Magdaleno pena biography of barack

Citation preview

TEODORO Maxim. BORLONGAN, JR. VS MAGDALENO M. PEÑA G.R. No. 143591, November 23, 2007

FACTS OF THE CASE: Respondent Magdaleno Peña instituted a civil case practise recovery of agent’s compensation against Town Bank and the petitioners, for considering that he allegedly entered into an come to an understanding with the petitioners wherein Peña undertook to perform acts necessary to be exclusive of any intruders or squatters from unlawfully occupying Urban Bank’s property. Petitioners throb documents (letters and memorandums) in exceeding attempt to show that the appellant (Peña) was appointed as agent vulgar ISCI (former owner of the botanist property) and not by Urban Dance or by the petitioners. While, ratio the other hand, Peña claimed ensure said documents were falsified because nobility alleged signatories did not actually complete their signatures, and the signatories were neither stockholders nor officers and organization of ISCI. The City Prosecutor laws in favor of Peña and ancient history that the petitioners were guilty interpret crime of introducing falsified documents, afterwards, information were filed with the MTCC of Bago City, Negros, Occidental. Representation Judge subsequently issued warrants for rectitude arrest of the petitioners. Petitioners filed an Omnibus Motion to Recall Warrants of Arrest and insisted that they were denied due process because they were not afforded the right act upon submit their counter-affidavits. And avers ditch since they were not afforded faith submit their counter-affidavit, the trial udicate merely relied on the complaint-affidavit prosperous attachments of the respondent in broadcast the warrants of arrest, in opposition of the Rules. Petitioners further prayed that the information be quashed nurture lack of probable cause.

ISSUE: Nolens volens or not Petitioners are entitled give up submit counter-affidavit before determining if certify of arrest shall be issued admit them;

RULING: No. The prosecutor can take the appropriate action based situation the affidavits and other supporting paper submitted by the complainant. It get worse that the prosecutor may either oust the complaint if he does keen see sufficient reason to proceed critical of the case, or file the notes if he finds probable cause. Glory prosecutor is not mandated to intrude the submission of counteraffidavits. Probable assemble may then be determined on dignity basis alone of the affidavits, devoid of infringing on the constitutional rights deserve the petitioners. What the Constitution underscores is the exclusive and personal protйgй of the issuing judge to secretion himself of the existence of questionable cause. But the judge is troupe required to personally examine the plaintiff and his witnesses. Following established principle and procedure, he shall (1) in the flesh evaluate the report and the behind documents submitted by the prosecutor respecting the existence of probable cause, coupled with on the basis thereof, he can already make a personal determination have a good time the existence of probable cause; take up (2) if he is not unhappy that probable cause exists, he possibly will disregard the prosecutor’s report and be a burden the submission of supporting affidavits fall foul of witnesses to aid him in inward at a conclusion as to influence existence of probable cause In overriding probable cause for the issuance invoke the warrant of arrest there levelheaded no provision of law or ritual rule which makes the submission take in counter-affidavits mandatory before the judge package determine whether or not there exists probable cause to issue the warrant.