CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2 FINALS REVIEWER DEAN SEDFREY CANDELARIA CROMBONDS 2011-2012

CASE LAW MEMORY AID

BILL OF RIGHTS
I. Section 1
a. Life, Liberty or Property
1. Mijares v. Ranada Alien Tort Act
2. Philippine Blooming Mills Employees Organization v. PBM Co. hierarchy of
rights
b. Due Process
3. Tupas v. CA late petition
i. Procedural Due Process
Judicial: CJ-OJ
1. Court with judicial power
2. Jurisdiction over person or
property
3. Opportunity to be heard
4. Judgment through lawful
hearing
School: IA-IAC
1. Inform student of charge
2. Right to answer the charges
3. Informed of evidence
4. Adduce evidence
5. Body must consider evidence
Administrative: HEDSBIK
1. Hearing
2. Consider evidence
3. Decision must be supported
4. Substantial evidence
5. Decision based on evidence
6. Independent consideration
7. Know issues and reason for
decision
4. Banco Espanol-Filipino v. Palanca jurisdiction over
person
5. State Prosecutors v. Muro 11 complaints; judicial
notice
6. People v. Teehankee media coverage
7. Ang Tibay v. CIR administrative proceedings
8. Government of Hong Kong v. Olalia extradition
proceedings
9. ADMU v. Capulong academic discipline
10. Lao Gi v. CA deportation
11. Maceda v. ERB fixing of rates
12. Globe Telecom v. NTC substantial
evidence from prior ruling
13. Corona v. UHPAP profession
14. People v. Nazario manager; void for
vagueness
15. Estrada v. Sandiganbayan
combination, series; vagueness or
overbreadth
16. Central Bank v. CA bank foreclosures;
TSB
17. ABAKADA v. Ermita E-VAT law
18. British American Tobacco v. Camacho expensive tax
category
ii. Substantive Due Process (Police Power) Police Power: SM
19. US v. Toribio carabao slaughterhouse 1. Lawful subject
20. Churchill v. Rafferty billboards as nuisance 2. Lawful means
21. Ermita-Malate Hotel v. City of Manila curb immorality; license fees
22. People v. Fajardo view of the plaza
23. Ynot v. Intermediate Apellate Court transport of carabao and carabeef
24. Balacuit v. CFI of Agusan movie theatres
25. New Agrix v. Philippine Veterans Bank dissolved mortgages
26. ACCFA v. CUGCO fringe benefits; CBA
27. Agustin v. Edu early warning devices
28. Maranaw Hotel v. NLRC illegal dismissal; writ Local Ordinance: CUPP-GU
of execution 1. Must not contravene law
29. Magtajas v. Pryce Properties Corp. local 2. Must not be unfair
ordinance against PAGCOR 3. Must not be partial
4. Must not prohibit trade
30. Bennis v. Michigan confiscated car 5. Must be general and
31. Cruzan v. Missouri Health Dept. informed consistent with public policy
consent; euthanasia 6. Must not be unreasonable
32. JMM Promotion and Management v. CA
OFW deployment ban
33. Dans v. People Imelda Marcos right to counsel
34. Ople v. Torres national ID system
Deportation: SP-RP 35. Montesclaros v. COMELEC SK elections
1. Specify charge against alien 36. Tan v. People trucks with lumber
2. Preliminary investigation 37. Cruz v. Flavier IPRA; Regalian doctrine
3. Rules of Criminal Procedure
4. Private prosecutors not
38. Smith Kline v. CA pharmaceutical patent
allowed 39. People v. De la Piedra illegal recruitment
40. Pilipinas Kao v. CA unpublished manual of operations
Judicial Notice: CAJ 41. PHILSA v. DOLE Secretary unpublished illegal exaction memo
1. Common knowledge 42. Chavez v. Romulo right to bear arms
2. Authoritatively settled
3. Known within limits of
43. GSIS v. Montesclaros survivorship pension claim
jurisdiction 44. Romualdez v. Sandiganbayan corruption; no preliminary
investigation
45. Chavez v. COMELEC candidate endorsements
46. Beltran v. Secretary of Health commercial blood banks
47. Ong v. Sandiganbayan ill-gotten wealth ; spouse
48. Lucena v. JAC Liner local government; exclusive franchise
49. City of Manila v. Laguio sauna, massageparlors, night clubs

1
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2 FINALS REVIEWER DEAN SEDFREY CANDELARIA CROMBONDS 2011-2012
50. Bayan v. Ermita no permit no rally 11. Tolentino v. Finance Sec. expanded value added tax law
51. KMU v. NEDA uniform government ID system 12. Himagan v. People accused PNP immediate suspension
52. Mirasol v. DPWH motorcycle prohibition 13. Almonte v. Vasquez Ombudsman can choose complaint
53. Parreno v. COA pension ban for US citizen 14. Lim v. Pacquing revoked jai-alai franchises
54. Esponcillia v. Bagong Tanyag Homeowners Assoc. member beneficiaries 15. Maritime Planning v. POEA land-based and sea-based workers
55. BF Homeowners v. Paranaque Mayor reclassified into commercial zones 16. Regala v. Sandiganbayan attorney-client privilege
56. St. Lukes Employees v. NLRC regulation of profession 17. Sison v. Ancheta higher tax rates on profession
57. Carlos Superdrug v. DSWD tax credits and tax deductions 18. Marcos v. CA person with pending criminal charge
58. Perez v. LPG Refillers Association penalties on per cylinder basis 19. Nolasco v. COMELEC power of COMELEC
59. MMDA v. Viron no police power 20. Phil. Judges v. Prado judiciary franking privilege
60. Secretary of DND v. Manalo writ of amparo 21. Olivarez v. Sandiganbayan mayors discretion in business permits
61. SJS v. DDB mandatory drug testing Standing: ITR 22. GMC v. Torres non-resident alien employment permit
62. SJS v. Atienza oil depots 1. Actual or threatened injury 23. Segovia v. Sandiganbayan Ombusman may impose suspension
63. SEC v. Interport show cause order 2. Traceable to challenged action 24. Chavez v. PCGG immunity of witness in ill-gotten wealth case
64. BANAT v. COMELEC fixed salary for poll 3. Injury is likely to be redressed 25. Telebap v. COMELEC free airtime for COMELEC
by favourable action
watchers 26. Tiu v. CA special privileges for Subic Naval Base
65. People v. Siton vagrancy 27. Lacson v. Exec. Sec. jurisdiction of Sandiganbayan
66. White Light Corp. v. City of Manila wash-up 3rd-Party Standing: ICH
28. Soriano v. CA probation and financial capability
rates; third party standing 1. Injury-in-fact on litigant 29. Aguinaldo v. COMELEC incumbent official considered resigned
67. CREBA v. Romulo creditable withholding 2. Close relation to the party 30. Loong v. COMELEC special election for governor
tax, minimum corporate income tax 3. Hindrance to the third party 31. International School Alliance of Educators v. Quisumbing salary distinction
68. Southern Hemisphere v. Anti-Terrorism Council tagging; as-applied for foreign-hires
doctrine 32. De Guzman v. COMELEC assign election officers to other station
69. Roxas v. Macapagal-Arroyo writ of habeas data 33. BAYAN v. Zamora VFA
70. Meralco v. Lim threatening letters; habeas data 34. People v. Mercado death penalty
35. People v. Jalosjos elective official not exempted
c. Equal Protection Clause 36. Lopez v. CA Ombudsman act
1. People v. Cayat non-Christian possession of Valid Classification: SGLA 37. PHILRECA v. DILG Sec. LGC withdraws certain tax exemptions
liquor 1. Substantial distinction 38. Farinas v. Exec. Sec. appointive officials considered resigned
2. Germane to the purpose of
2. Ichong v. Hernandez non-citizens in retail trade law 39. Dimaporo v. HRET congressional candidate and proclaimed congressional
3. Villegas v. Hiu Choing Tsai Pao Ho non-Filipino 3. Not limited to existing candidate
residents employment permit conditions only 40. GSIS v. Montesclaros married pensioners
4. Dumlao v. COMELEC retired elective official 4. Must apply equally to all 41. In Re: Request of Court Administrators additional compensation for judges,
members of the same
5. Goesart v. Cleary female bartenders class. justices, etc.
6. Ormoc Sugar Central v. Ormoc City only sugar 42. Central Bank Employees v. BSP classification based on salary
company 43. Mirasol v. DPWH motorcycle prohibition
7. BASCO v. PAGCOR legalized gambling 44. In Re: Request of ACA additional compensation for CTA judges and MTC
8. Republic v. Sandiganbayan De Venecias deed of assignment judges
9. Binay v. Domingo burial assistance for the poor 45. Dimayuga v. Ombudsman Ombudsman may conduct preliminary
10. National Police Commission v. De Guzman retirement at age 56 investigation

2
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2 FINALS REVIEWER DEAN SEDFREY CANDELARIA CROMBONDS 2011-2012
46. Yrasuegi v. PAL obese cabin attendants 16. Allado v. Diokno murder and kidnapping; corpus delicti not proven
47. SJS v. Atienza oil depots 17. Webb v. De Leon rape with homicide; evidence need not be conclusive
48. Gobenciong v. CA Ombudsman may impose preventive suspension 18. Roberts v. CA Pepsi; reinvestigation to determine probable cause
49. MIAA v. Olongapo Maintenance negotiated contract against public bidding 19. 20th Century Fox v. CA master tapes not needed
50. Nicolas v. Romulo VFA military member 20. People v. Francisco searched the wrong address
51. Serrano v. Galant Maritime Services OFW same as local worker 21. Microsoft Corp. v. Maxicorp copyright infringement; partially defective
52. People v. Siton vagrants warrant
53. League of Cities v. COMELEC cities enumerated in cityhood laws 22. Al-Ghoul v. CA searched places not in warrant; partially defective
54. Quinto v. COMELEC appointive official considered resigned 23. Uy v. BIR superceding warrant
55. CREBA v. Romulo CWT, MCIT 24. Vallejo v. CA more than one offense; falsification and graft
56. NPC v. Pinatubo manufacturers and processors of aluminium steel 25. Material Distributors v. Natividad production of documents material in
57. Biraogo v. PTC truth commission separate case
26. Oklahoma Press Publishing v. Walling corporations do not enjoy all rights
II. Section 2: Search and Seizure of individuals
27. Camara v. Municipal Court housing inspector
a. What is a search
1. Valmonte v. De Villa checkpoint c. Warrantless searches
Warrantless Searches:
2. SJS v. DDB mandatory drug testing 28. MHP Garments v. CA boy scout apparel;
IMP-C-WES
enough time to apply 1. Incidental to an arrest
b. Requisites of a valid warrant 29. People v. CFI of Rizal anti-smuggling; 2. Moving vehicles
Valid Warrant: PPEP
3. People v. Veloso John Doe warrant; best 1. Probable cause
customs; moving vehicle 3. Plain view
description personae 30. Roan v. Gonzales custodia legis 4. Customs
2. Personally determined by a
5. Waiver
4. Alvarez v. CFI search made at night judge
6. Exigent circumstances
5. Stonehill v. Diokno exclusionary rule; general 3. Examination upon oath or i. Incidental to lawful arrest 7. Stop-and-frisk
affirmation of complainant
warrants and witnesses
31. Nolasco v. Pano limited to the
6. Central Bank v. Morfe not isolated 4. Particularly describing the person of accused
transactions but general pattern place to be searched or ii. Moving vehicle
7. Bache & Co. v. Ruiz depositions made by persons to be seized 32. Carrol v. US warrant not practicable; can easily be moved out of
deputy clerk locality
8. Placer v. Villanueva judge must be satisfied with fiscals report 33. People v. Lo Ho Wing drug syndicate from Hong Kong
9. Burgos v. AFP Chief of Staff closure of publishing house for subversion; 34. People v. Malmstedt bus to Sagada; hashish
general 35. Mustang Lumber v. CA truck with lumber
10. Corro v. Lising Philippine Times inciting to sedition; general 36. Asuncion v. CA shabu in vehicle
11. Salazar v. Achacoso POEA administrator cannot issue search warrant iii. Plain view
12. Soliven v. Makasiar judge not required to personally examine 37. Harris v. US officer who has the right to be in position
13. Board of Commissioners (CID) v. Dela Rosa warrant of exclusion; 38. Coolidge v. US discovery must be advertent
deportation iv. Customs
14. Lim Sr. V. Judge Felix judge used certification as sole basis 39. Papa v. Mago Bureau of Customs may commission police
15. Silva v. Presiding Judge return of personal property not covered by v. Waiver
warrant 40. Lopez v. Commissioner of Customs manicurist allowed search

3
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2 FINALS REVIEWER DEAN SEDFREY CANDELARIA CROMBONDS 2011-2012
vi. Exigent circumstance 2. Freedman v. Maryland theatre; judicial determination
41. People v. De Gracia attempts to overthrow Aquino 3. NY Times v. USA top secret information
administration 4. Iglesia ni Kristo v. CA attacks on other religion Tests to Determine Validity
vii. Stop-and-frisk 5. David v. Arroyo state of emergency of Restraint: BCD
42. Aniag Jr. v. COMELEC return gun to Batasan 6. Chavez v. Gonzales warnings on release of 1. Dangerous tendency doctrine
43. Malact v. CA Muslim men with fast moving eyes Hello-Garci tapes 2. Balancing of interests test
44. People v. Canton airport search 7. Newsounds v. Dy radio station closed due to 3. Clear and present danger rule
content-based restraint
d. Arrests with Warrant
45. Amarga v. Abbas both search and arrest warrants require probable cause b. Subsequent Punishment
46. Harvey v. Defensor-Santiago pedophilia; CID 8. People v. Perez seditious speech; dangerous tendency rule
9. Dennis v. US law punishing advocacy for overthrow of the government
e. Warrantless arrests 10. Gonzales v. COMELEC prohibit too early nomination of candidates
47. People v. Aminnudin disembarking from a Warrantless Arrests: PPP 11. EBC v. Dans guidelines for courts and quasi-administrative tribunals
ship 1. In his presence, person 12. Ayer v. Capulong Enrile is a public figure; no clear and present danger of
48. People v. Burgos arrested while plowing committed, actually violation of right to privacy
field; seditious materials committed, will commit an 13. Roxas v. de Zuzuarregui contemptuous remarks against SC
49. Umil v. Ramos continuing crime offense
50. Go. CA arrested 6 days after 2. Offense has been committed c. Speech and Electoral Process
51. People v. Mengote looking side to side and he has personal 14. Sanidad v. COMELEC no candidates in Content-Neutral Regulations
knowledge (OBrien Test): P-SUE
52. Manalili v. CA red-eyes, swaying side to side plebiscite
3. Prisoner who has escaped 1. Within constitutional power of
15. National Press Club v. COMELEC prohibit
the government
sale/donation of print spacefor campaign; 2. Furthers substantial
III. Section 3: Privacy of Correspondence except to COMELEC for equal allocation government interest which is
16. Adiong v. COMELEC prohibited posting 3. Unrelated to suppression of
a. Exclusionary Rule election propaganda on private property free expression
4. Restriction no greater than
1. Salcedo-Ortanez v. Ca wiretaps 17. Osmena v. COMELEC re-examined NPC v. essential
2. Zulueta v. CA destroyed cabinets in clinic COMELEC; OBrien test
3. People v. Marti search by private entity 18. ABS-CBN v. COMELEC exit polls
4. KMU v. NEDA uniform government ID system 19. SWS v. COMELEC prohibition on publishing surveys before election

b. Waiver under Sec. 2 & 3 d. Commercial Speech

5. People v. Damaso waiver is personal 20. Rubin v. Coors Brewing liquor labels will Tests to Determine Validity
of Commercial Speech
6. Spouses Veroy v. Layague limited to search of person not materials promote strength wars
Suppression: LSAN
21. Cincinnati v, Discovery Network news racks; 1.Lawful activity is not
safety and aesthetic goals misleading
IV. Section 4: Freedom of Speech, of Expression and of the Press 22. City of Ladue v. Gilleo signage in front of 2. Substantial govt. interest
a. Prior Restraint house. 3. Advances govt. interest
2 Kinds of Prior Restraint: 4. Necessary to serve interest
1. Near v. Minnesota malicious articles
1. Content-neutral
published against officials 2. Content-based

4
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2 FINALS REVIEWER DEAN SEDFREY CANDELARIA CROMBONDS 2011-2012
e. Libel b. Free Exercise of Religion 2 Aspects of Free Exercise:
23. Policarpio v. Manila Times published wrong things about proceedings; 11. Victoriano v. Elizalde closed shop agreement; INC 1. Freedom to Believe - absolute
protected if true, faith and in good faith prohibition to join unions 2. Freedom to Act may be
regulated
24. Lopez v. CA hoax of the year 12. Cantwell v. Connecticut listen to music, buy book;
25. New York Times v. Sullivan actual malice; public official prior prestrant
26. Rosenbloom v. Metromedia Inc. nudist magazines 13. US v. Ballard Saint Germain; cannot question truth/falsity of belief
27. Gertz v. Robert Welch Inc. alleged that lawyer framed accused; private 14. American Bible Society v. City of Manila bible dissemination; license fee
person 15. Ebralinag v. Division Superintendent flag ceremony
28. Hustler Magazine v. Falwell liquor ad; first time parody of minister 16. Wisconsin v. Yoder Amish; not forced to attend highschool
29. In re: Jurado alleged corruption in the judiciary 17. Pamil v. Teleron prohibited priest candidate for mayor of Albuquerque
18. McDaniel v. Paty Baptist minister allowed in constitutional convention
f. Obscenity 19. Goldman v. Weinberger yarmulke; military discipline
Test to Determine
30. Miller v. California mailing books and Obscenity: 20. German v. Barangan St. Jude Chapel; rally; good faith
brochures of adult material Whether to the average person, 21. Centeno v. Villaon protection from fraudulent solicitations
31. Gonzales v. Kalaw-Katigbak Kapit sa applying contemporary 22. Lee v. Weisman rabbi; school graduation
Patalim movie community standards, the 23. Church of Lukumi v. City of Hialeah animal
dominant theme of the material Non-neutral Laws must be:
taken as a whole appeals to
sacrifices; ordinance not neutral 1. Justified by compelling
g. Assembly and Petition prurient interest. 24. Lambs Chapel v. School District film series on government interest
32. Bayan v. Ermita no permit no rally; family values 2. Narrowly tailored (neither
Calibrated Preemptive Response 25. INC v. CA criticisms; clear and present danger overbroad nor to specific)

26. Estrada v. Escritor live-in court employee;

V. Section 5: Religion
a. Non-establishment of Religion
1. Aglipay v. Ruiz postage stamps; incidental benefit
2. School District v. Schempp 10 Bible verses, morning prayers
3. Board of Education v. Allen lend textbooks to all schools; not for religious use
4. Lemon v. Kurtzman supplement salaries; aided
religious objectives
5. Tilton v. Richardson construction grants
6. County of Allegheny v. American Liberties Union
crche, menorah; government endorsement
7. Zobrest v. Catalina Foothills School District deaf
student; religious institutions not exempt from
social welfare and services programs
8. Capitol Square Review Board v. Pinette & Ku Klux
Klan cross in public forum
9. Islamic Dawah Council v. Sec. halal certification
10. Taruc v. De La Cruz excommunication
Lemon v. Kurtzman Test:
(SEN)
1. Secular legislative purpose
2. Neither advances nor inhibits
religion
3. No excessive entanglement
with religion
W/N Religious Expression
Violates Non-Establishment:
1. Purely private
2. Occurs in traditional or
designated public forums,
publicly announces and open
to all on equal terms
benevolent neutrality doctrine
27. In re: Request of Muslim Employees excused during Ramadan
VI. Section 6: Liberty of Abode
1. Villavicencio v. Lukban deported 170 prostitutes to Davao
2. Marcos v. Manglapus right to return to country
3. Marcos v. Sandiganbayan Imelda Marcos medical treatment
VII. Section 7: Right to Information and Access to Public Documents
1. Legaspi v. CSC eligibility of sanitarians
2. Sabio v. Gordon PCGG members not exempt from legislative inquiry
3. Bantay v. COMELEC list of partylist nominees
4. Neri v. Senate NBN-ZTE; executive privilege
5. Suplico v. NEDA inquiry became moot; government desisted from NBN-ZTE
6. AKBAYAN v. Aquino JPEPA; diplomatic negotiations
7. Province of North Cotabato v. GRP MOA-AD peace negotiations not exempt

5
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2 FINALS REVIEWER DEAN SEDFREY CANDELARIA CROMBONDS 2011-2012
VIII. Section 8: Right to Travel XI. Section 11: Free Access to Courts and Quasi-Judicicial Bodies
1. Manila Public School Teachers v. Laguio public school teachers have no right to
Miranda Rights:
strike XII. Section 12: Rights of a Person Under 1. right to remain silent
2. PADCOM v. Ortigas Center automatic membership of buyer Investigation 2. anything said can be used against him
1. Miranda v. Arizona Miranda Rights 3. right to have counsel present before and
during the questioning
IX. Section 9: Eminent Domain Taking: E-MAP-O 2. People v. Sunga city legal officer; conflict of 4. right to have a "free" attorney if indigent
1. Iron and Steel Authority v. CA republic to 1. Enter private property 5. even he consents to answering without
2. Not for a momentary period
interest counsel, interrogation must cease upon
substitute ISA request for counsel
3. Under warrant of legal 3. Magtoto v. Manguera prospective
2. Republic v. Vda. Castelvi leased by Air Force; authority 6. inadmissible if rights are violated
application
computed from date of taking not lease 4. Devoted to public use
3. US v. Causby chicken farm near airport; 5. As to oust the owner 4. Gamboa v. Cruz vagrancy; police line-up not part Totality of Circumstance
navigable airspace of custodial investigation Test: ODA-LTS
4. People v. Fajardo view of the plaza 5. People v. Escordial rape and robbery; no need for 1. witness opportunity to view
Expropriation by Municipal
the criminal
5. Republic v. PLDT public utility Government: P-JOL counsel in line-up 2. witness degree of attention
6. Penn Central v. New York City Grand Central; 1. Public use
6. People v. Teehankee totality of circumstances 3. accuracy of any prior
2. Just compensation
landmark preservation decription
3. Valid offer test; out-of-court identification valid 4. level of certainty of witness
7. Sumulong v. Guerreo opportunity to be 4. Legislative act (ordinance)
heard 7. Galman v. Pamaran violation of Sec. 12 rights; 5. time between crime and
identification
8. Philippine Columbian v. Hon. Panis housing project inadmissible 6. suggestiveness of procedure
9. Mactan v. Tudtud abandoned Cebu Lahug Airport project
10. City of Manila v. Estrada market; XIII. Section 13: Right to Bail Guidelines for determining
Judicial Review:
compensation subject to review 1. Adequacy of compensation 1. Yap v. CA convicted of estafa; P5.5M bail is Bail: ANO-CHEAF-FB
11. Madumba v. GSIS bank bonds accepted at 2. Necesity of taking excessive 1. Ability to give bail
2. Government of HK v. Olalia right to bail in 2. Nature of offense
face value 3. Public use character of taking
3. Penalty for offense
12. Mactan v. Urgello Lahug airport; extradition proceedings 4. Character and reputation
reconveyance; return compensation 3. De La Camara v. Enage guidelines for determining 5. Health
13. De Knecht v. Bautista EDSA extension; social impact factor bail 6. Evidence
7. Probability of appearing
14. Republic v. De Knecht EDSA extension; moot; cause disappeared 4. Comendador v. Gen. De Villa coup attempt; bail
8. Forfeiture of other bonds
15a. Hacienda Luisita Inc. v. PARC decision stock distribution plan; date of taking not granted to military personnel 9. Fugitive of justice
15b. Hacienda Luisita Inc. v. PARC resolution operative fact doctrine; SDP revoked 10.Bond for appearance
XIV. Section 14: Rights of the Accused in a Criminal
X. Section 10: Non-Impairment of Contracts Prosecution Rights of the Accused: DIHI-
1. Home Building v. Blaisell extended mortgage redemption; emergency 1. Olaguer v. Military Commission military courts; no SWA
jurisdiction 1. Due process
2. Rutter v. Esteban obligation delayed for 8 years; not reasonable
2. Presumed Innocent
3. Abella v. NLRC larorers not party to the contract; no impairment 2. US v. Luling prima facie evidence of guilt; 3. Heard by himself and counsel
4. Presley v. Bel Air hot pan de sal; commercial zone Congress power to define 4. Informed of nature and cause
5.Ortigas v. Feati Bank residential to commericial; police power 3. Dumlao v. COMELEC disqualification on the 5. Speedy, impartial, public trial
ground of a charge 6. Meet witness face to face
6. Republic v. Caguioa tax exemption of cigar and liquor in SEZ
7. Secure attendance of
7. Land Bank v. Republic inalienable forest; void contract 4. People v. Holgado pleaded guilty without counsel; witnesses and production of
decision inconsistent with charge evidence

6
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2 FINALS REVIEWER DEAN SEDFREY CANDELARIA CROMBONDS 2011-2012
5. People v. Regala information must allege all elements of qualifying
circumstance XX. Section 20: Debt and Non-Payment of Pol Tax
6. Enrile v. Salazar simple rebellion; charge
still exists but not complexed Grounds for Disqualification XXI. Section 21: Double Jeopardy
7. Conde v. Rivera remedy is mandamus to of a Judge: PR-PO 1. People v. Ylagan serious physical injuries; waiver cannot be predicated on
1. Pecuniary interest
dismiss the case; speedy trial silence
2. Relationship
8. People v. Gines reasonable delay; medical 3. Previous participation 2. Bulaong v. People rebellion and subversion; legal jeopardy must be terminated
reasons 4. Other just or valid reason 3. Melo v. People supervening fact; frustrated to consummated
9. Mateo Jr. Hon. Villaluz disqualified judge 4. People v. Buling incompetence of physician
10. Tampar v. Usman yamin oath is sharia court 5. People v. Tiozon illegal possession of firearms qualified by murder and murder;
11. Carredo v. People exception to waiver of appearance; identification by not the same offense
witnesses 6. People v. Relova electric wires; same act two offenses punished under national
law and ordinance
XV. Section 15: Habeas Corpus XVI. Section 16: Speedy Disposition 7. Estrada v. Sandiganbayan impeachment
of Cases
Requisites for Suspension of Application of Double Jeopardy
Privilege of Habeas Corpus:
1. Existence of actual invasion or 1. Legal Jeopardy 2. Termination 3. Identity of offense
rebellion a. upon valid a. acquittal a. one offense is identical to
2. Public safety requires indictment/complaint b. final conviction another
suspension b. before court with jurisdiction c. dismissal without express b. one is an attempt or
XVII. Section 17: Self-incrimination c. after arraignment consent of the accused frustration of the other
d. after plea d. dismissal on the merits c. one necessarily includes or
1. US v. Navaro Art. 483/481; declaration of whereabouts is incriminating is included in the other
2. US v. Tan Teng substances emitted; gonorrhoea
3. US v. Ong Sui Hong morphine from mouth XXII. Section 22: Bill of Attainder, Ex-post Facto Laws
4. Villaflor v. Summers pregnancy test; ocular inspection is permissible provided 1. People v. Ferrer subversion; requisites of bill of
proper safeguards are observed and no force/violence are employed Bill of Attainder:
attainder 1. Statute specifies persons or
5. Beltran v. Samson handwriting; creating evidence against oneself 2. Virata v. Sandiganbayan PCGG charter; groups
6. Bermudez v. Castillo denied writing letters; perjury substitute legislative rather than judicial 2. Applied retrospectively
7. Chavez v. CA compelled accused to take witness stand; right of prosecution determination of guilt
8. Cabal v. Kapunan forfeiture proceeding; graft and corruption 3. Lacson v. Executive Secretary Koratong Baleleng case; expanded
9. Pascual Jr. Board of Examiners revocation of license; malpractice in medicine Sandiganbayans jurisdiction; not penal statute but procedural
10. Standard Chartered v. Senate legislative inquiry; pending criminal case
CITIZENSHIP
XVIII. Section 18: Political Beliefs, Aspirations, Involuntary Servitude
1. Valles v. COMELEC failed to give facts to warrant reversal of prior case
2. Ong Chia v. Republic did not comply with naturalization requirements
3. Gatchalian v. Board of Commissioners deportation; no proof to invalidate
XIX. Section 19: Excessive Punishment, Death Penalty filiation to Filipino father
1. People v. Estoista imposed death for murder and illegal possession of firearms; 4. Tecson v. COMELEC FPJ; illegitimate son of a Filipino father; recognized
recommended executive clemency paternity
2. People v. Echegaray qualified rape; death penalty not cruel/degrading/inhuman 5. Co. v. Electoral Tribunal election of citizenship through positive acts

7
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2 FINALS REVIEWER DEAN SEDFREY CANDELARIA CROMBONDS 2011-2012
6. Yu v. Defensor-Santiago Portugese passport; express renunciation may be
deemed from acts
7. Frivaldo v. COMELEC repatriation retroacts to day of request
8. Labo Jr. v. COMELEC 3 modes of acquiring citizenship
9. Mercado v. Manzano took oath of allegiance upon filing of COC; alien
registration not renunciation
10. Tabasa v. CA who may repatriate
11. Bengson v. HRET natural-born citizenship reacquired after repatriation
12. AASJS v. Datumanong dual citizenship is not dual allegiance

SUFFRAGE
1. Romualdez v. RTC - requisites of changing Animus Non
domicile Revertendi/Animus
2. Macalintal v. COMELEC absentee voters exempt Manendi: PRA
from residency requirement 1. Presence in the new locality
3. Nicolas-Lewis v. COMELEC absentee voters/dual 2. Intention to remain there
3. Abandon old domicile
citizens need not comply with residency

SOCIAL JUSTICE
1. ISA v. Quisumbing equal pay for equal work
2. Association of Small Land Owners v. Sec. Of Agrarian Reform retention limits;
just compensation subject to review by court; compensation need not be in
money; revolutionary
3. Luz Farms v. DAR poultry and livestock
4. People v. Leachon due process in Ejectment
Due Process in Ejectment:
5. Carino v. CHR power to investigate; not 1. Opportunity to be heard
adjudicate 2. Notice
6. EPZA v. CHR cannot issue injunction 3. No lives lost
7. Simon Jr. v. CHR cannot cite for contempt

EDUCATION
1. DECS v. San Diego failed NMAT 3 times; regulate Academic Freedom:
admission 1. What may be taught
2. Miriam College v. CA erotic articles; academic 2. How it may be taught
freedom 3. Who may teach
4. Who may be admitted to be
3. Garcia v. Faculty Admin denied admission to taught
Loyola School of Theology
4. University of San Carlos v. CA failed Architecture subjects; did not graduate cum
laude; academic freedom