PEOPLE VS. JUDGE DONATO [198 SCRA 130; G.R. NO.

79269; 5 JUN 1991]

Thursday, February 12, 2009 Posted by Coffeeholic Writes
Labels: Case Digests, Political Law
Facts: Private respondent and his co-accused were charged of rebellion on
October 2, 1986 for acts committed before and after Februar 1986! Private
respondent filed with a "otion to #uash alleging that$ %a& the facts alleged
do not constitute an offense' %b& the (ourt has no )urisdiction over the
offense charged' %c& the (ourt has no )urisdiction over the persons of the
defendants' and %d& the criminal action or liabilit has been e*tinguished!
+his was denied! "a 9, 198, -espondent filed a petition for bail, which was
opposed that the respondent is not entitled to bail anmore since rebellion
became a capital offense under P. 1996, 9/2 and 180/ amending 1-+! 102
of -P(! On 2 3une 198, the President issued 4*ecutive Order 5o! 18,
repealing, among others, P!.! 5os! 1996, 9/2 and 180/ and restoring to full
force and effect 1rticle 102 of the -evised Penal (ode as it e*isted before
the amendator decrees! 3udge .onato now granted the bail, which was
fi*ed at P06,666!66 and imposed a condition that he shall report to the court
once ever two months within the first ten das of ever period thereof!
Petitioner filed a supplemental motion for reconsideration indirectl as7ing
the court to den bail to and to allow it to present evidence in support
thereof considering the 8inevitable probabilit that the accused will not
compl with this main condition of his bail! 9t was contended that$
1! +he accused has evaded the authorities for thirteen ears and was an
escapee from detention when arrested' %(hairman of (PP-5P1&
2! :e was not arrested at his residence as he had no 7nown address'
0! :e was using the false name 8"anuel "ercado (astro8 at the time of his
arrest and presented a .river;s <icense to substantiate his false identit'
/! +he address he gave 8Panamitan, =awit, (avite,8 turned out to be also a
false address'
2! :e and his companions were on board a private vehicle with a declared
owner whose identit and address were also found to be false'
6! Pursuant to "inistr Order 5o! 1-1 dated 11 3anuar 1982 , a reward of
P226,666!66 was offered and paid for his arrest!
+his however was denied! :ence the appeal!
Issue: >hether or 5ot the private respondent has the right to bail!
Held: ?es! @ail in the instant case is a matter of right! 9t is absolute since
the crime is not a capital offense, therefore prosecution has no right to
present evidence! 9t is onl when it is a capital offense that the right
becomes discretionar! :owever it was wrong for the 3udge to change the
amount of bail from 06= to 26= without hearing the prosecution!
-epublic 1ct 5o! 6968 approved on 2/ October 1996, providing a penalt of
reclusion perpetua to the crime of rebellion, is not applicable to the accused
as it is not favorable to him!
1ccused validl waived his right to bail in another case%petition for habeas
corpus&! 1greements were made therein$ accused to remain under custod,
whereas his co-detainees 3osefina (ruA and 3ose "ilo (oncepcion will be
released immediatel, with a condition that the will submit themselves in
the )urisdiction of the court! Baid petition for :( was dismissed! @ail is the
securit given for the release of a person in custod of the law! 4rgo, there
was a waiver! >e hereb rule that the right to bail is another of the
constitutional rights which can be waived! 9t is a right which is personal to
the accused and whose waiver would not be contrar to law, public order,
public polic, morals, or good customs, or pre)udicial to a third person with a
right recogniAed b law!