Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 84 views

    Santos Vs Bernardo

    Uploaded by

    Jica Rose Antog Parok
    This case is an administrative case against a judge for alleged impropriety and bias. The judge allowed the filing of a criminal case for grave coercion without conducting a preliminary investigation first. The issue is whether a preliminary investigation is needed for the crime of grave coercion. The court held that a preliminary investigation is required since the maximum penalty for grave coercion is six years imprisonment.

    Copyright:

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

    Santos Vs Bernardo

    Uploaded by

    Jica Rose Antog Parok
    84 views1 page
    This case is an administrative case against a judge for alleged impropriety and bias. The judge allowed the filing of a criminal case for grave coercion without conducting a preliminary investigation first. The issue is whether a preliminary investigation is needed for the crime of grave coercion. The court held that a preliminary investigation is required since the maximum penalty for grave coercion is six years imprisonment.

    Original Description:

    Santos vs Bernardo 559 SCRA 310

    Original Title

    Santos vs Bernardo

    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 is an administrative case against a judge for alleged impropriety and bias. The judge allowed the filing of a criminal case for grave coercion without conducting a preliminary investigation first. The issue is whether a preliminary investigation is needed for the crime of grave coercion. The court held that a preliminary investigation is required since the maximum penalty for grave coercion is six years imprisonment.

    Copyright:

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

    Santos Vs Bernardo

    Uploaded by

    Jica Rose Antog Parok
    This case is an administrative case against a judge for alleged impropriety and bias. The judge allowed the filing of a criminal case for grave coercion without conducting a preliminary investigation first. The issue is whether a preliminary investigation is needed for the crime of grave coercion. The court held that a preliminary investigation is required since the maximum penalty for grave coercion is six years imprisonment.

    Copyright:

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

    Santos vs Bernardo

    559 SCRA 310

    FACTS:
    This is an administrative case against respondent MTC Judge Lauro
    Bernardo for his alleged impropriety, manifest bias and partiality, grave
    abuse of discretion, and gross ignorance of the law/procedure. Under the
    case of manifest bias partiality and grave abuse of discretion, he committed
    it when he allowed the filing of Criminal Case No. 06-004 for Grave
    Coercion against the complainants. Instead of conducting a preliminary
    investigation after the filing of the complaint to find probable cause to hold
    complainants herein for trial, respondent immediately signed the criminal
    complaint upon its filing and ordered that the case be set for preliminary
    hearing. The Petitioner filed Motion to Quash Complaint but the respondent
    Judge remained adamant by issuing an order to raffle the case to another
    MTC Judge.

    ISSUE: Whether or not there is a need for Preliminary Investigation for the
    crime Grave Coercion?

    HELD: Yes. The maximum imposable penalty for grave coercion is six
    years imprisonment and such entitled the accused to their right to a
    preliminary investigation to save them from the rigors of trials in case no
    probable cause exists to warrant the filing of the criminal complaint or
    information against them. The court emphasized that whether or not there
    is a need for preliminary investigation it must depends upon the
    imposable penalty for the crime charged in the complaint filed in the
    Prosecutors and not on upon the imposable penalty for the crime
    found to have been committed by the respondent after a preliminary
    investigation. The Office of Court Administrator found the respondent
    administratively liable for gross ignorance of law and dismissed other
    charges for complainant’s failure to adduce sufficient evidence to
    substantiate the allegations.

    You might also like