"rights of the accused to a speedy trial"
Facts: Petitioners plea for their constitutional rights to a speedy trial by certiorari where the proceeding of the case for robbery against petitioners dragged on for over a decade without any final judgment rendered by the court. Petitioners sought for the dismissal of the case due to inordinate delay in its disposition. The People in its affirmative defense raised the facts that the case was not properly captioned, as the People of the Phils. against whom it is filed was not a tribunal exercising judicial functions and without the Court of Appeals being made a part to the petition there are insufficient facts to constitute a cause of action. Moreover it defends that the CA took all necessary steps to complete the transcript of stenographic notes of the original trial.
Issue: Whether or not the constitutional rights of the accused to a speedy trial was violated.
Held: The court referred to previous jurisprudence upholding the constitutional rights of the accused to a speedy trial. It re-affirmed with emphasis that such right is more significant than the procedural defects pointed out by the People of the Philippines that the CA should have been made party-respondent to the petition. Technicalities should always give way to the reality of the situation and that in the absence of a valid decision the stage trial was not completed and the accused should be accorded with the right to contend that they had not been accorded their right to be tried as promptly as circumstances permit. Thus the SC finds merit to dismiss the case against the petitioners.
Facts: Petitioners plea for their constitutional rights to a speedy trial by certiorari where the proceeding of the case for robbery against petitioners dragged on for over a decade without any final judgment rendered by the court. Petitioners sought for the dismissal of the case due to inordinate delay in its disposition. The People in its affirmative defense raised the facts that the case was not properly captioned, as the People of the Phils. against whom it is filed was not a tribunal exercising judicial functions and without the Court of Appeals being made a part to the petition there are insufficient facts to constitute a cause of action. Moreover it defends that the CA took all necessary steps to complete the transcript of stenographic notes of the original trial.
Issue: Whether or not the constitutional rights of the accused to a speedy trial was violated.
Held: The court referred to previous jurisprudence upholding the constitutional rights of the accused to a speedy trial. It re-affirmed with emphasis that such right is more significant than the procedural defects pointed out by the People of the Philippines that the CA should have been made party-respondent to the petition. Technicalities should always give way to the reality of the situation and that in the absence of a valid decision the stage trial was not completed and the accused should be accorded with the right to contend that they had not been accorded their right to be tried as promptly as circumstances permit. Thus the SC finds merit to dismiss the case against the petitioners.
RSS Feed