Legal Insights
Plain-language guides and case briefs on Philippine law — researched from the firm's law library of 184,000+ statutes, Supreme Court decisions, and agency issuances, and written so non-lawyers can understand and act on them.
Double Jeopardy and Parental Rape: What the Supreme Court Clarified in G.R. No. 262846
The Supreme Court clarifies double jeopardy in criminal appeals and affirms a father's rape conviction in G.R. No. 262846.
Double Jeopardy and the Limits of Estate Representation in Criminal Appeals
A Supreme Court ruling clarifies when an estate administrator may appeal an acquittal—and why double jeopardy bars such appeals.
Balancing Procedural Rules and Substantive Justice in Criminal Appeals
The Supreme Court recalls an entry of judgment and reinstates a drug conviction appeal, showing when procedural lapses yield to substantive justice.
Striking a Balance When Justice Outweighs Procedural Technicalities in Criminal Appeals
The Supreme Court acquits a drug suspect when police breaches of Section 21, RA 9165 compromise the integrity of seized evidence.
Who Represents the People? The Solicitor General's Exclusive Authority in Criminal Appeals
A Supreme Court ruling clarifies that only the Office of the Solicitor General may appeal criminal cases, not private complainants.
Standing to Sue: The Solicitor General's Exclusive Authority in Criminal Appeals
Who may appeal a dismissed criminal case? The Supreme Court clarifies the Solicitor General's exclusive authority and the limits on private prosecutors.
Judicial Ethics: Conviction of Moral Turpitude Leads to Dismissal and Disbarment
A judge's conviction for malversation and graft leads to dismissal from the bench and disbarment, even while criminal appeals are pending.
Why Deadlines Matter in Philippine Courts: Lessons from a Falsification Case
A Supreme Court ruling shows why procedural deadlines are crucial in Philippine criminal appeals and how courts review convictions.
When Dismissing an Appeal for Missing a Memorandum Is Wrong: Sanico v. People
The Supreme Court ruled that a trial court cannot dismiss a criminal appeal solely for failure to file a memorandum, as this violates due process.
Fresh Period Rule in Criminal Appeals: Rodriguez v. People Explained
The Supreme Court clarifies that the fresh period rule applies to criminal appeals, giving accused persons 15 days from denial of reconsideration to appeal.
Fresh Period Rule in Criminal Appeals: Protecting the Accused's Right to Appeal
The Supreme Court applies the fresh period rule to criminal appeals, ensuring accused persons get a full 15 days to appeal after denial of reconsideration.
Fresh Period Rule Expanded to Criminal Appeals: Equal Rights for Accused
The Supreme Court extends the fresh period rule to criminal appeals, ensuring accused persons get the same 15-day window as civil litigants.
Fresh Period Rule in Criminal Appeals: Rodriguez v. People Explained
The Supreme Court clarifies that the fresh period rule applies to criminal appeals, giving convicted accused a full 15 days from denial of reconsideration.
When an Acquittal Stands: Double Jeopardy and the Private Complainant’s Limited Role in Criminal Appeals
Explaining why an acquittal is final, who may appeal a criminal case, and the limits of a private complainant’s participation under Philippine law.
The Fresh Period Rule: Reconciling Procedure and Justice in Appeals
The Supreme Court extends the Neypes fresh period rule to criminal appeals, ensuring uniform 15-day appeal periods and protecting the accused's right to appeal.
Fresh Period Rule in Criminal Appeals: Understanding the Limits of Judicial Overreach
The Supreme Court clarifies that the Neypes fresh period rule applies to criminal appeals, ensuring uniform treatment for accused persons.
The Fresh Period Rule for Appeals in Philippine Criminal Cases
Learn how the Supreme Court applied the fresh period rule to criminal appeals, giving accused persons a full 15 days from denial of post-judgment motions.
Balancing Justice and Procedure: When Technicalities Yield to Equity in Appeals
The Supreme Court clarifies when procedural rules prevail over equitable arguments in criminal appeals involving the Ombudsman.
Right to Counsel in Criminal Appeals: Due Process Beyond the Trial Court
The Supreme Court rules that the right to counsel extends to appeals, and gross lawyer negligence can excuse a missed appeal.
Counsel’s Negligence Reopens Criminal Appeals for Fair Representation
When a lawyer abandons a client’s appeal, the Supreme Court may reopen the case to protect the accused’s right to counsel.
Withdrawing a Criminal Appeal: When the Supreme Court May Allow It
The Supreme Court explains when a convicted person may withdraw an appeal, and why it granted withdrawal in a rape case despite the prosecution's opposition.
Carnapping Penalties: Special Laws vs Revised Penal Code Explained
Understand how carnapping penalties under RA 6538 differ from Revised Penal Code terms, and why the distinction matters in Philippine criminal appeals.
Lawyer Suspended for Negligence: The Duty to File Briefs and Protect Clients' Rights
Supreme Court suspends lawyer for failing to file appellant's brief, causing delay in client's criminal appeal and violating professional responsibility rules.
Withdrawing a Criminal Appeal in the Philippines: Rights and Limits After Conviction
Can a convicted person withdraw a criminal appeal in the Philippines? People v. Redulosa explains the right, limits, and consequences.