Violations of the corporation's intellectual property
rights case: Read the case decided by the Supreme
Court: Petron Corporation and People of the Philippines Vs. William, Sr., et al. G.R. No. 243328. March 18, 2021
While generally an accused cannot be convicted of
an offense that is not clearly charged in the complaint or information, this rule is not without exception. The right to assail the sufficiency of the information or the admission of evidence may be waived by the accused-appellant. In People v. Lopez, 432 Phil. 500 (2002), we held that an information which lacks certain essential allegations may still sustain a conviction when the accused fails to object to its sufficiency during the trial, and the deficiency was cured by competent evidence presented therein. Thus failure to object was thus a waiver of the constitutional right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation. It is competent for a person to waive a right guaranteed by the Constitution, and to consent to action which would be invalid if taken against his will. This Court has, on more than one occasion, recognized waivers of constitutional rights, e.g., the right against unreasonable searches and seizures; the right to counsel and to remain silent; the right to be heard; and the right to bail (Id. at 509).
Conspiracy is not the product of
negligence but of intentionality on the part of cohorts. [Magsuci v. Sandiganbayan, 240 SCRA18] A home is not just property; it is a sanctuary, a realized dream. If for justifiable causes it must be seized, courts must ensure that the same is in accordance with law and upon observance of the requisites of due process. [Justice Zalameda in Spouses Wilfredo and Dominica Rosario vs. GSIS, G.R. No. 200991, March 18, 2021]