Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 43 views

    Parada v. Veneracion (A.E.Nuyda)

    Uploaded by

    Earl Nuyda
    This case examines whether a judge correctly denied bail to Danilo Parada. Parada was charged with 4 counts of estafa, a bailable offense. When Parada failed to appear in court due to not receiving notice of a hearing, the judge ordered Parada's arrest without recommending bail. The Court ruled the judge violated Parada's right to bail, as estafa is a bailable offense and the evidence against Parada was not strong enough to deny bail. The Court found the judge exhibited ignorance of the law in denying bail without cause.

    Copyright:

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

    Parada v. Veneracion (A.E.Nuyda)

    Uploaded by

    Earl Nuyda
    43 views1 page
    This case examines whether a judge correctly denied bail to Danilo Parada. Parada was charged with 4 counts of estafa, a bailable offense. When Parada failed to appear in court due to not receiving notice of a hearing, the judge ordered Parada's arrest without recommending bail. The Court ruled the judge violated Parada's right to bail, as estafa is a bailable offense and the evidence against Parada was not strong enough to deny bail. The Court found the judge exhibited ignorance of the law in denying bail without cause.

    Original Title

    316. Parada v. Veneracion (A.E.Nuyda)

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case examines whether a judge correctly denied bail to Danilo Parada. Parada was charged with 4 counts of estafa, a bailable offense. When Parada failed to appear in court due to not receiving notice of a hearing, the judge ordered Parada's arrest without recommending bail. The Court ruled the judge violated Parada's right to bail, as estafa is a bailable offense and the evidence against Parada was not strong enough to deny bail. The Court found the judge exhibited ignorance of the law in denying bail without cause.

    Copyright:

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

    Parada v. Veneracion (A.E.Nuyda)

    Uploaded by

    Earl Nuyda
    This case examines whether a judge correctly denied bail to Danilo Parada. Parada was charged with 4 counts of estafa, a bailable offense. When Parada failed to appear in court due to not receiving notice of a hearing, the judge ordered Parada's arrest without recommending bail. The Court ruled the judge violated Parada's right to bail, as estafa is a bailable offense and the evidence against Parada was not strong enough to deny bail. The Court found the judge exhibited ignorance of the law in denying bail without cause.

    Copyright:

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

    316. Parada v.

    Veneracion
    AM No. RTJ-96-1353 March 11, 1997 Relevant Issue:
    TOPIC: Aspects of the Right to Bail Whether or not respondent judge was correct in not
    recommending bail for Parada?
    Summary:
    Ruling: No, the judge was not correct in not recommending
    This case is case asking the Court to decide on whether bail
    or not the respondent judge was correct in not recommending
    bail for Parada. The Court in this case says that the respondent Ratio:
    judge erred and violated Parada’s right to bail. Because the
    crime he commited was not so gross that it merited the The warrant of arrest with no recommendation for bail
    punishment of reclusion perpetua. that was issued by respondent Judge is a downright violation of
    Parada’s constitutional right to bail. The rule is clear that
    Doctrine: unless charged with offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua
    and the evidence of guilt is strong, all persons detained,
    Unless charged with offenses punishable by reclusion arrested or otherwise under the custody of the law are entitled
    perpetua and the evidence of guilt is strong, all persons to bail as a matter of right. It should be noted that the crime
    detained, arrested or otherwise under the custody of the law are with which Parada was charged is estafa which is undoubtedly
    entitled to bail as a matter of right. a bailable offense. This circumstance could not have escaped
    Facts: the attention of the respondent judge when he issued on June 3,
    1994 the order of arrest of Parada with no recommendation for
    Danilo Parada was charged with 4 counts of Estafa. He his bail. In so doing, respondent judge exhibited that degree of
    was duly bonded with an accredited bonding company. In ignorance so gross which the Court can not countenance.
    October of 1993, Parada’s counsel formally notified the court
    and the manager of the bonding company of change of address.
    Apparently, the notice of hearing was sent to complainant’s
    former address. For failure to appear on the date of hearing,
    respondent judge ordered the arrest of the accused, confiscation
    of the bond and a trial in absentia was conducted. No bail was
    recommended for Parada’s arrest.

    You might also like