People vs Vera Case Digest
Mario Cu-Unjieng was convicted in a criminal case. He applied for PROBATION under the provisions of ACT # 4221. He insists that he is innocent of the crime for which he has been convicted and that he has no prior criminal record and he would observe good conduct in the future.
The matter was referred to the Insular Probation Office, but the Office DENIED THE PROBATION. Nevertheless, Judge Vera heard the petition. The City Fiscal obviously opposed the grant of probation.
Facts
Petitioners challenged the provisions of the Probation Act (Act No. 4221) saying that the said Act is unconstitutional as it is an invalid delegation of legislative powers to provincial boards.
The challenged provision thereof reads, “This act shall apply ONLY in those provinces in which the respective provincial boards have provided for the salary of a probation officer at rates not lower than those now provided for provincial fiscals.”.
RELATED
Issue
Whether or not the Probation Act constitutes an invalid delegation of legislative powers.
Ruling
Yes.
The effectivity of the Act was made to depend upon an act to be done by the provincial boards, that is, the appropriating of funds for the salary of the probation officer.
But the act does not fix and impose upon the provincial boards any standard or guide in the exercise of this discretionary power. What is granted is a roving commission.
LAW INVALID. UNDUE DELEGATION.
Act No. 4221 is hereby declared unconstitutional and void and the writ of prohibition is, accordingly, granted. Without any pronouncement regarding costs. So ordered.
People vs Vera Case Digest
