Chapter 8.

Rights of the Accused (Rule 115) Equipoise Rule

●​ The court is faced with conflicting versions of the prosecution & the defense,
Presumption of innocence & where the evidence, facts & circumstance are capable of 2/more
●​ If prosecution fails to discharge the burden, accused deserves a judgment of explanations (innocence/guilt)
acquittal ●​ Does not fulfill test of moral certainty = tilts scales in favor of accused
●​ As the plaintiff in criminal cases to prove beyond reasonable doubt not only ●​ IF evidence is not evenly balanced = i.e. prosecution evidence is
each element of crime BUT ALSO identity of the accused as the criminal overwhelming = doctrine does not apply
●​ GP: official duty has been regularly performed
○​ Presumption of regularity in the performance of official duty should What is the effect of plea of self-defense?
NOT by itself, prevail over the presumption of innocence ●​ GR: burden is on prosecution to prove guilt
○​ Obtains only where there is no deviation from regular performance of ●​ HOWEVER, burden of evidence is shifted to prove such defense by clear,
duty satisfactory & conviction evidence that excludes any vestige of criminal
○​ Irregularities are present: presumption is destroyed aggression on his part
●​ Implies the admission by the accused that he committed the criminal act
Proof beyond reasonable doubt
●​ Prosecution must prove two things = proof beyond reasonable doubt Right to be informed of the nature and cause of accusation
○​ Fact of the crime: elements ●​ Matters to be contained
○​ Accused is perpetrator of crime ○​ Name & surname of accused/appellation/nickname/fictitious name
●​ Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean such a degree of proof as, ○​ Name & surname of offended party/appellation/nickname/fictitious
excluding possibility of error, produces absolute certainty. Moral certainty name
only is required, or that degree of proof which produces conviction in an ○​ Acts or omissions constituting offense to enable accused to know
unprejudiced mind" offense being charged with (ordinary + concise language)
○​ must be satisfied with moral certainty that an accused has indeed ○​ Aggravating + qualifying circumstances
committed the crime on the basis of facts and circumstances to ○​ Essential ingredient
warrant a judgment of conviction. ○​ Date of the commission of act/omissions constituting offense
●​ When there is reasonable doubt as to guilt of the accused = may be acquitted ○​ Offenses against property = if name of OP is unknown, property must
even if innocence may be doubted be described with such particularity to identify the offense charged
○​ Constitutional right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty can ●​ Rules authorize quashal, upon motion of the accused of an information that
only be thrown by PBRD fails TO ALLEGE THE ACTS CONSTITUTING THE OFFENSE
Prosecution must rest on its own merits to prove guilt of accused ●​ Jurisprudence
●​ must rest not on the weakness of the defense but on the strength of the ○​ Right violated = The issue as to the identity of the check, though not
prosecution, is premised on the constitutional presumption raised as an error, should, according to the Court, be considered in
●​ IF prosecution fails to meet the required quantum of evidence, the defense favor of the accused the variance in the identity of the check nullifies
may logically not even present evidence on its own behalf = acquitted the conviction of the accused (first element: person draws/issued
check on account or for value)
 ○​ Right violated = Variance between dates of the check as alleged in the interrogations that lend itself to eliciting incriminating statements,
information & as indicated in the documentary evidence presented + that the Miranda Rule begins to operate
marked as exhibit ○​ Even when invited for questioning
○​ Right violated = No PI + no info filed before the court, judge set ●​ must also be advised that he has the option to reject the counsel provided for
criminal case him by the police authorities ( legal notarization IS NOT legal assistance)
○​ Right violated = Did not allege the supposed felonious act by means ●​ Applies in pre-trial proceedings
of violence against or intimidation of any person in carnapping ○​ Critical stages like PI
○​ Right NOT violated = chemical formula of ephedrine had only ●​ No right to counsel in a mere police line up: not yet being investigated; not
difference of single atom of oxygen = charge included lesser crimes accusatory since complainant is interrogated & gives statement
or offenses for sale & possession of ephedrine, a related drug ●​ Right to choose counsel is not plenary; right may be waived
○​ Court may appoint counsel de oficio who is competent & independent
Right to counsel of the accused and of persons arrested, detained or under to proceed with case
custodial investigation ○​ Voluntary & intelligent, must be in writing + presence of counsel
●​ Not a mere formality ○​ Silence does not constitute a valid waiver
●​ Requirement is part of a person’s basic rights ●​ Competent & independent counsel
●​ Even a person under investigation for an offense has the right to have a "[CAI] ○​ that he is willing to fully safeguard the constitutional rights of the
competent and independent counsel preferably of his own choice." Included accused, as distinguished from one who would be merely giving a
in this right is the right to be informed of his right to counsel routine, peremptory and meaningless recital of the individual's
●​ Even if the confession contains a grain of truth, if it was made without the constitutional rights
assistance of counsel, it becomes inadmissible in evidence, regardless of the ○​ "contemplates the transmission of meaningful information rather
absence of coercion or even if it was voluntarily given than just the ceremonial and perfunctory recitation of an abstract
○​ Counsel can at all times be allowed to confer privately with person constitutional principle."
arrested, detained or under CI i.e. arrested & brought to police station ○​ "should be engaged by the accused (himself), or by the latter's relative
to answer questions or person authorized by him to engage an attorney or by the court,
●​ Curb police state practice of extracting a confession that leads suspects to upon proper petition of the accused or person authorized by the
make self-incriminating statements accused to file such a petition."
●​ Right to be informed = implies a correlative obligation on the part of the ○​ are given as proof of their probity and supposed independence, are
police investigator to explain, and contemplates an effective communication generally suspect, as in many areas
that results in an understanding of what is conveyed ○​ Should be present from beginning to end (stages of interview,
●​ Mere inquiry on the commission of crime DOES NOT automatically trigger counseling/advising caution reasonably at every turn of investigation
application of right to counsel & stopping interrogation as needed to give advice)
○​ only after the investigation ceased to be a general inquiry into an ○​ Tersely put, it means an efficient and truly decisive legal assistance
unsolved crime and begins to focus on a particular suspect, the and not a simple perfunctory representation
suspect is taken into custody, and the police carries out a process of ●​ Extrajudicial confession = no compliance to standards of independent &
competent counsel = uncounseled confession = inadmissible in evidence
 ○​ the first with raping his own daughter, without sufficient reason, did When is it violated?
not cross-examine private complainant, and thus effectively waived ●​ [VCO] vexatious, capricious, and oppressive delays, or when unjustified
the right to private complainant and, thus, cross-examination postponements of the trial are asked for and secured, or when without cause or
○​ Legal consultant of office of municipal mayor = not independent justifiable motive
●​ Right to counsel in administrative cases = no requirement ●​ a mere mathematical reckoning of the time involved is not sufficient.
○​ Merely to determine whether there are facts that merit disciplinary Particular and due regard must be given to the facts and circumstances of
measures against erring public officers & employees, with the purpose ●​ each case because the concept of speedy disposition of cases is a relative
of maintaining the dignity of government service term and must necessarily be flexible
○​ Not violated: CSC took 6 years to resolve appeal
Extended meaning of custodial investigation ○​ Violated: judge has illness & failed to render decision; ask SC for
●​ any questioning initiated by law enforcement authorities after a person is extension
taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any ○​ Violated: designation of judge to preside over another sala
significant manner ○​ Violated: poor health, old age, heavy caseload, do not totally absolve a
○​ Brought to police station, already a suspect of crime of rape = under judge
CI ○​ Violated: absence of a branch clerk of court
○​ Silence could not be taken against him ○​ Violated: non-submission of the transcript of stenographic notes by
●​ include the practice of issuing an invitation to a person who is investigated in stenographers would not relieve judges of their duty to render a
connection with an offense he is suspected to have committed, without decision
prejudice to the liability of the 'inviting' officer for any violation of law"
●​ "request for appearance" issued by law enforcers to a person identified as a Doctrine of inordinate delay; dismissal based on a violation of the right to speedy
suspect is akin to an "invitation." disposition of cases
○​ Admission obtained from request for appearance W/O assistance of ●​ criminal case may be dismissed for violation of a person's right to speedy
counsel = inadmissible disposition of cases
○​ Tatad v. Sandiganbayan: A delay of close to three (3) years cannot be
Right to speedy trial deemed reasonable or justifiable in the light of the circumstances
●​ Cannot be invoked by someone who is not an accused obtaining in the case at bar.
●​ speedy trial" is a relative term and necessarily involves a degree of flexibility ○​ Coscuella v. Sandiganbayan: Noting that the criminal charges against
●​ while justice is administered with dispatch, the essential ingredient is orderly, him by Office of Ombudsman were resolved only after almost eight
expeditious and not mere speed years since the letter-complaint was filed, and six (6) years after the
●​ Right to speedy disposition of cases v right to speedy trial investigation officer found probable cause, the petitioner, on July 9,
○​ First: can be invoked before any tribunal, whether 2009
judicial/quasi-judicial or administrative bodies; civil or administrative ○​ On July 10, 1996, the special prosecution officer recommended the
in nature filing of informations against the respondent military officers but it
○​ Latter: invoked in criminal prosecutions against court of law was only on October 6, 2009 that the informations were filed before
the Sandiganbayan
 ○​ After the lapse of nine (9) years, the Office of the Ombudsman, in a ●​ deliberate attempt to delay the trial in order to hamper the defense should be
resolution dated August 27, 2014, found probable cause to warrant weighted heavily against the government.
the filing of an information against the private respondent. In ○​ negligence or overcrowded courts should be weighted less heavily
November 2014, the information was filed with the Sandiganbayan ●​ Whether and how a defendant asserts his right is closely related to the other
which dismissed the case factors we have mentioned. The strength of his efforts will be affected by the
length of the delay, to some extent by the reason for the delay, and most
How can the above pronouncements be reconciled with decisions which declared particularly by the personal prejudice, which is not always readily identifiable,
that, in order to validly assert one's right to speedy disposition of cases, one must that he experiences
have invoked or asserted such right? ●​ The defendant's assertion of his speedy trial right, then, is entitled to strong
●​ it took the respondents more than one year and eight months after the evidentiary weight in determining whether the defendant is being deprived of
informations were filed before they asserted the right to speedy disposition the right.
of cases, there is no violation of the right ○​ failure to assert the right will make it difficult for a defendant to prove
●​ Thus, this Court now holds for the purpose of determining whether inordinate that he was denied a speedy trial
delay exists a case is deemed to have commenced from the filing of the ●​ Prejudice to defendant
formal complaint and the subsequent conduct of preliminary investigation, ○​ (i) to prevent oppressive pretrial incarceration;
xxx the ruling that fact-finding investigations are included in the period of ○​ (ii) to minimize anxiety and concern of the accused; and
determination of inordinate delay is deemed abandoned" ○​ (iii) to limit the possibility that the defense will be impaired.

Approaches to speedy trial Effect of the violation of the right to speedy trial
●​ "fixed-time period": Constitution requires a criminal defendant to be offered a ●​ may dismiss a criminal case on a motion nolle prosequi if the accused is not
trial within a specified time period brought to trial within the prescribed time and is deprived of his right
●​ "demand-waiver rule": a defendant waives any consideration of his right to unreasonable or capricious delay caused by the prosecution
speedy trial for any period prior to which he has not demanded trial ●​ EQUIVALENT TO AN ACQUITTAL, and double jeopardy MAY ATTACH even if
○​ a prior demand is a necessary condition to the consideration of the the dismissal is with the consent of the accused
speedy trial right ●​ Dismissal upon motion of the accused because the prosecution was not
●​ Court adopted balancing test,' in which the conduct of both the prosecution prepared for trial (no complainant & witnesses appearance) = acquittal bar
and defendant are weighed further prosecution for the same offense
○​ speedy trial cases on an ad hoc basis where courts should assess ●​ To exercise right to a speedy trial, FIRST ask for the TRIAL of the case, not
and identify certain factors in determining whether a particular dismissal
defendant has been deprived of his right such as the length of the ○​ Prosecution cannot produce witnesses + evidence and MFP denied
delay ○​ THEN, move to dismiss
●​ Until there is some delay which is presumptively prejudicial, there is no ○​ Dismissal, prosec moved for MR of order of dismissal, court reset
necessity for inquiry into the other factors that go into the balance. trial, accused CAN claim DJ since order of dismissal is acquittal
○​ the delay that can be tolerated for an ordinary street crime is
considerably less than for a serious, complex conspiracy charge. Remedy where the accused is not brought to trial within the time limit
 ●​ the information may be dismissed on motion of the accused on the ground Privilege against self-incrimination
of denial of his right to speedy trial Purpose: intended to prevent the State, with all its coercive powers, from extracting
○​ Accused has burden but prosec. moving forward need to present from the suspect testimony that may convict him and to avoid a person subject to
evidence to establish exclusion of time such compulsion to perjure himself for his own protection
●​ Pertinent time limits
○​ Case raffled w/in 3 days from filing of info Meaning of compulsion
○​ Arraigned w/in 10 days from date of raffle ●​ Not necessarily violence
○​ Hold PTC within 30 days after arraignment OR w/in 10 days if accused ●​ Product of unintentional statements
= preventive detention ●​ which operates to overbear his will, disable him from making a free and
■​ If direct testimonies of the witnesses are to be presented rational choice, or impair his capacity for rational judgment would be
through JA, the court shall give prosec not more than 20 days sufficient, so is moral coercion that tends to force testimony from the
from arraignment within which to prepare & submit judicial unwilling lips of the accused
affidavits
○​ After pre trial conference, court set the trial of the case in PTO not Rights against self-incrimination of an accused distinguished from that of an
later than 30 days from termination of PTC ordinary witness
○​ Regular trial = 180 days, trial by judicial affidavit = 60 days ●​ Accused: Occupies a different tier of protection from an ordinary witness
●​ Ordinary witness: compelled to take the witness stand & claim the privilege
Waiver of the right to speedy trial as each question requiring an incriminating answer; MAY altogether refuse to
●​ Failure to object to the prosecution’s manifestation that cases be tried take the witness stand & refuse to answer any and all questions
separately is fatal to his case ○​ Can be claimed only when the specific question, incriminatory in
●​ During those 12 years, petitioner had shown no signs of asserting his right to character, is actually put to the witness
speedy disposition through overt acts ○​ Cannot be claimed at any other time
○​ Cannot disregard subpoena
Factors granting continuance ○​ Cannot decline to appear before the court at the time appointed
●​ Whether the failure to grant such a continuance in the proceeding would be ○​ Refuse to testify altogether
likely to make a continuation of such proceeding impossible, or result in a
miscarriage of justice. Scope of privilege against self-incrimination
●​ Whether the case taken as a whole is so novel, so unusual and so complex, ●​ the privilege against self-incrimination protects a person only from
due to the number of accused or the nature of the prosecution or otherwise, testimonial compulsion or a compelled testimony of a communicative nature
that it is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation within the periods of ●​ "the kernel of the privilege" was the prohibition against testimonial
time established by this Act compulsion
○​ Cannot be granted: general congestion of court’s calendar, lack of ○​ Not violated: woman accused of adultery that to compel her to submit
diligent preparation OR failure to obtain available witnesses on part of to a physical examination
PP ○​ Not violated & admitted in evidence: morphine forced out of the
mouth of the accused
 ○​ Not violated & admitted in evidence: stripped of clothing after his ○​ In reality she was not compelled to execute any positive act, much less
arrest and found gonorrhea on his body a testimonial act; she was only enjoined from something preventing the
■​ Not an exclusion of his body as evidence, when it may be examination; all of which is very different from what is required of the
material petitioner of the present case, where it is sought to compel him to
○​ Not violated: putting clothes or shoes for size or for measuring or perform a positive, testimonial act, to write and give a specimen of his
photographing handwriting for the purpose of comparison. Besides, in the case of
○​ Not violated: dna samples from an accused in crim case; paternity Villamor v. Summers, it was sought to exhibit something already in
case existence, while in the case at bar, the question deals with something
○​ Not violated: paraffin casts not yet in existence, and it is precisely sought to compel the petitioner to
make, prepare, or produce by this means, evidence not yet in existence;
Incriminatory nature of forced re-enactments ●​ Marcelo v. Sanigdanbayan: on pilfered mail; affixing one’s signature not
●​ Uncouncelled and coerced confessions = not admissible in evidence always under self-incrimination
●​ Includes any evidence “communicative in nature”
●​ Distinguished from mechanical acts = not violated
Beltran Marcelo
○​ Execute not meant to unearth undisclosed facts but to ascertain
physical attributes determinable by simple observation In Beltran, the purpose was to show that In Marcelo v. Sandiganbayan, the
○​ Test to extract virus from body the specimen handwriting matched the purpose was not to compare the
○​ Compel him to expectorate morphine from his mouth handwriting in the document alleged to signature of the petitioner for the
have been falsified and thereby show prosecution of falsification but merely
○​ Pregnancy test
that the accused was the author of the to authenticate the envelopes as the
○​ Footprinting test crime (falsification). There was no other ones seized from him and not to
○​ Police lineup evidence other than the writing produce a non-existent evidence. The
●​ Made to admit criminal responsibility against his will exemplar the accused was required to seized mail matters were already
give. In effect the accused was asked to evidence against the accused having
Incriminatory nature of writing exemplars or samples produce evidence against himself. been seized as result of a valid arrest.
●​ Stemmed from an order from judge required petition to appear before fiscal They were sufficient evidence
independent of his signature and can
to take dictation of his own handwriting
stand on their own, being the fruits of
●​ Beltran: [I]n the case before us, writing is something more than moving the the crime. The signature affixed was
body, or the hands, or the fingers; writing is not a purely mechanical the irrelevant to the admissibility of the
application of intelligent act, because it requires the application of intelligence letters as the items seized from the
and attention; and in the case at bar writing means that the petitioner herein is accused. Thus, the invocation of the
to furnish a means to determine whether or not he is the falsifier, as the petition right against self-incrimination was not
of the respondent fiscal clearly states. Here the witness is compelled to write upheld.
and create. by means of the act of writing, evidence which does not exist, and
which may identify him as the falsifier" ●​ right is accorded to every person who gives evidence
●​ Villaflor
 ○​ whether voluntarily or under compulsion of subpoena, in any civil, Right of the accused to defend himself; right to be present at trial; right to be heard
criminal, or administrative proceeding ●​ Can waive presence at trial BUT must be present if specifically ordered by
●​ the privilege against self-incrimination can be asserted in any proceeding, court for purposes of identification
civil or criminal, administrative or judicial, investigatory or adjudicatory; ●​ Waiver of right = inferred from absence without justifiable cause, provided he
●​ The right against self-incrimination is not self-executing or automatically had prior notice
operational. It must be claimed ●​ Accused absent during trial + after arraignment = trial proceed so long as
notified + failure to appear is unjustified
Waiver of the privilege ●​ Trial court should give the accused the opportunity to present his evidence
●​ It is a rule that an accused may refuse to testify. even after demurrer was denied
○​ If he testifies in his own behalf, he may be cross-examined on matters ○​ Denial is not subject to appeal or certiorari or prohibition
covered by the direct examination
●​ must be certain and unequivocal, and intelligently, understandably, and Right to testify as a witness
willingly made ●​ Under Sec. 6 of Rule 132, the witness may be cross-examined by the adverse
○​ such waiver following only where liberty of choice has been fully party not only as to any matter stated in the direct examination or those
accorded connected with the matters stated in the direct examination but the cross
○​ is an intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right. examiner is given "sufficient fullness and freedom"
●​ Never presumed
Right to confront and cross-examine witnesses against him
Inapplicability of privilege when witness is given immunity from prosecution ●​ essential to test his or her accuracy, expose falsehoods or half-truths,
●​ Immunity from prosecution occurs when the government, under an uncover the truth which rehearsed direct examination testimonies may
authorizing law, grants immunity to a witness in exchange for a testimony successfully suppress, and demonstrate inconsistencies in substantial
favorable to the prosecution matters to the guilt of the accused and, thus, give substance to the
○​ (a) Transactional immunity: "blanket" or "total" immunity, which constitutional right of the accused to confront the witnesses against him
completely protects the witness from future prosecution for crimes ●​ an actual cross-examination NEED NOT be had. The right is sufficiently
related to his or her testimony protected when there is a real opportunity to conduct a cross-examination
○​ (b) "Use and derivative use" immunity: prevents the prosecution only ○​ Failure to avail = waives the right
from using the witness' own testimony or any evidence derived from ○​ a waiver may occur when the party fails to cross-examine the
the testimony against the witness. witnesses against him despite opportunity to do so
■​ should the prosecutor later on acquire evidence of a crime
committed by the witness, independently of the witness'
testimony, witness may be prosecuted Effect of deprivation of the right to cross-examination
●​ If one is deprived of the opportunity to cross-examine + no fault on his end =
Immunity statutes; examples entitled to have the direct examination stricken from the record
 ●​ Where the adverse party is deprived of the right to cross-examine the ●​ the formal mode and manner of implementing the constitutional right of an
persons who executed the affidavits, said affidavits are generally rejected for accused to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against
being hearsay him
●​ absence of a cross-examination, the direct examination of the witness should ●​ Procedural due process requires that the accused be arraigned so that he
be expunged from the records. may be informed of the reason for his indictment, the specific charges he is
●​ If the witness is the lone witness, the trial court would not have a basis to bound to face, and the corresponding penalty that could be possibly meted
deny a demurrer to evidence against him
○​ The demurrer has to be granted ●​ absence of arraignment results in the nullity of the proceedings before the
trial court
Right to compulsory process ○​ No arraignment = no trial in absentia
●​ the accused to secure the attendance of witnesses and the production of
witnesses on his behalf Duty of the court before arraignment
●​ may move the court for the issuance of a subpoena ad testificandum or a ●​ (a) inform the accused of his right to counsel;
subpoena duces tecum pursuant to the provisions of Rule 21 of the Rules of ●​ (b) ask him if he desires to have one; and
Court. ●​ (c) must assign a counsel de oficio to defend him, unless the accused
●​ unjustified failure of the witness to comply, the court or judge issuing the ○​ (i) is allowed to defend himself in person; or
subpoena, upon proof of the service of such subpoena and proof of his failure ○​ (ii) has employed a counsel of his choice
to attend, may issue a warrant for his arrest ●​ WHEN TO ARRAIGN WITHOUT BENEFIT OF COUNSEL: if the accused waives
such right and the court, finding the accused capable, allows him to represent
Right to appeal himself in person
●​ of his cause, freed from the constraints of technicalities. The right to appeal ●​ If the accused informs the court that he cannot afford a lawyer, and the court
is statutory. Its suppression would be a violation of due process has not allowed the accused to represent himself or the accused is incapable
of representing himself, the judge has the duty to appoint a counsel de oficio
Matters for review by appellate court to give meaning and substance to the constitutional right of the accused ot
●​ an appeal throws the whole case wide open for review and the reviewing counsel
tribunal can correct errors or even reverse the trial court's decision on ●​ counsel de oficio members of the bar in good standing who, by reason of
grounds other than those that the parties raise as errors (Guy v. People, 582 their experience and ability, can competently defend the accused.
SCRA 108, 124)
●​ hat appellate courts will not interfere with the judgment of the trial court on Options of the accused before arraignment & plea
the credibility of witnesses, unless there appears in the record some facts or 1.​ Bill of particulars
circumstances of weight and influence 2.​ Suspension of arraignment
a.​ with the arraignment of the accused, the DOJ Secretary can no longer
entertain the appeal or petition for review because petitioner had
Chapter 9. Arraignment and plea (Rule 116) already waived or abandoned the same
 b.​ According to the Supreme Court, the Rules of Procedure of the ●​ If Executive Judge or Pairing Judge acts on bail:
Ombudsman allows the filing of an information in court pending a ○​ They must coordinate with the court where the case is assigned
motion for reconsideration of the finding of a probable cause; hence, if ○​ Purpose: proper scheduling of arraignment and pre-trial
the filing of a MR of the resolution finding probable cause cannot bar ●​ Notice of Arraignment and Pre-Trial (Sec. [b])
the filing of the corresponding information, then neither can it bar the ●​ Notice must be sent to:
arraignment of the accused, which, in the normal course of criminal ○​ The accused
procedure, logically follows the filing of the information. ○​ The counsel
3.​ Motion to quash ○​ The private complainant or law enforcement agent
4.​ Challenge the validity of arrest or legality of the warrant issued or assail the ○​ The public prosecutor
regularity or question the absence of a preliminary investigation of the charge ○​ Witnesses named in the Information

Arraignment under an amended information; substituted information May arraignment be made after a case has been submitted for decision?
●​ Substantial amendment: arraignment of amended info. is mandatory ●​ Yes. His arrest, not his arraignment, conferred on the trial court jurisdiction
○​ Not arraigned & convicted = constitutes reversible error over his person.
●​ Formal amendment = no new PI and retaking of plea of accused ●​ Appellant's belated arraignment did not prejudice him. This procedural defect
○​ Change date of commission of homicide was cured when his counsel participated in the trial without raising any
○​ does not affect the essence of the offense nor deprive the accused of objection that his client had yet to be arraigned. In fact, his counsel even
an opportunity to meet the new averment, and is not prejudicial to the cross-examined the prosecution witnesses.
accused
●​ Substitution of Information: another PI + plead anew to new information is When a plea of 'not guilty' shall be entered
needed ●​ accused, by entering a plea of not guilty = submits to the jurisdiction of the
trial court, thereby curing any defect in his arrest
How arraignment and plea are made ○​ Waiver of right to question illegality of arrest does not carry with the
●​ Made before the court where complaint/info was filed/assigned for trial question of admissibility of evidence
●​ Waiver of reading of information: shall be expressly stated in both the ●​ Fearing for life = plea of not guilty
minutes/ certificate of arraignment and the order of arraignment. ●​ Plea not considered conditional if it asks for leniency in the imposition of a
penalty
Revised Guidelines for Continuous Trial for Criminal Cases ○​ pleaded guilty to robbery with homicide but asked the court to impose
●​ Arraignment & PreTrial upon him a lesser penalty other than death.
○​ 10 calendar days → detained accused (from court’s receipt of case) ●​ Accused pleads guilty PROVIDED he is given a lesser penalty = not a plea to a
○​ 30 calendar days → non-detained accused (from court’s acquisition of lesser offense
jurisdiction) ○​ plea of guilty subject to the proviso that a certain penalty be imposed
●​ Shorter period allowed → if provided by law or SC circular upon him, is equivalent to a plea of not guilty and would, therefore,
○​ For detained accused → set in the commitment order require a full-blown trial before judgment may be rendered
○​ For non-detained accused → set in the order approving bail
 ●​ Plea of not guilty: amidst the truth of some or all of the allegations in the ●​ Necessarily included: essential elements or ingredients of the former
information but interposes EXCUSES or additional facts, which if duly constitute or form part of those constituting the latter
established would exempt or relieve him in whole or in part of crim ○​ Robbery or theft is not necessarily included in estafa
responsibility
○​ he denied the specific allegations about the killing of the victim When plea of guilty to a lesser offense may be made - asked to pat
○​ he manifested that he did not do any of those acts attributed to him ●​ At arraignment but also after arraignment and after his prior plea of not guilty
●​ Acting in self-defense - effect of vacating the plea of guilty - no standing plea is withdrawn
at time court render judgment ●​ "Plea bargaining is allowed during the arraignment, the pre- trial, or even up
○​ No double jeopardy since no plea to the point when the prosecution already rested its case
●​ Plea of guilty = judicial confession of guilt: admission of all material facts ●​ "If the accused moved to plead guilty to a lesser offense subsequent to a bail
alleged, incdg aggravating circumstance hearing or after the prosecution rested its case, the rules allow such a plea
○​ XPN: only when the prosecution does not have sufficient evidence to establish the
■​ Disproved by evidence guilt of the crime charged.
■​ Plea of guilty does not dispense with presentation of evidence ●​ If allowed = there is no need to amend the information or complaint

Plea of guilty to a lesser offense; plea bargaining Plea of guilty to a capital offense
●​ usually involves the defendant's pleading guilty to a lesser offense or to only When the accused pleads guilty to a capital offense, it is not proper for the court to
one or some of the counts of a multi-count indictment in return for a lighter immediately render judgment on the basis of the guilty plea. Instead, the court is
sentence than that for the graver charge mandated to perform the following acts:
●​ (a) To conduct a searching inquiry
Requisites for a plea of guilty to a lesser offense ○​ (1) to ascertain the voluntariness of the plea, and
●​ is necessarily included in the offense charged; ○​ (ii) to ascertain whether or not the accused has full comprehension of
●​ plea must be with the consent of both the offended party and the prosecutor the consequences of his plea;
○​ consent of the offended party will not be required if said party, despite ●​ (b) To require the prosecution to prove the following:
due notice, fails to appear ○​ (i) the guilt of the accused, and
●​ "If the accused desires to enter a plea of guilty to a lesser offense, plea ○​ (i) the precise degree of his culpability; and
bargaining shall immediately proceed, provided ●​ (c) To ask the accused if he wishes to present evidence in his behalf and be
○​ the private offended party in private crimes, or allowed to do so, if he desires
○​ the arresting officer in victimless crimes, is present to give his/her
consent + the public prosecutor to the plea bargaining *difference of rape and qualified rape; latter has parole
●​ is not demandable by the accused as matter of right but is a matter
addressed entirely to the sound discretion of the trial court Meaning of "searching inquiry"
○​ not supposed to be allowed as a matter of bargaining or compromise ●​ (a) Ascertain from the accused himself
for the convenience of the accused ○​ (i) how he was brought into the custody of the law;
 ○​ (ii) whether he had the assistance of a competent counsel during the ●​ When the accused pleads guilty to a non-capital offense, the court may
custodial and preliminary investigations; and receive evidence from the parties to determine the penalty to be imposed
○​ (iii) under what conditions he was detained and interrogated during ●​ Revise Guidelines for Continuous Trial of Criminal Cases: the accused pleads
the investigations. This is accordingly intended to rule out the guilty to the crime charged in the information, judgment shall be
possibility that the accused has been coerced or placed under a state immediately rendered, except in those cases involving capital punishment
of duress either by actual threats of physical harm coming from ●​ Immediate rendition of a judgment is far different from the automatic
malevolent quarters or simply because of the judge's intimidating rendition of a judgment after a plea of guilty to the offense charged.
robes. ○​ simply because the accused pleaded guilty to the charge that his
●​ (b) Ask the defense counsel a series of questions as to whether he had conviction automatically follows.
conferred with, and completely explained to the accused the meaning and ○​ Additional evidence independent of the plea may be considered to
consequences of a plea of guilty convince the judge that it was intelligently made
●​ (c) Elicit information about the personality profile of the accused, such as his ■​ Abuse of discretion if judge persists to hold the accused
age, socio-economic status, and educational background, which may serve bound to admission of guilt when evidence points to acquittal
as a trustworthy index of his capacity to give a free and informed plea of
guilty Improvident plea of guilty
○​ Inform the accused the exact length of imprisonment or nature of the ●​ Where the trial court failed in its duty to conduct the prescribed "searching
penalty under the law and the certainty that he will serve such inquiry" into the voluntariness of the accused's plea of guilty and full
sentence. For not infrequently, observed the Court, an accused pleads comprehension thereof, the plea of guilty is deemed made improvidently and
guilty in the hope of a lenient treatment or upon bad advice or rendered inefficacious
because of promises of the authorities or parties of a lighter penalty ●​ Convictions based on an improvident plea of guilty are set aside ONLY IF
should he admit guilt or express remorse. It is the duty of the judge to such plea is the sole basis of the judgment
ensure that the accused does not labor under these mistaken ○​ court receives evidence to determine precisely whether the accused
impressions because a plea of guilty carries with it not only the erred in admitting his guilt, the manner in which the plea is made
admission of authorship of the crime proper but also of the loses legal significance if the conviction is independent of the plea,
aggravating circumstances attending it, that increase punishment. based on evidence proving the commission by the accused of the
●​ (e) Inquire if the accused knows the crime with which he is charged and fully offense charged
explain to him the elements c fundamental right to be informed of the precise
nature of the accusation against him and a denial of his right to due process. Rule where no plea bargaining or plea of guilty takes place
○​ All questions posed to the accused should be in a language known ●​ if the accused does not enter a plea of guilty, whether to a lesser offense or to
and understood by the latter. the offense charged in the information, the court SHALL IMMEDIATELY
○​ The trial judge must satisfy himself that the accused, in pleading proceed with the arraignment and the pre-trial
guilty, is truly guilty. The accused must be required to narrate the
tragedy or reenact the crime or furnish its missing details Production or inspection of material evidence
●​ Motion of the accused
Plea of guilty to a non-capital offense
Chapter 10. Motion to quash (Rule 117) ○​ affidavit of desistance made by a witness after conviction of the
accused is not reliable, and deserves only scant attention
Characteristics and Nature of MTQ ■​ Why: can easily be secured from witnesses, usually through
●​ mode by which an accused assails the validity of a criminal complaint or intimidation or for a monetary consideration
information filed against him for insufficiency on its face in point of law, or ●​ absence of probable cause for the issuance of a warrant of arrest is not a
for defects which are apparent in the face of the info ground for the quashal of the information BUT can be for DISMISSAL of case
●​ a hypothetical admission of the facts alleged in the information ●​ Matters of defense are not grounds for MTQ
○​ determining the sufficiency of material averments in an information: ○​ Homicide because he only acted in self defense + such fact not
whether or not the facts alleged therein, which are hypothetically alleged in information + court should proceed with case & determine
admitted, would establish the essential elements of the crime defined validity of truth
by law ●​ Absence of PI not a ground for MTQ
●​ Evidence aliunde/matters extrinsic of information are not to be considered ○​ Proper ground is motion for reinvestigation
○​ MTQ SHOULD be based on a defect in the information which is ○​ Court’s jurisdiction nor validity of an information adversely affected by
evident on ITS FACT deficiencies
○​ If defect can be cured by amendment OR if it is based on the ground
that facts do not constitute an offense, the prosecution is given BY What grounds are not waived even if not asserted in the motion?
THE COURT the opportunity to correct defect by amendment ●​ Facts charged do not constitute an offense
●​ IF MTQ sustained = court orders another complaint/info to be filed except ●​ Court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the offense charged
when ●​ Criminal action/liability has been extinguished
○​ XPN: info is quashed on the ground of extinction of crim. ●​ Double jeopardy
liability/double jeopardy
○​ Grounds above = MAY be based on matters outside of the allegations Time for filing the motion to quash: made at any time before the accused enters his
of information/complaint plea
●​ Characteristics of an omnibus motion: motion attacking a pleading, order, ●​ Now allowed in summary procedure
judgment, or proceeding shall include all objections then available, and all ○​ XPN: ground of lack of jurisdiction over subject matter
objections not so included shall be deemed waived." ○​ Failure to comply with barangay conciliation proceedings special to
●​ Failure to answer ground = waiver summary procedure)
○​ Accused did not file MTQ
○​ Filed MTQ but failed to allege ground NO ORAL MTQ
●​ In writing signed by accused/his counsel
What grounds are not grounds to quash? ●​ Specify factual & legal grounds thereof
●​ The execution by the offended party of an affidavit of desistance is not a
ground for a motion to quash a complaint or an information.
○​ An affidavit of desistance or pardon is not a ground for the dismissal MTQ Demurrer to Evidence
of an action, once it has been instituted in court
 What actions can the court take when MTQ is filed?
Filed before the accused enters a plea Filed AFTER the prosecution rests its
case ●​ Order the amendment of the information
●​ Accused has already entered his ●​ Sustain the MTQ
plea + already going through trial ●​ Deny the MTQ

NO REQUIREMENT of prior leave of MAY be filed by accused either w/ or

1.​ Amendment of the information
court w/o leave of court
●​ Prevailing Rule: if the motion to quash is based on the alleged defect of the
Grounds stated Ground: insufficiency of evidence complaint or information, and the defect can be cured, the court shall order
that an amendment be made
Based on matters found on the face of ●​ Necessarily be predicated upon ○​ failure of the trial court to order the correction of a defect in the
the complaint/information matters OUTSIDE of the
information which is curable by an amendment amounts to an
●​ Facts charged do not constitute complaint/info
offense arbitrary exercise of power
●​ Does not conform to the ●​ if MTQ based on the facts charged do not constitute an offense, the court
prescribed form shall give the prosecution an opportunity to correct the defect by amendment
○​ BUT the court shall grant MTQ
When granted, dismissal of case DOES Resolution of the case on the merits; ■​ (a) fails to make the amendment, or
NOT ALWAYS FOLLOW; not a bar to amounts to an acquittal
■​ (b) if despite the amendment, the complaint or information still
another prosecution
GR: prosecution of accused after suffers from the same defect
acquittal would violate DJ
XPN: prosecution was denied due 2.​ Quashal of the information; filing of another complaint or information
process such as when evidence clearly ●​ [S]hould the trial court sustain the motion by actually ordering the quashal of
shows a sham trial where judgment of the information, the prosecution is not precluded from filing another
acquittal has already been
information.
predetermined; trial court commits
GADALEJ ●​ An order sustaining the motion to quash the information would neither bar
another prosecution or require the release of the accused from custody
○​ XPN: (a) extinction of the criminal liability, or (b) double jeopardy
Test in appreciation motion to quash
●​ a resolution of the challenge to the validity of the criminal proceeding, on
3.​ Denial of MTQ
such ground, should be limited to an inquiry whether the facts alleged in the
●​ Interlocutory + not appealable
information, if hypothetically admitted, constitute the elements of an
●​ Cannot be subject of a petition for certiorari
offense punishable under R.A. 3019 or the provisions on bribery of the
●​ If a judgment of conviction is rendered, and the lower court's decision of
Revised Penal Code
conviction is appealed, the accused can then raise the denial of his motion
●​ MTQ: distinctly specified not only its legal but also factual grounds
to quash not only as an error committed by the trial court but as an added
○​ Extinction of criminal liability + double jeopardy = retained as among
ground to overturn the latter's ruling"
the grounds for MTQ
 ○​ proper remedy against the court action is to proceed to trial, not to file ○​ Arraignment of the accused
a petition for certiorari ○​ Valid plea entered by him
○​ Proceed to trial and determine guilt/innocence ○​ Acquittal or conviction of the accused or dismissal or termination of
case against him w/o express consent
Double Jeopardy
●​ Jeopardy: danger of conviction and punishment which the defendant in a Valid Complaint or information
criminal action incurs when a valid indictment has been found ●​ Sufficient in form and substance: dependent on whether the same could
○​ Double jeopardy proscribed to not subject him to embarrassment, sustain a conviction
expense and ordeal & compelling him to live in continued anxiety & ○​ If it cannot sustain -> precludes DJ
insecurity ●​ Filing of the new corrected information DOES NOT trigger the application of
●​ Definition of DJ: jeopardy of punishment for the same offense, suggesting double jeopardy
that DJ presupposes 2 separate criminal prosecutions ○​ No DJ under 1st information
○​ presupposes that a first jeopardy has already attached prior to the ●​ Jeopardy does not attach where a defendant pleads guilty to a defective
second jeopardy indictment that is voluntarily dismissed by the prosecution
○​ the first jeopardy has already been terminated ○​ Filing officer has not authority = info defective + cannot sustain
■​ the accused has already been convicted, conviction
■​ or acquitted, or ○​ information, when required to be filed by a public PO, cannot be filed
■​ the case against him has been dismissed or by another
■​ terminated without his express consent ■​ must be exhibited or presented by the prosecuting attorney or
●​ Ask: can the second offense be included in the first offense? someone authorized by law
●​ When double jeopardy is not applicable ■​ Court does not acquire jurisdiction
○​ Administrative case + criminal case
○​ Same criminal act gives rise to 2 or more separate & distinct offenses Court must have competent jurisdiction
■​ DOES NOT ATTACH as long as variance between the elements ●​ A subsequent information filed before the proper Makati court will not
of the two offenses successfully give rise to a defense anchored on double jeopardy because the
○​ Public officer’s impropriety in performance of powers + discharge of first court, the Quezon City court, had no jurisdiction over the case.
duties (civil + criminal + administrative) ●​ No DJ when accused entered a plea in a court that had no jurisdiction
■​ Civil: preponderance of evidence ●​ One could not be validly convicted or acquitted by a court without jurisdiction
■​ Criminal: proof beyond reasonable doubt over the subject matter.
■​ Administrative: substantial evidence ●​ as a rule, the filing of an information with one court which has no jurisdiction
○​ PI: merely inquisitorial; executive in character; not judicial function over it does not prevent the prosecution from filing the same information later
■​ Dismissal of case during PI IS NOT DJ with the competent court.
●​ Requisites: ○​ The filing of the information in the Sandiganbayan did not put the
○​ Valid indictment accused in double jeopardy even though there was a plea of "not
○​ Before a court of competent jurisdiction guilty" to the information earlier filed in the RTC.
 ○​ The first jeopardy never attached in the first place, the RTC not being a court a quo not only erred in procedure but deprived the
court of competent jurisdiction. prosecution of its day in court and right to be heard

Accused should have validly pleaded to the charge (should have been arraigned) Prior conviction or acquittal of accused, or dismissal of case without his express
●​ REQUIRES that the accused MUST HAVE PLEADED TO THE CHARGE consent
○​ If before arraignment, the prosecutor withdrew an information ●​ Prior case must have been terminated in any of these ways:
charging theft and later on filed another information for theft or ○​ Conviction
robbery against the same accused, double jeopardy cannot be ○​ Acquittal
invoked if the accused was never arraigned under the first ○​ dismissal/termination w/o express content of the accused
information. ●​ even if two sets of information for homicide are filed involving the same
●​ NO DJ in the reinstatement of a criminal case dismissed before arraignment victim and the case under the first information has not yet been terminated
and upon his express motion either by conviction, acquittal or dismissal, it is highly doubtful for the filing of
●​ PLEA MUST BE VALID the second information to give rise to double jeopardy
○​ People v. Magat ○​ It is the conviction or jeopardy of being convicted or the acquittal of
■​ The order of the trial court convicting the accused-appellant on the accused or termination of the case that bars further prosecution
his own plea of guilty and sentencing him to a light penalty was, of the same offense
according to the Court, void ab initio on the ground that ●​ it has been repeatedly ruled that a verdict of acquittal is immediately final and
accused-appellant's plea was not the plea bargaining a reexamination of the merits of such acquittal, even in the appellate courts,
contemplated and allowed by law and the rules of procedure. will put the accused in jeopardy for the same offense
The accused appellant’s plea of guilty was undoubtedly a ○​ Presumption that the judgment of acquittal was made in accordance
conditional plea. Since it was a conditional plea, the trial court with law + procedure
should have vacated such a plea and entered a plea of not guilty ○​ Proceedings were rigged + a sham + mock trial held with a
which would require a full-blown trial before judgment may be predetermined judgment of acquittal = unlawful + void ab initio
rendered. ●​ Where the dismissal of a case was void for having been done with GADALEJ,
○​ Balisacan it is as if there was NO ACQUITTAL/DISMISSAL OF CASE AT ALL = DJ does
■​ The Court, however, added that since the accused asserted not exist
self-defense in his testimony, said assertion of self- defense had ●​ Order of the judge was to correct + amend the info from homicide to murder
the effect of vacating his plea of guilty. The trial court should BUT NOT TO DISMISS
have required him to plead anew to the charge, or at least direct ○​ Homicide was crossed out to put murder
that a new plea of not guilty be entered for him and conducted a ○​ No change in the recital of facts constituting the offense charged or in
trial on the merits. This was not done. It follows that, in effect, the determination of the jurisdiction of the court
there having been no standing plea at the time the court a quo ○​ DESPITE the ARRAIGNMENT of the accused to info for homicide, no
rendered its judgment of acquittal, there can be no double DJ
jeopardy with respect to the appeal of the prosecution. In
deciding the case upon the merits without the requisite trial, the Dismissal or termination of case without the express consent of the accused
 ●​ Dismissed or otherwise terminated WITHOUT his express consent = DJ will in double jeopardy. The verdict being one of acquittal, the case ends
operate there
○​ IF with express consent of the accused = DOES NOT PREVENT ○​ The Court made the observation that, in Esmeña, the accused were
another prosecution for same offense insisting on a trial. They relied on their constitutional right to have a
○​ Accused moves for dismissal; territorial jurisdiction issue speedy trial. The fiscal was not ready because his witness was not in
●​ Consent = positive, direct, unequivocal & requiring no inference or implication court. Respondent judge, on his own volition, provisionally dismissed
to supply its meaning the case; hence, the accused, after invoking their right to a speedy
●​ When a criminal case is dismissed upon the application and express consent trial, moved for the dismissal of the case and, therefore, consented to
of the accused and his counsel, the dismissal is not a bar to another it; the dismissal would still place them in jeopardy.
prosecution for the same offense because his action in having the case
dismissed constitutes a waiver of his constitutional prerogative against Effect of double jeopardy on the criminal aspect of the case; finality-of-acquittal
double jeopardy as he thereby prevents the court from proceeding to the trial doctrine
on the merits and rendering judgment of conviction against him". ●​ The finality-of-acquittal doctrine recognizes that the accused is entitled to
repose as a direct consequence of the finality of his acquittal.
Acquittal Dismissal
Appeal by the accused
Based on merits Does not decide the case on merits or ●​ when the accused appeals from the sentence (when convicted) of the trial
guilt of the accused court, he waives his right to the constitutional safeguard against double
jeopardy and throws the whole case open to review by the appellate court
Evidence does not show the defendant’s Terminates the proceedings, either
guilt is beyond a reasonable doubt because the court is not a court of ●​ Accused consents to MR = cannot invoke defense of DJ
competent jurisdiction, or the evidence
does not show that the offense was Review of an erroneous acquittal; grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of
committed within the territorial jurisdiction
jurisdiction of the court, or complaint is ●​ "A judgment of acquittal, rendered after trial on the merits, shall be
not valid or sufficient in form & immediately final and unappealable because further prosecution will place
substance
the accused in DJ
○​ Prosecution CANNOT APPEAL the acquittal
Dismissals equivalent to acquittal even with the consent of the accused; speedy ●​ Exceptions when prosecution may appeal
trial; demurrer to evidence; discharge as a state witness ○​ the State assails the very jurisdiction of the court that issued the
●​ NOT every dismissal with the consent of the accused would preclude the criminal judgment
invocation of the protection against double jeopardy. ○​ (a) there has been a deprivation of due process and when there is a
●​ Demurrer to evidence granted finding of mistrial, or (b) there has been a grave abuse of discretion
○​ Such dismissal of a criminal case by the grant of demurrer to under exceptional circumstances
evidence may not be appealed, for to do so would place the accused ●​ Unlike an appeal, a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 does not involve a
review of the facts and law on the merits, an examination of the evidence and
 its probative value, or an inquiry into the correctness of the evaluation of the ●​ If the accused has already served, in whole or in part, the judgment under the
evidence previous complaint or information, he shall be credited with the same in the
○​ Question: is the acquittal void on jurisdictional grounds; will not look event of conviction for the graver offense
into legal correctness of the decision ○​ (a) the graver offense developed due to supervening facts arising
●​ The Court declared, in no uncertain terms, that a petition for certiorari under from the same act or omission constituting the former charge; (Bar
Rule 65, not appeal, is the remedy to question a verdict of acquittal whether at 2005, 2011)
the trial court or at the appellate level. ○​ (b) the facts constituting the graver charge became known or were
○​ The 'finality-of-acquittal doctrine' which holds that a judgment of discovered only after a plea was entered in the former complaint or
acquittal is final and unappealable, does not apply when the judgment information; or
of acquittal is reviewed via the special civil action of certiorari under ○​ (c) the plea of guilty to a lesser offense was made of the prosecutor
Rule 65. and of the offended party except as otherwise provided in Sec. 1(f) of
Rule 116.
Effect of double jeopardy on the civil aspect of the case ●​ Double jeopardy does not exist because one cannot be in jeopardy for an
●​ The acquittal of the accused does not affect the right of the offended party to offense which did not as yet exist at the time of the filing of the first
appeal the civil aspect of the case information.
●​ While a judgment of acquittal cannot be appealed by the prosecution, "either
the offended party or the accused may appeal the civil aspect of the Meaning of same offense; when not the same (Bar 1993, 1994, 2011)
judgment despite the acquittal of the accused."
○​ Under Sec. 4 of Rule 111, if accused dies before arraignment, while Provisional Dismissal
the criminal case shall be dismissed because of its extinction, such
dismissal is without prejudice and shall not be a bar to any civil action Chapter 11. Pre-trial (Rule 118)
which the offended party may file against the estate of the deceased Purpose
■​ The estate cannot invoke double jeopardy. ●​ Plea bargaining
●​ Stipulation of facts
Double jeopardy in quasi offenses can be invoked ●​ Marking for identification of evidence of parties
●​ reckless imprudence under Art. 365 is a single quasi-offense by itself and not ●​ Waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence
merely a means to commit other crimes, found reiteration in a subsequent ●​ Modification of the order of trial if the accused admits the charge but
case interposes a lawful defense
●​ The law penalizes the negligent or careless act and not the result thereof ●​ Such matters as will promote a fair + expeditious trial of the criminal + civil
●​ Reckless imprudence under Article 365 is a single quasi-offense, and once aspects of the case
the accused is convicted or acquitted for that negligent act, he cannot be
prosecuted again for the same act, regardless of how many persons were No evidence shall be allowed to be presented and offered during trial other than
injured or killed. those identified + marked during pre trial
●​ XPN: good cause shown
When double jeopardy shall not apply despite a prior conviction (Bar 2005, 2011)
When pre-trial shall be held
●​ Within 30 days after arraignment OR within 10 days if the accused is under Duty of the judge before the PTC
preventive detention ●​ Study the allegations in the information
○​ ELSE where there are direct testimonies of the witnesses through ●​ Statements in the affidavits of witnesses + other documents which form part
judicial affidavits of the record of the PI
■​ Prosecution shall have not more than 20 days for arraignment
to prepare + submit JA for PTC Duty of the judge when plea bargaining agreed upon
●​ Revised Guidelines for Continuous Trial for Criminal cases ●​ During pre-trial, judge shall consider plea-bargaining arrangements
○​ Once the court has acquired jurisdiction over the person of the ○​ XPN: violations of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act
accused, the arraignment of the accused and the pretrial shall be set ●​ If agreed upon, the court shall
within ten (10) calendar days from date of the court's receipt of the ○​ Issue and order to that effect
case for a detained accused, and within thirty (30) calendar days from ○​ Proceed to receive evidence on civil aspect of the case
the date the court acquires jurisdiction (either by arrest or voluntary ○​ Render & promulgate judgment of conviction including civil
surrender) over a non-detained accused, unless a shorter period is liability/damages duly established by the evidence
provided by special law or Supreme Court circular"
Duty of the judge when plea bargaining fails
Absence of parties in the pre-trial ●​ Judge SHALL adopt the minutes of the PTC as part of the pre-trial
●​ shall proceed with the pre-trial despite the absence of the accused and/or proceedings
private complainant ●​ Confirm the markings of exhibits
●​ they must have been duly notified of the same, and the counsel for the ●​ Admissions of genuineness + due execution of documents
accused, as well as the public prosecutor, are present ●​ List object + testimonial evidence
●​ Scrutinize every allegation in the information
Duty of the Branch Clerk of Court (during) ●​ Scrutinize affidavits + documents forming parts of the records of PI
●​ (a) assist the parties in reaching a settlement of the civil aspect of the case ●​ Define factual issues
●​ (b) mark the documents to be presented as exhibits and copies thereof ●​ Ask parties to agree on specific dates for trial
attached to the records after comparison ●​ Require parties to submit the names, addresses + contact numbers of
●​ (c) ascertain from the parties the undisputed facts and admissions on the witnesses to be summoned
genuineness and due execution of documents marked as exhibits, and ●​ consider modification of the trial if the accused admits the charge but
●​ (d) consider such other matters as may aid in the prompt disposition of the interposes a lawful defense
case
Asking questions during the pre-trial
Recording of the minutes ●​ Judge shall be the one to ask questions on issues raised + all questions must
●​ Proceedings shall be recorded in minutes, signed by both parties + counsel be directed to him to avoid hostilities between the arpties
●​ Minutes + exhibits shall be attached by Clerk to the case record before
pre-trial
Stipulations in the pre-trial under the Revised Guidelines for Continuous Trial in ●​ Within 10 days after termination of pre-trial, judge shall issue PRE-TRIAL
Criminal Cases ORDER setting forth the actions taken during the PTC, facts stipulated,
●​ proposals for stipulations shall be done with the active participation of the admissions made, evidence marked, no. of witnesses to be presented +
court itself and shall not be left alone to the counsels schedule of trial
●​ During pre-trial/ preliminary conference, the court shall require the parties to ○​ Immediately be served upon parties + counsel on SAME DAY after
enter into stipulations on the subject of both direct and cross-examinations termination of pre-trial
of witnesses who have no personal knowledge of the material facts
constituting the crimes
○​ forensic chemists
Pre-trial in civil case Pre-trial in criminal case
○​ medico-legal officers
○​ Investigators Preceded by a motion ex prete filed by Motion not required
○​ Auditors plaintiff to set case for pre-trial
○​ Accountants
Set by the court after the requisite Ordered after arraignment + within 30
○​ Engineers motion from the plaintiff after all days from the date the court acquires
○​ Custodians pleadings have been served and filed jurisdiction over the person of the
○​ expert witnesses and other similar witnesses, who will testify on the accused
authenticity, due execution and the contents of public documents and *date of arraignment + pre-trial set on
reports; corroborative witnesses; the same date
○​ and those who will testify on the civil liability
Does not consider the propriety of
rendering a judgment on the pleadings
This rule is without prejudice to allowing additional direct and cross-examination or a summary judgment
questions
●​ If stipulations cannot be had in full, where the adverse party does not waive Possibility of an amicable settlement or Not an enumerated purpose
the right to cross-examination, the subject of the direct testimony of these of a submission to alternative modes
witnesses should be stipulated upon, without prejudice to additional direct An offer of compromise by the accused
and cross-examination questions may be received in evidence as an
implied admission of guilt
Pre-trial agreements; signing of admissions made (Bar 2004)
it must be noted, CC authorizes Excepted from this implied admission
●​ agreements and admissions made or entered during the pre-trial conference
compromise upon the civil liability are those offers of compromise made
shall be (a) reduced in writing, and (b) signed by the accused and counsel.
arising from an offense, but such by the accused in cases involving quasi-
○​ Not followed, and cannot be used against the accused compromise shall not extinguish the offenses (criminal negligence) or those
●​ All proceedings during the pre-trial shall be recorded, the transcripts prepared public action for the imposition of the allowed by law to be compromised
and the minutes signed by the parties and/or their counsels legal penalty. (Sec. 27, Rule 130, Rules of Court).

Sanction for non-appearance is Upon the cousin of the accused or the

Pre-trial order; effect
 ■​ Cannot be outside the PH
imposed on the non-appearing party prosecutor upon whom “proper
sanctions” or penalties” may be Chapter 12. Trial (Rule 119)
imposed for non-appearance in case of ●​ Shall commence within 30 days from the termination of the pre-trial
failure to offer an acceptable excuse for conference
lack of cooperation ○​ Held M to TH
○​ Calls at 8:30 AM and 2:00 PM
Discovery procedures in criminal cases ○​ Hearings on motions, arraignment & pre-trial & promulgations of
●​ The modes of discovery are applicable, no doubt, to civil proceedings which decisions = Friday
necessarily include the civil aspect of a criminal case ●​ Schedule is prepared during arraignment & pre-trial, where there is no plea of
●​ provisional remedies are available in connection with the civil action deemed guilty or no plea bargaining
instituted with ●​ AFTER plea of NOT GUILTY is entered, accused has 15 DAYS TO PREP FOR
●​ What is allowed? TRIAL
○​ Production + inspection of material evidence in possession of the
prosecution under Sec. 10 of Rule 116 = equivalent to Rule 27 Effect of not bringing the accused to trial within the prescribed period
○​ Mental condition of the accused, an examination could be conducted ●​ The ground for the dismissal is the denial of his right to speedy trial. The
under the the spirit of Rule 28, another mode of discovery accused shall, however, have the burden of proving the ground for his motion
○​ Rule on depositions for the perpetuation of one’s own testimony or ○​ the prosecutor shall have the burden of going forward with the
that of another person regarding any matter that may be cognizable evidence to establish that the delay belongs to the exclusion of time
in any court of the PH mentioned in Sec. 3
■​ Any matter: sufficiently broad to cover criminal proceedings ●​ Dismissal on this ground makes it subject to rules on DJ
cognizable by PH courts ●​ Motion for dismissal must be MADE PRIOR TO TRIAL (else, it is deemed a
●​ Conditional Examination of both defense and prosecution before trial waiver)
○​ Necessity of the conditional examination must be shown to the
satisfaction of the court When delay or suspension of trial is justified by reason of the absence of a witness
○​ If for the accused ●​ To justify the delay, the witness cannot be just any witness. The rule
■​ Witness is sick or infirm as to afford reasonable ground to describes such a witness as an "essential" witness
believe that he will not be able to trend the trial ○​ "indispensable," "necessary" or "important in the highest degree"
■​ Resides >100 km from place of trial + has not means to attend ■​ Absent: his whereabouts are unknown; or whereabouts cannot
the same be determined by due diligence
■​ Similar circumstances that exist that would make him ■​ Unavailable: whereabouts are known, presence for trial cannot
unavailable be obtained by due diligence
○​ If for the prosecution
■​ Satisfactorily appears that a witness for the prosecution is too Trial period SHALL NOT EXCEED 180 DAYS from the first day of trial
sick or infirm to appear at the trial as directed
○​ To be done before the court where the case is pending Postponement or continuance; motion for postponement is prohibited
 ●​ a motion for postponement is prohibited, except if it is based on (a) acts of ○​ b)bThere is no other direct evidence available for the proper
God, (b) force majeure, or (c) physical inability of the witness to appear and prosecution of the offense committed, except the testimony of said
testify accused;
○​ If the motion is granted based on such exceptions, the moving party ○​ c) The testimony of said accused can be substantially corroborated in
shall be warned that the presentation of its evidence must still be its material points;
finished on the dates previously agreed upon. ○​ d ) Said accused does not appear to be the most guilty; and
○​ e) Said accused has not at any time been convicted of any offense
Examples of prohibited grounds for a continuance under the Rules of Court involving moral turpitude
●​ (a) congestion of the court's calendar, or
●​ (b) lack of diligent preparation; or Because of the requirements in letters "a" and "b," a discharge of an accused to eb a
●​ (c) failure to obtain available witnesses on the part of the prosecutor state witness is not proper when the testimony of the witness is merely corroborative
●​ Attention is drawn to the requirement that a state witness does not need to
One-day examination of witness rule: every court is required to adhere to t h e rule be found to be the least guilty; instead, he or she should "not appear to be the
that a witness has to be fully examined in one day most guilty"
●​ decision to employ the accused as a state witness must necessarily originate
How to secure appearance of a material witness from the public prosecutors
●​ upon motion, secure an order from the court for a material witness to post ○​ In case a motion to discharge an accused as state witness is filed and
bail for such sum as may be deemed proper, if the court is satisfied upon the prosecution is required to present evidence,
either ■​ shall be submitted for resolution from the termination of the
○​ (a) proof, or hearing of the said motion and shall be resolved within a
○​ (b) oath that a material witness will not testify when required non-extendible period of ten (10) calendar days thereafter
●​ If the witness refuses to post bail, the court shall commit him to prison until ○​ evidence adduced in support of the discharge shall automatically
he complies or is legally discharged after his testimony has been taken form part of the trial
○​ the court denies the motion for discharge of the accused as state
Requisites of discharge of accused to be a state witness witness, his sworn statement shall be inadmissible in evidence
●​ (1) Two or more accused are jointly charged with the commission of an ●​ discharge of an accused shall amount to an acquittal and shall be a bar to
offense; another prosecution for the same offense,
●​ (2) The motion for discharge is filed by the prosecution before it rests its ○​ XPN: if the accused fails or refuses to testify against his co- accused
case; in accordance with his sworn statement constituting the basis for his
●​ (3) the prosecution is required to present evidence and the sworn statement discharge
of each proposed state witness at a hearing in support of the discharge
●​ (4) The accused gives his consent ot be a state witness; Order of trial
●​ (5) The trial court is satisfied that:
○​ a) There is absolute necessity for the testimony of the accused whose Conditional examination of the witnesses of the accused before trial
discharge is requested;
 ●​ The accused is allowed to have his witnesses conditionally examined in his
behalf even before the trial by filing a motion to that effect and with notice to Chapter 13. Judgment (Rule 120)
the other parties Judgment
○​ Witness is sick or inform and that there is reasonable ground to ●​ is the adjudication by the court that the accused is guilty or not guilty of the
believe that he will not be able to attend the trial offense charged and the imposition on him of the proper penalty and civil
○​ Witness resides more than 100 kilometers from the place of trial + no liability, if any
means to attend the same ●​ Requisites
●​ Taken before whom? ○​ Written in the official language
○​ Shall be taken before a judge ○​ Must be personally and directly prepared and signed by the judge
○​ A member of the bar in good standing if examination before the judge ○​ Must contain clearly & distinctly a statement of (i) the facts and (ii)
is not practicable the law upon which it is based
●​ Must have had jurisdiction over the subject matter, jurisdiction over the
Conditional examination of the witness for the prosecution territory and jurisdiction over the person of the accused
●​ shall not be taken before any court but before the court where the action is
pending Effect of lack of stenographic notes
○​ the witness is too sick or infirm to appear at the trial as directed by the ●​ Judges who conducted the trial and heard the testimonies of some or all of
court or when the witness has to leave the Philippines with no definite the witnesses shall not defer the submission of the case for decision on the
date of returning. ground of incomplete or missing transcript of stenographic notes.
●​ Examination is conducted in the presence of the accused ●​ If the case was heard completely by another judge, not the judge tasked to
○​ shall be notified of the examination of the witness for the prosecution. write the decision, the latter shall direct the stenographers concerned to
○​ Failure or refusal of the accused to attend the examination despite submit the complete transcripts within a period of thirty (30) calendar days
notice shall be considered a waiver and the examination shall proceed from date of his/her assumption to office
despite his absence.
■​ even in his absence, may be admitted in behalf of or against What shall it state?
the accused ●​ legal qualification of the offense
●​ Aggravating and mitigating circumstances which attended the commission
of the offense
Form of testimony during the trial
●​ Participation of the accused [principal, accomplice, accessory]
MTC RTC/Sandiganbayan ●​ Penalty imposed upon the accused
●​ Civil liability/damages caused by his wrongful act/omission to be recovered
from accused by the offended party
○​ XPN: the enforcement of civil liability by a separate civil action has
Modification of the order of trial; reverse trial (Bar 2007) been reserved or waived
The order of the trial may be modified when the accused admits the act or omission ●​ Judgment of acquittal
charged in the complaint or information but interposes a lawful defense ○​ State whether or not the evidence of the prosecution
 ■​ Absolutely failed to prove the guilt of the accused the offense proved which is included in the offense charged, or of the
■​ Merely failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt offense charged which is included in the offense proved
○​ Determine of act/omission from which civil liability MIGHT arise did ●​ Offense charged necessarily includes the offense proved
not exist ○​ some of the essential elements/ingredients of the former, as alleged
○​ Acquittal: immediately final in the complaint/information constitute the latter
●​ An offense changed is necessarily included in the offense proved
Effect of failure to object to a duplicitous complaint or Information ○​ when the essential ingredients of the former constitute or form part of
●​ Accused fails to object before trial for the violation, accused is deemed to those constituting the latter
have waived the defect and the court MAY convict him for as many offenses
as are charged + proved GR: accused can only be convicted of an offense which is both charged + proved
○​ Impose on him the penalty for each offense, setting out separately the ●​ If it is not charged, although proved, or if its proved but not charged, accused
findings of fact + law in each offense cannot be convicted thereof
●​ Failure to raise this issue during arraignment AMOUNTS to a waiver + the ○​ XPN: unless the offense proved is included in the offense charged
objection can no longer be raised on appeal ●​ Charged with murder, homicide proven = convicted of homicide, the offense
proved
Judgment rendered by judge who did not hear case: ●​ Charged with homicide, murder proven = convicted of homicide, the offense
●​ fact that the trial judge who rendered judgment was not the one who had the charged
occasion to observe the demeanor of the witnesses during trial, but merely ○​ Not be convicted of murder, the offense proved, since murder was not
relied on the records of the case, does not render the judgment erroneous, the offense charged
especially where the evidence on record is sufficient to support its conclusion ●​ Charged with rape by sexual assault, proven acts of lasciviousness, convicted
of the latter offense = allowed
Variance doctrine; variance between the allegation + proof ●​ Charged with qualified rape, can be found guilty of lesser crime of acts of
●​ One of the fundamental rights of the accused is the right to be informed of lasciviousness committed against a child
the nature + cause of the accusation against him ●​ Charged with acts of lasciviousness, cannot be convicted of rape
○​ Cannot be convicted of an offense UNLESS it is clearly charged in the ○​ To convict an accused of higher/more serious offense than that
information specifically charged in the information = outright violation of his rights
●​ When does this happen? ●​ An accused charged in the information with rape by sexual intercourse
○​ Offense proved is different from offense as charged in the cannot be found guilty of rape by sexual assault, even though the latter crime
complaint/information was proven during the trial
○​ Offense as charged is either included in offense proved or
necessarily includes the offense proved When an offense includes or is included in another
●​ When there is a variance between the offense charged in the complaint or ●​ An offense charged necessarily includes the offense proved when some of
information and that proved, and the offense as charged is included in or the essential elements or ingredients of the former, as alleged in the
necessarily includes the offense proved, the accused shall be convicted of complaint or information, constitute the latter
○​ murder includes the offense of homicide;
 ○​ serious physical injuries include less serious or slight physical injuries; ○​ Not more than 90 calendar days from the date the case is submitted
○​ robbery includes theft for decision, except when case is covered by special rules or shorter
●​ An offense charged is necessarily included in the offense proved, when the period
essential ingredients of the former constitute or form part of those
constituting the latter How accused is to be notified of the promulgation
○​ less serious physical injuries are included in serious physical injuries ●​ Notice given by COC to accused personally or through bondsmen/warden &
○​ Acts of lasciviousness are included in rape counsel
○​ Theft is included in robber ●​ If accused tried in absentia because he jumped bail/escaped from prison =
notice served at last known address
A variance in the mode of commission of the offense is binding upon the accused if
he fails to object to evidence showing that the crime was committed in a different Rule if the accused fails to appear in the promulgation of judgment
manner than what was alleged. ●​ If the accused fails to appear at the scheduled promulgation of judgment
●​ The information alleges "force and intimidation" as the mode of commission, DESPITE NOTICE = promulgation NOT SUSPENDED
while the victim testified during the trial that she was asleep at the time it ○​ Recording the judgment in the criminal docket
happened and only awoke to find the male organ of the accused inside her ○​ Serving him a copy at his last known address
mouth ●​ CONVICTION, and failure of accused to appear was w/o justifiable cause,
●​ the accused did not object to the presentation of evidence showing that the consequences are more severe
crime was committed in a different manner than what was stated in the ○​ Lose the remedies available in the ROC against the judgment & the
information court shall order his arrest
●​ variance is not a bar to his conviction of the crime charged in the information ■​ The reason is simple. When the accused on bail fails to
present himself at the promulgation of a judgment of
Promulgation of judgment conviction, he is considered to have lost his standing in court.
●​ Judgment is promulgated be reading it in the presence of the accused and ■​ Without any standing in court, the accused cannot invoke its
any judge of the court in which it was rendered jurisdiction to seek relief
○​ Merely for a light offense: judgment may be pronounced in the ○​ UNLESS, within 15 days from promulgation of judgment, he
presence of counsel/representative surrenders + filed a motion for leave of court to avail of remedies
○​ May be promulgated by clerk of court if the judge is absent/outside ○​ Absence was justified = allowed to avail of remedies w/in 15 days
the province or city from notice
●​ If accused confined/detained in another province/city = may be promulgated ■​ it is error for the court to entertain a MR filed by a convicted
by executive judge of the RTC having jurisdiction over place of accused who did not appear, despite notice, during the
confinement/detention upon request promulgation of the judgment.
■​ What the court should do is to dismiss the motion outright.
Schedule of promulgation ■​ Granting the motion and reversing the conviction, by acquitting
●​ Announce in open court & include in the order submitting the case for the accused, is a blatant abuse of authority resulting in a void
decision, the date of the promulgation of its decision acquittal.
 ●​ When the order of acquittal is void, double jeopardy is Motion for new trial or motion for reconsideration (Rule 121)
not triggered ●​ Accused = may file a MNT/MR of judgment adverse to him
○​ Need not wait for motion for accused
When judgment becomes final ○​ Court MAY at its own instance grant a new trial/recon. BUT w/
●​ Lapse of period for perfecting an appeal consent of the accused
●​ Sentence has been partially/totally satisfied/served ●​ When: file the motion at any time before the judgment of conviction becomes
●​ Accused has waived in writing his right to appeal final
●​ Applied for probation
Resolution of motion for reconsideration of judgment of conviction or motion for
Probation; appeal and probation are mutually exclusive remedies new trial
●​ Applying for probation is necessarily deemed a waiver of one's right to appeal ●​ shall be resolved within a non-extendible period of ten (10) calendar days
○​ Mutually exclusive remedies from the submission of the comment of the prosecution
●​ Probation: admission og guilt ○​ with/without comment, court shall resolve motion

Entry of Judgment Grounds for a new trial

●​ Has become final, it shall be entered in accordance w/ Rule 36 ●​ New & material evidence has been discovered which the accused could not,
with reasonable diligence, have discovered & produced at the trial & which, is
REMEDIES AGAINST A JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION introduced + admitted, would probs change the judgment
●​ Modification of the judgment ○​ Errors of law have been committed during the trial
●​ Reopening of the proceedings ○​ Irregularities prejudicial to the substantial rights of the accused have
●​ Motion for new trial been committed during the trial
●​ Motion for reconsideration ○​ New & material evidence has been discovered
●​ Appeal from judgment
Requisites for newly-discovered evidence
Modification of Judgment (Rule 120) ●​ Evidence must have been discovered after the trial
●​ modified/set aside upon motion of the accused ●​ Could not have been previously discovered & produced at the trial even with
●​ BEFORE judgment becomes final OR before appeal is perfected the exercise of reasonable diligence
●​ Cannot be done on court’s own motion ●​ New + material evidence
●​ HEARING is NOT a condition ●​ If introduced + admitted, it would probably change the judgment

Reopening of proceedings (Rule 119) Based on case law

●​ Anytime before finality of judgment, MOTU PROPRIO or upon motion + ●​ (a) is discovered after trial;
HEARING ●​ (b) could not have been discovered and produced at the trial even
●​ Done to avoid miscarriage of justice ●​ with the exercise of reasonable diligence; [MOST IMPORTANT]
○​ Terminated w/in 30 days from the order granting it ●​ (c) is material, not merely cumulative, corroborative or impeaching; and
 ●​ (d) is of such weight that it would probably change the judgment if admitted. ●​ A proceeding undertaken to have a decision reconsidered by bringing it to a
higher court authority
Grounds for reconsideration of the judgment ●​ Right to appeal is neither a natural right nor is it a component of due process
●​ (a) Errors of law in the judgment which requires no further proceedings; and ●​ Mere statutory privilege + may be exercised only in the manner + in
●​ (b) Errors of fact in the judgment which also requires no further proceedings accordance w/ the provisions of the law

Form of the motions; notice Who may appeal?

●​ In writing ●​ Any party may appeal from a judgment/final order
●​ State the grounds on which it is based ○​ XPN: accused will be placed in double jeopardy
●​ IF: newly-discovered evidence ○​ Subject of appeal: judgment or final order
○​ Supported by affidavits of witnesses by whom such evidence is ●​ Prosecution may appeal provided the accused will not be placed in DJ
expected to be given or by duly authenticated copies of documents ●​ When an accused appeals from the sentence of the trial court, he waives the
which are proposed to be introduced in evidence constitutional safeguard against double jeopardy; throws whole case open
●​ Notice of the motion for new trial/reconsideration shall be given to for review
prosecutor
Subject matter for review on appeal; factual findings of trial court
When hearing of the motion is required ●​ duty of the reviewing tribunal to correct, cite, and appreciate errors in the
●​ Shall be conducted when the MNT = resolution of a question of fact appealed judgment whether they are assigned or unassigned
○​ Hear evidence on the motion by affidavits or otherwise ○​ no error will be considered by the appellate court, unless stated in the
assignment of errors except
Effects of granting a new trial/reconsideration ■​ (a) the error affects the jurisdiction of the court over the
●​ Original judgment shall be set aside or vacated and a new judgment shall be subject matter;
rendered accordingly ■​ (b) the error affects the validity of the judgment appealed from
○​ Errors of law/irregularities during trial or the proceedings therein;
■​ Proceedings + evidence affected thereby shall be (a) set aside, ■​ (c) the error is closely related or dependent on an assigned
and (b) taken anew error and properly argued in the brief;
■​ Court in the interest of justice may allow introduction of addtl ■​ (d) the error is a plain error or a clerical error
evidence ■​ (e) the appellate court finds that the consideration of errors
○​ Newly-discovered evidence not assigned on appeal is necessary in arriving at a complete
■​ already adduced shall stand and just resolution of the case, serving the interests of justice
■​ newly-discovered evidence, together with other evidence which ●​ GR: factual findings of the trial court hold great weight
the court may allow be taken and considered together with the ○​ unless there are facts of weight and substance that were overlooked
evidence already in the record or misinterpreted that would materially affect the disposition of the
APPEALS case
Change of theory on appeal ○​ errors pertaining to the appreciation of the evidence or factual errors
●​ GR: a party cannot change his theory on appeal, nor raise in the appellate are not within the province of a petition for review on certiorari under
court ANY question of law/fact not raised in court below/which was not Rule 45
within the issue raised by the parties in their pleadings ○​ Question of law: doubt/difference arises as to what the law is on
certain state of facts
Factual findings; credibility of witness ○​ Question of fact: doubt/difference arises as to the truth or the
●​ they have the distinct advantage of observing the demeanor and conduct of falsehood of alleged facts
witnesses during the trial ●​ In cases where the CA imposes reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment, the
●​ the trial court is in a better position than the appellate court to evaluate judgment of the CA may be appealed to the SC by notice of appeal filed with
testimonial evidence properly the CA.
●​ Hubert Webb ○​ However, if the appellant desires to raise only a pure question of law
○​ records disclosed that the trial court was impressed by the witness' from the judgment of the Court of Appeals, the rule does not
supposed detailed narration of the crime and the events surrounding preclude him from availing of a petition for review on certiorari under
it, having allegedly testified in a "categorical, straightforward, Rule 45.
spontaneous, and frank testimony." ○​ If he opts to appeal the decision of the CA via a petition under Rule 45,
○​ The High Court, however, expressed surprise why the trial court he could only raise questions of law and cannot raise a question of
"remained unfazed by significant discrepancies" between the two fact that would require an examination of the evidence presented.
affidavits of the witness. ●​ when the CA imposed a penalty of reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, an
○​ In sum, the Court found the testimony of the prosecution's main accused may:
witness devoid of the credibility necessary to convict an accused, not ○​ (1) file a notice of appeal under Section 13(c), Rule 124 to avail of an
because of having observed the conduct of the witness while being appeal as a matter of right before the Court and open the entire case
examined in open court, but because of discrepancies in the for review on any question; or
testimony ○​ (2) file a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 to resort to an
appeal as a matter of discretion and raise only questions of law
How to appeal
●​ Note: Sec. 1of R.A. 9346, approved on June 24, 2006, now prohibits the When appeal is to be taken
imposition of the death penalty ●​ must be taken within fifteen (15) days from (a) promulgation of the judgment
○​ In lieu of the death penalty, the law imposes the penalty of reclusion or (b) from notice of the final order appealed from
perpetua, when the law violated makes use of the nomenclature of the ●​ period for perfecting an appeal shall be suspended from the time a motion
penalties of the Revised Penal Code, or life imprisonment, when the for new trial or reconsideration is filed until notice of the order overruling the
law violated does not make use of the nomenclature of the penalties motion has been served upon the accused or his counsel
of the Code
●​ A petition for review raises only questions of law and should raise the errors Stay of execution
of law of the CA and not those of the RTC ●​ Upon perfection of the appeal, the execution of the judgment or final order
appealed from shall be stayed as to the appealing party
 ●​ benefit of the stay of execution afforded to a co- accused, who timely files an Chapter 16. Provisional remedies in criminal cases (Rule 127)
appeal, cannot be extended to those who failed to file the same.
○​ the period of appeal continued to run against the accused who did not
appeal even if his co-accused appealed

RTC shall not receive new evidence or conduct a trial before deciding on the
appealed case
●​ The decision of the court is based on the entire records of the case and the
memoranda or briefs filed by the parties
●​ AS OPPOSED TO CA: shall have the power to try cases and conduct hearings,
receive evidence and perform all acts necessary to resolve factual issues
raised in cases falling within its original and appellate jurisdiction
○​ Must be continuous
○​ Must be complete in 3 months
○​ Unless extended by CJ

Although the rule states that a favorable judgment shall benefit those who did not
appeal, the Court emphasized that the phrase, "did not appeal" should not be
interpreted literally to deprive those who appealed their convictions from the benefits
of the provision.
●​ The provision applies "without regard as to the filing or non-filing of an appeal
by a co- accused, as long as the judgment is favorable to him"
●​ the execution of the judgment or final order appealed from shall be stayed as
to the appealing party only
○​ DOES NOT PROVIDE THAT THE EXECUTION OF THE JUDGMENT shall
be stated ALSO AS TO THE NON-APPEALING PARTY

Chapter 14. New trial or reconsideration (Rule 121)

Chapter 15. Appeal (Rules 122, 123, 124 and 125)