Procedures in Criminal Law

Published on March 2017 | Categories: Documents | Downloads: 38 | Comments: 0 | Views: 299
of 21
Download PDF   Embed   Report

Comments

Content


Representation By A Non-Lawyer
CAN A NON-LAWYER REPRESENT THE ACCUSED
DURING ARRAIGNENT!
> No, during the arraignment, it is the obligation of the
court to ensure that the accused is represented by a lawyer
because it is the frst time when the accused is informed
of the nature and cause of the accusation against him.
> This is a task which only a lawyer can do.
> But during trial, there is no such duty. The accused must
ask for a lawyer, or else, the right is deemed waived. He
can even defend himself personally.

AY AN ACCUSED BE "ALIDLY REPRESENTED BY A
NON-LAWYER AT THE TRIAL!
> If the accused knowingly engaged the service of the non-
lawyer, he is bound by the non-lawyer’s actions
> But if he didn’t know that he was represented by a
non-laywer, the judgment is void because of the
misrepresentation

N.B: In MTCs, one can defend himself or by a non-lawyer.

WHAT ARE THE CONSE#UENCES I$ REPRESENTED
BY A NON-LAWYER!
1. He is bound by the rules
2. He cannot raise right to counsel

SUPPOSE % DE$ENDS HISEL$& IS THIS CONSIDERED A
PRACTICE O$ LAW UNDER THE DOCTRINE IN CAYETANO
"& ONSOD!
> No, this is an exercise of a constitutional right.
WHAT IS THE DI$$ERENCE BETWEEN THE DUTY O$ THE
COURT TO APPOINT COUNSEL DE O$$ICIO
DURING ARRAIGNENT AND DURING TRIAL!
> During arraignment, the court has the afrmative duty to
inform the accused of his right to counsel and to provide him
with one in case he cannot aford it
> The court must act on its own volition unless the right is
waived by the accused
> On the other hand, during trial, it is the accused who must
asser this right to counsel. The court will not act unless
the accused invokes his rights.
Co'nse( De O))i*io
Sec. 7. Appointment of counsel de ofcio. – The court,
considering the gravity of the ofense and the difculty of
the questions that may arise, shall appoint as counsel de
ofcio such members of the bar in good standing who, by
reason of their experience and ability, can competently
defend the accused. But in localities where such members
of the bar are not available, the court may appoint any
person, resident of the province and of good repute for probity
and ability, to defend the accused.
Sec. 8. Time for counsel de ofcio to prepare for
arraignment. – Whenever a counsel de ofce is appointed by
the court to defend he accused at the arraignment, he shall be
given a reasonable time to consult with the accused as to his
plea before proceeding with the arraignment.
WHAT IS A COUNSEL DE O$$ICIO!
> A counsel de ofcio is the counsel appointed by the
court to represent and defend the accused in case he
cannot aford to employ one himself
WHO CAN BE APPOINTED COUNSEL DE O$$ICIO!
> The court, considering the gravity of the ofense and the
difculty of the questions that may arise shall appoint as
counsel de ofcio
1. A member of the bar in good standing
2. And such member, by reason of his/her experience
and ability, can competently defend the accused
> ONLY DURING TRIAL: But, in localities where such
members of the bar are not available, the court may appoint
any person who
is—
1. A resident of the province
2. And of good repute for probity and with ability to defend the
accused
THE $OUR-$OLD DUTY O$ THE COURT
1. It must inform the defendant that he has a right
to an attorney before being arraigned
2. After informing him, the court must ask the
defendant if he desires to have the aid of an attorney
3. If he desires and is unable to employ an attorney, the
court must assign an attorney de ofcio to defend him
4. If the accused desires to procure an attorney of his
own, the court must grant him a reasonable time to
procure one
WHAT IS THE REASON $OR THE $OUR-$OLD DUTY!
> The right to be heard would be of little avail if it doesn’t
include the right to be heard by counsel

WHAT IS THE E$$ECT O$ THE $AILURE O$ THE COURT
TO COPLY WITH THESE DUTIES!
> It is a violation of due process
Withdrawal Of Improvident Plea Of
Guilty
Sec. 5. Withdrawal of improvident plea of
guilty.– At any time before the udgment of
conviction become! "nal# the court may
permit an improvident plea of guilty to be
withdrawn and be !ub!tituted by a plea of not
guilty.

NOTE: The tenor of above provision is clear.
There should be a categorical declaration from the
accused that he is withdrawing his plea of guilty and
substituting it with a plea of not guilty.
$A% A% I&P'O(I)*%+ P,*A O- G.I,+/ 0*
WI+1)'AW% AS A &A++*' O- 'IG1+2
> No, the withdrawal of the plea of guilty is
not a matter of strict right to the accused but is
within the discretion of the court.
> The reason behind this is that trial has
already commenced and will put all of the past
proceedings to waste. Therefore, the plea may only be
withdrawn with permission of the court.
> Moreover, there is presumption that the
plea was made voluntarily. The court must
decide whether the consent of the accused was in
fact vitiated when he entered his plea.
3 IS $1A'G*) WI+1 1O&I$I)*. 1* P,*A)S
G.I,+/# 0.+ +*,,S +1* 4.)G* 1I%)I %I/A
SI%ASA)/A. IS 1IS P,*A (A,I)2
> No. n order to be valid, the plea of guilty must be
unconditional.
> n this case, ! said hindi niya sinasadya. This is
not a valid plea of guilty. " plea of not guilty should be
entered instead.

&A/ A% A$$.S*) 0* A,,OW*) +O $1A%G*
1IS P,*A O- %O+ G.I,+/ *(*% A-+*' +1*
P'OS*$.+IO% 1A) '*S+*) I+S $AS*2
> The trial court may allow the accused to plead
guilty to a lesser o#ense
W1*% $A% +1* (A,I)I+/ O- P,*A O- G.I,+/ 0*
A++A$5*)2
> $enerally, a plea of guilty cannot be attac%ed
if it is made voluntarily and intelligently
> t can only be attac%ed if it was induced
by threats, misrepresentation, or bribes
> &hen the consensual character of the plea is
called into 'uestion or when it is shown that the
defendant was not fully apprised of the conse'uences,
the plea can be challenged
Plea Of Guilty +o %on $apital O6en!e
(ec. ). *lea of guilty to non+capital o#ense, reception of
evidence, discretionary. - &hen the accused pleads
guilty to a non+capital o#ense, the court may
receive evidence from the parties to determine the
penalty to be imposed.
W1A+ S1O.,) +1* $O.'+ )O W1*% +1*
A$$.S*) P,*A)S G.I,+/ +O A %O%7$API+A,
O--*%S*2
> The court may receive evidence from the parties
to determine the penalty to be imposed
> .nli%e in a plea of guilty to a capital o#ense,
the reception of evidence in this case is not
mandatory
> t is merely discretionary on the court
$A% A $O.'+ (A,I),/ $O%(I$+ A% A$$.S*)
0AS*) O% A% I&P'O(I)*%+ P,*A O- G.I,+/2
8 /e!
8 If there i! ade9uate evidence of the
guilt of the accu!ed independent of the
improvident plea of guilty# the court may !till
convict the accu!ed
8 +he conviction will be !et a!ide only if the
plea of guilt i! the !ole ba!i! of the udgment
W1A+ IS +1* &*A%I%G O- +1* ).+/ O- +1*
4.)G* +O $O%).$+ A S*A'$1I%G I%:.I'/2
8 In all ca!e!# the udge mu!t convince
him!elf
;. +hat the accu!ed i! entering the plea of
guilty voluntarily and intelligently
<. +hat he i! truly guilty
=. +hat there e>i!t! a rational ba!i! for a
"nding of guilt ba!ed on hi! te!timony
8 In addition# the udge mu!t inform the
accu!ed of the e>act length of impri!onment
and the certainty that he will !erve it at the
national penitentiary or a penal colony. +he
udge mu!t di!pel any fal!e notion that the
accu!ed may have that he will get o6 lightly
becau!e of hi! plea of guilty
)O*S A P,*A O- G.I,+/ &*A% A% A)&ISSIO%
*(*% O- +1* AGG'A(A+I%G $I'$.&S+A%$*S2
> /es
> " plea of guilty results in the admission of all the
material facts in the complaint or information,
including the aggravating circumstances
> t is tantamount to a 0udicial confession of guilt
> 1ecause of this, the court should only accept a
clear, de2nite, and unconditional plea of guilt
Plea Of Guilty +o $apital O6en!e
Sec. =. Plea of guilty to capital o6en!e?
reception of evidence. – When the accu!ed
plead! guilty to a capital o6en!e# the court !hall
conduct a !earching in9uiry into the
voluntarine!! and full comprehen!ion of the
con!e9uence! of hi! plea and !hall re9uire
the pro!ecution to prove hi! guilt and the
preci!e degree of culpability. +he accu!ed may
pre!ent evidence in hi! behalf.
W1A+ S1O.,) +1* $O.'+ )O W1*% +1*
A$$.S*) P,*A)S G.I,+/ +O A $API+A,
O--*%S*2
> &hen the accused pleads guilty to a capital
o#ense, the court should
3. 4onduct a searching in'uiry into the
voluntariness and full comprehension of the
conse'uences of the plea
5. 6e'uire the prosecution to present evidence to
prove the guilt and the precise degree of culpability of
the accused for the purpose of imposing the proper
penalty
7. "s% the accused if he desires to present evidence
in his behalf and allow him to do so if he desires
> Mandatory for the court to conduct the
searching in'uiry otherwise, there would be an
improvident plea
Plea Of Guilty +o A ,e!!er O6en!e
Sec. <. Plea of guilty to a le!!er o6en!e. –
At arraignment# the accu!ed# with the
con!ent of the o6ended party and pro!ecutor#
may be allowed by the trial court to plead guilty
to a le!!er o6en!e which i! nece!!arily
included in the o6en!e charged. After
arraignment but before trial# the accu!ed
may !till be allowed to plead guilty to !aid
le!!er o6en!e after withdrawing hi! plea of not
guilty. %o amendment of the complaint or
information i! nece!!ary.
W1A+ S1O.,) 0* )O%* I- +1*'* IS A P,*A
+O A ,*SS*' O--*%S*2 W1*% $A% +1*
A$$.S*) P,*A) G.I,+/ +O A ,*SS*' O--*%S*2
8 )uring arraignment
3. O#ended party and prosecutor must be present
5. 8esser o#ense must necessarily be included in
the original o#ense charged
7. O#ended party and prosecutor must consent to
such plea
). f o#ended party is absent despite due notice, the
court may allow accused to plead to a lesser o#ense
8 After arraignment and before trial
3. &ithdraw the plea of not guilty
5. *rivate o#ended party and prosecutor must give
consent to the plea to lesser o#ense
7. f private o#ended party is absent despite due
notice, court may allow accused to plea to lesser
o#ense
). Enter plea for the lesser o#ense
8 When the penalty impo!able for the o6en!e i!
at lea!t @ year! and ; day or a "ne e>ceeding
P;<AAA# the pro!ecutor mu!t "r!t !ubmit hi!
recommendation to the $ity or Provincial or the
$hief State Pro!ecutor for approval. If
the recommendation i! approved# the trial
pro!ecutor may then con!ent to the plea of
guilty to a le!!er o6en!e.
P.'POS* O- A''AIG%&*%+ A%) P,*A
3. 9ouble 0eopardy to attach
5. 4ourt can proceed trial in absentia in case accused
absconds
W1*'* S1O.,) +1* A$$.S*) 0* A''AIG%*)2
> The accused must be arraigned before the
court where the complaint was 2led or assigned for
trial
1OW IS A''AIG%&*%+ &A)*2
"rraignment is made
3. n open court
5. 1y the 0udge or cler%
7. 1y furnishing the accused with a copy of the
complaint or information
). 6eading it in the language or dialect %nown to him
:. "s%ing him whether he pleads guilty or not guilty
W1A+ IS +1* I&PO'+A%$* A%) SIG%I-I$A%$* O-
+1* '*:.I'*&*%+ .%)*' S*$+IO% ;BAC2
> t must be strictly complied with as it is
intended to protect the constitutional right of the
accused to be informed of the nature and cause of
the accusation against him
> The constitutional protection is part of due process
> ;ailure to observe the rules necessarily nulli2es the
arraignment
! ( 4<"6$E9 &T< <OM49E. <E *8E"9(
$.8T/ 1.T *6E(ENT( E=9EN4E TO E(T"18(<
(E8;+9E;EN(E. &<"T (<O.89 T<E 4O.6T 9O>
> The court should withdraw the plea and enter a
plea of not guilty
W1*% S1O.,) +1* A''AIG%&*%+ 0* 1*,)2
> The general rule is that the accused should be
arraigned within 7? days from the date the court
ac'uires 0urisdiction over the person of the accused.
> The time of pendency of a motion to 'uash or a bill
of particulars or other cause 0ustifying suspension of
the arraignment shall be e@cluded in computing the
period.
> <owever in the following cases, the accused
should be arranged within a shorter period, as
re'uired by law:
3. &here the complainant is about to depart from the
*hilippines with no de2nite date of return, the
accused should be arraigned without delay and his
trial should commence within 7 days from arraignment
5. The trial of cases under the 4hild "buse "ct
re'uires that the trial should be commenced within 7
days from arraignment
7. &hen the accused is under preventive
detention, his case shall be raAed and its records
transmitted to the 0udge to whom the case is raAed
within 7 days from the 2ling of the information or
complaint. The accused shall be arraigned within
3? days from the date of raAe.
N.1:
3. 6earraignment needed for substitution
5. (ubstantial amendment needs
rearraignment but formal amendment doesnBt
P'*S*%$* O- O--*%)*) PA'+/
3. *lea bargaining
5. 4ivil liability
7. denti2cation of accused
W1A+ I- P'I(A+* O--*%)*) PA'+/ -AI,*) +O
A++*%) )*SPI+* ).* %O+I$*2
> The accused may be allowed by the court to plea
guilty to a lesser o#ense which is necessarily included
in the o#ense charged with the conformity of the
prosecutor alone
$A% +1* ,AW/*' O- +1* A$$.S*) *%+*' +1*
P,*A -O' 1I&2
> No, the accused must enter the plea himself
W1A+ IS +1* I&PO'+A%$* O- A''AIG%&*%+2
> "rraignment is the means for bringing the accused
into court and informing him of the nature and cause
of the accusation against
him.
> 9uring arraignment, he is made fully aware of
possible loss of freedom or of life. <e is informed why
the prosecuting arm of the (tate is mobiliCed against
him. t is necessary in order to 2@ the identity of the
accused, to inform him of the charge, and to him an
opportunity to plead.
).'I%G +1* A''AIG%&*%+# IS +1* 4.)G*
).+/70O.%) +O POI%+ O.+ +1A+ A%
I%-O'&A+IO% IS ).P,I$I+O.S2
> No, the 0udge has no obligation to point out that an
information is duplicitous or to point out any other
defect in an information during arraignment
> The obligation to move to 'uash a defective
information belongs to the accused, whose failure to do
so constitutes a waiver of the right to ob0ect
3 WAS +'I*) -O' &.')*' WI+1O.+ 1A(I%G
0**% A''AIG%*). A+ +1* +'IA,# 3DS $O.%S*,
P'*S*%+*) WI+%*SS*S A%) $'OSS7*3A&I%*)
+1* P'OS*$.+IO% WI+%*SS*S. I+ WAS O%,/
A-+*' +1* $AS* WAS S.0&I++*) -O'
)*$ISIO% +1A+ 3 WAS A''AIG%*). 3 WAS
$O%(I$+*). $A% 3 I%(O5* +1* -AI,.'* O- +1*
$O.'+ +O A''AIG% 1I& 0*-O'* +'IA, -O'
:.*S+IO%I%G +1* $O%(I$+IO%2
> No, the failure of the court to arraign ! before trial
was conducted didnBt pre0udice the rights of !
since he was able to present evidence and cross+
e@amine the witnesses of the prosecution
> The error was cured by the subse'uent
arraignment
IS +1* A$$.S*) P'*S.&*) +O 1A(* 0**%
A''AIG%*) I% +1* A0S*%$* O- P'OO- +O +1*
$O%+'A'/2
> /es
> n view of the presumption of regularity in
the performance of oDcial duties, it can be
presumed that a person accused of a crime was
arraigned, in the absence of proof to the contrary
> <owever, the presumption of regularity is not
applied when the penalty imposed is death
> &hen the life of a person is at sta%e, the
court cannot presume that there was an
arraignment, it has to be sure that there was one
IS +1* A$$.S*) *%+I+,*) +O 5%OW I% A)(A%$*
+1* %A&*S O- A,, P'OS*$.+IO% WI+%*SS*S2
> .nder the same amended rules on pre+trial, this
would be up to the trial 0udgeBs discretion
3 WAS $1A'G*) WI+1 1O&I$I)*. 1*
*%+*'*) A P,*A O- %O+ G.I,+/. 1* WAS
,A+*' A,,OW*) +O +*S+I-/ I% O')*' +O
P'O(* +1* &I+IGA+I%G $I'$.&S+A%$* O-
I%$O&P,*+* S*,-7)*-*%S*. A+ +1* +'IA,#
1* P'*S*%+*) *(I)*%$* +O P'O(* +1A+
1* A$+*) I% $O&P,*+* S*,- )*-*%S*.
+1* $O.'+ A$:.I++*) 1I&. ,A+*'# 3 WAS
AGAI% $1A'G*) WI+1 P1/SI$A, I%4.'I*S. 3
I%(O5*) )O.0,* 4*OPA')/. $A% 3 0*
P'OS*$.+*) AGAI% -O' P1/SI$A, I%4.'I*S2
> /es. There was no double 0eopardy. n order for
double 0eopardy to attach, there must have been a
valid plea to the 2rst o#ense.
> n this case, the presentation by ! of
evidence to prove self+defense had the e#ect of
vacating the plea of guilt
> &hen the plea of guilt was vacated, the court
should have ordered him to plead again, or at least
should have directed that a new plea of not guilty be
entered for him
> 1ecause the court didnBt do this, at the time of the
ac'uittal, there was actually no standing plea for !.
> (ince there was no valid plea, there can be no
double 0eopardy
$A% A P*'SO% W1O P,*A)*) G.I,+/ S+I,, 0*
A$:.I++*)2
> /es, when an accused pleads guilty, it doesnBt
necessarily follow that he is convicted
> "dditional evidence independent of the guilty
plea may be considered by the 0udge to ensure
that the plea of guilt was intelligently made
> The totality of evidence should determine
whether the accused should be convicted or ac'uitted
W1A+ 1APP*%S I- +1* A$$.S*) '*-.S*S +O
*%+*' A%/ P,*A2
> The court may validly enter a plea of guilty for the
accused who refuses to plead
W1A+ IS A% I&P'O(I)*%+ P,*A2
> *lea involuntarily made and without consent
> t would be considered if there was failure to
conduct searching in'uiry, failure of prosecution to
present evidence, no rational basis between
testimony and guilt
'IG1+ +O 0* P'*S*%+ I% +'IA,
W1A+ A'* +1* '*:.ISI+*S O- A (A,I) +'IA, I%
A0S*%+IA2
3. The accused has been already arraigned
5. <e has been duly noti2ed of the trial
7. <e fails to appear at the trial but his non+
appearance at the trial is un0usti2able
$A% +1* 'IG1+ +O 0* P'*S*%+ 0* WAI(*)2
> /es, e@cept in the following situations where the
presence of the accused at the trial is re'uired
3. 9uring arraignment
5. 9uring promulgation of 0udgment, e@cept if it
is for a light o#ense
7. &hen the presence of the accused at the trial is
re'uired for purposes of identi2cation, unless he
admits beforehand that he is the same person
charged
W1A+ IS +1* &*A%I%G O- +1* 'IG1+ O-
P'*S.&P+IO% O- I%%O$*%$*2
> The right means that the presumption must be
overcome by evidence of guilt beyond reasonable
doubt
3. $uilt beyond reasonable doubt means that
there is moral certainty as to the guilt of the accused
5. "ccusation is not synonymous to guiltEconviction
should then be based on the strength of the evidence
of the prosecution and not the wea%ness of the
defense

W1A+ IS +1* 'A+IO%A,* -O' +1* P'*S.&P+IO%
O- I%%O$*%$*2
> There ought to be a balance between the
machineries of the (tate and the accused

W1A+ A'* +1* *3$*P+IO%S +O +1*
$O%S+I+.+IO%A, P'*S.&P+IO% O- I%%O$*%$*2

3. f there is a 6E"(ON"18E 4ONNE4TON
between the fact presumed and the fact ultimately
proven from such fact. ;or e@ample, an
accountable public oDcer who fails to account for
funds or property that should be in his custody is
presumed to be guilty of malversation of public
funds, or that persons in possession of recently
stolen goods are presumed guilty of the
o#ense in connection with the goods
5. n cases of (E8;+9E;EN(E, the person who
invo%es the self+defense is presumed guilty. The
burden of proving the elements of self+defense is
incumbent upon the accused.
0ail
-orfeiture Of 0ail
(ec. 53. ;orfeiture of bail. - &hen the presence of the
accused is re'uired by the court or these 6ules, his
bondsmen shall be noti2ed to produce him before
the court on a given date and time. f the
accused fails to appear in person as re'uired, his
bail shall be declared forfeited and the bondsmen
given thirty F7?G days within which to produce their
principal and to show why no 0udgment should be
rendered against them for the amount of their bail.
&ithin the said period, the bondsmen must:
FaG produce the body of their principal or give the
reason for his non+production, and
FbG e@plain why the accused did not appear before the
court when 2rst re'uired to do so.
;ailing in these two re'uisites, a 0udgment shall
be rendered against the bondsmen, 0ointly and
severally, for the amount of the bail. The court shall not
reduce or otherwise mitigate the liability of the
bondsmen, unless the accused has been
surrendered or is ac'uitted.
W1A+ )O 0O%)S&*% .%)*'+A5* +O )O .%)*'
+1* 0O%)2
> &hen the appearance of the accused is re'uired,
the sureties shall be noti2ed to produce the
accused before the court on a given date
> f the accused fails to appear as re'uired, the
bond is declared forfeited and the bondsmen are
given 7? days within which to produce the accused
and show cause why 0udgment shouldnHt be rendered
against them for the amount of the bond
> &ithin the period of 7? days, the bondsmen must:
3. *roduce the body of the accused
5. E@plain satisfactorily why the accused didnHt
appear when 2rst re'uired to do so
o f they fail to comply with these re'uisites, the
court shall render 0udgment against them on the bond.
W1A+ IS +1* *--*$+ O- ASS.&I%G +1*
O0,IGA+IO% O- 0AI,2
> The sureties become in law the 0ailers of the
principal
> Their custody of him is the continuation
of the original imprisonment and though they cannot
actually con2ne him, they are subrogated to all
other rights and means which the
government possesses to ma%e their control of him
e#ective when the accused 0umps bail and the trial
shall continue and the bondsman held to their
underta%ing and sureties
.%)*' W1OS* )IS$'*+IO% IS +1* '*).$+IO%
O- +1* ,IA0I,I+/ O- A 0O%)S&A% .%)*' +1*
-O'-*I+*) 0O%)2
> t is wholly sub0ect to the discretion of the trial
court
> To be refused or granted according to the merits of
the particular case before the court, and the e@ercise of
such discretion will not be disturbed on appeal
unless grave abuse of discretion was
committed or that there are circumstances which
the trial court failed to consider
W1A+ IS +1* ).+/ O- +1* 0O%)S&A%
W1*% A$$.S*) IS '*:.I'*) +O APP*A'2
> Notice alone to the accused is insuDcient.
> The bondsman is duty bound to produce the
person of the accused when his appearance is
re'uired by the court, which shows that mere notice
is not suDcient but the bondsman must ma%e every
e#ort to see that he actually ma%es his appearance
> ;ailure to do so, trial court may consider it
negligent in the performance of his duties which the
(4 cannot disturb
W1A+ A'* +1* '*:.ISI+*S +O 4.S+I-/ +1*
0O%)S&A%DS *3*&P+IO% -'O& ,IA0I,I+/2
> &ithin the period of 7? days, the bondsmen must:
3. *roduce the body of the accused
5. E@plain satisfactorily why the accused didnHt
appear when
2rst re'uired to do so
> ;ailure of the bondsman to produce the accused
when re'uired by the court and subse'uent
presentment will not e@onerate the bondsmanBs
liability unless he gives satisfactory reason why he
failred to appear when 2rst re'uired to do so
> ("T(;"4TO6/ E!*8"N"TONEact of $od, act of
the obligee, act of the law e@onerates the sureties. f
the accused died, the fact of death must be before
the breach and the fact of death must be
established by competent evidence for the
sureties to be e@onerated from liability.
WHAT ARE THE CONDITIONS O$
THE BAIL!
1. If before conviction, that the defendant shall answer the
complaint or information in the court in which it is fled or to
which it may be transferred for trial
2. After conviction, that he will surrender himself in execution
of the judgment that the appellate court may render
3. That in case the cause is remanded for new trial, he will
appear in court to which it may be remanded and submit
himself to the orders and processes thereof
*For failure to perform any of these conditions, the bond given
as security thereof may be forfeited.
CAN THE COURT IPOSE
OTHER CONDITIONS OR
LIITATIONS ON THE BAIL!
> Yes, the trial court may impose other conditions in
granting bail where the likelihood of the accused jumping bail
or of committing other harm to the citizenry is feared.
> The court even has the power to prohibit a person admitted
to bail from leaving the Phiippines or restrict his right to travel
DOES AN ADDITIONAL
CONDITION NOT "IOLATE
THE PROHIBITION ON
E%CESSI"E BAIL!
> No because the determination if there is excessive
bail would depend on the facts and circumstances of each
case
> Bail would still be determined based on the following
factors--fnancial liability of the accused to give bail;
nature and circumstance of the ofense; penalty for the
ofense charged; character and reputation of the accused;
age and health of the accused; weight of the evidence
against the accused; probability of the accused appearing at
the trial; forfeiture of other bail; the fact that the accused was
a fugitive from justice when arrested; and pendency of other
cases where the accused is on bail.
REEDIES O$ A PARTY
AGAINST WHO A
WARRANT O$ ARREST
HAS BEEN ISSUED
+ A party a,ainst w-o. a warrant o)
arrest -as /een iss'e0 .ay
1& Post /ai(
2& As3 )or rein4esti,ation
5& $i(e a .otion to 6'as-
in)or.ation
7& $i(e a petition )or re4iew
8& I) 0enie09 -e .ay appea(
t-e :'0,.ent a)ter tria( ;no
*ertiorari<
=Co0e> PAPI
NO PRELIINARY
IN"ESTIGATION
CONDUCTED9
REEDIES
I$ THERE WAS NO
PRELIINARY
IN"ESTIGATION
CONDUCTED9 WHAT IS THE
REEDY O$ THE ACCUSED!
=Co0e> RICA P
1& Re)'se to enter p(ea
2& Insist on a pre(i.inary in4esti,ation
5& $i(e *ertiorari i) re)'se0
7& Raise it as an error on appea(
8& $i(e a petition )or pro-i/ition
DOUBLE ?EOPARDY
To s'/stantiate a *(ai. o) 0o'/(e
:eopar0y9 t-e )o((owin, .'st
/e pro4en>
a. The frst jeopardy must have attached prior to the second
b. The frst jeopardy must have been validly terminated
c. The second jeopardy must be for the same ofense, or the
second ofense includes or is necessarily included in the
ofense charged in the frst information, or is an attempt to
commit the same or is a frustration thereof
WHEN DOES DOUBLE
?EOPARDY ATTACH!
> In order that protection against double jeopardy may inure in
favor of the accused, the following should be present:
a. A valid complaint or information
b. A competent court
c. The defendant pleaded to the charge
d. The defendant was acquitted or convicted, or the case
against him was dismissed or otherwise terminated without his
express consent
W1A+ IS +1* S$OP* O- +1* 'IG1+ AGAI%S+
S*,-7I%$'I&I%A+IO%2
> The right against self+incrimination covers testimonial
compulsion only and the compulsion to produce
real or physical evidence using the body of the
accused
> *hysical or moral compulsion to e@tort
communication

WI+1 W1A+ 5I%) O- +*S+I&O%/ O' I%S+A%$*S
$A% +1* 'IG1+ 0* I%(O5*)2
> t applies to commutative testimony and not
mechanical testimony
> 4ommutative testimony involves the use of
intelligence on the part of the accused or
witness. 4orrorarily, on cases on self+incrimination,
the following are permissibleEsubstance from the
body, morphine from mouth, put on pants, physical
e@am, wallet, picture ta%ing, etc. The following on
the other hand are not permissibleEhandwriting,
signature, and similar incidents which
involve the use of intelligence.
S.PPOS* +1A+ +1*'* IS A 1O,* I% A )OO'
+O W1I$1 I- I+ IS -O.%) O.+ +1A+ +1* 1A%)
O- +1* A$$.S*) -I+S +1* 1O,*# 1* IS &OS+
P'O0A0,* G.I,+/ O- +1* A$$.SA+IO%. $A% 1*
I%(O5* +1* 'IG1+ AGAI%S+ S*,-7
I%$'I&I%A+IO%2
> No, what is being as%ed of him is mechanical in
nature. The inserting of his hand into the hole will not
involve intelligence on his part to ful2ll the tas%.

IS +1*'* A% *3$*P+IO% +O +1* 'IG1+ AGAI%S+
S*,-7I%$'I&I%A+IO%2
> The right cannot be invo%ed when the (tate has
the rights to inspect documents under its police
power, such as documents of corporations.

O% W1A+ 5I%) O- P'O$**)I%GS $A% +1* 'IG1+
AGAI%S+ S*,-7I%$'I&I%A+IO% 0* I%(O5*)2
> The right against self+incrimination can be invo%ed in
all proceedings instituted by the government

W1A+ IS +1* 'A+IO%A,* -O' P'O+*$+I%G
+1* 'IG1+ AGAI%S+ S*,-7I%$'I&I%A+IO%2
3. ;O6 <.M"NT"6"N 6E"(ON(Eto prevent the
(tate with all its coercive powers from e@tracting
testimony that may convict the accused
5. ;O6 *6"4T4"8 6E"(ON(Ethe accused is
li%ely to commit per0ury if he were compelled to testify
against himself

S.PPOS* +1A+ 3 WAS A WI+%*SS I% A
4.)I$IA, P'O$**)I%G. +1* $O.%S*, AS5*)
1I& A0O.+ 1IS W1*'*A0O.+S ).'I%G A
$*'+AI% )A+*. 3 WAS A$+.A,,/ +OG*+1*'
WI+1 A WO&A% I% A &O+*, ).'I%G +1A+
)A+*. '*(*A,I%G 1IS W1*'*A0O.+S WO.,)
'*S.,+ +O A )O&*S+I$ +.'0.,*%$*. $A% 3
'IG1+-.,,/ I%(O5* 1IS 'IG1+ AGAI%S+ S*,-7
I%$'I&I%A+IO%2
> ! cannot invo%e the right. <e can only invo%e the
right if there is only a possibility of criminal
prosecution but not in cases of possible
embarrassment.

W1O &A/ I%(O5* +1* 'IG1+ AGAI%S+ S*,-7
I%$'I&I%A+IO% A%) W1*% $A% S.$1 P*'SO%
I%(O5* +1* 'IG1+2
> "n ordinary witness may invo%e the right but he may
only do so as each incriminating 'uestion is as%ed
> The accused himself may invo%e the right, but unli%e
the ordinary witness, he may altogether refuse to ta%e
the witness stand and refuse to answer any and all
'uestions.
> 1ut once the accused waives his right and
chooses to testify on his own behalf, he may be cross+
e@amined on matters covered in his direct
e@amination. <e cannot refuse to answer
'uestions
during cross+e@amination by claiming that the answer
that he will give could incriminate him for the crime he
is being charged.
> <owever, if the 'uestion during cross+
e@amination relates to a crime di#erent from that
which he was charged, he can still invo%e the right and
refuse to answer.

$A% A% A$$.S*) O' WI+%*SS I%(O5* +1*
'IG1+ AGAI%S+ S*,-7I%$'I&I%A+IO% I- 1* IS
AS5*) A0O.+ PAS+ $'I&I%A,I+/2
> t depends
> f he can still be prosecuted for it, 'uestions about
the past criminal liability are still covered by the
protection against self+incrimination
> 1ut if he cannot anymore be prosecuted for it
anymore, he cannot invo%e the right

S.PPOS* 3 WAS A WI+%*SS AS5*) A0O.+ 0*I%G
$1A'G*) WI+1 P*'4.'/ +WO /*A'S AGO.
1* I%(O5*S 1IS 'IG1+ AGAI%S+ S*,-7
I%$'I&I%A+IO%. $A% +1IS 0* +A5*% AGAI%S+
1I&2
> t depends. f in the prior charge of per0ury against
him, the case has already been terminated through his
ac'uittal, conviction, or dismissal of the complaint, he
couldnHt invo%e the right anymore.
1ut if it is the case that he could still be charged
with this past criminality, then he could invo%e said
right.

S.PPOS* 3 WAS A WI+%*SS AS5*)
A0O.+ 0*I%G A PAI) WI+%*SS I% +1*
PAS+. 3 '*-.S*) +O A%SW*' I%(O5I%G +1*
'IG1+ AGAI%S+ S*,-7I%$'I&I%A+IO%. $A%
+1IS 0* +A5*% AGAI%S+ 32
> "gain, it depends. f he could still be charged for
rendering false testimony, then he could invo%e the
right. f he cannot anymore be charged for past
criminality, then it could not invo%e the right.

3 A$$.S*) WAS AS5*) +O 0* A 1OS+I,*
WI+%*SS. 1* '*-.S*) +O )O SO. $A% +1IS 0*
+A5*% AGAI%S+ 32
> No, ! cannot be pre0udiced whatsoever as a result of
his refusal to be a hostile witness. To pre0udice !
as a result of his refusal would render his right
against self+incrimination useless and
nugatory.
TRIAL
Section 1. Time to prepare for trial. – After a plea of not
guilty is entered, the accused shall have at least ffteen
(15) days to prepare for trial. The trial shall commence within
thirty (30) days from receipt of the pre-trial order.
HOW UCH TIE DOES THE
ACCUSED HA"E TO PREPARE
$OR TRIAL!
> After he enters his plea of not guilty, the accused shall
have at least 15 days to prepare for trial
> The trial shall commence within 30 days from receipt of the
pre-trial order
HOW LONG SHOULD THE TRIAL LAST!
> The entire trial period should not exceed 180 days from the
frst day of trial, except if authorized by the SC
IS +1* $O%$*P+ O- +'IA, +1* SA&* AS
1*A'I%G2
8 According to uri!prudence# they are not the
!ame concept!
8 +he word! hearing and trial have
di6erent meaning and connotation!
8 +rial may refer to the reception of evidence and
other proce!!e!. It embrace! the period for
the introduction of evidence by both partie!
8 1earing# a! Enown in law# i! not con"ned to
trial but embrace! the !everal !tage! of
litigation# including the pre7trial !tage. A
hearing doe!nDt nece!!arily mean
pre!entation of evidence. It doe!nDt nece!!arily
imply the pre!entation of oral or documentary
evidence in open court but that the partie!
are a6orded an opportunity to be heard.
WHAT IS PLEA
BARGAINING!
> It is the disposition of criminal charges by agreement between
the prosecution and the accused
> The accused and the prosecutor in a criminal case
work out a mutually satisfactory disposition of the case
subject to court approval
> It usually involves the defendant’s pleading guilty to a
lesser ofense or to only one or some of the counts of a
multi-count indictment in return for a lighter sentence than that
for the graver charge
> It is encouraged because it leads to prompt and fnal
disposition of most criminal cases. It shortens the time
between charge and disposition and enhances whatever
may be the rehabilitative prospects of the guilty when they are
ultimately imprisoned
WHEN IS PLEA BARGAINING
NOT ALLOWED!
> It is not allowed under the Dangerous Drugs Act where
the imposable penalty is reclusion perpetua to death.
WHAT I$ THERE IS A PLEA
BARGAINING ARRI"ED AT!
1. Issue an order which contains the plea bargaining arrived
at;
2. Proceed to receive evidence on the civil aspect of the case;
and
3. Render and promulgate judgment of conviction, including
the civil liability or damages duly established by the evidence.
WHAT HAPPENS I$ THERE WAS
NO PLEA BARGAINING
AGREEENT! WHAT
WOULD THE COURT DO!
1. Adopt the minutes of preliminary conference as part
of the pre-trial proceedings, confrm markings of exhibits
or substituted photocopies and admissions on the
genuineness and due
execution of documents and list object and testimonial
evidence;
2
. Scrutinize every allegation of the information and the
statements in the afdavits and other documents which
form part of the record of the preliminary investigation and
other documents
identifed and marked as exhibits in determining farther
admissions of facts, documents and in particular as to the
following:
a. The identity of the accused;
b. Court's territorial jurisdiction relative to the ofense/s
charged;
c. Qualifcation of expert witness/es;
d. Amount of damages;
e. Genuineness and due execution of documents;
f. The cause of death or injury, in proper cases;
g. Adoption of any evidence presented during the
preliminary investigation;
h. Disclosure of defenses of alibi, insanity, self-defense,
exercise of public authority and justifying or exempting
circumstances; and
i. Such other matters that would limit the facts in issue.
3. Defne factual and legal issues;
4. Ask parties to agree on the specifc trial dates and adhere
to the fow chart determined by the court which shall
contain the time frames for the diferent stages of the
proceeding up to
promulgation of decision and use the time frame for each stage
in setting the trial dates;
5. Require the parties to submit to the Branch COC the
names, addresses and contact numbers of witnesses that
need to be summoned by subpoena; and
6. Consider modifcation of order of trial if the accused
admits the charge but interposes a lawful defense.
Pro4isiona( Dis.issa(
Sec. 8. Provisional dismissal. – A case shall not be
provisionally dismissed except with the express consent of
the accused and with notice to the ofended party.

The provisional dismissal of ofenses punishable
imprisonment not exceeding six (6) years or a fne of any
amount, or both, shall become permanent one (1) year
after issuance of the order without the case having
been revived. With respect to ofenses punishable by
imprisonment of more than six (6) years, their
provisional dismissal shall become permanent two (2)
years after issuance of the order without the case having
been revived.

WHAT IS THE TIE-BAR
RULE! WHEN DOES A
PRO"ISIONAL DISISSAL
BECOE $INAL!
> The provisional dismissal of ofenses punishable by
imprisonment exceeding 6 years or a fne of any amount
shall become permanent after one year without the case
having been revived
> For ofenses punishable by imprisonment of more
than 6 years, the provisional dismissal shall become
permanent after 2 years without the case having been
revived.
> After the provisional dismissal becomes fnal, the accused
cannot be prosecuted anymore

WHEN CAN A CASE BE
PRO"ISIONALLY
DISISSED!
> A case can only be dismissed provisionally if the accused
expressly consents, such consent given in writing or viva voce.
> It must be positive, direct, unequivocal consent
requiring no inference or implication to supply its meaning
> The mere inaction or silence of the accused to a
provisional dismissal of the case or his failure to object to
a provisional dismissal doesn’t amount to express consent.

WHAT ARE THE CONDITIONS
$OR SECTION @ O$ THE
RULES O$ COURT TO
APPLY!
WHAT ARE THE RE#UISITES
LAID DOWN BY PEOPLE "&
LACSON!
1. The prosecution, with the express conformity of the
accused or the latter’s counsel moves for a provisional
dismissal of the case; or both the prosecution or accused
move for a provisional dismissal of the case
2. The ofended party is notifed of the motion for a
provisional dismissal of the case
3. The court issues an order granting the motion and
dismissing the case provisionally
4. The public prosecutor is served with a copy of the
order of provisional dismissal of the case

WHAT DOES IT EAN WHEN THE
TIE BAR RULE WILL NOT
APPLY!
> Provisional dismissal will not become permanent, even
after one year or two years depending on the ofense’s nature

HOW CAN A CASE BE RE"I"ED!
1. Re-fling the information or fling of a new information
for the same ofense necessarily included therein without need
of a new preliminary investigation unless the original
witnesses of the
prosecution or some of them may have recanted their
testimonies or may no longer be available and new
witnesses for the State have emerged
2. A new preliminary investigation is also required if aside
from the original accused, other persons are charged under a
new criminal complaint for the same ofense or necessarily
included therein
3. Under a new criminal complaint, the criminal liability
of the accused is upgraded from that of an accessory to
that of a principal
4. Under a new criminal complaint, the charge has been
upgraded
Pre-Tria( A,ree.ent
Sec. 2. Pre-trial agreement. – All agreements or admissions
made or entered during the pre-trial conference shall be
reduced in writing and signed by the accused and
counsel, otherwise, they cannot be used against the accused.
The agreements covering the matters referred to in section
1 of this Rule shall be approved by the court.
WHAT HAPPENS DURING PRE-
TRIAL!
> The following things are considered
1. Plea bargaining
2. Stipulation of facts
3. Marking for identifcation of evidence of the parties
4. Waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence
5. Modifcation of the order of trial if the accused admits the
charge but interposes a lawful defense
6. Other matters that will promote a fair and expeditious
trial of the criminal and civil aspects of the case
WHAT IS THE $OR RE#UIRED
$OR THE PRE-TRIAL
AGREEENT!
> Any agreement or admission entered into during the
pre-trial conference should be
1. In writing
2. Signed by the accused
3. Signed by counsel
> A pre-trial agreement that doesn’t follow this form cannot be
used against the accused
Pre-tria( Or0er
Sec. 4. Pre-trial order. – After the pre-trial conference,
the court shall issue an order reciting the actions taken, the
facts stipulated, and evidence marked. Such order shall
bind the parties, limit the trial to matters not disposed of, and
control the course f the action during the trial, unless
modifed by the court to prevent manifest injustice.
WHAT IS A PRE-TRIAL ORDER!
> It is an order issued by the court after the pre-trial
conference containing:
o A recital of the actions taken
o The facts stipulated
o The evidence marked
> The pre-trial order binds the parties, limits the trial to
matters not disposed of, and controls the course of
action during the trial, unless modifed by the court to
prevent manifest injustice
WHAT IS THE
PROCEDURE $OR
DISCHARGING A
PERSON AS A STATE
WITNESS!
1& Be)ore restin, its *ase9
t-e prose*'tion s-o'(0 )i(e
a .otion to 0is*-ar,e t-e
a**'se0 as a state witness
wit- -is *onsent
2& T-e *o'rt wi(( re6'ire t-e
prose*'tion to present
e4i0en*e an0 t-e sworn
state.ent o) t-e propose0
state witness at a -earin,
in or0er to s'pport t-e
0is*-ar,e
5& T-e *o'rt wi(( 0eter.ine i)
t-e re6'isites o) ,i4in,
t-e 0is*-ar,e are present&
E4i0en*e a00'*e0 in s'pport
o) t-e 0is*-ar,e0 s-a((
a'to.ati*a((y )or. part o) t-e
tria(
7& I) t-e *o'rt is satis)ie09 it
wi(( 0is*-ar,e t-e state
witness& T-e 0is*-ar,e is
e6'i4a(ent to an a*6'itta(9
'n(ess t-e witness (ater
)ai(s or re)'ses to testi)y
8& T-e *o'rt 0enies t-e
.otion )or 0is*-ar,e9 -is
sworn state.ent s-a(( /e
ina0.issi/(e as e4i0en*e
WHAT ARE THE
RE#UISITES IN ORDER
$OR A PERSON TO BE
DISCHARGED AS A
STATE WITNESS!
1. The discharge must be WITH THE CONSENT OF
THE ACCUSED sought to be a state witness
2. There is ABSOLUTE NECESSITY for the testimony of the
accused whose discharge is requested;
3. There is NO OTHER DIRECT EVIDENCE AVAILABLE for
the proper prosecution of the ofense committed, except
the testimony of said accused;
4. The testimony of said accused can be
SUBSTANTIALLY CORROBORATED in its material points;
5. Said accused DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE THE MOST
GUILTY; and
6. Said accused has not at any time been convicted of
any ofense involving MORAL TURPITUDE.
CAN THE COURT GRANT THE
DISCHARGE BE$ORE THE
PROSECUTION HAS
$INISHED PRESENTING ALL
ITS E"IDENCE!
⊥ No. As a general rule, the court should resolve any
motion to discharge only AFTER the prosecution has
presented all of its evidence since it is at this time when the
court shall determine the
presence of the requisites above
⊥ In some cases, HOWEVER, the SC held that the
prosecution is not required to present all of its other evidence
before an accused is discharged. The accused may be
discharged at any time before
the defendants have entered upon their defense.

IS A HEARING O$ THE OTION
TO DISCHARGE
ANDATORY!
⊥ So long as the motion is able to receive evidence for and
against the discharge of an accused to become a state
witness, its subsequent order granting or denying the motion
for discharge is
in order notwithstanding the lack of actual hearing on the
motion
WHAT IS THE EANING
WHEN THE TESTIONY
O$ THE ACCUSED CAN
BE SUBSTANTIALLY
CORROBORATED IN ITS
ATERIAL POINTS!
⊥ There is presence of indirect testimony or evidence
that could corroborate with the truthfulness of the testimony of
the accused

WHAT HAPPENS I$ THERE IS
LACA O$ RE#UISITES
PRESENT IN THE OTION
$OR THE DISCHARGE O$
THE ACCUSED!
⊥ There is no need to allege all the requisites in the motion.
What is required is that the court is satisfed that the
requisites are present for the discharge.
⊥ The evidence for the discharge may be presented
during the hearing on the motion

WHAT IS THE EANING O$
ABSOLUTE NECESSITY O$
THE TESTIONY O$ THE
PROPOSED STATE
WITNESS!
⊥ It means that there is no other evidence to establish the
ofense other than the testimony of the accused
⊥ For example, where an ofense is committed in
conspiracy and clandestinely, the discharge of one of
the conspirators is necessary in order to provide direct
evidence of the commission of
the crime
⊥ No one else other than one of the conspirators can testify
on what happened among them

DOES ABSOLUTE
NECESSITY EAN THAT
TESTIONY WOULD
RESULT IN ABSOLUTE
CERTAINTY O$
CON"ICTION!
⊥ No

CAN THERE BE ORE
THAN ONE ACCUSED
WHO CAN BE
DISCHARGED!
⊥ Yes

WHAT IS THE REEDY O$
THE PROSECUTION I$
THE COURT DENIES THE
OTION O$ THE
PROSECUTION!
⊥ The State can fle a petition for certiorari

THE ACCUSED PLEADED GUILTY
TO THE CRIE CHARGED
ANDBOR ALREADY
TESTI$IED AS AN
ACCUSED9 CAN HE
STILL BE DISCHARGED!
⊥ Yes

CAN A CO-CONSPIRATOR BE
DISCHARGED AS A STATE
WITNESS!
⊥ RULE—a co-conspirator cannot be discharged as a
state witness
against a co-conspirator
⊥ EXCEPTION—if the crime was committed
clandestinely and there
is no way to prove the crime

WHAT IS AN IRREGULAR
DISCHARGE!
⊥ Irregular discharge is a discharge where one or all of
the
conditions required for discharge didn’t really exist

I$ THE STATE WITNESS
RE$USES TO TESTI$Y9
WILL HIS SWORN
STATEENT BE ADISSIBLE
AGAINST HI!
⊥ No, his sworn statement will not be admissible against him
⊥ Otherwise, it violates his right against self-incrimination
Sec. 18. Discharge of accused operates as acquittal.
– The order indicated in the preceding section shall
amount to an acquittal of the discharged accused and
shall be a bar to future prosecution for the same ofense,
unless the accused fails or refuses to testify against
his co-accused in accordance with his sworn
statement constituting the basis for his discharge.

WHAT ARE THE E$$ECTS O$
THE DISCHARGE!
1. Evidence in support of the discharge forms part of the trial.
But if the court denies the motion to discharge, his sworn
statement shall be inadmissible as evidence
2. Discharge of the accused operates as an ACQUITTAL
and bar to further prosecution for the same ofense,
except if he fails or refuses to testify against his co-
accused in accordance with his
sworn statement constituting the basis of the discharge. In
this case, he can be prosecuted again and his admission can
be used against him.
WHAT DOES IT EAN WHEN HE
$AILS OR RE$USES TO
TESTI$Y IN ACCORDANCE
WITH HIS SWORN
STATEENT!
⊥ It means that the accused makes substantial changes
in his testimony that would naturally afect the proceedings
and would be prejudicial to the prosecution of the ofense
charged

WHAT I$ IN THE SWORN
STATEENT O$ %9 HE
ENTIONED ONLY THAT 5
O$ HIS COPANIONS
WERE IN CONSPIRACY
WITH EACH OTHER&
DURING HIS TESTIONY9
HE TESTI$IED THAT ALL
1C O$ HIS COPANIONS
WERE IN CONSPIRACY& IS
THIS PROPER!
⊥ Yes
⊥ This doesn’t fall within the ambits of “refusing to
testify in accordance with his sworn statement”
⊥ It will be proper as long as it will help further the
prosecution in prosecuting the ofense charged against the
accused

WHAT HAPPENS I$ THE
COURT IPROPERLY OR
ERRONEOUSLY
DISCHARGES AN
ACCUSED AS STATE
WITNESS9 AS WHEN $OR
E%APLE9 THE ACCUSED
HAS BEEN CON"ICTED
O$ A CRIE IN"OL"ING
ORAL TURPITUDE!
⊥ The improper discharge will not render inadmissible his
testimony nor detract from his competency as a witness
⊥ Neither will it invalidate his acquittal because the
acquittal becomes inefective only if he fails or refuses to testify

WHAT I$ A$TER AN ACCUSED
HAS BEEN DISCHARGED TO
BECOE A STATE
WITNESS9 IT WAS $OUND
OUT DURING THE TRIAL
THAT THE $ACTS HE
ATTESTED TO IN HIS
SWORN STATEENT WERE
ALL LIES! DOES THE
COURT HA"E ANY
RECOURSE I$ THERE
WAS A WRONG$UL
DISCHARGE!
⊥ The discharge of the accused wouldn’t be afected. His
discharge would still amount to an acquittal and is a bar
for further prosecution for the same ofense. First, the grounds
mentioned in
the rule as exceptions to the general rule are exclusive in
character. The discharge will not be a bar to further
prosecution and not amount to acquittal is when the accused
refuses or fails to testify in accordance with his sworn
statement. Second, what the rules require is ABSOLUTE
NECESSITY and not ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY. Third, what
transpired was an error of judgment on the part of the court.
⊥ If the court has a recourse, it would be to detain the
discharged accused, following Section 19 of this Rule, and fle a
case against him but not for the same ofense but for perjury

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE
ORIGINAL IN$ORATION
UNDER WHICH AN
ACCUSED WAS
DISCHARGED IS LATER
AENDED!

⊥ A discharge under the original information is just as
binding upon the subsequent amended information,
since the amended information is just a continuation of the
original

UST THE ACCUSED TO BE
DISCHARGED $IRST BE
CHARGED IN THE
COPLAINT OR
IN$ORATION!
⊥ No.
⊥ Note: the fling of the motion in court gives the court
jurisdiction over the persons

CAN THE OTHER
CONSPIRATORS BE
SOLELY CON"ICTED ON
THE BASIS O$ THE
DISCHARGED STATE
WITNESS!
⊥ No, there must be other evidence to support his testimony
⊥ The testimony of a state witness comes from a
polluted source and must be received with caution
⊥ It should be substantially corroborated in its material points
⊥ As an exception however, the testimony of a co-
conspirator, even if uncorroborated, will be considered
sufcient if given in a straightforward manner and it contains
details which couldn’t have
been a result of deliberate afterthought.
Contin'o's Tria( Syste.
Sec. 2. Continuous trial until terminated; postponements. –
Trial once commenced shall continue from day to day as
far as practicable until terminated. It may be postponed for a
reasonable
period of time for good cause.

The court shall, after consultation with the prosecutor and
defense counsel, set the case for continuous trail on a
weekly or other short-term trial calendar at the earliest
possible time so as to ensure speedy trial. In no case shall
the entire trial period exceed one hundred eighty (180) days
from the frst day of trial, except as otherwise authorized by the
Supreme Court.
The time limitations provided under this section and the
preceding section shall not apply where special laws or
circulars of the Supreme Court provide for a shorter period of
trial.

WHAT PROCEDURE IS USED
TO A"AIL HIS RIGHT TO
SPEEDY TRIAL!
> Continuous trial system—a tool for the early and
expeditious disposition of a case

WHAT IS THE CONTINUOUS
TRIAL SYSTE!
> Trial once commenced shall continue from day to day
as far as practicable until terminated.
> It may be postponed for a reasonable period of time
for good cause.
> The court shall, after consultation with the prosecutor and
defense counsel, set the case for continuous trail on a
weekly or other short-term trial calendar at the earliest
possible time so as to ensure speedy trial.
> In no case shall the entire trial period exceed one hundred
eighty (180) days from the frst day of trial, except as
otherwise authorized by the Supreme Court.

HOW DO YOU ENSURE
CONTINUOUS TRIAL
SYSTE!
> There must be a time limit within which the case
should be terminated

WHAT ARE THE DUTIES O$
THE PRESIDING ?UDGE
UNDER THE CONTINUOUS
TRIAL SYSTE!
1. Adhere faithfully to the session hours prescribed by laws
2. Maintain full control of the proceedings
3. Efciently allocate and use time and court resources to
avoid court delays

IS THE TIE LIIT ABSOLUTE!
> No

IN WHICH CASES IS THE TIE
LIITATION NOT
APPLICABLE!
1. CRIMINAL CASES COVERED BY THE RULES
ON SUMMARY PROCEDURE OR THOSE WHERE THE
PENALTY DOESN’T EXCEED 6 MONTHS IMPRISONMENT
OR A FINE OF P1000: governed by the
rules on summary procedure
2. WHEN THE OFFENDED PARTY IS ABOUT TO
DEPART WITH NO DEFINITE DATE OF RETURN—trial
shall commence within 3 days from the date of arraignment,
and cannot be postponed except on
grounds over which the accused has no control
3. CHILD ABUSE CASES—trial shall commence within 3
days from arraignment and cannot be postponed except on
grounds of illness of the accused or other grounds beyond his
control
4. VIOLATIONS OF DANGEROUS DRUGS LAW—trial shall
be fnished within 3 months from the fling of the information
5. KIDNAPPING, ROBBERY IN A BAND, ROBBERY
AGAINST A BANKING OR FINANCIAL INSTITUTION,
VIOLATION OF THE CARNAPPING ACT, AND OTHER
HEINOUS CRIMES—trial shall be fnished within 60 days
from the frst day of trial
Sec. 4. Factors for granting continuance. – The
following factors, among others, shall be considered
by a court in determining whether to grant a continuance
under section 3(f) of this Rule.

(a) Whether or not the failure to grant a
continuance in the proceeding would likely make a
continuation of such proceeding impossible or result in a
miscarriage of justice; and

(b) Whether or not the case taken as a whole is
so novel, unusual and complex, due to the number of
accused or the nature of the prosecution, or that it is
unreasonable to expect adequate
preparation within the periods of time established therein.

In addition, no continuance under section 3(f) of this
Rule shall be granted because of congestion of the court’s
calendar or lack of diligent preparation or failure to obtain
available witnesses on the part of the prosecutor.
WHAT IS A CONTINUANCE!
⊥ A continuance is a postponement of trial

WHAT ARE THE $ACTORS $OR
GRANTING A
CONTINUANCEBPOSTPONEENT
S!
1. Whether or not the failure to grant a continuance in
the proceeding would likely make a continuation of such
proceeding impossible or result in a miscarriage of justice; and
2. Whether or not the case taken as a whole is so novel,
unusual and complex, due to the number of accused or
the nature of the prosecution, or that it is unreasonable to
expect adequate
preparation within the periods of time established therein.
⊥ No continuance under section 3(f) of this Rule shall
be granted because of congestion of the court’s calendar
or lack of diligent preparation or failure to obtain available
witnesses on the part of
the prosecutor.

IS THE GRANT O$ A OTION
$OR CONTINUANCE OR
POSTPONEENT A ATTER O$
RIGHT!
⊥ It is a matter of discretion on the part of the court
IS THERE A DI$$ERENCE
BETWEEN THE RIGHT
TO COUNSEL DURING
THE CUSTODIAL
IN"ESTIGATION AND
THE RIGHT TO
COUNSEL DURING
TRIAL!
>Yes. During the trial, the right to counsel means the
right to efective counsel. During trial, the purpose of the
counsel is not so much to protect the accused from being
forced to confess, but
rather is to defend the accused.
> On the other hand, a custodial investigation has
stricter requirements. A custodial investigation requires the
presence of a competent and independent counsel, who is
preferably the
accused’s own choice. Furthermore, the right to counsel
could only be waived in writing and in the presence of counsel.
> A custodial investigation take note is not done in public,
hence the danger that confessions will be extracted against
the will of the defendant during the custodial investigation.
This danger doesn't
really exist during trial since the latter is done in public.

WHY IS THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL
A$$ORDED DURING TRIAL!
> The right to counsel aforded during trial because this
right is embraced in one’s right to be heard

WHEN SHOULD THE RIGHT TO
COUNSEL BE IN"OAED!
> The right to counsel can be invoked at any stage of the
proceedings, even on appeal
> However, it can also be waived
> The accused is deemed to have waived his right to counsel
when he voluntarily submits himself to the jurisdiction of the
Court and and proceeds with his defense
> But in two cases, the Court held that the defendant cannot
raise for the frst time on appeal his right to have an attorney. If
the question is not raised in the trial court, the prosecution may
go to
trial. The question will not be considered in the appellate court
for the frst time when the accused fails to raise it in the lower
court.

IS IT THE DUTY O$ THE COURT
TO APPOINT COUNSEL DE
O$$ICIO ANDATORY AT
ALL TIES!
> No, the duty to appoint counsel de ofcio is mandatory only
up to the time of arraignment

DOES THE ISTAAE O$
COUNSEL BIND THE
CLIENT!
> As a rule, the mistake of counsel binds the client
> Therefore, the client cannot question a decision on the
ground that his counsel was an idiot
> However, an exception to this if counsel misrepresents
himself as a lawyer, and he turns out to be a fake lawyer. In this
case, the accused is entitled to new trial because his right to be
represented
by a member of the bar was violated. He was thus denied of
his right to counsel and due process.

IS THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL
ABSOLUTE!
> No since the right of choice must be exercised in a
reasonable manner within reasonable time.
> The accused cannot insist on counsel that he cannot
aford, one who is not a member of the bar, or one who
declines for a valid
reason.
> Also the right of the accused to choose counsel is subject to
the right of the state to due process and adequate justice.

WHEN CAN THE ACCUSED
DE$END HISEL$ IN
PERSON!
> The accused can defend himself in person only if the
court is convinced that he can properly protect his rights even
without the assistance of counsel.
Noti*e O) App(i*ation To
Prose*'tor
WHY IS NOTICE TO THE PROSECUTOR
RE#UIRED!
> Such notice is required because the burden of
showing that the evidence of guilt is strong is on the
prosecution
Sec. 18. Notice of application to prosecutor. – In the
application for bail under section 8 of this Rule, the
court must give reasonable notice of the hearing to the
prosecutor or require him to submit his recommendation.
WHAT IS HABEAS CORPUS!
⊥ Habeas corpus means “having it brought” plus “body”
⊥ To inquire into the legality of the detention of a person
⊥ A writ or order requiring that a prisoner be brought before a
judge or into court to decide whether he is being held lawfully.

WHY IS HABEAS CORPUS
CONSIDERED AN
E%CEPTION TO THE
E%CEPTION!
⊥ Because it is a prerogative writ and therefore must
be decided upon immediately by the court
⊥ The habeas corpus proceeding must take precedence
over all other cases because it involves the liberty of the
person

WITHIN HOW ANY HOURS
SHOULD A ?UDGE RESOL"E
A HABEAS CORPUS
PROCEEDING!
⊥ Within 48 hours or 2 days

WHAT ARE THE DUTIES O$ THE
PUBLIC ATTORNEY I$ THE
ACCUSED ASSIGNED TO
HI IS IPRISONED!
1. He shall promptly undertake to obtain the presence of the
prisoner for trial, or cause a notice to be served on the
person having custody of the prisoner, requiring such
person to advise the
prisoner of his right to demand trial
2. Upon receipt of that notice, the person having
custody of the prisoner shall promptly advise the prisoner of
the charge and his right to demand trial. If at anytime
thereafter, the prisoner
informs the custodian that he demands such trial, the latter
shall cause notice to that efect to be sent promptly to
the public attorney
3. Upon receipt of such notice, the public attorney shall
promptly seek to obtain the presence of the prisoner for trial
4. When the person having custody of the prisoner receives
from the public attorney a properly supported request for the
availability of the prisoner for purposes of trial, the prisoner
shall be made
available accordingly.
Right to Counsel De Parte Is Not Absolute
"ccordingly, an accused may e@ercise his right to
counsel by electing to be represented either by a court+
appointed lawyer or by one of his own choice. &hile
his right to be represented by counsel is
immutable, his option to secure the services of
counsel de parte, however, is not absolute. The court is
obliged to balance the privilege to retain a counsel of
choice against the statesBs and the o#ended partyBs
e'ually important right to speedy and ade'uate
0ustice. Thus, the court may restrict the accusedBs
option to retain a counsel de parte if the accused insists
on an attorney he cannot a#ord, or the chosen counsel
is not a member of the bar, or the attorney declines to
represent the accused for a valid reason, e.g. conIict of
interest and the li%e.
J5KL
"lso, the right to counsel de parte is, li%e other personal
rights, waivable
J7?L
so long as F3G the waiver is not
contrary to law, public order, public policy, morals or
good customs, or pre0udicial to a third person with a
right recogniCed by law
J73L
and F5G the waiver is
une'uivocally, %nowingly and intelligently made.
J75L
n Sayson vs. People,
J77L
this 4ourt held that the duty of
the court to appoint a counsel de ofcio is not
mandatory where the accused has proceeded with the
arraignment and the trial with a counsel of his choice
but, when the time for the presentation of the evidence
for the defense was due, he appears by himself alone
because of the ine@cusable absence of his counsel. n
another case, this 4ourt held that the right to be heard
and to reopen the case Fand send it to trial anewG could
not be allowed if doing so would sanction a plainly
dilatory tactic and a reprehensible triIing with the
orderly administration of 0ustice.
J7)L
n the present case, appellant claims that he was not
given suDcient time to engage a counsel de
parte, thereby preventing him from presenting
evidence in his defense. n his 1rief he adds, but
without giving particulars or proof, that allegedly his
counsels de ofcio did not e@ert their Mutmost e#ortsN in
representing him, thus:
J7:L
M@ @ @ FTGhe lower court a#orded the accused the
assistance of counsel de o2cio as early as the
arraignment stage but failed to show that utmost
e#orts were e@erted by said counsel to defend the life
and liberty of the accused. The duty of the court is not
ended with such appointment, however, as it should
also see to it that the counsel does his duty by the
defendant. 4ounsel de o2cio should not merely ma%e
the motions of defending the accused but e@ert his
utmost e#orts as if he were representing a paying
client.N
The (olicitor $eneral, in his eleven+page 1rief,
J7OL
rebuts
this, arguing that appellantBs actions during the trial
showed instead a Mlac%adaisical stance on his own
defense.N
"ppellant had been given ample time to secure the
services of a counsel de parte, but his subse'uent
appearances in court without such counsel and his act
of allowing this situation to continue until the
presentation of his evidence betrays his lac% of
intention to do so. t even appears that he was merely
delaying his own presentation of evidence on purpose
to the pre0udice of the o#ended party, the trial court
and the orderly administration of 0ustice.
;urthermore, appellant did not demonstrate in what
way the services of his counsels de ofcio were
unsatisfactory. <e did not cite any instance
substantiating his claim that he was not e#ectively
represented. n short, he was a#orded a chance to be
heard by counsel of his own choice, but by his own
neglect or mischief, he e#ectively waived such right. t
ta@es the mind to thin% that, almost two years
J7PL
since
appellant 2rst invo%ed his right to be represented by
counsel de parte, he still could not 2nd one who would
suit his needs and desires. Neither did he cooperate
with his court+named lawyers.
The facts of this case do not constitute a deprivation of
appellantBs constitutional right to counsel because he
was ade'uately represented by three court+appointed
lawyers: "tty. 8ina+ac, "tty. "ntonano and "tty.
$arcia. 4ourts are not re'uired to await inde2nitely the
pleasure and convenience of the accused as they are
also mandated to promote the speedy and orderly
administration of 0ustice. Nor should they countenance
such an obvious triIing with the rules. ndeed, public
policy re'uires that the trial continue as scheduled,
considering that appellant was ade'uately represented
by counsels who were not shown to be negligent,
incompetent or otherwise unable to represent him.
If the accu!ed appear! without a lawyer during
arraignment# the court appoint! a Fcoun!el de
oGcioH from among the lawyer! pre!ent in the
courtroom to a!!i!t him."ny lawyer the 0udge
chooses cannot refuse since the appointment as
Mcounsel de oDcioN is for purposes of arraignment only.
=eteran lawyers always manifest for e@ample,
M6espectfully appearing as counsel de oDcio for
purposes of arraignment only.N ;or new bar passers
who wish to gain trial e@perience however, it is a good
idea to ta%e on clients on a de oDcio basis not only for
the arraignment but for the whole trial.
The court sta# records the name of the Mcounsel de
oDcioN and as%s himQher to sign. This is to prevent the
accused from later on claiming that he has not been
arraigned and that therefore the court has no
0urisdiction over him.

Sponsor Documents

Or use your account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Forgot your password?

Or register your new account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link to create a new password.

Back to log-in

Close