Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 139 views

    Us Versus Sweet

    Uploaded by

    Cee El Sawil
    Sweet, a U.S. military employee, was charged with assaulting a prisoner of war. He claimed the court did not have jurisdiction as he was acting in the line of duty. The court found it had jurisdiction over criminal cases involving penalties over 6 months under the relevant act. Additionally, military character does not exempt one from civil court jurisdiction for offenses under the penal code, such as assault. While assaults during military service are not specifically included in the penal code, related charges could be brought. The court affirmed its jurisdiction over Sweet and that military service does not negate civil court jurisdiction.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Us Versus Sweet

    Uploaded by

    Cee El Sawil
    139 views2 pages
    Sweet, a U.S. military employee, was charged with assaulting a prisoner of war. He claimed the court did not have jurisdiction as he was acting in the line of duty. The court found it had jurisdiction over criminal cases involving penalties over 6 months under the relevant act. Additionally, military character does not exempt one from civil court jurisdiction for offenses under the penal code, such as assault. While assaults during military service are not specifically included in the penal code, related charges could be brought. The court affirmed its jurisdiction over Sweet and that military service does not negate civil court jurisdiction.

    Original Description:

    US vs Sweet

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Sweet, a U.S. military employee, was charged with assaulting a prisoner of war. He claimed the court did not have jurisdiction as he was acting in the line of duty. The court found it had jurisdiction over criminal cases involving penalties over 6 months under the relevant act. Additionally, military character does not exempt one from civil court jurisdiction for offenses under the penal code, such as assault. While assaults during military service are not specifically included in the penal code, related charges could be brought. The court affirmed its jurisdiction over Sweet and that military service does not negate civil court jurisdiction.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    139 views2 pages

    Us Versus Sweet

    Uploaded by

    Cee El Sawil
    Sweet, a U.S. military employee, was charged with assaulting a prisoner of war. He claimed the court did not have jurisdiction as he was acting in the line of duty. The court found it had jurisdiction over criminal cases involving penalties over 6 months under the relevant act. Additionally, military character does not exempt one from civil court jurisdiction for offenses under the penal code, such as assault. While assaults during military service are not specifically included in the penal code, related charges could be brought. The court affirmed its jurisdiction over Sweet and that military service does not negate civil court jurisdiction.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    U.S. v. Sweet, 1 Phil.

    18 (1901) FACTS: Sweet was employed by the United States military who committed an offense against a POW (prisoner of war). His case is filed with the CFI (court of first instance), who is given original jurisdiction in all criminal cases for which a penalty of more than 6 months is imposed. He is now contending that the courts are without jurisdiction because he was acting in the line of duty. ISSUES: 1. WON this case is within the jurisdiction of the CFI. Yes. By Act No. 136 of the US-Phil Commission, the CFIs are given original jurisdiction in all criminal cases in which a penalty more than 6 months imprisonment or a fine greater than $100 may be imposed. Furthermore, CFIs have jurisdiction to try offenders charged with violation of the Penal Code within their territorial limits, regardless of the military character of the accused. The defendant and his acts are within the jurisdiction of the CFI because he failed to prove that he was indeed acting in the line of duty. 2. WON an assault committed by a soldier or military employee upon a prisoner of war is not an offense under the penal code? Yes. Though assault by military officer against a POW is not in the RPC, physical assault charges may be pressed under the RPC. 3. Assuming that it is an offence under the penal code, whether or not the military character sustained by the person charged with the offence at the time of its commission exempts him from the ordinary jurisdiction of the civil tribunals? No. The application of the general principle that the jurisdiction of the civil tribunals is unaffected by the military or other special character brought before them for trial (R.A.

    No. 7055). Appellant claims that the act was service but this cannot affect the right of the Civil Court to takes jurisdiction of the case. Judgment: Judgment thereby affirmed An offense charged against a military officer in consequence of an act done in obedience to an order is clearly shown on the face, where such offense is against the military law, is not within the jurisdiction of the courts of the Civil Government.

    You might also like