Right against self-incrimination, ConstiFull description
Crim2 Digest of People v. Tomio KidnappingFull description
for Evidence class of Prof. Rowena Daroy-Morales
People v. Almazan Digest
Digest for Tarapen v. People
case
Full description
Digest for the case of Cabugao vs People
Issue on whether or not warrantless arrest is justified in the case.Full description
Constitutional law 2 Rights of the accusedFull description
Digest
Full description
SPL
Search and Seizures, Search Warrant can be severed.Full description
digest
Criminal Procedure digest
case digestFull description
People v. Beronilla DigestFull description
Crim Pro case
People v. Sandiganbayan Case Digest
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. RUFO B. CRUZ GUTIERREZ DAVID, J .: .: Facts:
That, on or about the 19th day of October, 1948, in the municipality of Cainta, province of Rizal, Philippines the above-named accused a private person and applicant for Civil Service Examination (Patrolman) falsify or cause to be falsified and commit acts of falsification in the Philippine Civil Service Form No. 2 (Application for examination . Said accused, filled up or cause to be filled up the blanks in said Form No. 2, by stating in said document that he had never been accused, indicted or tried for violation of any law, ordinance or regulation before any court. Issue: Whether or not the accused had h ad committed perjury? Held: Yes. We are inclined to agree with the defense that the crime committed is perjury. p erjury. That offense as defined in Article 183 of the Revised Penal Code is the willful and corrupt assertion of a falsehood under oath or affirmation administered by authority of law on a material matter.