Preview

criminal procedure (courts jurisdiction)

Satisfactory Essays
Open Document
Open Document
928 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
criminal procedure (courts jurisdiction)
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

Jurisdiction
Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
Sandiganbayan
RTC
MeTC, MTC, MCTC
Original – Concurrent
Exercise original jurisdiction over cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls.

Exercise original jurisdiction over petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, and habeas corpus

It shall exercise exclusive original jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, habeas corpus, and quo warranto, and auxiliary writs and processes, whether or not in aid of its appellate jurisdiction.

Its power over petitions for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus extends to courts or quasi-judicial agencies, boards, instrumentalities, or commissions over which it has exclusive appellate jurisdiction and all other courts and quasi-judicial agencies, not falling under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

Under EO 1,2,14, and 14-A (RA 7975 Sec. 2, RA 8249), the Marcos ill-gotten wealth cases, the Sandiganbayan has concurrent original jurisdiction with the Supreme Court in the:
1. special civil actions of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, and quo warranto,
2. the special proceeding of habeas corpus, and
3. provisional remedies of injunction and ancillary writs in aid of its appellate jurisdiction.

In the issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, habeas corpus and injunction which may be enforced in any part of their respective regions.

In actions affecting ambassadors and other public ministers and consuls

Original – Exclusive
Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, and habeas corpus against court of appeals and sandiganbayan.
Actions for annulment of judgment of the RTCs.
1. Violation of RA 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices), RA 1379 (unlawfully acquired property), and the Revised Penal Code (Book II, Title VII, Chapter II, Section 2), and,

2. Other offenses committed by public employees (and

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    Gbl395 Exam1 Review Sheet

    • 1123 Words
    • 5 Pages

    GBL 395 EXAM #1 -­‐ TOPICS Jurisdiction -­‐Power, authority • Impersonal: on person • In rem: on property -­‐Basically establish the current USA, the central gov. -­‐Majority of power belongs to states; empower national gov. with certain authority Federal Court System -­‐Administers cases under the federal laws. -­‐Separate court systems to : •…

    • 1123 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Jurisdiction refers to a court’s authority and right to speak the law or render a decision in a legal dispute. According to The legal environment of business: A managerial approach: Theory to practice, jurisdiction can be described as, is a court’s authority to decide a particular case based on (1) who the parties are, and (2) the subject matter of the dispute” (Melvin, 2012, p.58).…

    • 1577 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In New Jersey, “Prior to the adoption of the 1947 Constitution, ‘persons aggrieved by action or inaction of … administrative agencies could seek judicial relief by applying for one of the prerogative writs – certiorari, mandamus, quo warranto and prohibition.” Jeffery S. Mandel, New Jersey Appellate Practice 141 (GANN, 2008). However, such writs were abolished by the 1947 Constitution in an attempt to simplify the procedure with regard to prerogative writs. Id. at 142. At that time, prerogative writs were superseded and consolidated into one action, now called actions “in lieu of prerogative writs.” Id.; 19 N.J. Prac., Skills And Methods § 4:1, § 4:2 (Rev. 3d ed.).…

    • 1272 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The authority of a court to hear and decide cases is called the jurisdiction. When a case is first brought to court is the authority of the original jurisdiction. When there is an error of law and the courts need to review the case, they will go to the appellate jurisdiction. When the court has the power to hear any case, this is called general jurisdiction. Special jurisdiction is where the court has the authority to hear exceptional circumstances. A particular…

    • 272 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Article III, Section 2, paragraph one says that the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction only in cases affecting ambassadors, public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall party. However, in all other…

    • 388 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    One of the most essential inquiries of law is whether a particular court has authority to preside over a given case. The jurisdictional question may be broken down into three components: is jurisdiction over the person, is jurisdiction over the subject matter, and is jurisdiction to render the particular judgment sought. Then there is different courts that have jurisdiction depending on the case. State courts have general jurisdiction, meaning that they can hear any controversy except those prohibited by their specific state laws.…

    • 1497 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    | When the U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear a case, it issues a writ of________.Answer…

    • 523 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Judicial Act of 1789 gave Congress the act of granting the Supreme Court the right to issue writs of mandamus. Article III of the Constitution grants the Supreme Court the authority to review acts of Congress to validate whether they are unconstitutional or not and therefore void. Article III of the Constitution also states "the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction in all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be a party. In all other cases, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction." The Supreme Court held that they had the authority to review acts of Congress and determine whether or not they were constitutional and void those that were not, but that Congress did not have the right to expand the scope of the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction beyond what was specified in the Constitution. The Supreme Court also held that the Judiciary Act of 1789 was unconstitutional and therefore void.…

    • 981 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Habeas Corpus Research Paper

    • 2303 Words
    • 10 Pages

    The general meaning of the right of habeas corpus in the U.S. Constitution and its relationship to the protection of other civil liberties. The historical evolution of habeas corpus, including its English…

    • 2303 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Cjad

    • 624 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The Supreme Court noted that it possesses supervisory authority over the federal courts to prescribe binding rules of evidence and procedure. It emphasized that while Congress has ultimate authority to modify or set aside any such rules that are not constitutionally required or of constitutional…

    • 624 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Presidents tend to choose judges from their own political party because judges may serve for…

    • 250 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    In this paper, I have explained where the Act of Habeas Corpus came from and how it originated along with a few examples of such. I also explained how the president and congress view and use the act during the war on…

    • 915 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    indicates if if the four justice believe that case she be heard then, a writ of certiorari would be…

    • 661 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The Right of Habeas Corpus is derived from the Latin meaning “you have the body.” The meaning according to the U.S. Constitution is the right of any person to question their incarceration before a judge. The detainees of war are entitled to habeas corpus because the authorized use of military force does not activate the Suspension Clause, holding them indefinitely is a violation of the Due Process Clause, and it is undetermined whether the detainees are prisoners of war or citizens suspected of treason. As citizens of the United States we must consider if it is legal for the…

    • 1987 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    State 6. Local Treaties – only STATE can produce 4. Case Law/Precedent/STARE DECISIS 5. Executive Orders 6. Administrative Rates & Regulations 7.…

    • 18216 Words
    • 73 Pages
    Powerful Essays