Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Gov. - of - The - USA - Vs - Purganan
Gov. - of - The - USA - Vs - Purganan
Of USA vs Purganan
Facts:
The petition at bar seeking to void and set aside the Orders issued by the
Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila, Branch 42. The first assailed Order set
for hearing petitioner’s application for the issuance of a warrant for the arrest
of Respondent Mark B. Jimenez.
Issue/s:
Discussions:
Ruling/s:
No. The court agree with petitioner. As suggested by the use of the word
“conviction,” the constitutional provision on bail quoted above, as well as
Section 4 of Rule 114 of the Rules of Court, applies only when a person has
been arrested and detained for violation of Philippine criminal laws. It does
not apply to extradition proceedings, because extradition courts do not render
judgments of conviction or acquittal.
It is also worth noting that before the US government requested the extradition
of respondent, proceedings had already been conducted in that country.
But because he left the jurisdiction of the requesting state before those
proceedings could be completed, it was hindered from continuing with the due
processes prescribed under its laws. His invocation of due process now has
thus become hollow. He already had that opportunity in the requesting state;
yet, instead of taking it, he ran away.