This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2011-03-16 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| Applying Declarador v. Gubaton,[153] which was promulgated on 18 August 2006, the Court of Appeals held that, consistent with Article 192 of Presidential Decree No. 603, as amended,[154] the aforestated provision does not apply to one who has been convicted of an offense punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment.[155] | |||||
|
2009-07-03 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| (3) Whether or not the CA erred in applying the ruling in Declarador v. Hon. Gubaton[13] thereby denying the petitioner the benefit of exemption from criminal liability under R.A. No. 9344. The threshold issue in this case is the determination of who bears the burden of proof for purposes of determining exemption from criminal liability based on the age of the petitioner at the time the crime was committed. | |||||
|
2008-08-20 |
NACHURA, J. |
||||
| However, Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9344,[37] or the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006, was enacted into law on April 28, 2006 and it took effect on May 20, 2006.[38] The law establishes a comprehensive system to manage children in conflict with the law[39] (CICL) and children at risk[40] with child-appropriate procedures and comprehensive programs and services such as prevention, intervention, diversion, rehabilitation, re-integration and after-care programs geared towards their development. In order to ensure its implementation, the law, particularly Section 8[41] thereof, has created the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council (JJWC) and vested it with certain duties and functions[42] such as the formulation of policies and strategies to prevent juvenile delinquency and to enhance the administration of juvenile justice as well as the treatment and rehabilitation of the CICL. The law also provides for the immediate dismissal of cases of CICL, specifically Sections 64, 65, 66, 67 and 68 of R.A. No. 9344's Transitory Provisions.[43] | |||||