Scribd
Upload
301 views1 page

Lee V People

The Supreme Court affirmed the denial of Lee's motion for a document and handwriting examination by the National Bureau of Investigation. The trial court found no injustice in the denial since Lee could still utilize the NBI as a witness during his defense. His request came late, after the start of trial and beyond the period for reconsideration. The appellate court properly dismissed Lee's petition for certiorari.

Uploaded by

Cristine Bilocura
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
301 views1 page

Lee V People

The Supreme Court affirmed the denial of Lee's motion for a document and handwriting examination by the National Bureau of Investigation. The trial court found no injustice in the denial since Lee could still utilize the NBI as a witness during his defense. His request came late, after the start of trial and beyond the period for reconsideration. The appellate court properly dismissed Lee's petition for certiorari.

Uploaded by

Cristine Bilocura
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Lee v. People, G.R. No.

192274, [February 8, 2012]

Facts:
Petitioner Lee assails the decision of the Court of Appeals which dismissed
his petition for certiorari and affirmed the two (2) questioned interlocutory
orders of the public respondent RTC.
In the questioned interlocutory orders, the RTC denied Lee's Motion for
Document and Handwriting Examination by the National Bureau of Investigation
and his subsequent motion for the reconsideration of the denial.
Issue:
Whether or not RTC and CA properly denied petitioner's motion for a
credible NBI document and handwriting examination.
Held:
Yes. The Court does not perceive any injustice in the denial of Lee's
motion. In fact, the RTC wrote that "the accused has the option to utilize the
concerned NBI intended witness during the presentation of defense evidence."
When his time comes to present evidence, Lee can utilize the NBI by availing of
the coercive power of the court.
It could have been otherwise had the accused requested for the
examination of the disbursement vouchers, purchase requests and authorization
requests by the NBI from the beginning. In the case at bench, however, the trial
had already started and, worse, the accused's motion for reconsideration was
filed beyond the reglementary period.

You might also like