Practice question
Under Crespo, may presentation be entrusted to a private prosecutor while the public prosecutor retains direction and control? Assume no applicable court-approved written authorization allowing a private prosecutor to proceed without the public prosecutor under amended Rule 110, Section 5.
- No, private counsel can never participate.
- Yes, under the stated continuing public direction and control.
- Yes, but public control must disappear.
- Yes, private counsel thereby becomes the judge.
- Yes, the accused must select private prosecution counsel.
Legal references
- Crespo v. Mogul, G.R. No. L-53373, June 30, 1987, main decision, prosecutor duties following denial of withdrawal: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1987/jun1987/gr_l-53373_1987.html
- A.M. No. 02-2-07-SC, April 10, 2002, amending Rule 110, Section 5 effective May 1, 2002, court-approved written authority for private prosecution in absence of public prosecutor: https://chief.lawphil.net/courts/supreme/am/am_02-2-07-sc_2002.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.