Bustos vs. Lucero

USA College of Law
LIM, SL
Section C
Case Name BUSTOS vs. LUCERO

Topic Introduction
Case No. |
G.R. No. L-2068 |October 20, 1948
Date
Ponente TUASON, J.
https://chanrobles.com/scdecisions/jurisprudence1948/oct1948/gr_l-
Link 2068_1948.php
RELEVANT FACTS:
The petitioner in this case, Bustos, an accused in a criminal case, appeared at the preliminary
investigation of the Justice of the Peace Court in Masantol. When the petitioner was asked for his
plea by the Justice of the Peace, and after the petitioner pleaded not guilty to the charges, the
counsel for the accused moved that the complainant present their evidence so that the
complainant and her witnesses may be examined and cross-examined.
This was objected to by the fiscal and the private prosecutor, invoking Section 11 of Rule 108, the
justice of the peace sustained such motion, subsequently to that the aforementioned counsel for
the accused waived his own presentation of evidence, thus the Justice forwarded the case to the
Court of First Instance in Pampanga.
In the CFI, the petitioner filed a motion requesting that the case be remanded back to the Justice
of the Peace in order that the petitioner might cross-examine the complainant and her witnesses
in connection with their testimony, on the strength of which warrant was issued for the arrest of
the accused.
The motion was denied and that denial is the subject matter of this proceeding.
ISSUE: Whether Section 11, Rule 108 impairs substantive rights thereby violating the
constitutional limitation on the rule-making power of the Court?
RULING:
No.
The Supreme Court ruled that the rule in question in this specific instance is an adjective law
and not a substantive one that subsequently creates substantive rights.
They iterated that Preliminary Investigation is eminently and essentially remedial; it is the first
step taken in a criminal prosecution. Therefore under that understanding the SC clarified that it
is not an essential part of the due process of law stating that:
“ It may be suppressed entirely, and thus, mere restriction of the privilege formerly enjoyed
thereunder cannot be held to fall within the constitutional prohibition. In the latter stage of the
proceedings, the only stage where the guarantee of due process comes into play, he still enjoys
to the full extent the right to be confronted by and to cross-examine the witnesses against him.”
The SC further stated that as a rule of Evidence the aforementioned Rule is procedural they
cannot tear down that rule via Constitutional grounds without throwing out the whole Code of
Evidence and such the distinction between “remedy” and “substantive right” is incapable of
exact definition. This being so, it is inevitable that the SC in making rules should step on
substantive rights, and the Constitution must be presumed to tolerate, if not to expect, such
incursion as does not affect the accused in a harsh and arbitrary manner or deprive him of a
defense, but operates only in a limited and unsubstantial manner to his disadvantage.
RULING
Upon the foregoing considerations, the present petition is dismissed with costs against the
petitioner.
SO ORDERED.
SEPARATE OPINIONS
NOTES
¹ Substantive law and adjective law, distinguished. – Substantive law creates, defines and
regulates rights, or that which regulates the rights and duties which give rise to a cause of action.
Adjective or remedial law prescribes the method of enforcing rights or obtains redress for their
invasion. As applied to criminal law, substantive law is that which declares what acts are crimes
and prescribes the punishment for committing them, as distinguished from the procedural law
which provides or regulates the steps by which one who commits a crime is to be punished .
² Evidence—the mode and manner of proving the competent facts and circumstances on which a
party relies to establish the fact in dispute in judicial proceedings. It is identified with and forms
part of the method by which, in private law, rights are enforced and redress obtained, and, in
criminal law, a law transgressor is punished. (Criminal procedure refers to pleading, evidence and
practice.)

Bustos vs. Lucero

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bustos vs. Lucero

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

USA College of Law

Case Name BUSTOS vs. LUCERO

You might also like