digests law and tech.docx

7/29/2019 digests law and tech.docx

1/8

Virgilio Garcillano v House of Representatives

Facts:

The Hello Garci tapes or wiretapped conversation or purportedly between the

then President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and a high-ranking official of

(COMELEC) surfaced. It allegedly contained the Presidents instructions to

COMELEC Commissioner Virgilio Garcillano to manipulate in her favor results of

the 2004 presidential elections. These recordings were to become the subject of

heated legislative hearings conducted separately by committees of both Houses of

Congress.

Petitions were filed pertaining to the tapes. The first (filed by Garciallano)

is poised at preventing the playing of the tapes in the House and their subsequent

inclusion in the committee reports, and the second seeks to prohibit and stop the

conduct of the Senate inquiry on the wiretapped conversation.

Issue: Whether the publication of rules on the Senates website can be used for the purpose of

legislative inquiry .

No. The first petition is dismissed for being moot and academic since the

recordings were already played in the House and heard by its members. As regards

the second petition, the court ruled that the Senate cannot be allowed to continue

with the conduct of the questioned legislative inquiry without duly published rules


2/8

of procedure, in clear derogation of the constitutional requirement. Respondents

justify their non-observance of the constitutionally mandated publication by

arguing that the rules have never been amended since 1995 and, despite that, they

are published in booklet form available to anyone for free, and accessible to the

public at the Senates internet web page.\

The absence of any amendment to the rules cannot justify the Senates

defiance of the clear and unambiguous language of Section 21, Article VI of the

Constitution. The organic law instructs, without more, that the Senate or its

committees may conduct inquiries in aid of legislation only in accordance with

duly published rules of procedure, and does not make any distinction whether or

not these rules have undergone amendments or revision . The constitutional

mandate to publish the said rules prevails over any custom, practice or tradition

followed by the Senate.

The invocation by the respondents of the provisions of R.A. No. 8792,

otherwise known as the Electronic Commerce Act of 2000, to support their claim

of valid publication through the internet is all the more incorrect. R.A. 8792

considers an electronic data message or an electronic document as the functional

equivalent of a written document only for evidentiary purposes. In other words, the

law merely recognizes the admissibility in evidence (for their being the original) of

electronic data messages and/or electronic documents.

It does not make the

internet a medium for publishing laws, rules and regulations.

Given this discussion, the respondent Senate Committees, therefore, could

not, in violation of the Constitution, use its unpublished rules in the legislative

inquiry subject of these consolidated cases. The conduct of inquiries in aid of


3/8

legislation by the Senate has to be deferred until it shall have caused the

publication of the rules, because it can do so only in accordance with its duly

published rules of procedure.

Diamond v Diehr

The patent application involves an a process for molding raw, uncured synthetic rubber into curedprecision products. The process uses a mold for precisely shaping the uncured material under heat and

pressure and then curing the synthetic rubber in the mold so that the product will retain its shape and befunctionally operative after the molding is completed.

Respondents claim that their process ensures the production of molded articles which are properly cured.Achieving the perfect cure depends upon several factors including the thickness of the article to bemolded, the temperature of the molding process, and the amount of time that the article is allowed toremain in the press. It is possible using well-known time, temperature, and cure relationships to calculate

by means of the Arrhenius equationwhen to open the press and remove the cured product.

Respondents claimed the continuous measuring of the temperature inside the mold cavity, the feeding of

this information to a digital computer which constantly recalculates the cure time, and the signaling by

the computer to open the press, are all new in the art.

Diamond rejected the application on the ground that they were drawn to nonstatutory subject matterunder 35 U.S.C. 101, which provides for the issuance of patents to "[w]hoever invents or discovers any

new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful

improvement thereof . . . ." He determined that those steps in respondents' claims that are carried out by a

computer under control of a stored program constituted nonstatutory subject matter under this Court's

decision in Gottschalk v. Benson. The remaining steps - installing rubber in the press and the subsequent

closing of the [450 U.S. 175, 181] press - were "conventional and necessary to the process and cannot be

the basis of patentability."

Issue:Whether the a patent application if its carried out by a computer under control of stored program

constituted nonstatutory subject matter under this Court's decision

Ruling: No.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=450&invol=175#f2http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=450&invol=175#f2


4/8

the respondents here do not seek to patent a mathematical formula. Instead, they seek patent protectionfor a process of curing synthetic rubber. Their process admittedly employs a well-known mathematicalequation, but they do not seek to pre-empt the use of that equation. Rather, they seek only to foreclosefrom others the use of that equation in conjunction with all of the other steps in their claimed process.These include installing rubber in a press, closing the mold, constantly determining the temperature ofthe mold, constantly recalculating the appropriate cure time through the use of the formula and a digitalcomputer, and automatically opening the press at the proper time. Obviously, one does not need a"computer" to cure natural or synthetic rubber, but if the computer use incorporated in the process patentsignificantly lessens the possibility of "overcuring" or "undercuring," the process as a whole does notthereby become unpatentable subject matter.

Our earlier opinions lend support to our present conclusion that a claim drawn to subject matter

otherwise statutory does not become nonstatutory simply because it uses a mathematical formula,

computer program, or digital computer.

Zaldy Nuez v Elvira Cruz Apao

Facts:An administrative case for Dishonesty and Grave Misconduct against Elvira Cruz-

Apao (Respondent), Executive Assistant II of the Acting Division Clerk of Court of the

Fifteenth (15th

) Division, Court of Appeals (CA). The complaint arose out of

respondents solicitation of One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00) from Zaldy Nuez

(Complainant) in exchange for a speedy and favorable decision of the latters pending

case in the CA.

A series of messages including the details of the case and negotiation of amount to bepaid by Zaldi to Elvira was exchanged via SMS.

Issue: Whether messages via SMS may be admitted in evidence.

Ruling:

Yes. Complainant was able to prove by his testimony in conjunction with the textmessages from respondent duly presented before the Committee that the latter askedfor One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00) in exchange for a favorable decision of theformers pending case with the CA. The text messages were properly admitted by the

Committee since the same are now covered by Section 1(k), Rule 2 of the Rules onElectronic Evidence[65]which provides:

Ephemeral electronic communication refers to telephone conversations, textmessages . . . and other electronic forms of communication the evidence of which isnot recorded or retained.

Under Section 2, Rule 11 of the Rules on Electronic Evidence, Ephemeralelectronic communications shall be proven by the testimony of a person who was a
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2005/apr2005/am_ca_05_18_p.htm#_ftn65http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2005/apr2005/am_ca_05_18_p.htm#_ftn65http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2005/apr2005/am_ca_05_18_p.htm#_ftn65


5/8

party to the same or who has personal knowledge thereof . . . . In this case,complainant who was the recipient of said messages and therefore had personalknowledge thereof testified on their contents and import. Respondent herself admittedthat the cellphone number reflected in complainants cellphone from which themessages originated was hers.[66]Moreover, any doubt respondent may have had as to

the admissibility of the text messages had been laid to rest when she and her counselsigned and attested to the veracity of the text messages between her andcomplainant.[67]It is also well to remember that in administrative cases, technical rules ofprocedure and evidence are not strictly applied.[68]We have no doubt as to the probativevalue of the text messages as evidence in determining the guilt or lack thereof ofrespondent in this case.

Judge Canda v Anna Jane Lihaylihay

Two complaints for grave misconduct filed by Anna Jane D. Lihaylihay

against Judge Alejandro T. Canda Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC). One of

which is charging Judge Canda sending her threatening and indecent text

messages. The threatening text message she received saying that she would have

fair share of trouble in due time was reported to the police and Lihaylihay

requested that a blotter entry be made.

Judge Canda denied that he sent Lihaylihay indecent text messages;

described his 5 January 2006 text message as brotherly; and stated that his 6

January 2006 text message was not intimidating it only reflected the natural

reaction of an angry person.

Issue: Whether the allegation of indecent text messages established a ground for

gross misconduct.

No. The charge that Judge Canda sent Lihaylihay indecent text messages is

unsubstantiated, thus, they must be dismissed. In administrative proceedings, the

complainant has the burden of proving, by substantial evidence or such relevant
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2005/apr2005/am_ca_05_18_p.htm#_ftn66http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2005/apr2005/am_ca_05_18_p.htm#_ftn66http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2005/apr2005/am_ca_05_18_p.htm#_ftn66http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2005/apr2005/am_ca_05_18_p.htm#_ftn67http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2005/apr2005/am_ca_05_18_p.htm#_ftn67http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2005/apr2005/am_ca_05_18_p.htm#_ftn67http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2005/apr2005/am_ca_05_18_p.htm#_ftn68http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2005/apr2005/am_ca_05_18_p.htm#_ftn68http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2005/apr2005/am_ca_05_18_p.htm#_ftn68http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2005/apr2005/am_ca_05_18_p.htm#_ftn68http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2005/apr2005/am_ca_05_18_p.htm#_ftn67http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2005/apr2005/am_ca_05_18_p.htm#_ftn66


6/8

evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion,

the allegations in the complaint. The Court cannot rely on mere conjectures or

suppositions.

However, the threatening text messages were considered by the Court andbecame grounds, among other actuations, for finding the judge liable of gross

misconduct constituting violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct.

Eva Lucia Z. Geroy v Judge Calderon

Eva Lucia Z. Geroy filed a complaint for gross immorality against Judge Dan R.Calderon. She alleged that they had extra marital affairs. Attached to the complaint,

among other documents, are transcripts of respondent's text messages to her, such as:

Gud am, just saying thanks for the wonderful evening?

knock, knock hello are you still there?

I feel more 4 your comfort Tet, I felt u really nid d rest, I just can't resist it wen u're here u know.

Am in my room now thanks for a wonderful evening the songs and the towelets sleep tight,

Respondent denied the allegations and claimed that their relationship is purely platonic and professional.

While respondent insists that his relationship with complainant is purely

professional, the text messages which admittedly came from him are not of the kind an

employer would ordinarily send an employee. Try as he might, respondent's own

admissions betray his claim of innocence.


7/8

Issue: Whether the text messages sent by Judge Calderon substantiated the charges of

gross immorality against him.

Yes. While respondent insists that his relationship with complainant is purely

professional, the text messages which admittedly came from him are not of the kind an

employer would ordinarily send an employee. Complainant related in detail her

relationship with respondent and respondent could only offer general denials. Even then,

he could not completely deny some communications which transpired between him and

complainant which betrayed his claim of a purely platonic relationship. Try as he might,

respondent's own admissions betray his claim of innocence.

As the Court has held, mere denial does not overturn the relative weight and

probative value of an affirmative assertion. Denial is an inherently weak defense. To be

believed, it must be buttressed by strong evidence of non-culpability; otherwise, such

denial is purely self-serving and has no evidentiary value.

Granting arguendo that respondent's relationship with complainant never went

physical or intimate, still he cannot escape the charge of immorality, for his own

admissions show that his relationship with her was more than professional, more than

acquaintanceship, more than friendly.

Geraldine Dizon v Hiyasmin Campo

Geraldine P. Dizon filed a case against Hiyasmin L. Campo, Court Stenographer for

Immorality. She alleged that Campo was having an illicit relationship with her husband.

In one instance, the complainant received a text message from respondent that

complainants husband loves her and was willing to leave his family for her. Despite the

confrontation, Campo and the complainants husband applied for marriage license.


8/8

Respondent denied having sent text messages to complainant and she claimed to have

been misled by complainants husband that the latter was not married.

Issue: Whether the text message substantiated the charge of immorality.

Ruling: Yes. Instead of rectifying her errant ways after the wife of her paramour hadpleaded with her, she continued the illicit relationship and even abhorrently aggravatedthe situation by marrying complainants husband. Interestingly, respondent married himafter she stated in herComment that her relationship with him was purely based onfriendship. Respondent cannot feign ignorance of Arnel T. Dizons marital status for hewas then a member of the Sangguniang Bayan of Capas, Tarlac. Someone likerespondent who works in the same Municipal Hall must have known of, or at least couldhave easily verified, the status of Arnel. Even assuming that she was unaware of Arnelsmarried status when they first became acquainted with each other, she should havebeen put on guard when a woman claiming to be his wife pleaded to her to abort herillicit relationship for the sake of the couples two children.

By agreeing to marry a man during the subsistence of the latters marriage toanother person, respondent subjected both herself and her paramour to the risk ofcriminal prosecution. Also, while it appears that Arnel had courted respondent, the factremains that she entertained the advances of a married man. Respondents subsequentfiling of an action for the annulment of her marriage to Arnel does not extenuate herliability.

Documents

digests law and tech.docx