GR No. L-9527 United States v. Tamparong Facts: defendants were caught violating Baguio City Ordinance No.

. 35 prohibiting the playing of a game of chance called monte Justice of the Peace of Baguio (gobernadorcillo/ city court) and Court of First Instance both convicted the defendants with the same charge Supreme Court tried the case because the validity of Ordinance No. 35 was put into question In tackling the question, the history of penal laws in the Philippines was looked into Issues: Is Ordinance No. 35 valid? Affirmative, as in the case of United States v. Joson Is the Supreme Court required by law to examine the evidence to determine guilt or innocence of the defendants? No. To explain this, the history of penal laws and criminal procedure in the Philippines was looked into. In execution of the royal order dated December 17, 1887, the Penal Code and Provisional Law of Criminal Procedure used in Spain were applied to the Philippines Spanish Period (1887) (Penal Code and Provisional Law of Crim. Pro.) Lowest court Next Level Highest Court Gobernadorcillo Courts of First Instance Audencia del Territorio American Period (1900) (General Order No. 58) Justice of the Peace Courts of First Instance Supreme Court Sec. 54: The decisions of the Courts of First Instance shall be final and conclusive, except in cases involving the validity or constitutionality of the statute, wherein appeal may be made to the Supreme Court (statutes include ordinances) The powers of the Justices of the Peace were extended to all offenses which the Penal Code designates as punishable by arresto mayor. This allowed the lower courts to have decisions on higher offenses. Appeals on all kinds of cases were allowed to the Supreme Court, but only the

Is the Supreme Court required by Rule 19: The judgment of the law to examine the facts? Court of First Instance will be executory, and there will be no recourse from the same except that of responsibility before the Audencia del Territorio

What happens?

The Gobernadorcillo only had responsibility over crimes whose punishment are arresto and arresto menor. These cases may not reach the Audiencia. As for cases which may be punished by arresto mayor, the case is retried in its entirety by the Audiencia, and the facts are again examined.

validity or constitutionality will be questioned, and not the facts. Held: The Supreme Court affirms the decision of the lower courts The Supreme Court will not examine the facts regarding any appeal, only the constitutionality or validity of the decision