Carpio and Alawas Law Office

Good news, Kapamilya!

Those who applied for renewal of their driver’s licenses that expired from April-August 2023 can now get their plastic licenses from the Land Transportation Office.

SC: Persons Convicted of Heinous Crimes Still Entitled to Good Conduct Time Allowance - Supreme Court of the Philippines SC: Persons Convicted of Heinous Crimes Still Entitled to Good Conduct Time Allowance April 03, 2024 In G.R. No. 249027 and G.R. No. 249155 (Guinto et al., v. Department of Justice; Inmates of New Bilibid Prison, et al. v. Department of Justice), the Supreme Court En Banc, through Associate Justice....

SC Imposes Imprisonment for Sale of Counterfeit Bills │

The Supreme Court has affirmed the penalty of imprisonment imposed on a person for illegal possession and use of false bank notes.

In a Decision penned by Associate Justice Jhosep Y. Lopez, the Supreme Court’s Second Division denied the petition for review on certiorari filed by Allan Gacasan (Gacasan) which challenged the rulings of the Court of Appeals (CA) and the Regional Trial Court (RTC) finding Gacasan guilty of violating Article 168 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC).

In a test-buy operation conducted in Bukidnon, Misamis Oriental, the Criminal Investigation Detection Group (CIDG) arrested Gacasan after the latter offered to sell counterfeit bills to a confidential CIDG agent. Gacasan was caught in possession of 100 pieces of counterfeit 1000-peso bills and 25 pieces of counterfeit 500-peso bills. The said bills were confirmed to be counterfeit upon examination by Atty. Andrew E. Asperin (Atty. Asperin) of the Currency Issue and Integrity Office of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas.

The RTC convicted Gacasan for the crime of illegal possession and use of false treasury or bank notes under Article 168 of the RPC. The CA affirmed the conviction, prompting the present petition before the Court.

Read more at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-imposes-imprisonment-for-sale-of-counterfeit-bills/

SC Affirms Conviction of Child Pornographer |

Sending a strong message that child po*******hy, among other forms of sexual exploitation and abuse, presents an acute danger worldwide if facilitated through the internet, the Court affirmed the conviction of a child pornographer and sentenced it to imprisonment and a fine of PHP 2,000,000.

This was the ruling of the Supreme Court En Banc, through Associate Justice Mario V. Lopez, as it denied the appeal of Luisa Pineda (Pineda) who was convicted by the Regional Trial Court (RTC) and the Court of Appeals (CA) for child po*******hy qualified with the use of a computer system.

The Court found all the elements of child po*******hy under RA 9775 present in Pineda’s case.

Under Sections 4(a), (b), and (c) of RA 9775, the elements of child po*******hy are: (1) the victim is below 18 years old or over but unable to fully take care of himself or herself; (2) the offender either: (i) hires, employs, uses, persuades, induces or coerces a child to perform in the creation or production of any form of child po*******hy; or (ii) produces, directs, manufactures or creates any form of child po*******hy; or (iii) publishes, offers, transmits, sells, distributes, broadcasts, advertises, promotes, exports or imports any form of child po*******hy; and (3) the child’s sexual activities were represented through visual, audio, or written combination, by electronic, mechanical, digital, optical, magnetic, or any other means.

Read more at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-sentences-child-pornographer-to-imprisonment-and-php2-million-fine/

SC Acquits Accused in Drug Case for Law Enforcers’ Failure to Comply with Mandatory Witness Rule │

Without the insulating presence of the mandatory witnesses during the seizure and marking of evidence in warrantless drug arrests, the evils of switching, planting, or contamination of the evidence negates the integrity and credibility of the seized items, casting reasonable doubt on the guilt of the accused.

Thus reiterated the Supreme Court’s Third Division, in a Decision penned by Associate Justice Samuel H. Gaerlan, granting the appeal of Gerald Flores (Flores) and Harrold Francisco (Francisco) who challenged their conviction by the lower court for violation of Republic Act No. (RA) 9165 of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002, as amended.

Flores and Francisco, along with Louie Truelen (Truelen), were charged in 2016 for the sale of methamphetamine hydrochloride or shabu following a buy-bust operation conducted by the Quezon City Police Department (QCPD).

The evidence for the prosecution included a Chain of Custody Form and Inventory of Seized/Confiscated Item/Property Form accomplished by the arresting officers. At the bottom of the latter form, appear the names and signatures of the following insulating witnesses: Jun E. Tobias (Tobias), a senior reporter for the media outlet Hirit/Saksi, and Nelson N. Dela Cruz (Dela Cruz), a barangay kagawad. The press identification card of Tobias was also attached. However, no other document identifies Dela Cruz as kagawad.

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City, Branch 77 found the accused guilty, noting that the validity of the buy-bust operation was not affected by the fact that there was no preparatory coordination with the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency. The RTC also held that the police officers’ actions enjoyed the presumption of regularity absent any showing of ill motive or intent on the part of the police officers to illegally incriminate the accused.

The RTC was affirmed by the Court of Appeals, prompting the present petition from Flores and Francisco. As to Truelen, his criminal liability was extinguished in 2021 following his death while in detention.

In granting Flores and Francisco’s appeal, the Court stressed the importance of complying with the mandatory insulating witness rule under Section 21 of RA 9165, which requires the apprehending team to conduct a physical inventory of the seized items and the photographing of the same immediately after seizure and confiscation, to be done in the presence of the accused, his counsel or representative, a representative of the Department of Justice (DOJ), the media, and an elected public official. These witnesses shall be required to sign the copies of the inventory and be given a copy.

Read more at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-acquits-accused-in-drug-case-for-law-enforcers-failure-to-comply-with-mandatory-witness-rule/.

The Supreme Court has ordered the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO) to pay a man who won a Lotto 6/42 draw, but whose ticket was partially blackened with a flat iron.

In a 17-page Decision penned by Associate Justice Jhosep Y. Lopez, the Court’s Second Division denied the petition for review on certiorari filed by the PCSO which sought to set aside the Decision and Resolution of the Court of Appeals (CA) affirming the Decision of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Balayan, Batangas in Civil Case No. 5353. The said RTC Decision ordered the PCSO to pay respondent Antonio F. Mendoza (Mendoza) the amount of P12,391,600.00 as payment for the Lotto 6/42 jackpot prize.

The Supreme Court, in deciding in Mendoza’s favor, held that the PCSO Amended Games and Rules and Regulations for the Lotto 6/42 (PCSO Rules), which provides the rights and obligations of both the sweepstakes office and bettors such as Mendoza, are ambiguous and susceptible to two reasonable alternative interpretations.

The Court reviewed the nature of the game of lotto as a game of chance duly authorized under Republic Act No. 1169, as amended. Citing Article I of the PCSO Rules, the Court noted that there is no reference to a “winning ticket” in the said rules. At most, a ticket was only defined by the PCSO Rules as “produced by a terminal confirming the selection made by the customer.”

“Stated otherwise, the ticket is only proof of the fact that the bettor selected the winning ticket combination,” held the Court, as it found that the CA did not err in finding that it is the act of selecting the winning combination that entitles a bettor to the corresponding prize.

The Court held that the circumstances surrounding the fact that Mendoza bet in the eventual winning numbers of the lotto were clearly established. Noting that both the RTC and the CA characterized the pieces of evidence presented by Mendoza as secondary evidence, the Court explained that secondary evidence may be resorted to when the original document is unavailable.

Read more at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-to-pcso-pay-p12-39m-to-lotto-winner-with-partially-burned-ticket/. Read the Decision in full at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/257849-philippine-charity-sweepstakes-office-vs-antonio-f-mendoza/.

To our clients, the SEC has further extended the amnesty applications of non-compliant and suspended or revoked corporations. Apply now and prevent the application of the new higher scale of fines and penalties.

A panel in the Senate has finally approved a consolidated measure that provides for an absolute divorce in the Philippines.

READ: inq.news/DivorceBillNod

From a reader: “A reminder to car owners who want to sell their old cars. Please make sure to keep a file of the deed of sale and a copy of IDs of the buyer. You'll never know if and when you’ll need them to identify the new owners to apprehending goverment agencies.

“Sometimes the new owner doesn't register its new ownership to LTO. So chances are, when the new owner has a no contact apprehension/violation—like in our case with MMDA a year ago and NLEX last week—the notices will still be addressed to the previous owners. If you do not report it to apprehending agencies, you might be the ones to suffer the consequences. Kainis lang since we sold the other vehicle 6 or 7 years ago. Buti na lang the files are still with us.”

SC Reiterates Ruling that Family Code can be Applied Retroactively |

The Family Code, including its concept of psychological incapacity as a ground to nullify marriage, shall be given retroactive effect, so long as no vested or acquired rights under relevant laws will be prejudiced or impaired.

SC Reiterates Ruling that Family Code can be Applied Retroactively |

The Family Code, including its concept of psychological incapacity as a ground to nullify marriage, shall be given retroactive effect, so long as no vested or acquired rights under relevant laws will be prejudiced or impaired.

Thus reiterated the Supreme Court’s First Division, in a Decision penned by Justice Ramon Paul L. Hernando, denying the Petition for Review on Certiorari filed by Arthur A. Candelario and affirming the Order of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of San Jose, Antique.

In resolving Candelario’s petition, the Supreme Court first ruled on the issue of whether or not the Family Code applies to Candelario’s marriage.

The Court cited Article 256, which states that the Family Code “shall have retroactive effect insofar as it does not prejudice or impair vested or acquired rights in accordance with the Civil Code or other laws.” Thus, it is explicitly stated in the Family Code that the law, including its concept of psychological incapacity as a ground to nullify marriage, shall apply retroactively, so long as no vested or acquired rights under relevant laws will be prejudiced or impaired.

Read more at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-reiterates-ruling-that-family-code-can-be-applied-retroactively/.

Read the Decision in full at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/222068-arthur-a-candelario-vs-marlene-e-candelario-and-the-office-of-the-solicitor-general/.

Because of the storm and power outages, our office is closed tomorrow (July 27,2023) and online services remain unavailable.

The Office is Closed today (July 26,2023) and online services are also suspended because of the ongoing storm and power outages in the city and province.

Notarial Service / Notary is now available.

We are open for appointment from Monday to Sunday.

Ayaw mo ng pila? Mag-eAppointment ka na!

Make your next visit to the BIR easy and hassle-free by scheduling an appointment through the eAppointment system. Skip long queues and transact with the BIR at your most convenient time.

To access the System, click on the eAppointment logo on the BIR Website homepage or scan the QR Code. The eAppointment system is also accessible via this link: https://bit.ly/BIREAPPOINTMENT

JUST IN: DILG memo - Only the LTO can confiscate Driver's Licenses.

READ: ONLY LTO CAN CONFISCATE DRIVERS LICENSE, SAYS DILG

DILG’s Joint Memorandum Circular (JMC) No. 01, s., 2008 dated September 14, 2022, states that “the LGUs can issue traffic citation tickets but only the LTO and their deputized agents can confiscate drivers’ licenses.”

The memo also directs LGUs to “review their ordinances, orders, and local policies, to ensure conformity and compliance with the said provision and with the entirety o the above-cited JMC.”

LAW OFFICE Schedule Advisory for Sept. 23, 2022 (Thursday)

We are closed tomorrow (Sept. 22, 2022) because of the city-wide scheduled whole day power interruptions. Requests for online or face-to-face legal services will be entertained on Sept. 23, 2022.

FOR INFO!

IMBILIN ti Land Transportation Office kadagiti amin a regional office daytoy ken kadagiti maseknan ti nainget a panangipatungpal da iti Section 32 ken 51 ti Republic Act No. 4136 wenno Land Transportation and Traffic Code a mangiparparit iti panagbiyahe dagiti lugan nu lumabes ti bilang ti pasahero daytoy iti nairehistro a passenger capacity ken nu adda ti nakalugan iti ruar wenno likod ti lugan a nairangta para iti cargo.

Maipariten ti panangipalubos kadagiti pasahero nga aglugan kadagiti cargo/freight dagiti truck pakairamanan dagiti pick-up vehicles.

Daytoy ket kasaruno pay laeng ti makapaalarma a bilang dagiti aksidente iti kalsada a pakairamramanan dagiti trucks nu sadino, dagiti pasahero a nakalugan kadagiti espasyo a para kuma iti cargo ket pimmusay wenno nakaro a nadangran.//GEvascoD.

https://www.facebook.com/ltolatrinidad/photos/a.114511839911306/143429113686245/?type=3&theater

Credits: LTO-Benguet

To our non-profit org clients, this might be helpful.

WEBINAR ON PROTECTING NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS (NPOs) FROM MONEY LAUNDERING AND TERRORIST FINANCING ABUSE

The Securities and Exchange Commission invites you to a free webinar entitled, “PROTECTING NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS (NPOs) FROM MONEY LAUNDERING AND TERRORIST FINANCING ABUSE.” The said webinar is part of the Commission’s OUTREACH PROGRAM to enhance the NPO sector's knowledge and understanding of the 2019 NPO Guidelines and the concept of Beneficial Ownership (BO).

Pre-registration to the webinar is required and is on a first-come, first-served basis. To register, please fill out the form through the following link:

https://forms.gle/cax4Y7M9szGwxFXRA

For more information, please refer to the invitation.

Supreme Court Issues TRO in No Contact Apprehension Policy Petitions |

The Court has issued a temporary restraining order enjoining all respondents, including all those implementing MMDA Resolution No. 16-10, s. 2016, and all ordinances subject of the petitions from carrying out the No Contact Apprehension Policy (NCAP) programs and ordinances and the Land Transportation Office from giving out motorist information to all local government units, cities, and municipalities enforcing NCAP programs.

The case was also set for oral arguments in the afternoon of 24 January 2023. The SC PIO will be creating a microsite in the SC website in connection with the case and where the public may access and view all pertinent pleadings.

Read the Notice of Resolution at sc.judiciary.gov.ph/29468/.

Supreme Court Issues TRO in No Contact Apprehension Policy Petitions |

The Court has issued a temporary restraining order enjoining all respondents, including all those implementing MMDA Resolution No. 16-10, s. 2016, and all ordinances subject of the petitions from carrying out the No Contact Apprehension Policy (NCAP) programs and ordinances and the Land Transportation Office from giving out motorist information to all local government units, cities, and municipalities enforcing NCAP programs.

The case was also set for oral arguments in the afternoon of 24 January 2023. The SC PIO will be creating a microsite in the SC website in connection with the case and where the public may access and view all pertinent pleadings.

Read the Notice of Resolution at sc.judiciary.gov.ph/29468/.

𝐁𝐀𝐖𝐀𝐋 𝐁𝐀𝐒𝐓𝐎𝐒 𝐋𝐀𝐖
RA 11313 (Safe Space Act)
Alam nyo ba?!
Ang mga sumusunod ay mga ipinagbabawal o mga paglabag sa R.A. No. 11313 or the Safe Spaces Act/Bawal Bastos Law:
- Catcalling
- Wolf- whistling
- Unwanted invitations
- Mga pagamit ng transphobic, homophobic,
misogynistic at sexist na mga salita at
komento
- Hindi nais na puna o komento sa itsura ng
isang tao
- Pagsasambit ng mga komento na may
sekswal na suhestyon
- Sapilitan na pagkuha ng personal na detalye
tulad ng phone number at email address
- Panghihipo
- Public ma********on
- Pagbabanta sa iyong kaligtasan, lalo kung
nagaganap ito sa mga kalsada, parke at
eskinita.
Ang mga sumusunod ay mga kaparusahan sa paglabag ng nasabing batas:
- Unang Paglabag - isang libong piso (Pnp
1,000) multa, paglinis ng komunidad sa loob
ng 12 oras at pagdalo sa gender sensitivity
seminar.
- Ikalawang paglabag - tatlong libong piso (Php
3,000) multa, 6-7 araw na pagkakakulong.
- Ikatlong paglabag - sampung libong piso(Php
10,000) multa at 30 araw na pagkakakulong.
Read More: shorturl.at/jlSX6

PROVINCIAL ORDINANCE: SUSPENSION on the requirement of riders of motorcycles and bicycles to wear high visibility vests within Benguet.

USE of HIGH VISIBILITY VEST in BENGUET SUSPENDED:
Executive Order No. 2022-011 issued by Benguet Gov. Melchor D. Diclas, MD

SUSPENDING the Implementation of Provicial Ordinance No. 2022-302, Entitled: "An Ordinance Requiring all drivers and riders of Motorcycle, Tricycle, E-Bike and Bicycle to wear a high visibility vest while travelling along the national highway and in all provicial, municipal and barangay roads wihtin the province of Benguet and Providing penalties for violation thereof," Pending Amendments Thereof"

Supreme Court RULES that photos and messages on Facebook are admissible as evidence.

SC: Photos, Messages from Facebook Messenger obtained by Private Individuals Admissible as Evidence

The Supreme Court has ruled that photos and messages obtained by private individuals from a Facebook messenger account are admissible as evidence in court.

In a 31-page decision penned by Associate Justice Jhosep Y. Lopez, the Court sustained the conviction of the petitioner, Christian C. Cadajas, for violation of RA 9775, or the Anti-Child Po*******hy Act, rejecting the petitioner's claim that the chat thread presented as evidence against him should be excluded since the same was obtained in violation of his right to privacy.

In 2016, petitioner, then 24 years old, started a romantic relationship with AAA, a 14-year-old girl. AAA, using her mother's cellphone, BBB, would converse with petitioner on Facebook Messenger. In one of their conversations, petitioner coaxed AAA to send photos of her private parts, to which AAA relented. BBB later discovered this conversation when AAA forgot to log out of her Facebook account on her mother's phone, prompting AAA to delete the messages on her account. However, BBB forced AAA to open the petitioner's Facebook messenger account to get a copy of their conversation.

The Court held that because the Bill of Rights under the Constitution, which includes the right to privacy, was intended to protect citizens from government intrusions, the right to privacy and its consequent effects on the rules on admissibility of evidence cannot be invoked against private individuals.

In the case of petitioner, the Facebook Messenger chat thread was not obtained through the efforts of police officers or any State agent but by AAA, a private individual who had access to the photos and conversations in the chat thread.

Neither can AAA be said to have violated the petitioner's privacy, ruled the Court, since by giving AAA the password to his Facebook Messenger account, the petitioner lost a reasonable expectation of privacy over the contents of his account. Thus, even if AAA was only forced by her mother to obtain the photos and messages, there is still no violation of the petitioner's privacy, since by allowing another person access to his account, the petitioner made its contents available not only to AAA but to other persons AAA might show the account to, whether she be forced or not to do so.

The Court also held that the restrictions under the Data Privacy Act (DPA) do not apply to petitioner since the DPA allows the processing of personal information related to the determination of criminal liability of a data subject.

The Court also ruled that the crime of child po*******hy, while defined and penalized under a special law, should be classified as mala in se, or acts that are inherently immoral and thus require proof of criminal intent by the accused, as opposed to mala prohibita, or those acts which are prohibited only because the law says so, making the intent of the accused irrelevant. The Court held that consistent with legislative deliberations on the Anti-Child Po*******hy Act, it is clear that the illegal acts under the law are not mere prohibitions but serious, depraved acts.

Thus, in cases of child po*******hy, the criminal intent of the accused must be proven. In the petitioner's case, it was established that he had intended to induce AAA, a minor, to exhibit AAA's private parts, since it was petitioner's prodding that led AAA to take and share the intimate photos.

Read the full text of the decision at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/27967//.

"Under Republic Act 10642 or the Philippine Lemon Law, a brand new car may be replaced if the dealer fails to address complaints at least four times in a year."

https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1176522?fbclid=IwAR05HeN27mXgSoZWrWYMsuF0-ABTVRPVAuX8h5G-nrUXo5Fe1beXiztnu9g

DTI scores win for buyer of defective vehicle MANILA – A local vehicle dealer must replace a defective car, at no cost to the buyer, following a Court of Appeals (CA) ruling.Chevrolet Carmona in Cavite lost its appeal to overturn the CA's July 22, 2021 decision that upheld the Department of Trade of Industry (DTI) ruling on a...

Please take note po mga kabayan.

The chewing of Moma has a cultural attachment in the lives of the Baguio people. On the contrary, the City Ordinance no. 35 series of 2020, better known as the Anti-Moma Ordinance, regulates the chewing and spitting of Moma in public places in the city.

It is advisable to use a container or a spittoon for sanitation purposes and dispose of this appropriately.

In general, the ordinance aims to teach Moma chewers to be responsible.

Check the infographic to know more about the law.

From the BENGUET SANGGUNIANG PANLALAWIGAN:

ALL Drivers and Riders of MOTORCYCLE, E-BIKE and BICYCLE.

PROVINCIAL Ordinance No. 2022-302 requiring the use of HIGH VISIBILITY VESTS (with penalties) when traversing/travelling within Benguet.

NB: Effective May 23, 2022, per Benguet Sangguniang Panlalawigan

Carpio and Alawas Law Office updated their business hours.

Baguio City Ordinances on the prohibition of the slaughtering of animals; and on the taxation of slaughtering for sale.

Comments on the ordinances are being collected by the Sangguniang Panglungsod of Baguio.

𝗪𝗛𝗔𝗧 𝗔𝗥𝗘 𝗬𝗢𝗨𝗥 𝗧𝗛𝗢𝗨𝗚𝗛𝗧𝗦 𝗢𝗡 𝗧𝗛𝗜𝗦 𝗢𝗥𝗗𝗜𝗡𝗔𝗡𝗖𝗘?
NOTE: This is an antiquated ordinance enacted in 1947 and has not been amended nor repealed since then. Comments will be consolidated and submitted to the members of the Baguio City Council for information and appropriate action.

Under Section 2 of Ordinance 38-1947, it is unlawful for any person, firm, entity, or corporation in the city to slaughter any four-footed animal for food or for sale, or allow the same or cause such animal to be slaughtered, except in the city abattoir/slaughterhouse. Provided that, upon recommendation of the city veterinarian duly approved by the mayor, suckling (young) pigs, lambs, goats, or any tiny animal the weight of which is less than 15 kilos may be slaughtered outside of the abattoir for personal use, not for sale.

Article III Section 3 of Tax Ordinance 2012-01 (SLAUGHTERHOUSE OPERATION) states that “all food animals such as cattle, carabao, swine, sheep, and goat intended for human consumption and for sale shall be slaughtered in the city abattoir/slaughterhouse” with a corresponding fee.

cattle/carabao - P200.00 per head
swine - P100.00 per head
goat/sheep - P100.00 per head

Higher premium contributions for PhilHealth ahead.

PhilHealth Advisory No. 2022-0010
CY 2022 Premium Contribution
Schedule for All Direct Contributors
https://www.philhealth.gov.ph/advisories/2022/