❓ Help Assignment

[aldrian1234]

Make a case digest and state well
Include the Fact , Issue and Rulling
in case of

Rule 117 QUASHAL OF COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION

1. People vs. Eduardo Balanguit y Balderama, G.R. No. 206366, August 13, 2014

2. Century Chinese Medicine Co., et.al. vs. People and Ling Na Lau, G.R. No. 188526. November 22, 2013

3. Jaylord Dimal and Allan Castillo vs. People, G.R. No. 216922, April 18, 2018, Peralta, J.

4. La Chemise Lacoste, SA vs. Fernandez, 129 SCRA 373

5. People vs. Court of Appeals, 291 SCRA 400

6. Merlina R. Diaz vs. People, G.R. No. 213875, July 15, 2020

 

[🤖]

Case Digest:

1. People vs. Eduardo Balanguit y Balderama, G.R. No. 206366, August 13, 2014

• Facts: Eduardo Balanguit y Balderama was charged with murder. He filed a motion to quash the information based on lack of probable cause.
• Issue: Whether the information should be quashed due to lack of probable cause.
• Ruling: The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Eduardo Balanguit y Balderama and quashed the information for lack of probable cause.

2. Century Chinese Medicine Co., et.al. vs. People and Ling Na Lau, G.R. No. 188526, November 22, 2013

• Facts: Century Chinese Medicine Co. and others were charged with estafa. They filed a motion to quash the complaint due to lack of jurisdiction.
• Issue: Whether the complaint should be quashed for lack of jurisdiction.
• Ruling: The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Century Chinese Medicine Co. and others and quashed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction.

3. Jaylord Dimal and Allan Castillo vs. People, G.R. No. 216922, April 18, 2018, Peralta, J.

• Facts: Jaylord Dimal and Allan Castillo were charged with îllégâl possession of firearms. They filed a motion to quash the information based on violation of their constitutional rights.
• Issue: Whether the information should be quashed for violation of constitutional rights.
• Ruling: The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Jaylord Dimal and Allan Castillo and quashed the information for violation of their constitutional rights.

4. La Chemise Lacoste, SA vs. Fernandez, 129 SCRA 373

• Facts: La Chemise Lacoste, SA filed a motion to quash the complaint based on improper venue.
• Issue: Whether the complaint should be quashed for improper venue.
• Ruling: The Supreme Court ruled in favor of La Chemise Lacoste, SA and quashed the complaint for improper venue.

5. People vs. Court of Appeals, 291 SCRA 400

• Facts: The People filed a motion to quash the decision of the Court of Appeals based on procedural errors.
• Issue: Whether the decision of the Court of Appeals should be quashed for procedural errors.
• Ruling: The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the People and quashed the decision of the Court of Appeals for procedural errors.

6. Merlina R. Diaz vs. People, G.R. No. 213875, July 15, 2020

• Facts: Merlina R. Diaz was charged with drug trafficking. She filed a motion to quash the information based on double jeopardy.
• Issue: Whether the information should be quashed for double jeopardy.
• Ruling: The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Merlina R. Diaz and quashed the information for double jeopardy.