Scribd
Upload
186 views1 page

People v. Declaro

This case discusses whether double jeopardy applies when a case is dismissed with the consent of the accused. The Supreme Court ruled that dismissal with the express consent of the accused results in a waiver of their right against double jeopardy. Therefore, dismissing a case with an accused's consent does not prevent another prosecution for the same offense. However, double jeopardy would still apply if the initial dismissal was due to insufficient evidence or denial of a speedy trial, as these dismissals have the effect of an acquittal. But since the initial dismissal in this case was with the accused's consent and not based on insufficient evidence or lack of a speedy trial, double jeopardy did not prevent the second prosecution of the accused.

Uploaded by

Aphr
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
186 views1 page

People v. Declaro

This case discusses whether double jeopardy applies when a case is dismissed with the consent of the accused. The Supreme Court ruled that dismissal with the express consent of the accused results in a waiver of their right against double jeopardy. Therefore, dismissing a case with an accused's consent does not prevent another prosecution for the same offense. However, double jeopardy would still apply if the initial dismissal was due to insufficient evidence or denial of a speedy trial, as these dismissals have the effect of an acquittal. But since the initial dismissal in this case was with the accused's consent and not based on insufficient evidence or lack of a speedy trial, double jeopardy did not prevent the second prosecution of the accused.

Uploaded by

Aphr
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
You are on page 1/ 1

USA College of Law

OCASO 1-F

Case Name People vs. Declaro

Topic Double Jeopardy


Case No. | Date G.R. No. 64362. February 9, 1989.

Ponente GANCAYCO, J.
Doctrine Dismissal with the consent of the accused

RELEVANT FACTS
 The case is a result of a traffic accident in Aklan. Edgar Ibabao was charged for slight physical
injuries through reckless imprudence by certain Crispin Cananam as the offended party.
 Three months later, an information for serious physical injuries through reckless
imprudence was filed against the same accused by an Eduardo Salido. The second case arose
from the same incident.
 The accused entered a plea of not guilty. Then the case was set for its first hearing, both the
offended party and the fiscal failed to appear despite notice.
 The counsel for the accused moved for dismissal for lack of interest on the part of the
prosecution after the accused has given his express consent to his counsel – Hon. Declaro
granted.
 Due to this the second case was dismissed as well on the ground of double jeopardy.

ISSUE: Whether or not there was double jeopardy

RULING: NO.

The dismissal with consent of the accused results a waiver on his right against double jeopardy. Thus,
dismissal of a case with the express consent of the accused will not bar another prosecution for the same offense
or appeal by the prosecution from such dismissal. It must be noted, the consent to be effected, must be express,
and this excludes mere silence or failure of the accused to object to the dismissal. The accused expressly
consented when his counsel filed a motion to dismiss the case, thus it must take effect. So, applying it to the case
at bar, he cannot question or invoke double jeopardy on the second charge against him for serious physical
injuries through reckless imprudence.

Double jeopardy will apply even if the dismissal is made with the express consent of the accused, only if it
is predicated on either of two grounds, i.e., insufficient of the evidence or denial of the right to speedy trial. In
both cases, the dismissal will have the effect of acquittal. Since the dismissal in this case does not fall under either
of these two instances and it was made with the express consent of the accused, it would not thereby be a bar to
another prosecution for the same offense.

You might also like