Practice question
A case is pending when an effective procedural amendment changes the evidentiary treatment of duplicates. The amendment does not alter the offense's elements or create a new substantive liability. No genuine authenticity issue, injustice, transition exclusion or other applicable obstacle is established. A party argues that using the amended procedure is necessarily forbidden retroactivity because the events occurred earlier. Which approach follows Lastimosa?
- Every evidentiary amendment is an ex post facto law
- Every duplicate must always be rejected
- The court should examine the procedural character and recognized exceptions; earlier events alone do not categorically prohibit application
- The court must automatically convict because the rule changed
- Private disagreement repeals the amendment
Legal references
- Civil Code Articles3–5,7,1334 and1409–1410: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1949/ra_386_1949.html
- People v. Lastimosa, GR265758, February3 2025, main decision: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2025/feb2025/gr_265758_2025.html
- Nedira v. NJ World, GR240005, December6 2022, main decision: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2022/dec2022/gr_240005_2022.html
- 1987 Constitution, ArticleIII Sections1 and10: https://lawphil.net/consti/cons1987.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.