Practice question
After conviction for injuries, a genuinely graver offense develops from supervening facts arising from the same act. Does section 7 invariably bar prosecution for that graver necessarily inclusive offense?
- Yes, no exception exists.
- Yes, even if the Rule expressly provides otherwise.
- No; section 7 states an exception for the graver offense developing through such supervening facts, with credit for the judgment already satisfied or served as provided.
- No; every later charge for any unrelated act is automatically proved.
- Yes, unless the accused requests harsher punishment.
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/rc_110-127_crim.html — Rule 117 section 7: prior jeopardy, included offenses and specified graver-offense exceptions.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2026/feb2026/gr_259277_2026.html — Bakal v. People, G.R. 259277, 2026 main opinion: finality of acquittal and strict jurisdictional standard for Rule 65 review.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.