Practice question
The prosecution proves criminal guilt beyond reasonable doubt but offers no competent basis for computing the corresponding unpaid taxes. It asks the court to invent a tax amount because guilt was established. Under Mendez, what is required?
- A tax amount may always be guessed
- The prosecutor may personally retain any amount selected
- Criminal guilt automatically proves every possible tax figure
- The accused must prove the government’s computation for it
- Civil tax liability must be established by competent evidence; proof of guilt does not authorize an invented amount
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2004/ra_9282_2004.html — RA 9282, section 7 amending RA 1125 section 7
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2008/ra_9503_2008.html — RA 9503, CTA organization amendments
- https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/69095 — People v. Mendez, G.R. Nos. 208310-11 and 208662, March 28, 2023, main opinion
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1980/may1980/gr_41919_24_1980.html — Ungab v. Cusi, G.R. Nos. L-41919-24, May 30, 1980
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2023/nov2023/gr_264192_2023.html — People v. Tiotangco, G.R. No. 264192, November 13, 2023
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.