Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • People v. Romualdez

    Uploaded by

    Morales Genecio
    41 views1 page
    The respondent, a governor of Leyte, appointed himself as ambassador while also receiving dual compensation, which is prohibited by law. A case was filed within the 15-year prescriptive period, but it was deemed void due to a lack of authority. After the 15-year period had passed, a new complaint was filed against the accused. The Supreme Court ruled that the offense had prescribed because the first complaint was void and did not interrupt the prescriptive period, so it had already passed. In dissent, Justice Carpio argued that since the special law was silent, the Revised Penal Code provision stating the prescriptive period does not run when the offender is absent from the Philippines should apply.

    Original Description:

    Case digest in SPL

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The respondent, a governor of Leyte, appointed himself as ambassador while also receiving dual compensation, which is prohibited by law. A case was filed within the 15-year prescriptive period, but it was deemed void due to a lack of authority. After the 15-year period had passed, a new complaint was filed against the accused. The Supreme Court ruled that the offense had prescribed because the first complaint was void and did not interrupt the prescriptive period, so it had already passed. In dissent, Justice Carpio argued that since the special law was silent, the Revised Penal Code provision stating the prescriptive period does not run when the offender is absent from the Philippines should apply.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    41 views1 page

    People v. Romualdez

    Uploaded by

    Morales Genecio
    The respondent, a governor of Leyte, appointed himself as ambassador while also receiving dual compensation, which is prohibited by law. A case was filed within the 15-year prescriptive period, but it was deemed void due to a lack of authority. After the 15-year period had passed, a new complaint was filed against the accused. The Supreme Court ruled that the offense had prescribed because the first complaint was void and did not interrupt the prescriptive period, so it had already passed. In dissent, Justice Carpio argued that since the special law was silent, the Revised Penal Code provision stating the prescriptive period does not run when the offender is absent from the Philippines should apply.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    People of the Philippines v.

    Romualdez
    GR 166510
    Facts: The respondent bein a overnor of le!te had himself appointed as an ambassador"
    receivin dual compensation as prohibited b! R# $01%.
    # chared &as file &ithin the 15 !ear prescriptive period" ho&ever due to lac' of authorit! the
    same &as deemed void. #fter the 15 !ear prescriptive period a ne& complaint &as filed aainst
    the accused
    (ssue: )hether or not the offense has prescribed.

    *eld: +es" ,ince the first complaint &as declared void it did not interrupted the prescriptive
    period of the offense- thus the offense did prescribed.
    (n the dissentin opinion .ustice carpio added that since the special la& &as silent the provision
    of the RP/ should be applied that the term of prescription should not run &hen the offender is
    absent from the Philippine #rchipelao.

    You might also like