About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

90 Phil. L.J. 401 (2016-2017)
Guilty by Reasonable Doubt and Counterfactual Innocence: Asymmetrical Appeals in Philippine Double Jeopardy Law

handle is hein.journals/philplj90 and id is 417 raw text is: 

                       DOUBLE JEOPARDY LAw*

                                Paolo S. Taiase


         This paper proposes  a reexamination of the asymmetric appeals
         regime in the law on double  jeopardy in the Philippines on the
         ground that it is an economically inefficient system. It begins with
         an exposition of the historical development of the constitutional
         proscription against a second prosecution for the same offense
         along with a survey of the legal systems that apply the prohibition.
         This paper argues that the principle of double jeopardy per se does
         not require courts to bar prosecutorial appeals. It then proceeds to
         discuss the development of the principle in Philippine law to show
         that the asymmetric appeals regime vas adopted froi the United
         States without examination. After reiterating the normative cases
         for and against asymmetric appeal rights, the paper presents its
         main argument: that amidst imperfect information, there is a moral
         hazard on the part of judges to convict when there is reasonable
         doubt in order  to externalize the cost of rendering an unjust
         judgment or to preserve difficult issues on appeal. To support this,
         the paper proposes and  examines a social utility function and a
         utility function of a judge, employing game theory to illustrate the
         strategic behavior of lower court judges. The paper ends with a
         discussion of the  viability of the proposal and  calls for an
         independent examination of legal principles imported from foreign

         Cit  as Paolo S. Tamase, Gi/ty by by  easonable Do/Ibl aid Coiner/actua/ Innocence:
 ymmnifC   iPea/s in PhI// inii Dolb/e/jeopaniv Laar, 90 Pi iiiL. L.J. 401, (page cited) (2017).
          J.D., riici /aide, and valedictorian, University of the Philippincs (2016); B.S. Business
Elconomiics, nrgua cam beaidr, University of the Philippines (2012). Chair, Pil_\\IPPINi L\
j)tWR-it, Vol. 88.
         I ani indebted to Prof. Dante Gatmaytan, my supervised kgal research adviser, for
guiding ic in the research for this paper. I likewise acknowledge Dean Gerard Dulay (Duke
Univ. Ph.D. Pol. Econ. Program), Carlhs Tolentino II (C.P. School of EIconoiics M.A. Econ.
Program)., Jennifer Castro (Vol. 88), and J rorhn Glenn \Agbavani (Vol. 89), who reviewed and
criticized the initial drafts. Notwvithstanding their help and input, any shortcomings in this
work are solely mine.


What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing nearly 3,000 academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.

Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline with pricing starting as low as $29.95

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most