Case Digest (G.R. No. 223036)
Facts:
In Dominador B. Bustos v. Hon. Antonio G. Lucero (G.R. No. L-2068, March 8, 1949), petitioner Bustos challenged the constitutionality of Section 11, Rule 108 of the Rules of Court before the Supreme Court. Bustos had been arrested and brought before Branch II of the Court of First Instance of Pampanga, where a preliminary investigation was conducted without allowing him to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses. He then filed an application for certiorari in the Supreme Court, alleging that the omission violated his right to confrontation under Section 13, Article VIII of the 1935 Constitution. In an earlier resolution dismissing his certiorari petition, the Court relied on its decision in Dequito v. Arellano (G.R. No. L-1336) and held that the right to confront witnesses does not extend to preliminary investigations. Bustos moved for reconsideration, insisting that Section 11 of Rule 108 impairs substantive rights and therefore exceeds the Court’s rule-making power.Issues:
Case Digest (G.R. No. 223036)
Facts:
- Background of the Case
- Dominador B. Bustos (Petitioner) filed a petition for certiorari against Hon. Antonio G. Lucero, Judge of Branch II, Court of First Instance of Pampanga (Respondent), challenging Section 11, Rule 108 of the Rules of Court on the ground it denied confrontation and cross-examination at preliminary investigation.
- The Supreme Court initially resolved the constitutional question by citing Dequito, et al. vs. Arellano (G.R. No. L-1336), holding that the right to confront witnesses does not apply to preliminary hearings and that dispensing with preliminary examinations does not infringe due process.
- Motion for Reconsideration
- Bustos filed a motion for reconsideration contending that Section 11, Rule 108 infringes Section 13, Article VIII of the Constitution by impairing substantive rights.
- The Court directed further elaboration on whether the rule affects substantive rights under the Due Process Clause.
Issues:
- Whether Section 11 of Rule 108, Rules of Court, denying cross-examination at preliminary investigation, violates Section 13, Article VIII, of the Constitution by impairing substantive rights.
- Whether the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses at preliminary investigation is a substantive, constitutionally protected right, or merely procedural/adjective.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)