yap v paras.pdf - SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 205 VOL 205 625 Yap vs Paras G.R No 101236 JULIANA P YAP petitioner vs MARTIN PARAS and ALFREDO

yap v paras.pdf - SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME...

This preview shows page 1 - 3 out of 8 pages.

8/28/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 205 1/8 VOL. 205, JANUARY 30, 1992 625 Yap vs. Paras G.R. No. 101236. January 30, 1992. * JULIANA P. YAP, petitioner, vs. MARTIN PARAS and ALFREDO D. BARCELONA, SR., Judge of the 3rd MTC of Glan Malapatan, South Cotabato, respondents. Remedial Law; Criminal Procedure; Prejudicial question; For a civil case to be considered prejudicial to a criminal action, it must appear not only that the civil case involves the same facts upon which the criminal prosecution is based, but also that the resolution of the issues raised in said civil action would be necessarily determinative of the guilt or innocence of the accused. —Section 5, Rule 111 of the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure as amended provides: Section 5. Elements of prejudicial question, —The two (2) essential elements of a prejudicial question are: (a) the civil action involves an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the criminal action; and (b) the resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action may proceed. A prejudicial question is defined as that which arises in a case the resolution of which is a logical antecedent of the issue involved therein, and the cognizance of which pertains to another tribunal. The prejudicial question must be determinative of the case before the court but the jurisdiction to try and resolve the question must be lodged in another court or tribunal. It is a question based on a fact distinct and separate from the crime but so intimately connected with it that it determines the guilt or innocence of the accused. We have held that "for a civil case to be considered prejudicial to a criminal action as to cause the suspension of the criminal action pending the determination of the civil action, it must appear not only that the civil case involves the same facts upon which the criminal prosecution is based, but also that the resolution of the issues raised in said civil action would be necessarily determinative of the guilt or innocence of the accused." Same; Same; Same; Suspension; The order dismissing the criminal action without a motion for suspension in accordance with Sec. 6, Rule 111 of the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure as amended and without the accused in the civil case for the annulment of the second sale, suggests not only ignorance of the law but also bias on the part of the respondent judge. —It is worth remarking that not every defense raised in the civil action will raise a prejudicial question to justify
Image of page 1
8/28/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 205 2/8 _______________ * FIRST DIVISION. 626 626 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED Yap vs. Paras suspension of the criminal action. The defense must involve an issue similar or intimately related to the same issue raised in the criminal action and its resolution should determine whether or not the latter action may proceed.
Image of page 2
Image of page 3

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 8 pages?

  • Summer '16
  • Supreme Court of the United States, Pleading, Appellate court

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture