lemon Test

CASES

1. Aglipay vs. Ruiz [G.R. No. 45459, March 13, 1937]

2. Garces vs. Estenzo [G.R. No. L-53487, May 25, 1981]
3. Taruc vs. De la Cruz [G.R. No. 144801, March 10, 2005]
4. American Bible Society vs. City of Manila [G.R. No.
L9637, April 30, 1957]
 5. Iglesia Ni Cristo vs. Court of Appeals [G.R. No. 119673,
July 26, 1996]
6. Ebralinag vs. Division Superintendent of Cebu [G.R. No.
95770, March 1, 1993]
7. Estrada vs. Escritor [A.M. No. P-02-1651, June 22, 2006]
8. Imbong vs. Ochoa, G.R. No. 204819, April 8, 2014

XIV. LIBERTY OF ABODE AND RIGHT TO TRAVEL

1. Extent of the Right to Abode

2. Limitations of Liberty of Abode
3. Extent of Right to Travel
4. Right to Travel vs. Right to Return to One’s Country
5. Limitations of the Right to Travel
a. Constitutional
b. Statutory
c. Inherent

CASES

1. Marcos vs. Manglapus [G.R. No. 88211, September 15,

1989]
2. SPARK vs. Quezon City [G.R. No. 225442, August 8,
2017]
3. Manotoc vs. Court of Appeals [G.R. No. L62100, May 30,
1986]
4. Silverio vs. Court of Appeals [G.R. No. 94284, April 8,
1991]
5. Genuino vs. Delima, G.R. No. 197930, April 17, 2018
6. Leave Division, Office of Administrative Services-Office of
the Court Administrator vs. Heusdens [A.M. No. P-11-
2927, December 11, 2007

XV.RIGHT TO INFORMATION

1. Information/Contracts Covered
2. Policy of Full Public Disclosure
3. Conditions in Order that right can be invoked
4. Exemptions from the Right

CASES

1. Legaspi vs. Civil Service Commission [G.R. No. 72119,

May 29, 1987]
2. Valmonte vs. Belmonte, Jr. [G.R. No. 74930, February
13, 1989]
 3. Province of Cotabato vs. The Gov’t. of the RP Peace Panel
on Ancestral Domain [G.R. No. 183591, October 14,
2008]
4. Echagaray vs. Secretary of Justice [G.R. NO. 132601,
October 12, 1998]
5. Chavez vs. Presidential Commission on Good
Government [G.R. No. 130716, December 9, 1998]
6. In Re: Production of Court Records and Documents and
the Attendance of Court officials and employees as
witnesses for the Impeachment Prosecution [February 14,
2012]

XVI. RIGHT TO ASSOCIATION

1. Extent of the Right

2. Valid Limitations
3. Strike not Included for employees in the public service

CASES:

1. SSS Employees Association vs. Court of Appeals [G.R.

No. 85279, July 28, 1989
2. Victoriano vs. Elizalde Rope Workers’ Union [G.R. No. L-
25246, September 12, 1974]
3. In re: IBP membership Dues Delinquency of Atty. Marcial
Edillon [A.C. No. 1928, August 3, 1978]

XVII. NON-IMPAIRMENT OF CONTRACT

1. Essence of the Guarantee

2. Limitations

CASES:

1. Rutter vs. Esteban [G.R. No. L-3708, May 18, 1953]

2. Ortigas & Co. Ltd. Partnership vs. Feati Bank & Trust Co.
[G.R. No. L-24670, December 14, 1979]
3. Lozano vs. Martinez [G.R. No. L-63419, December 18,
1986]
4. Ganzon vs. Inserto [G.R. No. L-56450, July 25, 1983

XVIII. FREE ACCESS TO COURT AND ADEQUATE LEGAL

ASSISTANCE

1. Extent of the Guarantee

2. Limitations
Case:

1. In Re: Query of Mr. Roger Prioreschi [A.M. No. 09-6-9-SC,

August 19, 2009]

XIX. RIGHTS UNDER CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION

1. Custodial Investigation, meaning

2. When does custodial investigation begin
3. Rights of a person under custodial investigation
4. Requisites of valid waiver
5. Law enforcement officers, meaning
6. Additional statutory requirements for admissibility of
extrajudicial confession
7. Exclusionary doctrine
8. Fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine

CASES

1. Ho Wai Pang v. People of the Philippines [G.R. No.

176229, October 19, 2011]
2. Gamboa vs. Cruz [G.R. No. L-56291, June 27, 1988]
3. People vs. Macam [G.R. Nos. 91011-12, November 24,
1994]
4. People vs. Judge Ayson [G.R. No. 85215, July 7, 1989]
5. People vs. Pinlac [G.R. Nos. 74123-24, September 26,
1988]
6. People vs. Bolanos [G.R. No. 101808, July 3, 1992]
7. People vs. Andan [G.R. No. 116437, March 3, 1997]
8. Navallo vs. Sandiganbayan [G.R. No. 97214, July 18,
1994]
9. People vs. Dy [G.R. No. 74517, February 23, 1988]
10. People vs. Alicando [G.R. No. 117487, December 12,
1995]

XX. RIGHT TO BAIL

1. Bail, meaning
2. When available
3. Kinds of bail
a. Bail as a matter of right
b. Bail as a matter of discretion
4. Waiver of the right, requirements
5. Availability to Members of the AFP
6. Availability in noncriminal proceedings
7. Standard of evidence to be granted bail in noncriminal
proceedings
Cases:

1. Basco vs. Rapatalo [Adm. Matter No. RTJ-96-1335,

March 5, 1997]
2. People vs. Judge Donato [G.R. No. 79269, June 5, 1991]
3. People vs. Fortes [G.R. No. 90643, June 25, 1993]
4. Comendador vs. De Villa [G.R. No. 93177, August 2,
1991]
5. Baylon vs. Judge Sison [Adm. Matter No. 92- 7-360-0,
April 6, 1995
6. Manotoc vs. Court of Appeals [G.R. No. L62100, May 30,
1986]
7. Government of the U.S. vs. Judge Puruganan [G.R. No.
148571, September 24, 2002; December 17, 2002]
8. Government of Hong Kong vs. Hon. Olalia [G.R. No.
153675, April 19, 2007]
9. Enrile vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 213847, August 18,
2015

XXI. RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED

1. Criminal Due Process

2. Requisites
3. Delayed Preliminary Investigation vs No Preliminary
Investigation
4. Sham Trial
5. Presumption of Innocence
6. Proof beyond reasonable doubt
7. Evidence to destroy the presumption
8. Equipoise Rule
9. Presumption of Guilt, when allowed
10. Right to Counsel
a. Why Mandatory
b. When is the Court required to appoint a Counsel de
officio
c. When may the accused appear for himself
11. Right to be Informed of the Nature and Cause of
Accusation
12. Purposes
a. What must be alleged
b. Title of the Offense vs. Factual Allegations
c. Offense Charged vs. Offense Proved
d. Value of Arraignment
13. Speedy Trial
a. What is Speedy Trial
b. When is there violation
14. Stages of the Proceedings covered by the right
15. Effects of Violation
16. Impartial Trial What is Impartial Trial
 17. Right Against Prejudicial Publicity
18. Totality of Circumstances Test
19. Public Trial
20. Purpose
21. Public Trial vs. Publicized Trial
22. Recording of Judicial Proceedings
23. Right to Confrontation
24. Purposes
25. Hearsay Rule
26. Right to Compulsory Processes
27. Available compulsory processes
28. Test to determine propriety of compulsory processes
29. Trial in absentia
a. Requisites
b. Effects of trial in absentia
c. Rights waived in trial in absentia

CASES

1. Tatad vs. Sandiganbayan [G.R. Nos. L-72335-39. March

21, 1988.]
2. Galman vs. Sandiganbayan [G.R. No. 72670, September
12, 1986]
3. Alonte vs. Savellano [G.R. No. 131652, March 9, 1998]
4. People vs. Dramayo [G.R. No. L-21325, October 29, 1971]
5. Dumlao vs. COMELEC [G.R. No. L-52245, January 22,
1980]
6. Marquez vs. COMELEC [G.R. No. 112889, April 18, 1995]
7. Corpus vs. People [G.R. No. 74259, February 14, 1991]
8. Feeder International Line vs. CA [G.R. No. 94262 May 31,
1991]
9. People vs. Holgado [G.R. No. L-2809, March 22, 1950]
10. People vs. Agbayani [G.R. No. 122770, January 16,
1998]
11. Amion vs. Judge Chiongson [A.M. No. RTJ-97-1371,
January 22, 1999]
12. People vs. Quitlong [G.R. No. 121562, July 10,
1998]
13. Pecho vs. People [G.R. No. 111399, September 27,
1996]
14. Soriano vs. Sandiganbayan [G.R. No. L-65952, July
31, 1984]
15. Borja vs. Mendoza [G.R. No. L-45667, June 20,
1977]
16. People vs. Tee [G.R. Nos. 140546-47, January 20,
2003]
17. Flores vs. People [G.R. No. L-25769, December 10,
1974]
18. Conde vs. Rivera [G.R. No. 21741, January 25,
1924]
 19. Mateo, Jr. vs. Villaluz [G.R. Nos. L-34756- 59,
March 31, 1973]
20. Garcia vs. Domingo [G.R. No. L-30104, July 25,
1973]
21. People vs. Teehankee, Jr. [G.R. No. 11206- 08,
October 6, 1995]
22. In re: request for Live Radio and TV Coverage of the
Trial in the Sandiganbayan of the Plunder Cases against
Former President Joseph Estrada [A.M. No. 00- 1-4-03-
SC, September 13, 2001]
23. Re: Petition For Radio And Television Coverage Of
The Multiple Murder Cases Against Maguindanao
Governor Zaldy Ampatuan, et al.,; [A.M. No. 10-11-5- SC,
June 14, 2011; October 23, 2012]
24. United States vs. Javier [G.R. No. L12990, January
21, 1918]
25. Talino vs. Sandiganbayan [G.R. Nos. L-75511-14,
March 16, 1987]
26. Roco vs. Contreras [G.R. No. 158275, June 28,
2005]
27. People vs. Mapalao [G.R. No. 92415, May 14, 1991]
28. People vs. Valeriano [G.R. Nos. 103604-05,
September 23, 1993]

XXII.SUSPENSION OF THE PRIVILEGE OF THE WRIT OF

HABEAS CORPUS

Writ of Habeas Corpus

1. Purpose of suspension
2. Grounds for suspension
3. Who may suspend
4. Standard of evidence to determine the existence of
grounds
5. Period of suspension
6. Revocation and extension
7. Constitutional safeguards

CASES

1. Lansang vs. Garcia [G.R. No. L-33964, December 11,

1971]
2. In re: The Issuance of the Writ of Habeas Corpus for Dr.
Aurora Parong, et al. vs. Ponce Enrile, [G.R. No. L-61388,
April 20, 1983]
3. Lagman vs. Medialdea, G.R. No. 231658, July 4, 2017
4. Lagman vs. Pimentel, G.R. No. 235935, February 6, 2018
5. Padilla vs. Congress, G.R. No. 231671, July25, 2017
6. Jackson vs. Macalino [G.R. No. 139255, November 24,
2003]
XXIII. SPEEDY DISPOSITION OF CASES

1. Speedy Trial vs Speedy Disposition of Cases

2. Stages of the proceedings covered
3. Consequences of violations

Cases:

Padua vs. Ericta [G.R. No. L-38570, May 24, 1988]

Flores vs. People [G.R. No. L-25769, December 10, 1974]

XXIV. RIGHT AGAINST SELF INCRIMINATION

1. Origin of the right

2. Extent of the guaranty
3. Evidence covered
4. Excluded evidence
5. Accused vs. Witness
6. Proceedings covered
7. Immunity Statutes

Cases:

1. United States vs. Tan Teng [G.R. No. 7081, September 7,

1912]
2. Villaflor vs. Summers [G.R. No. 16444, September 8,
1920]
3. Beltran vs. Samson [G.R. No. 32025, September 23,
1929]
4. Chavez vs. Court of Appeals [G.R. No. L29169, August
19, 1968]
5. People vs. Gallarde [G.R. No. 133025, February 27, 2000]
6. Pascual vs. Board of Medical Examiners [G.R. No. L-
25018, May 26, 1969]
7. Mapa, Jr. vs. Sandiganbayan [G.R. No. 100295, April 26,
1994]

XXV. INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE

1. Definition
2. Aspects of Involuntary Servitude
3. Exemptions

Cases
 1. Philippine Refining Company Worker’s Union vs.
Philippine Refining Co. [G.R. No. L-1668, March 29,
1948]
2. In the Matter of Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus of
Segifredo Aclaracion [G.R. No. L-39115, May 26, 1975]

XXV. PROHIBITED PUNISHMENT

1. When is punishment cruel

2. Remedy when punishment is excessive
3. Death punishment
4. Automatic Review
5. Direct Review
6. Intermediate Review
7. Consequence of removal of unusual punishment from the
list of prohibited punishment

CASES:

1. People vs. Estoista [G.R. No. L-5793, August 27, 1953]

2. People vs. Esparas [G.R. No. 120034, August 20, 1996]
3. Echagaray vs. Secretary of Justice [G.R. No. 132601,
October 12, 1998]
4. Maturan vs. COMELEC G.R. No. 227155, 28 March 2017

XXVI.NON IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT OR POLL TAX

1. Origin
2. Wisdom/Policy
3. Extent of the guaranty

Cases:

1. Serafin vs. Lindayag [A.M. No. 297-MJ, September 30,

1975]
2. Lozano vs. Martinez [G.R. No. L-63419, December 18,
1986]

XXVII. DOUBLE JEOPARDY

1. Origin
2. Kinds of Double Jeopardy
3. Identity of Offenses
4. Identity of Acts
5. Requisites of Double Jeopardy
6. Requisites of Legal Jeopardy
7. Dismissal vs Acquittal
8. Appeal of Dismissal
 9. Dismissal upon the motion of the accused
10. Dismissal on technical grounds
11. Dismissal due to demurrer to evidence
12. Dismissal due to violation of speedy trial
13. Appeal/MR of Acquittal
14. Doctrine of supervening event

Cases:

1. Philippine Savings Bank vs. Bermoy [G.R. No. 151912,

September 26, 2005]
2. People vs. Obsania [G.R. No. L-24447, June 29, 1968]
3. Paulin vs. Gimenez [G.R. No. 103323, January 21, 1993]
4. Icasiano vs. Sandiganbayan [G.R. No. 95642, May 28,
1992]
5. Lejano vs. People of the Philippines [G.R. No. 176389,
January 18, 2011]
6. People vs. Balisacan [G.R. No. L-26376, August 31, 1966]
7. People vs. City Court of Silay [G.R. No. L43790,
December 9, 1976]
8. Esmeña vs. Pogoy [G.R. No. L-54110, February 20, 1981]
9. People vs. Pineda [G.R. No. L-44205, February 16, 1993]
10. People vs. Tampal [G.R. No. 102485, May 22, 1995]
11. Melo vs. People [G.R. No. L-3580, March 22, 1950]
12. People vs. Adil [G.R. No. L-41863, April 22, 1977]
13. People vs. Relova [G.R. No. L-45129, March 6, 1987]

XXVIII. EX POST FACTO AND BILL OF ATTAINDER

1. Kinds of ex post facto law

2. Characteristics of ex post facto law
3. Bill of attainder, definition

Cases

1. United States vs. Conde [G.R. No. L18208, February 14,

1922]
2. Concepcion vs. Garcia [G.R. No. L-32380, November 29,
1929]
3. Nasi-Villar vs People of the Philippines [G.R. No. 176169,
November 14, 2008]
4. Salvador vs. Mapa, Jr. [G.R. No. 135080, November 28,
2007

XXVI.CITIZENSHIP

1. Citizenship vs. Nationality

2. Modes of acquiring citizenship
3. Principles in acquiring citizenship by birth
 4. Who are citizens of the Philippines
a. Philippine Bill of 1902
b. Jones Law
c. 1935 Constitution
d. 1987 Constitution
5. Status of Foundlings and Illegitimate Children
6. Election of Citizenship
a. Who are required to elect
b. When to elect
c. Formal election
d. Informal election
e. Effect of election

7. Naturalization
a. Initial acquisition of citizenship
b. Re-acquisition of citizenship
c. Procedure for naturalization
d. Derivative naturalization
8. Grounds for losing Philippine citizenship
9. Repatriation
10. Dual citizenship

CASES:

1. Poe-Llamansares vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 221697, March

8, 2016
2. David vs. Senate Electoral Tribunal, G.R. No. 221538, 20,
2016
3. Tecson vs. COMELEC [G.R. No. 161434, March 3, 2004]
4. Republic vs. Lim [G.R. No. 153883, January 13, 2004]
5. Co vs. House of Representatives [G.R. Nos. 92191-92,
July 30, 1991]
6. In re: Application for Admission to the Bar of Vicente
Ching [B.M. No. 914, October 1, 1999]
7. Cabiling Ma vs. Fernandez [G.R. No. 183133, July 26,
2010]
8. Yu vs. DefensorSantiago [G.R. No. 83882, January 24,
1989]
9. Maquiling vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 195649, April 16,
2013
10. Frivaldo vs. COMELEC [G.R. No. 87193, June 23, 1989]
11. Republic vs. De la Rosa [G.R. No. 104654, June 6, 1994]
12. Labo vs. COMELEC [G.R. No. 86564, August 1, 1989]
13. Aznar vs. COMELEC [G.R. No. 83820, May 25, 1990]
14. Mercado vs. Manzano [G.R. No. 135083, May 26,
1999]
15. Bengzon III vs. HRET [G.R. No. 142840, May 7,
2001]
16. Mo Ya Lim Yao vs. Commissioner of Immigration
[G.R. No. L-21289, October 4, 1971]
17. Altajeros vs. COMELEC [G.R. No. 163256,
November 10, 2004]