Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 73 views

    Go Vs People

    Uploaded by

    anon_421571815
    The Supreme Court ruled that depositions cannot be taken from witnesses in criminal cases based on the rules for civil cases. In criminal cases, the Constitution guarantees the accused the right to a public trial and to confront witnesses face-to-face. While there are exceptions allowing pre-recorded testimony, the general requirement is for oral examination of witnesses before the judge in open court to assess credibility. The procedures to take depositions in civil cases via oral examination or written interrogatories do not apply to criminal cases.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Go Vs People

    Uploaded by

    anon_421571815
    73 views1 page
    The Supreme Court ruled that depositions cannot be taken from witnesses in criminal cases based on the rules for civil cases. In criminal cases, the Constitution guarantees the accused the right to a public trial and to confront witnesses face-to-face. While there are exceptions allowing pre-recorded testimony, the general requirement is for oral examination of witnesses before the judge in open court to assess credibility. The procedures to take depositions in civil cases via oral examination or written interrogatories do not apply to criminal cases.

    Original Title

    go vs people..docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court ruled that depositions cannot be taken from witnesses in criminal cases based on the rules for civil cases. In criminal cases, the Constitution guarantees the accused the right to a public trial and to confront witnesses face-to-face. While there are exceptions allowing pre-recorded testimony, the general requirement is for oral examination of witnesses before the judge in open court to assess credibility. The procedures to take depositions in civil cases via oral examination or written interrogatories do not apply to criminal cases.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    73 views1 page

    Go Vs People

    Uploaded by

    anon_421571815
    The Supreme Court ruled that depositions cannot be taken from witnesses in criminal cases based on the rules for civil cases. In criminal cases, the Constitution guarantees the accused the right to a public trial and to confront witnesses face-to-face. While there are exceptions allowing pre-recorded testimony, the general requirement is for oral examination of witnesses before the judge in open court to assess credibility. The procedures to take depositions in civil cases via oral examination or written interrogatories do not apply to criminal cases.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    Go vs.

    People,
    G.R. No. 185527,
    July 18, 2012

    FACTS: Petitioners Harry Go, Tonny Ngo, Jerry Ngo and Jane Go were charged before the
    Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) of Manila for Other Deceits under Article 318 of the Revised
    Penal Code (RPC) docketed as Criminal Case No. 396447. Upon arraignment, petitioners
    pleaded not guilty to the charge. The prosecution's complaining witness, Li Luen Ping, a frail old
    businessman from Laos, Cambodia, traveled from his home country back to the Philippines in
    order to attend the hearing held on September 9, 2004. However, trial dates were subsequently
    postponed due to his unavailability. The private prosecutor filed with the MeTC a Motion to Take
    Oral Deposition of Li Luen Ping, alleging that he was being treated for lung infection at the
    Cambodia Charity Hospital in Laos, Cambodia and that, upon doctor's advice; he could not
    make the long travel to the Philippines by reason of ill health. Notwithstanding petitioners'
    Opposition, the MeTC granted the motion after the prosecution complied with the directive to
    submit a Medical Certificate of Li Luen Ping. Petitioners sought its reconsideration which the
    MeTC denied, prompting petitioners to file a Petition for Certiorari before the RTC. The RTC
    granted the petition and declared the MeTC Orders null and void. Upon denial by the RTC of
    their motion for reconsideration, the prosecution elevated the case to the CA. The CA
    promulgated the assailed Decision which held that no grave abuse of discretion can be imputed
    upon the MeTC for allowing the deposition-taking of the complaining witness Li Luen Ping
    because no rule of procedure expressly disallows the taking of depositions in criminal cases and
    that, in any case, petitioners would still have every opportunity to cross-examine the
    complaining witness and make timely objections during the taking of the oral deposition either
    through counsel or through the consular officer who would be taking the deposition of the
    witness.

    ISSUE: Whether or not Section 17, Rule 23 on the taking of depositions of witnesses in civil
    cases can be applied suppletorily to the case?

    RULING: The examination of witnesses must be done orally before a judge in open court. This
    is true especially in criminal cases where the Constitution secures to the accused his right to a
    public trial and to meet the witnesses against him face to face. The requirement is the "safest
    and most satisfactory method of investigating facts" as it enables the judge to test the witness'
    credibility through his manner and deportment while testifying. It is not without exceptions,
    however, as the Rules of Court recognizes the conditional examination of witnesses and the use
    of their depositions as testimonial evidence in lieu of direct court testimony. Even in criminal
    proceedings, there is no doubt as to the availability of conditional examination of witnesses —
    both for the benefit of the defense, as well as the prosecution. The Court's ruling in the case of
    Vda. de Manguerra v. Risos. The procedure under Rule 23 to 28 of the Rules of Court allows
    the taking of depositions in civil cases, either upon oral examination or written interrogatories,
    before any judge, notary public or person authorized to administer oaths at any time or place
    within the Philippines; or before any Philippine consular official, 2 commissioned officer or
    person authorized to administer oaths in a foreign state or country, with no additional
    requirement except reasonable notice in writing to the other party.

    You might also like