Lawrence v Texas

FactsA reported weapons disturbance prompted Houston police to go to Lawrences apartment. There, police found Lawrence and Garner engaged in a sexual act. Both were charged and convicted, under a Texas statute, which prohibits sodomy. Both contested the statute as a violation of the 14th Amendment.IssueWhether or not the statute in question violates the 14th Amendment.HeldYes. Decision reversed.RatioThe petitioners were legal adults and performed the act consensually and in private. As such, the States intrusion and the eventual harm it inflicted on the petitioners is unconstitutional since it was not in accordance with the Due Process Clause. Also, it violated the Equal Protection Clause because the statute criminalized sexual intimacy between same sex couples and not same sexual activity between different sex couples.

De Castro v. JBC

FactsC.J Punos compulsory retirement on May 17, 2010. Presidential elections on May 10, 2010. Sec 4, Art 8 of the Constitution states that any vacancy in the SC should be filled within 90 days. The JBC is tasked to submit to the incumbent President a list of nominees for the position to be vacated by the C.J. On Jan 20, 2010, the JBC unanimously agreed to proceed with the submission of applications for said position. List of nominees by the JBC came out in national broadsheets on Feb 13, 2010.IssueGiven the time constraints, is it constitutional for the JBC to submit a list of nominees for the replacement of C.J Puno to the President even if the Constitution (Sec15, Art 7) prohibits the Pres or acting Pres from making appointments within 2 months before the next presidential elections and up to the end of his term on June 30, 2010?HeldDirects the JBC to carry on.RatioSec5, Art7 of the Constitution does not apply to appointments in the Supreme Court rather only in the Executive branch and that as stated in Sec4, Art8, any vacancy in the SC should be filled within 90 days from the occurrence thereof.

People v. Webb

FactsThe acquittal of convicted murders Webb et al on Dec 14, 2010 on the ground of lack of proof of their guilt beyond reasonable doubt prompted complainant Lauro Vizconde, immediate relative of the victims, filed a motion to the Court to reconsider its decision.IssueWhether or not to entertain the complainants reconsideration.HeldDenied.RatioPlaces accused under double jeopardyComplainants claims (denied prosecution due process of law, misappreciated the facts, unreasonably regarded witness as lacking credibility, and issued a tainted and erroneous decision) to be lacking in merit