J.A.B. Bulao & Associates

CASE 2019-0050 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. NORMAN ANGELES Y MIRANDA(G.R. NO. 224223. NOVEMBER 20, 2019, INTING) (SUBJECT/S: SALE OF ILLEGAL DRUGS; ONLY MEDIA REPR WAS PRESENT; NO PHOTOGRAPH OF THE SHABU) (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS NORMAN ANGELES)

 DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE.

THE RULE ON CHAIN OF CUSTODY WAS NOT FOLLOWED. ONLY THE MEDIA REPRESENTATIVE WITNESSED THE TAKING OF INVENTORY. NO PHOTOGRAPH WAS TAKEN. THUS THE CASE WAS DISMISSED.

 TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

SCD-2019-0050-People of the Philippines Vs. Norman Angeles y Miranda

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

CASE 2019-0049 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. XANDRA SANTOS Y LITTAUA A.K.A. “XANDRA SANTOS LITTAUA” (G.R. NO. 243627. NOVEMBER 27, 2019, PERLAS-BERNABE, J.) (SUBJECT/S: DANGEROUS DRUGS) (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS XANDRA SANTOS)

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

THE MARKING OF THE ALLEGED DRUGS WAS NOT IMMEDIATELY DONE AT THE PLACE OF ARREST NOR WAS THE INVENTORY OF THE SAME WITNESSED BY A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE MEDIA OR THE NATIONAL PROSECUTION SERVICE.

WHO SHALL WITNESS THE CONDUCT OF INVENTORY AND PHOTOGRAPHING?

IS THE CHAIN OF CUSTODY PROCEDURE SUBSTANTIVE OR JUST PROCEDURAL TECHNICALITY?

SUBSTANTIVE BECAUSE IT IS A SAFETY PRECAUTION TO ADDRESS POTENTIAL POLICE ABUSES.

WHAT IS THE EXCEPTION TO FOLLOWING THE CHAIN OF CUSTODY PROCEDURE?

WHEN THERE IS JUSTIFIABLE GROUND FOR NON-COMPLIANCE AND WHEN THE INTEGRITY AND EVIDENTIARY VALUE OF THE OBJECTS ARE PRESERVED.

WHAT ARE SOME EXAMPLES OF JUSTIFIABLE GROUNDS OF NON-COMPLIANCE?

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

SCD-2019-0049-People of the Philippines Vs. Xandra Santos y Littaua a.k.a. “Xandra Santos Littaua”

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

CASE 2019-0048: MELVIN G. SAN FELIX VS. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION (G.R. NO. 198404,  OCTOBER 14, 2019, HERNANDO, J.) SUBJECT/S: AUTHORITY OF THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION TO INVESTIGATE ANOMALIES IN EXAMINATIONS; DISHONESTY) (BRIEF TITLE: SAN FELIX VS CSC)

 DISPOSITIVE:

        SO ORDERED.

 SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

 WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

SAN FELIX STATED IN HIS PERSONAL DATA SHEET (PDS) THAT HE PASSED THE POLICE OFFICER 1 EXAMINATION. BUT IT WAS DISCOVERED IN AN INVESTIGATION CONDUCTED BY THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION THAT SAN FELIX NEVER TOOK THE SAID EXAMINATION BUT RATHER SOMEONE TOOK THE EXAMINATION IN HIS BEHALF.  CSC FOUND HIM GUILTY OF DISHONESTY AND THUS HE WAS DISMISSED WITH FORFEITURE OF RETIREMENT BENEFITS AND LEAVE CREDITS.

 SAN FELIX ARGUED THAT UNDER A NEW LAW, RA 8551, IT IS NPC NOT ANYMORE CSC WHO CAN CONDUCT SUCH EXAMINATION. THEREFORE CSC HAS NO LONGER JURISDICTION TO INVESTIGATE HIS CASE. IS HIS CONTENTION CORRECT?

NO BECAUSE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION HAS THE MANDATE TO INVESTIGATE ANOMALIES IN CONNECTION WITH SUCH EXAMINATIONS.

RULING ON DISHONESTY IN PERSONAL DATA SHEET. WHAT IS DISHONESTY?

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

SCD-2019-0048-Melvin G. San Felix Vs. Civil Service Commission 

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.