Constitutional Law 2

 DUE PROCESS: Section 1

  1. US vs. Ling Su Fan; 10 Phil 104 (1908)
  2. Vellez vs. De Vera; 496 SCRA 345
  3. Dadugo vs. CSC; 223 SCRA 747
  4. Carbonell vs. CSC; 630 SCRA 202 (2010)
  5. Ang Tibay vs. CIR; 69 Phil 635 (1940)
  6. Air Manila vs. Balatbat; 38 SCRA 489 (1971)
  7. Guzman vs. National University; 142 SCRA 706 (1986)
  8. Tañada vs. Tuvera; 146 SCRA 466 (1985)
  9. US vs. Toribio; 15 Phil 85 (1910)
  10. Ynot vs. IAC; 148 SCRA 659 (1987)

II. EQUAL PROTECTION: Section 1

  1. People vs. Vera; 65 Phil 56; p. 273 
    • Guarantee as a safeguard against acts ofthe State and not discrimination by private individuals.
  2. Biraogo vs. PTC; 637 SCRA 78 (2010) – Meaning of Equal Protection
  3. People vs. Ching Kuan; 74 Phil 23 (1942)
  4. Araullo vs. Aquino; 728 SCRA 1;
  5. ABAKADA vs. Purisima; 562 SCRA 251
  6. MIAA vs. Olongapo; 543 SCRA 269
  7. Ichong vs. Hernandez; 101 Phil 1155
  8. Lutz vs. Araneta; 98 Phil 48
  9. De Guzman vs. COMELEC; 336 SCRA 188;
  10. Tolentino vs. Secretary of Finance; 235 SCRA 630
  11. People vs. Cayat; 68 Phil 12
  12. Bartolome vs. SSS; 740 SCRA 78
  13. Imbong vs. Ochoa; 721 SCRA 146
  14. City of Manila vs. Laguio; 455 SCRA 308
  15. Quinto vs. COMELEC (2010 MR)

III. UNREASONABLE SEARCH AND SEIZURE: Section 2

  1. David vs. Macapagal-Arroyo (PP 1017) – GR 171396; May 3, 2006
  2. Soliven vs. Makasiar – 167 SCRA 394 (1988); G.R. No. 82585; November 14, 1988;
  3. Abdula vs. Guiani 326 SCRA 1; G.R. No. 118821; February 18, 2000;
  4. Columbia Pictures vs. Flores – G.R. No. L-78631June 29, 1993
  5. Go vs. CA – 206 SCRA 138; G.R. No. 101837; February 11, 1992
  6. People vs. Aminudin – 163 SCRA 402; L-74869; July 6, 1988
  7. People vs. Dichoso – G.R. No. 101216-18; June 4, 1993;
  8. People vs. Evaristo –216 SCRA 431; G.R. No. 93828; Dec. 11, 1992;
  9. People vs. Exala – 221 SCRA 292 (494?)
  10. People vs. Omaweng – 213 SCRA 462 (1992)
  11. People vs. Tangliban – 184 SCRA 220; 1990;
  12. Prudente vs. Dayrit – 180 SCRA 69; 1989;
  13. Salazar vs. Achacoso – March 14, 1990;
  14. Stonehill vs. Diokno – 20 SCRA 383; June 19, 1967
IV. PRIVACY OF COMMUNICATION AND CORRESPONDENCE: Section 3
  1. Gaanan vs. IAC – 145 SCRA 112 (1986);
  2. In re: Wenceslao Laureta – 148 SCRA 382 (1987);
  3. Ramirez vs. CA – Sept. 28, 1995; 248 SCRA 590 (1995)
  4. Zulueta vs. CA – 253 SCRA 639; Feb. 20, 1996
  5. People vs. Albofera; 152 SCRA 123 (1987);
FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION: Section 4
  1. ABS-CBN vs. COMELEC – GR 133486; Jan. 28, 2000
  2. Chavez vs Gonzales; 511 SCRA 441 (2008);
  3. Gonzales vs. COMELEC; 27 SCRA 835 (1969)
  4. Lagunzad vs. Sotto Vda. De Gonzales – 92 SCRA 476;
  5. Pita vs. CA – 178 SCRA 362 (1989);
VI. FREEDOM OF RELIGION: Section 5
  1. Gerona vs. Secretary of Education – 106 Phil 2
  2. Ebralinag vs. Division Superintendent of Schools of Cebu – March 1, 1993 (219 SCRA 256 [1991];
  3. Garces vs. Estenzo – 104 SCRA 510; G.R. No. L-53487; May 25, 1981
  4. Islamic Da’wah Council vs. Office of the Executive Secretary; G.R. No. 153888; July 9, 2003
  5. Taruc vs Bishop Dela Cruz; G.R. No. 144801; March 10, 2005. –
VII. LIBERTY OF ABODE AND TO TRAVEL: Section 6
  1. Yap vs CA; G.R. No. 141529; June 6, 2001
  2. Marcos vs. Manglapus – 177 SCRA 668
  3. Silverio vs. CA – 195 SCRA 760; April 8, 1991
VIII. RIGHT TO INFORMATION: Section 7
  1. Chavez vs PEA and Amari; G.R. No. 1333250; July 9, 2002
  2. In re: Request for Live Radio-TV coverage of the trial in the Sandiganbayan of the Plunder case of President Estrada;
  3. Perez vs Estrada; A.M. No. 00-1-4-03-SC; June 29, 2001.
IX. FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION: Section 8
  1. Gesite vs CA- 444 SCRA 51 (2004);
X. INHERENT POWERS OF GOVERNMENT: Section 9 – Just Compensation
  • a. POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN
  • b. POLICE POWER
  • c. POWER OF TAXATION
XI. NON-IMPAIRMENT OF OBLIGATION OF CONTRACTS: Section 10
  1. Lozano vs. Martinez – 146 SCRA 323
  2. Ortigas vs Feati Bank – 94 SCRA 533
XII. FREE ACCESS TO THE COURTS AND QUASI-JUDICIAL BODIES: Section 11

XIII. RIGHTS OF PERSONS UNDER INVESTIGATION: Section 12
  1. People vs Dela Cruz – 224 SCRA 506; G.R. NO. 118866-68; September 17, 1997;
  2. People vs Baloloy; G.R. No. 140740; April 12, 2002;
  3. People vs Lugod; G.R. No. 136253; February 21, 2001;
  4. People vs Del Rosario; GR No. 127755; 14 April 1999
  5. Gamboa vs Cruz – 162 SCRA 642
  6. People vs Peralta; GR No. 145176; 30 March 2004
  7. People vs Sayaboc; GR No. 147201; 15 January 2004
  8. People vs Samolde; Gr No. 128551; 31 July 2000
  9. People vs Andan; GR No. 116437; 3 March 1997
  10. People vs Mahinay – 302 SCRA 385; GR No. 122485; 1 February 1999
XIV. RIGHT TO BAIL: Section 13
  1. People vs Fitzgerald; GR No. 149723; 27 October 2006;
  2. Lavides vs CA; GR No. 129670; 1 February 2000
  3. Govt of the US vs Purganan; GR No. 148571; 17 December 2002
  4. Gov of Hongkong Special Administrative Region vs. Olalia, Jr.; 521 SCRA 470; 2007;
  5. Tucay vs Dumagas – 242 SCRA 110
  6. Maguddatu vs CA – Feb. 23, 2000
XV. RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED: Section 14
  1. Estrada vs Desierto – March 2, 2001
  2. Cosep vs People – May 21, 1998
  3. People vs Sta. Teresa; GR No. 130663; 20 March 2001
  4. Dumlao vs COMELEC – 95 SCRA 392
  5. Reyes vs CA; GR No. 111682; 06 February 1997
  6. People vs Bonghanoy; GR No. 1240997; 17 June 1999
  7. Tai Lim cs CA; GR No. 131483; 26 October 1999
  8. People vs Monje; GR No. 146689; 27 September 2002
  9. People vs Chua; GR No. 128280; 4 April 2001
  10. People vs CA; GR No. 140285; 27 September 2006

De Leon Notes:















Popular posts from this blog

Equality and Human Rights: The United Nations and Human Rights System (September 16, 2023)

Sovereign Equality of States/Principle of sovereign equality UN Charter of 1945 All states are equal before international law no matter the size of their territory, population, economy or military. All states have equal rights and duties under international law, and that no state has the right to interfere in the internal affairs of another state. Positive Consequences: All states have a voice in international affairs .   All states have the opportunity to participate in international organizations and to negotiate and conclude treaties. This helps to ensure that the interests of all states are represented in the development of international law and policy. No state has the right to interfere in the internal affairs of another state.  This helps to protect the sovereignty of all states and to prevent the use of force or coercion to achieve political objectives. States have the right to develop their own political, economic, and social systems without interference from othe...
Read more

Election Laws: Requirements Before Election

REQUIREMENTS BEFORE ELECTION A. Registration Registration of Voters The right of a citizen to vote is necessarily conditioned upon certain procedural requirements he must undergo, among others, the process of registration. Registration regulates the exercise of the right of suffrage .  It is not a qualification for such right.  R.A. No. 8189, the Voter's Registration Act of 1996 (approved June 11, 1996) : Sec. 2. Declaration of Policy. It is the policy of the State to systematize the present method of registration in order to establish a clean, complete, permanent and updated list of voters. Sec. 3. Definition of Terms. – As used in this Act: Registration refers to the act of accomplishing and filing of a sworn application for registration by a qualified voter before the election officer of the city or municipality wherein he resides and including the same in the book of registered voters upon approval by the Election Registration Board; Registration Record refers to an ...
Read more

Special Rules and Proceedings: Rule 75

Special Rules and Proceedings RULE 75 Production of Will; Allowance of Will Necessary Section 1. Allowance necessary. Conclusive as to execution. — No will shall pass either real or personal estate  unless it is proved and allowed in the proper court.  Subject to the right of appeal,  such allowance of the will shall be conclusive as to its due execution. Probate  A special proceeding to establish the validity of a will. Kinds of wills A will has been defined as a species of conveyance whereby a person is permitted, with the formalities prescribed by law, to control to a certain degree thze disposition of his estate after his death.   Under the Civil Code, there are two kinds of wills which a testator may execute.  The first is the notarial will , which must be acknowledged before a notary public by a testator and the attesting witness and is governed by Articles 804 to 809 of the Civil Code. The second is the holographic will , which Article 810 ...
Read more