8/10/2019 Yapdiangco v Buencamino-2
1/1
Yapdiangco v. Buencamino (122 SCRA 713)
FACTS:
On February 1, 1965, the fiscal filed information for slight
physical injuries allegedly
committed by the petitioner on December 2, 1964. Since the
information was filed afterthe prescribed 60-day period, petitioner
moved to quash the criminal prosecution on the
ground of prescription. Respondent contended that it was filed
within the prescriptive
period since the last day fell on a Sunday or legal Holiday,
therefore, should not be
counted.
ISSUE:
Whether period of prescription is interrupted by Sundays or
Legal Holidays.
HELD:
No. A Sunday or legal holiday does not interrupt nor stop the
running of the prescriptive
period as a matter of statutory articulation. According to
Article 91, the only exception is
the offenders physical absence and no other cause can be
sufficient to interrupt
prescription.
The Court ruled that Where the sixtieth and last day to file
information falls on a
Sunday or legal holiday, the sixty-day period cannot be extended
up to the next working
day. Prescription has automatically set in. The fiscal cannot
file the information
on the next following working day as it would tantamount to
extending the prescriptive
period fixed by law.
Therefore, the motion to quash the criminal prosecution was
granted on the valid
ground of prescription.
![#2 & ) 0 # %%#$' % $2 - icamanzioranuccialfieri.it · ³,pshjqr h 5hvsrqvdelolwj shu xqd 6fxrod &rpxqlwj´ #!# \^ #!# \ ] \2 + v ) +v\0%+#$+ #2 & ) 0 # %%#$' % $2 '+, ] _\ \ v \ ]](https://img.pdfslide.tips/doc/110x75/6046025af5b6a4392651b5d7/2-0-2-ica-pshjqr-h-5hvsrqvdelolwj-shu-xqd-6fxrod-rpxqlwj.jpg)
![CHARAKTERYSTYKI STAŁOPRĄDOWE … · dsp =β p V in −V DD −V tp] 2 [( ) 2 1 2 out dsn n in tn out V I =βV −V V](https://img.pdfslide.tips/doc/110x75/5b96032409d3f2d7438d1c5c/charakterystyki-stalopradowe-dsp-p-v-in-v-dd-v-tp-2-2-1-2.jpg)
![2 V...796= NH]G 4NQHN 2 V](https://img.pdfslide.tips/doc/110x75/5e3a7c8bea02f0140326da90/-2-v-796-nhg-4nqhn-2-v.jpg)
