This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2005-08-09 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| Likewise, every judge should know by heart that in indictments for capital offenses like syndicated estafa, bail shall not be granted when the evidence of guilt is strong.[8] Though the determination of whether or not the evidence of guilt is strong is a matter of judicial discretion, this discretion lies not in the determination of whether or not a hearing should be held, but in the appreciation and evaluation of the weight of the prosecution's evidence of guilt against the accused. A hearing is absolutely necessary and indispensable because the judge may rightly exercise this discretion only after the evidence is submitted to the court at the hearing.[9] The prosecution must be given an opportunity to present, within a reasonable time, all the evidence necessary for its opposition to the grant of bail.[10] Evidence of guilt must be submitted to the court, the petitioner having the right of cross-examination and to introduce his own evidence in rebuttal, because the discretion is directed to the weight of the evidence.[11] In turn, evidence cannot properly be weighed if not duly exhibited or produced before the court.[12] | |||||