Exam (elaborations)
Consti 2 cases (ex post facto laws, citizenship) questions and answers 2025.
- Course
- Institution
Consti 2 cases (ex post facto laws, citizenship) questions and answers 2025.
[Show more]
Content preview
Consti 2 cases (expost facto laws,
citizenship) questions
and answers 2025
Carmell v Texas - answer In Carmell v. Texas, the defendant was convicted
on 15 counts of sexual offenses against his stepdaughter between 1991
and 1995 when she was between 12 and 16 years old. The Texas sexual
offense statute specifies that a victim's testimony about a sexual offense
cannot support a conviction unless it is corroborated by other evidence or
the victim informed another person of the offense within six months of its
occurrence. But the victim's testimony alone can support a verdict if the
victim was under a certain age at the time of the offense. In 1993,
legislation increased this age limit from 14 to 18.
On four counts, the defendant's conviction depended on which version of
the law applied because (1) the incidents occurred before the law changed
on September 1, 1993 and (2) the only evidence produced was the
testimony of the victim who was 14 or 15 years old at the time of the
incidents.
The U.S. Supreme Court considered whether applying the amended
statute to these counts violated the ex post facto clause of the U.S.
Constitution (Art. 1, §§ 9, 10). The clause generally prohibits a law passed
after an act occurs from retroactively changing the legal consequences of
that act. In a five to four decision, the Court ruled that applying the
amended Texas statute retroactively violated the ex post facto clause
because the statute is a sufficiency of the evidence rule that reduced the
amount of evidence required to convict the person (No. 98-7540 (May 1,
2000)).
The dissent argued that the statute was a witness competency rule that
could apply retroactively based on the Court's precedents and did not
,conflict with the fundamental purposes of the ex post facto clause of
preventing unfairness and vindictive legislation.
Calder v Bull - answer "1st. Every law that makes an action done before
the passing of the law, and which was innocent when done, criminal; and
punishes such action.
2d. Every law that aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it was,
when committed.
3d. Every law that changes the punishment, and inflicts a greater
punishment, than the law annexed to the crime, when committed.
4th. Every law that alters the legal rules of evidence, and receives less, or
different, testimony, than the law required at the time of the commission
of the offence, in order to convict the offender."
---
1. make the act criminal and punish it,
2. aggravate the crime or make it greater than it was when the act was
committed,
3. change the punishment and inflict greater punishment than the law
required when the act was committed, or
4. alter the legal rules of evidence to receive less or different testimony to
convict the offender than the law required at the time of the offense.
Katigbak v SolGen - answer Assailed law is RA 1379, " "An Act Declaring
Forfeiture in Favor of the State of Any Property Found To Have Been
Unlawfully Acquired by Any Public Officer or Employee and Providing for
the Proceedings Therefor" - Alleges that the said law is an ex-post facto
law that a. authorizes the confiscation of private property acquired prior
to the approval of the law and obliges the public official or employee to
explain how he acquired his private property thereby compelling himself
, to incriminate himself, and to a certain extent authorizes the confiscation
of said property without due process of law b. And authorizes the
confiscation of property previously mortgaged in good faith to a person. -
There were actions that led to the proceedings: 1. Instituted by spouses
Katigbak praying: o that the Solicitor General be enjoined from filing a
complaint against them for forfeiture of property under RA 1379 o that the
above law be declared unconstitutional as it authorizes forfeiture of
properties acquired before its approval o that the properties acquired by
Alejandro Katigbak when he was out of the government service be
excluded from forfeiture proceedings o NBI officers and Investigating
Prosecutor be sentenced to pay damages.
2. RP v Katigbak
Sentenced the forfeiture in favor of the State of the properties of Katigbak
allegedly gotten by him illegally
o
Said properties were allegedly acquired while Katigbak was holding
various positions in the government, the last being that of an examiner of
the Bureau of Customs -
Cases were jointly tried -
Trial court held that R.A. No. 1379 is not penal in nature, its objective not
being the enforcement of a penal liability but the recovery of property
held under an implied trust; that with respect to things acquired through
delicts, prescription does not run in favor of the offender;
Salvador v Mapa Jr. - answer Facts:
On or about August 13, 1962, Mario Mapa was apprehended due to
possession of an unlicensed firearm. The defendant admitted before the
trial court that he was carrying the unlicensed firearm and that he does
not have a permit to carry such a weapon. In his defense, he said that he
is a secret agent of the Governor of Batangas and that he is exempt from
the requirement of securing a license of firearm. The defendant also
showed a certification that he was appointed as such.
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller BRAINBOOSTERS. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $13.99. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
73216 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now