The document discusses various rules and procedures regarding representation of an accused person in court. It addresses the following key points in 3 sentences:
During arraignment, only a lawyer can represent the accused as it is the court's obligation to ensure the accused is informed of the charges. At trial, the accused can defend themselves or be represented by a non-lawyer if they do not request legal counsel. The document outlines various consequences if an accused is represented by a non-lawyer, such as being bound by the non-lawyer's actions but the judgment could be void if representation was misrepresented.
The document discusses various rules and procedures regarding representation of an accused person in court. It addresses the following key points in 3 sentences:
During arraignment, only a lawyer can represent the accused as it is the court's obligation to ensure the accused is informed of the charges. At trial, the accused can defend themselves or be represented by a non-lawyer if they do not request legal counsel. The document outlines various consequences if an accused is represented by a non-lawyer, such as being bound by the non-lawyer's actions but the judgment could be void if representation was misrepresented.
The document discusses various rules and procedures regarding representation of an accused person in court. It addresses the following key points in 3 sentences:
During arraignment, only a lawyer can represent the accused as it is the court's obligation to ensure the accused is informed of the charges. At trial, the accused can defend themselves or be represented by a non-lawyer if they do not request legal counsel. The document outlines various consequences if an accused is represented by a non-lawyer, such as being bound by the non-lawyer's actions but the judgment could be void if representation was misrepresented.
DURING ARRAIGNENT! > No, during the arraignment, it is the obligation of the court to ensure that the accused is represented by a lawyer because it is the frst time when the accused is informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him. > This is a task which only a lawyer can do. > But during trial, there is no such duty. The accused must ask for a lawyer, or else, the right is deemed waived. He can even defend himself personally.
AY AN ACCUSED BE "ALIDLY REPRESENTED BY A NON-LAWYER AT THE TRIAL! > If the accused knowingly engaged the service of the non- lawyer, he is bound by the non-lawyers actions > But if he didnt know that he was represented by a non-laywer, the judgment is void because of the misrepresentation
N.B: In MTCs, one can defend himself or by a non-lawyer.
WHAT ARE THE CONSE#UENCES I$ REPRESENTED BY A NON-LAWYER! 1. He is bound by the rules 2. He cannot raise right to counsel
SUPPOSE % DE$ENDS HISEL$& IS THIS CONSIDERED A PRACTICE O$ LAW UNDER THE DOCTRINE IN CAYETANO "& ONSOD! > No, this is an exercise of a constitutional right. WHAT IS THE DI$$ERENCE BETWEEN THE DUTY O$ THE COURT TO APPOINT COUNSEL DE O$$ICIO DURING ARRAIGNENT AND DURING TRIAL! > During arraignment, the court has the afrmative duty to inform the accused of his right to counsel and to provide him with one in case he cannot aford it > The court must act on its own volition unless the right is waived by the accused > On the other hand, during trial, it is the accused who must asser this right to counsel. The court will not act unless the accused invokes his rights. Co'nse( De O))i*io Sec. 7. Appointment of counsel de ofcio. The court, considering the gravity of the ofense and the difculty of the questions that may arise, shall appoint as counsel de ofcio such members of the bar in good standing who, by reason of their experience and ability, can competently defend the accused. But in localities where such members of the bar are not available, the court may appoint any person, resident of the province and of good repute for probity and ability, to defend the accused. Sec. 8. Time for counsel de ofcio to prepare for arraignment. Whenever a counsel de ofce is appointed by the court to defend he accused at the arraignment, he shall be given a reasonable time to consult with the accused as to his plea before proceeding with the arraignment. WHAT IS A COUNSEL DE O$$ICIO! > A counsel de ofcio is the counsel appointed by the court to represent and defend the accused in case he cannot aford to employ one himself WHO CAN BE APPOINTED COUNSEL DE O$$ICIO! > The court, considering the gravity of the ofense and the difculty of the questions that may arise shall appoint as counsel de ofcio 1. A member of the bar in good standing 2. And such member, by reason of his/her experience and ability, can competently defend the accused > ONLY DURING TRIAL: But, in localities where such members of the bar are not available, the court may appoint any person who is 1. A resident of the province 2. And of good repute for probity and with ability to defend the accused THE $OUR-$OLD DUTY O$ THE COURT 1. It must inform the defendant that he has a right to an attorney before being arraigned 2. After informing him, the court must ask the defendant if he desires to have the aid of an attorney 3. If he desires and is unable to employ an attorney, the court must assign an attorney de ofcio to defend him 4. If the accused desires to procure an attorney of his own, the court must grant him a reasonable time to procure one WHAT IS THE REASON $OR THE $OUR-$OLD DUTY! > The right to be heard would be of little avail if it doesnt include the right to be heard by counsel
WHAT IS THE E$$ECT O$ THE $AILURE O$ THE COURT TO COPLY WITH THESE DUTIES! > It is a violation of due process Withdrawal Of Improvident Plea Of Guilty Sec. 5. Withdrawal of improvident plea of guilty. At any time before the udgment of conviction become! "nal# the court may permit an improvident plea of guilty to be withdrawn and be !ub!tituted by a plea of not guilty.
NOTE: The tenor of above provision is clear. There should be a categorical declaration from the accused that he is withdrawing his plea of guilty and substituting it with a plea of not guilty. $A% A% I&P'O(I)*%+ P,*A O- G.I,+/ 0* WI+1)'AW% AS A &A++*' O- 'IG1+2 > No, the withdrawal of the plea of guilty is not a matter of strict right to the accused but is within the discretion of the court. > The reason behind this is that trial has already commenced and will put all of the past proceedings to waste. Therefore, the plea may only be withdrawn with permission of the court. > Moreover, there is presumption that the plea was made voluntarily. The court must decide whether the consent of the accused was in fact vitiated when he entered his plea. 3 IS $1A'G*) WI+1 1O&I$I)*. 1* P,*A)S G.I,+/# 0.+ +*,,S +1* 4.)G* 1I%)I %I/A SI%ASA)/A. IS 1IS P,*A (A,I)2 > No. n order to be valid, the plea of guilty must be unconditional. > n this case, ! said hindi niya sinasadya. This is not a valid plea of guilty. " plea of not guilty should be entered instead.
&A/ A% A$$.S*) 0* A,,OW*) +O $1A%G* 1IS P,*A O- %O+ G.I,+/ *(*% A-+*' +1* P'OS*$.+IO% 1A) '*S+*) I+S $AS*2 > The trial court may allow the accused to plead guilty to a lesser o#ense W1*% $A% +1* (A,I)I+/ O- P,*A O- G.I,+/ 0* A++A$5*)2 > $enerally, a plea of guilty cannot be attac%ed if it is made voluntarily and intelligently > t can only be attac%ed if it was induced by threats, misrepresentation, or bribes > &hen the consensual character of the plea is called into 'uestion or when it is shown that the defendant was not fully apprised of the conse'uences, the plea can be challenged Plea Of Guilty +o %on $apital O6en!e (ec. ). *lea of guilty to non+capital o#ense, reception of evidence, discretionary. - &hen the accused pleads guilty to a non+capital o#ense, the court may receive evidence from the parties to determine the penalty to be imposed. W1A+ S1O.,) +1* $O.'+ )O W1*% +1* A$$.S*) P,*A)S G.I,+/ +O A %O%7$API+A, O--*%S*2 > The court may receive evidence from the parties to determine the penalty to be imposed > .nli%e in a plea of guilty to a capital o#ense, the reception of evidence in this case is not mandatory > t is merely discretionary on the court $A% A $O.'+ (A,I),/ $O%(I$+ A% A$$.S*) 0AS*) O% A% I&P'O(I)*%+ P,*A O- G.I,+/2 8 /e! 8 If there i! ade9uate evidence of the guilt of the accu!ed independent of the improvident plea of guilty# the court may !till convict the accu!ed 8 +he conviction will be !et a!ide only if the plea of guilt i! the !ole ba!i! of the udgment W1A+ IS +1* &*A%I%G O- +1* ).+/ O- +1* 4.)G* +O $O%).$+ A S*A'$1I%G I%:.I'/2 8 In all ca!e!# the udge mu!t convince him!elf ;. +hat the accu!ed i! entering the plea of guilty voluntarily and intelligently <. +hat he i! truly guilty =. +hat there e>i!t! a rational ba!i! for a "nding of guilt ba!ed on hi! te!timony 8 In addition# the udge mu!t inform the accu!ed of the e>act length of impri!onment and the certainty that he will !erve it at the national penitentiary or a penal colony. +he udge mu!t di!pel any fal!e notion that the accu!ed may have that he will get o6 lightly becau!e of hi! plea of guilty )O*S A P,*A O- G.I,+/ &*A% A% A)&ISSIO% *(*% O- +1* AGG'A(A+I%G $I'$.&S+A%$*S2 > /es > " plea of guilty results in the admission of all the material facts in the complaint or information, including the aggravating circumstances > t is tantamount to a 0udicial confession of guilt > 1ecause of this, the court should only accept a clear, de2nite, and unconditional plea of guilt Plea Of Guilty +o $apital O6en!e Sec. =. Plea of guilty to capital o6en!e? reception of evidence. When the accu!ed plead! guilty to a capital o6en!e# the court !hall conduct a !earching in9uiry into the voluntarine!! and full comprehen!ion of the con!e9uence! of hi! plea and !hall re9uire the pro!ecution to prove hi! guilt and the preci!e degree of culpability. +he accu!ed may pre!ent evidence in hi! behalf. W1A+ S1O.,) +1* $O.'+ )O W1*% +1* A$$.S*) P,*A)S G.I,+/ +O A $API+A, O--*%S*2 > &hen the accused pleads guilty to a capital o#ense, the court should 3. 4onduct a searching in'uiry into the voluntariness and full comprehension of the conse'uences of the plea 5. 6e'uire the prosecution to present evidence to prove the guilt and the precise degree of culpability of the accused for the purpose of imposing the proper penalty 7. "s% the accused if he desires to present evidence in his behalf and allow him to do so if he desires > Mandatory for the court to conduct the searching in'uiry otherwise, there would be an improvident plea Plea Of Guilty +o A ,e!!er O6en!e Sec. <. Plea of guilty to a le!!er o6en!e. At arraignment# the accu!ed# with the con!ent of the o6ended party and pro!ecutor# may be allowed by the trial court to plead guilty to a le!!er o6en!e which i! nece!!arily included in the o6en!e charged. After arraignment but before trial# the accu!ed may !till be allowed to plead guilty to !aid le!!er o6en!e after withdrawing hi! plea of not guilty. %o amendment of the complaint or information i! nece!!ary. W1A+ S1O.,) 0* )O%* I- +1*'* IS A P,*A +O A ,*SS*' O--*%S*2 W1*% $A% +1* A$$.S*) P,*A) G.I,+/ +O A ,*SS*' O--*%S*2 8 )uring arraignment 3. O#ended party and prosecutor must be present 5. 8esser o#ense must necessarily be included in the original o#ense charged 7. O#ended party and prosecutor must consent to such plea ). f o#ended party is absent despite due notice, the court may allow accused to plead to a lesser o#ense 8 After arraignment and before trial 3. &ithdraw the plea of not guilty 5. *rivate o#ended party and prosecutor must give consent to the plea to lesser o#ense 7. f private o#ended party is absent despite due notice, court may allow accused to plea to lesser o#ense ). Enter plea for the lesser o#ense 8 When the penalty impo!able for the o6en!e i! at lea!t @ year! and ; day or a "ne e>ceeding P;<AAA# the pro!ecutor mu!t "r!t !ubmit hi! recommendation to the $ity or Provincial or the $hief State Pro!ecutor for approval. If the recommendation i! approved# the trial pro!ecutor may then con!ent to the plea of guilty to a le!!er o6en!e. P.'POS* O- A''AIG%&*%+ A%) P,*A 3. 9ouble 0eopardy to attach 5. 4ourt can proceed trial in absentia in case accused absconds W1*'* S1O.,) +1* A$$.S*) 0* A''AIG%*)2 > The accused must be arraigned before the court where the complaint was 2led or assigned for trial 1OW IS A''AIG%&*%+ &A)*2 "rraignment is made 3. n open court 5. 1y the 0udge or cler% 7. 1y furnishing the accused with a copy of the complaint or information ). 6eading it in the language or dialect %nown to him :. "s%ing him whether he pleads guilty or not guilty W1A+ IS +1* I&PO'+A%$* A%) SIG%I-I$A%$* O- +1* '*:.I'*&*%+ .%)*' S*$+IO% ;BAC2 > t must be strictly complied with as it is intended to protect the constitutional right of the accused to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him > The constitutional protection is part of due process > ;ailure to observe the rules necessarily nulli2es the arraignment ! ( 4<"6$E9 &T< <OM49E. <E *8E"9( $.8T/ 1.T *6E(ENT( E=9EN4E TO E(T"18(< (E8;+9E;EN(E. &<"T (<O.89 T<E 4O.6T 9O> > The court should withdraw the plea and enter a plea of not guilty W1*% S1O.,) +1* A''AIG%&*%+ 0* 1*,)2 > The general rule is that the accused should be arraigned within 7? days from the date the court ac'uires 0urisdiction over the person of the accused. > The time of pendency of a motion to 'uash or a bill of particulars or other cause 0ustifying suspension of the arraignment shall be e@cluded in computing the period. > <owever in the following cases, the accused should be arranged within a shorter period, as re'uired by law: 3. &here the complainant is about to depart from the *hilippines with no de2nite date of return, the accused should be arraigned without delay and his trial should commence within 7 days from arraignment 5. The trial of cases under the 4hild "buse "ct re'uires that the trial should be commenced within 7 days from arraignment 7. &hen the accused is under preventive detention, his case shall be raAed and its records transmitted to the 0udge to whom the case is raAed within 7 days from the 2ling of the information or complaint. The accused shall be arraigned within 3? days from the date of raAe. N.1: 3. 6earraignment needed for substitution 5. (ubstantial amendment needs rearraignment but formal amendment doesnBt P'*S*%$* O- O--*%)*) PA'+/ 3. *lea bargaining 5. 4ivil liability 7. denti2cation of accused W1A+ I- P'I(A+* O--*%)*) PA'+/ -AI,*) +O A++*%) )*SPI+* ).* %O+I$*2 > The accused may be allowed by the court to plea guilty to a lesser o#ense which is necessarily included in the o#ense charged with the conformity of the prosecutor alone $A% +1* ,AW/*' O- +1* A$$.S*) *%+*' +1* P,*A -O' 1I&2 > No, the accused must enter the plea himself W1A+ IS +1* I&PO'+A%$* O- A''AIG%&*%+2 > "rraignment is the means for bringing the accused into court and informing him of the nature and cause of the accusation against him. > 9uring arraignment, he is made fully aware of possible loss of freedom or of life. <e is informed why the prosecuting arm of the (tate is mobiliCed against him. t is necessary in order to 2@ the identity of the accused, to inform him of the charge, and to him an opportunity to plead. ).'I%G +1* A''AIG%&*%+# IS +1* 4.)G* ).+/70O.%) +O POI%+ O.+ +1A+ A% I%-O'&A+IO% IS ).P,I$I+O.S2 > No, the 0udge has no obligation to point out that an information is duplicitous or to point out any other defect in an information during arraignment > The obligation to move to 'uash a defective information belongs to the accused, whose failure to do so constitutes a waiver of the right to ob0ect 3 WAS +'I*) -O' &.')*' WI+1O.+ 1A(I%G 0**% A''AIG%*). A+ +1* +'IA,# 3DS $O.%S*, P'*S*%+*) WI+%*SS*S A%) $'OSS7*3A&I%*) +1* P'OS*$.+IO% WI+%*SS*S. I+ WAS O%,/ A-+*' +1* $AS* WAS S.0&I++*) -O' )*$ISIO% +1A+ 3 WAS A''AIG%*). 3 WAS $O%(I$+*). $A% 3 I%(O5* +1* -AI,.'* O- +1* $O.'+ +O A''AIG% 1I& 0*-O'* +'IA, -O' :.*S+IO%I%G +1* $O%(I$+IO%2 > No, the failure of the court to arraign ! before trial was conducted didnBt pre0udice the rights of ! since he was able to present evidence and cross+ e@amine the witnesses of the prosecution > The error was cured by the subse'uent arraignment IS +1* A$$.S*) P'*S.&*) +O 1A(* 0**% A''AIG%*) I% +1* A0S*%$* O- P'OO- +O +1* $O%+'A'/2 > /es > n view of the presumption of regularity in the performance of oDcial duties, it can be presumed that a person accused of a crime was arraigned, in the absence of proof to the contrary > <owever, the presumption of regularity is not applied when the penalty imposed is death > &hen the life of a person is at sta%e, the court cannot presume that there was an arraignment, it has to be sure that there was one IS +1* A$$.S*) *%+I+,*) +O 5%OW I% A)(A%$* +1* %A&*S O- A,, P'OS*$.+IO% WI+%*SS*S2 > .nder the same amended rules on pre+trial, this would be up to the trial 0udgeBs discretion 3 WAS $1A'G*) WI+1 1O&I$I)*. 1* *%+*'*) A P,*A O- %O+ G.I,+/. 1* WAS ,A+*' A,,OW*) +O +*S+I-/ I% O')*' +O P'O(* +1* &I+IGA+I%G $I'$.&S+A%$* O- I%$O&P,*+* S*,-7)*-*%S*. A+ +1* +'IA,# 1* P'*S*%+*) *(I)*%$* +O P'O(* +1A+ 1* A$+*) I% $O&P,*+* S*,- )*-*%S*. +1* $O.'+ A$:.I++*) 1I&. ,A+*'# 3 WAS AGAI% $1A'G*) WI+1 P1/SI$A, I%4.'I*S. 3 I%(O5*) )O.0,* 4*OPA')/. $A% 3 0* P'OS*$.+*) AGAI% -O' P1/SI$A, I%4.'I*S2 > /es. There was no double 0eopardy. n order for double 0eopardy to attach, there must have been a valid plea to the 2rst o#ense. > n this case, the presentation by ! of evidence to prove self+defense had the e#ect of vacating the plea of guilt > &hen the plea of guilt was vacated, the court should have ordered him to plead again, or at least should have directed that a new plea of not guilty be entered for him > 1ecause the court didnBt do this, at the time of the ac'uittal, there was actually no standing plea for !. > (ince there was no valid plea, there can be no double 0eopardy $A% A P*'SO% W1O P,*A)*) G.I,+/ S+I,, 0* A$:.I++*)2 > /es, when an accused pleads guilty, it doesnBt necessarily follow that he is convicted > "dditional evidence independent of the guilty plea may be considered by the 0udge to ensure that the plea of guilt was intelligently made > The totality of evidence should determine whether the accused should be convicted or ac'uitted W1A+ 1APP*%S I- +1* A$$.S*) '*-.S*S +O *%+*' A%/ P,*A2 > The court may validly enter a plea of guilty for the accused who refuses to plead W1A+ IS A% I&P'O(I)*%+ P,*A2 > *lea involuntarily made and without consent > t would be considered if there was failure to conduct searching in'uiry, failure of prosecution to present evidence, no rational basis between testimony and guilt 'IG1+ +O 0* P'*S*%+ I% +'IA, W1A+ A'* +1* '*:.ISI+*S O- A (A,I) +'IA, I% A0S*%+IA2 3. The accused has been already arraigned 5. <e has been duly noti2ed of the trial 7. <e fails to appear at the trial but his non+ appearance at the trial is un0usti2able $A% +1* 'IG1+ +O 0* P'*S*%+ 0* WAI(*)2 > /es, e@cept in the following situations where the presence of the accused at the trial is re'uired 3. 9uring arraignment 5. 9uring promulgation of 0udgment, e@cept if it is for a light o#ense 7. &hen the presence of the accused at the trial is re'uired for purposes of identi2cation, unless he admits beforehand that he is the same person charged W1A+ IS +1* &*A%I%G O- +1* 'IG1+ O- P'*S.&P+IO% O- I%%O$*%$*2 > The right means that the presumption must be overcome by evidence of guilt beyond reasonable doubt 3. $uilt beyond reasonable doubt means that there is moral certainty as to the guilt of the accused 5. "ccusation is not synonymous to guiltEconviction should then be based on the strength of the evidence of the prosecution and not the wea%ness of the defense
W1A+ IS +1* 'A+IO%A,* -O' +1* P'*S.&P+IO% O- I%%O$*%$*2 > There ought to be a balance between the machineries of the (tate and the accused
3. f there is a 6E"(ON"18E 4ONNE4TON between the fact presumed and the fact ultimately proven from such fact. ;or e@ample, an accountable public oDcer who fails to account for funds or property that should be in his custody is presumed to be guilty of malversation of public funds, or that persons in possession of recently stolen goods are presumed guilty of the o#ense in connection with the goods 5. n cases of (E8;+9E;EN(E, the person who invo%es the self+defense is presumed guilty. The burden of proving the elements of self+defense is incumbent upon the accused. 0ail -orfeiture Of 0ail (ec. 53. ;orfeiture of bail. - &hen the presence of the accused is re'uired by the court or these 6ules, his bondsmen shall be noti2ed to produce him before the court on a given date and time. f the accused fails to appear in person as re'uired, his bail shall be declared forfeited and the bondsmen given thirty F7?G days within which to produce their principal and to show why no 0udgment should be rendered against them for the amount of their bail. &ithin the said period, the bondsmen must: FaG produce the body of their principal or give the reason for his non+production, and FbG e@plain why the accused did not appear before the court when 2rst re'uired to do so. ;ailing in these two re'uisites, a 0udgment shall be rendered against the bondsmen, 0ointly and severally, for the amount of the bail. The court shall not reduce or otherwise mitigate the liability of the bondsmen, unless the accused has been surrendered or is ac'uitted. W1A+ )O 0O%)S&*% .%)*'+A5* +O )O .%)*' +1* 0O%)2 > &hen the appearance of the accused is re'uired, the sureties shall be noti2ed to produce the accused before the court on a given date > f the accused fails to appear as re'uired, the bond is declared forfeited and the bondsmen are given 7? days within which to produce the accused and show cause why 0udgment shouldnHt be rendered against them for the amount of the bond > &ithin the period of 7? days, the bondsmen must: 3. *roduce the body of the accused 5. E@plain satisfactorily why the accused didnHt appear when 2rst re'uired to do so o f they fail to comply with these re'uisites, the court shall render 0udgment against them on the bond. W1A+ IS +1* *--*$+ O- ASS.&I%G +1* O0,IGA+IO% O- 0AI,2 > The sureties become in law the 0ailers of the principal > Their custody of him is the continuation of the original imprisonment and though they cannot actually con2ne him, they are subrogated to all other rights and means which the government possesses to ma%e their control of him e#ective when the accused 0umps bail and the trial shall continue and the bondsman held to their underta%ing and sureties .%)*' W1OS* )IS$'*+IO% IS +1* '*).$+IO% O- +1* ,IA0I,I+/ O- A 0O%)S&A% .%)*' +1* -O'-*I+*) 0O%)2 > t is wholly sub0ect to the discretion of the trial court > To be refused or granted according to the merits of the particular case before the court, and the e@ercise of such discretion will not be disturbed on appeal unless grave abuse of discretion was committed or that there are circumstances which the trial court failed to consider W1A+ IS +1* ).+/ O- +1* 0O%)S&A% W1*% A$$.S*) IS '*:.I'*) +O APP*A'2 > Notice alone to the accused is insuDcient. > The bondsman is duty bound to produce the person of the accused when his appearance is re'uired by the court, which shows that mere notice is not suDcient but the bondsman must ma%e every e#ort to see that he actually ma%es his appearance > ;ailure to do so, trial court may consider it negligent in the performance of his duties which the (4 cannot disturb W1A+ A'* +1* '*:.ISI+*S +O 4.S+I-/ +1* 0O%)S&A%DS *3*&P+IO% -'O& ,IA0I,I+/2 > &ithin the period of 7? days, the bondsmen must: 3. *roduce the body of the accused 5. E@plain satisfactorily why the accused didnHt appear when 2rst re'uired to do so > ;ailure of the bondsman to produce the accused when re'uired by the court and subse'uent presentment will not e@onerate the bondsmanBs liability unless he gives satisfactory reason why he failred to appear when 2rst re'uired to do so > ("T(;"4TO6/ E!*8"N"TONEact of $od, act of the obligee, act of the law e@onerates the sureties. f the accused died, the fact of death must be before the breach and the fact of death must be established by competent evidence for the sureties to be e@onerated from liability. WHAT ARE THE CONDITIONS O$ THE BAIL! 1. If before conviction, that the defendant shall answer the complaint or information in the court in which it is fled or to which it may be transferred for trial 2. After conviction, that he will surrender himself in execution of the judgment that the appellate court may render 3. That in case the cause is remanded for new trial, he will appear in court to which it may be remanded and submit himself to the orders and processes thereof *For failure to perform any of these conditions, the bond given as security thereof may be forfeited. CAN THE COURT IPOSE OTHER CONDITIONS OR LIITATIONS ON THE BAIL! > Yes, the trial court may impose other conditions in granting bail where the likelihood of the accused jumping bail or of committing other harm to the citizenry is feared. > The court even has the power to prohibit a person admitted to bail from leaving the Phiippines or restrict his right to travel DOES AN ADDITIONAL CONDITION NOT "IOLATE THE PROHIBITION ON E%CESSI"E BAIL! > No because the determination if there is excessive bail would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case > Bail would still be determined based on the following factors--fnancial liability of the accused to give bail; nature and circumstance of the ofense; penalty for the ofense charged; character and reputation of the accused; age and health of the accused; weight of the evidence against the accused; probability of the accused appearing at the trial; forfeiture of other bail; the fact that the accused was a fugitive from justice when arrested; and pendency of other cases where the accused is on bail. REEDIES O$ A PARTY AGAINST WHO A WARRANT O$ ARREST HAS BEEN ISSUED + A party a,ainst w-o. a warrant o) arrest -as /een iss'e0 .ay 1& Post /ai( 2& As3 )or rein4esti,ation 5& $i(e a .otion to 6'as- in)or.ation 7& $i(e a petition )or re4iew 8& I) 0enie09 -e .ay appea( t-e :'0,.ent a)ter tria( ;no *ertiorari< =Co0e> PAPI NO PRELIINARY IN"ESTIGATION CONDUCTED9 REEDIES I$ THERE WAS NO PRELIINARY IN"ESTIGATION CONDUCTED9 WHAT IS THE REEDY O$ THE ACCUSED! =Co0e> RICA P 1& Re)'se to enter p(ea 2& Insist on a pre(i.inary in4esti,ation 5& $i(e *ertiorari i) re)'se0 7& Raise it as an error on appea( 8& $i(e a petition )or pro-i/ition DOUBLE ?EOPARDY To s'/stantiate a *(ai. o) 0o'/(e :eopar0y9 t-e )o((owin, .'st /e pro4en> a. The frst jeopardy must have attached prior to the second b. The frst jeopardy must have been validly terminated c. The second jeopardy must be for the same ofense, or the second ofense includes or is necessarily included in the ofense charged in the frst information, or is an attempt to commit the same or is a frustration thereof WHEN DOES DOUBLE ?EOPARDY ATTACH! > In order that protection against double jeopardy may inure in favor of the accused, the following should be present: a. A valid complaint or information b. A competent court c. The defendant pleaded to the charge d. The defendant was acquitted or convicted, or the case against him was dismissed or otherwise terminated without his express consent W1A+ IS +1* S$OP* O- +1* 'IG1+ AGAI%S+ S*,-7I%$'I&I%A+IO%2 > The right against self+incrimination covers testimonial compulsion only and the compulsion to produce real or physical evidence using the body of the accused > *hysical or moral compulsion to e@tort communication
WI+1 W1A+ 5I%) O- +*S+I&O%/ O' I%S+A%$*S $A% +1* 'IG1+ 0* I%(O5*)2 > t applies to commutative testimony and not mechanical testimony > 4ommutative testimony involves the use of intelligence on the part of the accused or witness. 4orrorarily, on cases on self+incrimination, the following are permissibleEsubstance from the body, morphine from mouth, put on pants, physical e@am, wallet, picture ta%ing, etc. The following on the other hand are not permissibleEhandwriting, signature, and similar incidents which involve the use of intelligence. S.PPOS* +1A+ +1*'* IS A 1O,* I% A )OO' +O W1I$1 I- I+ IS -O.%) O.+ +1A+ +1* 1A%) O- +1* A$$.S*) -I+S +1* 1O,*# 1* IS &OS+ P'O0A0,* G.I,+/ O- +1* A$$.SA+IO%. $A% 1* I%(O5* +1* 'IG1+ AGAI%S+ S*,-7 I%$'I&I%A+IO%2 > No, what is being as%ed of him is mechanical in nature. The inserting of his hand into the hole will not involve intelligence on his part to ful2ll the tas%.
IS +1*'* A% *3$*P+IO% +O +1* 'IG1+ AGAI%S+ S*,-7I%$'I&I%A+IO%2 > The right cannot be invo%ed when the (tate has the rights to inspect documents under its police power, such as documents of corporations.
O% W1A+ 5I%) O- P'O$**)I%GS $A% +1* 'IG1+ AGAI%S+ S*,-7I%$'I&I%A+IO% 0* I%(O5*)2 > The right against self+incrimination can be invo%ed in all proceedings instituted by the government
W1A+ IS +1* 'A+IO%A,* -O' P'O+*$+I%G +1* 'IG1+ AGAI%S+ S*,-7I%$'I&I%A+IO%2 3. ;O6 <.M"NT"6"N 6E"(ON(Eto prevent the (tate with all its coercive powers from e@tracting testimony that may convict the accused 5. ;O6 *6"4T4"8 6E"(ON(Ethe accused is li%ely to commit per0ury if he were compelled to testify against himself
S.PPOS* +1A+ 3 WAS A WI+%*SS I% A 4.)I$IA, P'O$**)I%G. +1* $O.%S*, AS5*) 1I& A0O.+ 1IS W1*'*A0O.+S ).'I%G A $*'+AI% )A+*. 3 WAS A$+.A,,/ +OG*+1*' WI+1 A WO&A% I% A &O+*, ).'I%G +1A+ )A+*. '*(*A,I%G 1IS W1*'*A0O.+S WO.,) '*S.,+ +O A )O&*S+I$ +.'0.,*%$*. $A% 3 'IG1+-.,,/ I%(O5* 1IS 'IG1+ AGAI%S+ S*,-7 I%$'I&I%A+IO%2 > ! cannot invo%e the right. <e can only invo%e the right if there is only a possibility of criminal prosecution but not in cases of possible embarrassment.
W1O &A/ I%(O5* +1* 'IG1+ AGAI%S+ S*,-7 I%$'I&I%A+IO% A%) W1*% $A% S.$1 P*'SO% I%(O5* +1* 'IG1+2 > "n ordinary witness may invo%e the right but he may only do so as each incriminating 'uestion is as%ed > The accused himself may invo%e the right, but unli%e the ordinary witness, he may altogether refuse to ta%e the witness stand and refuse to answer any and all 'uestions. > 1ut once the accused waives his right and chooses to testify on his own behalf, he may be cross+ e@amined on matters covered in his direct e@amination. <e cannot refuse to answer 'uestions during cross+e@amination by claiming that the answer that he will give could incriminate him for the crime he is being charged. > <owever, if the 'uestion during cross+ e@amination relates to a crime di#erent from that which he was charged, he can still invo%e the right and refuse to answer.
$A% A% A$$.S*) O' WI+%*SS I%(O5* +1* 'IG1+ AGAI%S+ S*,-7I%$'I&I%A+IO% I- 1* IS AS5*) A0O.+ PAS+ $'I&I%A,I+/2 > t depends > f he can still be prosecuted for it, 'uestions about the past criminal liability are still covered by the protection against self+incrimination > 1ut if he cannot anymore be prosecuted for it anymore, he cannot invo%e the right
S.PPOS* 3 WAS A WI+%*SS AS5*) A0O.+ 0*I%G $1A'G*) WI+1 P*'4.'/ +WO /*A'S AGO. 1* I%(O5*S 1IS 'IG1+ AGAI%S+ S*,-7 I%$'I&I%A+IO%. $A% +1IS 0* +A5*% AGAI%S+ 1I&2 > t depends. f in the prior charge of per0ury against him, the case has already been terminated through his ac'uittal, conviction, or dismissal of the complaint, he couldnHt invo%e the right anymore. 1ut if it is the case that he could still be charged with this past criminality, then he could invo%e said right.
S.PPOS* 3 WAS A WI+%*SS AS5*) A0O.+ 0*I%G A PAI) WI+%*SS I% +1* PAS+. 3 '*-.S*) +O A%SW*' I%(O5I%G +1* 'IG1+ AGAI%S+ S*,-7I%$'I&I%A+IO%. $A% +1IS 0* +A5*% AGAI%S+ 32 > "gain, it depends. f he could still be charged for rendering false testimony, then he could invo%e the right. f he cannot anymore be charged for past criminality, then it could not invo%e the right.
3 A$$.S*) WAS AS5*) +O 0* A 1OS+I,* WI+%*SS. 1* '*-.S*) +O )O SO. $A% +1IS 0* +A5*% AGAI%S+ 32 > No, ! cannot be pre0udiced whatsoever as a result of his refusal to be a hostile witness. To pre0udice ! as a result of his refusal would render his right against self+incrimination useless and nugatory. TRIAL Section 1. Time to prepare for trial. After a plea of not guilty is entered, the accused shall have at least ffteen (15) days to prepare for trial. The trial shall commence within thirty (30) days from receipt of the pre-trial order. HOW UCH TIE DOES THE ACCUSED HA"E TO PREPARE $OR TRIAL! > After he enters his plea of not guilty, the accused shall have at least 15 days to prepare for trial > The trial shall commence within 30 days from receipt of the pre-trial order HOW LONG SHOULD THE TRIAL LAST! > The entire trial period should not exceed 180 days from the frst day of trial, except if authorized by the SC IS +1* $O%$*P+ O- +'IA, +1* SA&* AS 1*A'I%G2 8 According to uri!prudence# they are not the !ame concept! 8 +he word! hearing and trial have di6erent meaning and connotation! 8 +rial may refer to the reception of evidence and other proce!!e!. It embrace! the period for the introduction of evidence by both partie! 8 1earing# a! Enown in law# i! not con"ned to trial but embrace! the !everal !tage! of litigation# including the pre7trial !tage. A hearing doe!nDt nece!!arily mean pre!entation of evidence. It doe!nDt nece!!arily imply the pre!entation of oral or documentary evidence in open court but that the partie! are a6orded an opportunity to be heard. WHAT IS PLEA BARGAINING! > It is the disposition of criminal charges by agreement between the prosecution and the accused > The accused and the prosecutor in a criminal case work out a mutually satisfactory disposition of the case subject to court approval > It usually involves the defendants pleading guilty to a lesser ofense or to only one or some of the counts of a multi-count indictment in return for a lighter sentence than that for the graver charge > It is encouraged because it leads to prompt and fnal disposition of most criminal cases. It shortens the time between charge and disposition and enhances whatever may be the rehabilitative prospects of the guilty when they are ultimately imprisoned WHEN IS PLEA BARGAINING NOT ALLOWED! > It is not allowed under the Dangerous Drugs Act where the imposable penalty is reclusion perpetua to death. WHAT I$ THERE IS A PLEA BARGAINING ARRI"ED AT! 1. Issue an order which contains the plea bargaining arrived at; 2. Proceed to receive evidence on the civil aspect of the case; and 3. Render and promulgate judgment of conviction, including the civil liability or damages duly established by the evidence. WHAT HAPPENS I$ THERE WAS NO PLEA BARGAINING AGREEENT! WHAT WOULD THE COURT DO! 1. Adopt the minutes of preliminary conference as part of the pre-trial proceedings, confrm markings of exhibits or substituted photocopies and admissions on the genuineness and due execution of documents and list object and testimonial evidence; 2 . Scrutinize every allegation of the information and the statements in the afdavits and other documents which form part of the record of the preliminary investigation and other documents identifed and marked as exhibits in determining farther admissions of facts, documents and in particular as to the following: a. The identity of the accused; b. Court's territorial jurisdiction relative to the ofense/s charged; c. Qualifcation of expert witness/es; d. Amount of damages; e. Genuineness and due execution of documents; f. The cause of death or injury, in proper cases; g. Adoption of any evidence presented during the preliminary investigation; h. Disclosure of defenses of alibi, insanity, self-defense, exercise of public authority and justifying or exempting circumstances; and i. Such other matters that would limit the facts in issue. 3. Defne factual and legal issues; 4. Ask parties to agree on the specifc trial dates and adhere to the fow chart determined by the court which shall contain the time frames for the diferent stages of the proceeding up to promulgation of decision and use the time frame for each stage in setting the trial dates; 5. Require the parties to submit to the Branch COC the names, addresses and contact numbers of witnesses that need to be summoned by subpoena; and 6. Consider modifcation of order of trial if the accused admits the charge but interposes a lawful defense. Pro4isiona( Dis.issa( Sec. 8. Provisional dismissal. A case shall not be provisionally dismissed except with the express consent of the accused and with notice to the ofended party.
The provisional dismissal of ofenses punishable imprisonment not exceeding six (6) years or a fne of any amount, or both, shall become permanent one (1) year after issuance of the order without the case having been revived. With respect to ofenses punishable by imprisonment of more than six (6) years, their provisional dismissal shall become permanent two (2) years after issuance of the order without the case having been revived.
WHAT IS THE TIE-BAR RULE! WHEN DOES A PRO"ISIONAL DISISSAL BECOE $INAL! > The provisional dismissal of ofenses punishable by imprisonment exceeding 6 years or a fne of any amount shall become permanent after one year without the case having been revived > For ofenses punishable by imprisonment of more than 6 years, the provisional dismissal shall become permanent after 2 years without the case having been revived. > After the provisional dismissal becomes fnal, the accused cannot be prosecuted anymore
WHEN CAN A CASE BE PRO"ISIONALLY DISISSED! > A case can only be dismissed provisionally if the accused expressly consents, such consent given in writing or viva voce. > It must be positive, direct, unequivocal consent requiring no inference or implication to supply its meaning > The mere inaction or silence of the accused to a provisional dismissal of the case or his failure to object to a provisional dismissal doesnt amount to express consent.
WHAT ARE THE CONDITIONS $OR SECTION @ O$ THE RULES O$ COURT TO APPLY! WHAT ARE THE RE#UISITES LAID DOWN BY PEOPLE "& LACSON! 1. The prosecution, with the express conformity of the accused or the latters counsel moves for a provisional dismissal of the case; or both the prosecution or accused move for a provisional dismissal of the case 2. The ofended party is notifed of the motion for a provisional dismissal of the case 3. The court issues an order granting the motion and dismissing the case provisionally 4. The public prosecutor is served with a copy of the order of provisional dismissal of the case
WHAT DOES IT EAN WHEN THE TIE BAR RULE WILL NOT APPLY! > Provisional dismissal will not become permanent, even after one year or two years depending on the ofenses nature
HOW CAN A CASE BE RE"I"ED! 1. Re-fling the information or fling of a new information for the same ofense necessarily included therein without need of a new preliminary investigation unless the original witnesses of the prosecution or some of them may have recanted their testimonies or may no longer be available and new witnesses for the State have emerged 2. A new preliminary investigation is also required if aside from the original accused, other persons are charged under a new criminal complaint for the same ofense or necessarily included therein 3. Under a new criminal complaint, the criminal liability of the accused is upgraded from that of an accessory to that of a principal 4. Under a new criminal complaint, the charge has been upgraded Pre-Tria( A,ree.ent Sec. 2. Pre-trial agreement. All agreements or admissions made or entered during the pre-trial conference shall be reduced in writing and signed by the accused and counsel, otherwise, they cannot be used against the accused. The agreements covering the matters referred to in section 1 of this Rule shall be approved by the court. WHAT HAPPENS DURING PRE- TRIAL! > The following things are considered 1. Plea bargaining 2. Stipulation of facts 3. Marking for identifcation of evidence of the parties 4. Waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence 5. Modifcation of the order of trial if the accused admits the charge but interposes a lawful defense 6. Other matters that will promote a fair and expeditious trial of the criminal and civil aspects of the case WHAT IS THE $OR RE#UIRED $OR THE PRE-TRIAL AGREEENT! > Any agreement or admission entered into during the pre-trial conference should be 1. In writing 2. Signed by the accused 3. Signed by counsel > A pre-trial agreement that doesnt follow this form cannot be used against the accused Pre-tria( Or0er Sec. 4. Pre-trial order. After the pre-trial conference, the court shall issue an order reciting the actions taken, the facts stipulated, and evidence marked. Such order shall bind the parties, limit the trial to matters not disposed of, and control the course f the action during the trial, unless modifed by the court to prevent manifest injustice. WHAT IS A PRE-TRIAL ORDER! > It is an order issued by the court after the pre-trial conference containing: o A recital of the actions taken o The facts stipulated o The evidence marked > The pre-trial order binds the parties, limits the trial to matters not disposed of, and controls the course of action during the trial, unless modifed by the court to prevent manifest injustice WHAT IS THE PROCEDURE $OR DISCHARGING A PERSON AS A STATE WITNESS! 1& Be)ore restin, its *ase9 t-e prose*'tion s-o'(0 )i(e a .otion to 0is*-ar,e t-e a**'se0 as a state witness wit- -is *onsent 2& T-e *o'rt wi(( re6'ire t-e prose*'tion to present e4i0en*e an0 t-e sworn state.ent o) t-e propose0 state witness at a -earin, in or0er to s'pport t-e 0is*-ar,e 5& T-e *o'rt wi(( 0eter.ine i) t-e re6'isites o) ,i4in, t-e 0is*-ar,e are present& E4i0en*e a00'*e0 in s'pport o) t-e 0is*-ar,e0 s-a(( a'to.ati*a((y )or. part o) t-e tria( 7& I) t-e *o'rt is satis)ie09 it wi(( 0is*-ar,e t-e state witness& T-e 0is*-ar,e is e6'i4a(ent to an a*6'itta(9 'n(ess t-e witness (ater )ai(s or re)'ses to testi)y 8& T-e *o'rt 0enies t-e .otion )or 0is*-ar,e9 -is sworn state.ent s-a(( /e ina0.issi/(e as e4i0en*e WHAT ARE THE RE#UISITES IN ORDER $OR A PERSON TO BE DISCHARGED AS A STATE WITNESS! 1. The discharge must be WITH THE CONSENT OF THE ACCUSED sought to be a state witness 2. There is ABSOLUTE NECESSITY for the testimony of the accused whose discharge is requested; 3. There is NO OTHER DIRECT EVIDENCE AVAILABLE for the proper prosecution of the ofense committed, except the testimony of said accused; 4. The testimony of said accused can be SUBSTANTIALLY CORROBORATED in its material points; 5. Said accused DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE THE MOST GUILTY; and 6. Said accused has not at any time been convicted of any ofense involving MORAL TURPITUDE. CAN THE COURT GRANT THE DISCHARGE BE$ORE THE PROSECUTION HAS $INISHED PRESENTING ALL ITS E"IDENCE! No. As a general rule, the court should resolve any motion to discharge only AFTER the prosecution has presented all of its evidence since it is at this time when the court shall determine the presence of the requisites above In some cases, HOWEVER, the SC held that the prosecution is not required to present all of its other evidence before an accused is discharged. The accused may be discharged at any time before the defendants have entered upon their defense.
IS A HEARING O$ THE OTION TO DISCHARGE ANDATORY! So long as the motion is able to receive evidence for and against the discharge of an accused to become a state witness, its subsequent order granting or denying the motion for discharge is in order notwithstanding the lack of actual hearing on the motion WHAT IS THE EANING WHEN THE TESTIONY O$ THE ACCUSED CAN BE SUBSTANTIALLY CORROBORATED IN ITS ATERIAL POINTS! There is presence of indirect testimony or evidence that could corroborate with the truthfulness of the testimony of the accused
WHAT HAPPENS I$ THERE IS LACA O$ RE#UISITES PRESENT IN THE OTION $OR THE DISCHARGE O$ THE ACCUSED! There is no need to allege all the requisites in the motion. What is required is that the court is satisfed that the requisites are present for the discharge. The evidence for the discharge may be presented during the hearing on the motion
WHAT IS THE EANING O$ ABSOLUTE NECESSITY O$ THE TESTIONY O$ THE PROPOSED STATE WITNESS! It means that there is no other evidence to establish the ofense other than the testimony of the accused For example, where an ofense is committed in conspiracy and clandestinely, the discharge of one of the conspirators is necessary in order to provide direct evidence of the commission of the crime No one else other than one of the conspirators can testify on what happened among them
DOES ABSOLUTE NECESSITY EAN THAT TESTIONY WOULD RESULT IN ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY O$ CON"ICTION! No
CAN THERE BE ORE THAN ONE ACCUSED WHO CAN BE DISCHARGED! Yes
WHAT IS THE REEDY O$ THE PROSECUTION I$ THE COURT DENIES THE OTION O$ THE PROSECUTION! The State can fle a petition for certiorari
THE ACCUSED PLEADED GUILTY TO THE CRIE CHARGED ANDBOR ALREADY TESTI$IED AS AN ACCUSED9 CAN HE STILL BE DISCHARGED! Yes
CAN A CO-CONSPIRATOR BE DISCHARGED AS A STATE WITNESS! RULEa co-conspirator cannot be discharged as a state witness against a co-conspirator EXCEPTIONif the crime was committed clandestinely and there is no way to prove the crime
WHAT IS AN IRREGULAR DISCHARGE! Irregular discharge is a discharge where one or all of the conditions required for discharge didnt really exist
I$ THE STATE WITNESS RE$USES TO TESTI$Y9 WILL HIS SWORN STATEENT BE ADISSIBLE AGAINST HI! No, his sworn statement will not be admissible against him Otherwise, it violates his right against self-incrimination Sec. 18. Discharge of accused operates as acquittal. The order indicated in the preceding section shall amount to an acquittal of the discharged accused and shall be a bar to future prosecution for the same ofense, unless the accused fails or refuses to testify against his co-accused in accordance with his sworn statement constituting the basis for his discharge.
WHAT ARE THE E$$ECTS O$ THE DISCHARGE! 1. Evidence in support of the discharge forms part of the trial. But if the court denies the motion to discharge, his sworn statement shall be inadmissible as evidence 2. Discharge of the accused operates as an ACQUITTAL and bar to further prosecution for the same ofense, except if he fails or refuses to testify against his co- accused in accordance with his sworn statement constituting the basis of the discharge. In this case, he can be prosecuted again and his admission can be used against him. WHAT DOES IT EAN WHEN HE $AILS OR RE$USES TO TESTI$Y IN ACCORDANCE WITH HIS SWORN STATEENT! It means that the accused makes substantial changes in his testimony that would naturally afect the proceedings and would be prejudicial to the prosecution of the ofense charged
WHAT I$ IN THE SWORN STATEENT O$ %9 HE ENTIONED ONLY THAT 5 O$ HIS COPANIONS WERE IN CONSPIRACY WITH EACH OTHER& DURING HIS TESTIONY9 HE TESTI$IED THAT ALL 1C O$ HIS COPANIONS WERE IN CONSPIRACY& IS THIS PROPER! Yes This doesnt fall within the ambits of refusing to testify in accordance with his sworn statement It will be proper as long as it will help further the prosecution in prosecuting the ofense charged against the accused
WHAT HAPPENS I$ THE COURT IPROPERLY OR ERRONEOUSLY DISCHARGES AN ACCUSED AS STATE WITNESS9 AS WHEN $OR E%APLE9 THE ACCUSED HAS BEEN CON"ICTED O$ A CRIE IN"OL"ING ORAL TURPITUDE! The improper discharge will not render inadmissible his testimony nor detract from his competency as a witness Neither will it invalidate his acquittal because the acquittal becomes inefective only if he fails or refuses to testify
WHAT I$ A$TER AN ACCUSED HAS BEEN DISCHARGED TO BECOE A STATE WITNESS9 IT WAS $OUND OUT DURING THE TRIAL THAT THE $ACTS HE ATTESTED TO IN HIS SWORN STATEENT WERE ALL LIES! DOES THE COURT HA"E ANY RECOURSE I$ THERE WAS A WRONG$UL DISCHARGE! The discharge of the accused wouldnt be afected. His discharge would still amount to an acquittal and is a bar for further prosecution for the same ofense. First, the grounds mentioned in the rule as exceptions to the general rule are exclusive in character. The discharge will not be a bar to further prosecution and not amount to acquittal is when the accused refuses or fails to testify in accordance with his sworn statement. Second, what the rules require is ABSOLUTE NECESSITY and not ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY. Third, what transpired was an error of judgment on the part of the court. If the court has a recourse, it would be to detain the discharged accused, following Section 19 of this Rule, and fle a case against him but not for the same ofense but for perjury
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE ORIGINAL IN$ORATION UNDER WHICH AN ACCUSED WAS DISCHARGED IS LATER AENDED!
A discharge under the original information is just as binding upon the subsequent amended information, since the amended information is just a continuation of the original
UST THE ACCUSED TO BE DISCHARGED $IRST BE CHARGED IN THE COPLAINT OR IN$ORATION! No. Note: the fling of the motion in court gives the court jurisdiction over the persons
CAN THE OTHER CONSPIRATORS BE SOLELY CON"ICTED ON THE BASIS O$ THE DISCHARGED STATE WITNESS! No, there must be other evidence to support his testimony The testimony of a state witness comes from a polluted source and must be received with caution It should be substantially corroborated in its material points As an exception however, the testimony of a co- conspirator, even if uncorroborated, will be considered sufcient if given in a straightforward manner and it contains details which couldnt have been a result of deliberate afterthought. Contin'o's Tria( Syste. Sec. 2. Continuous trial until terminated; postponements. Trial once commenced shall continue from day to day as far as practicable until terminated. It may be postponed for a reasonable period of time for good cause.
The court shall, after consultation with the prosecutor and defense counsel, set the case for continuous trail on a weekly or other short-term trial calendar at the earliest possible time so as to ensure speedy trial. In no case shall the entire trial period exceed one hundred eighty (180) days from the frst day of trial, except as otherwise authorized by the Supreme Court. The time limitations provided under this section and the preceding section shall not apply where special laws or circulars of the Supreme Court provide for a shorter period of trial.
WHAT PROCEDURE IS USED TO A"AIL HIS RIGHT TO SPEEDY TRIAL! > Continuous trial systema tool for the early and expeditious disposition of a case
WHAT IS THE CONTINUOUS TRIAL SYSTE! > Trial once commenced shall continue from day to day as far as practicable until terminated. > It may be postponed for a reasonable period of time for good cause. > The court shall, after consultation with the prosecutor and defense counsel, set the case for continuous trail on a weekly or other short-term trial calendar at the earliest possible time so as to ensure speedy trial. > In no case shall the entire trial period exceed one hundred eighty (180) days from the frst day of trial, except as otherwise authorized by the Supreme Court.
HOW DO YOU ENSURE CONTINUOUS TRIAL SYSTE! > There must be a time limit within which the case should be terminated
WHAT ARE THE DUTIES O$ THE PRESIDING ?UDGE UNDER THE CONTINUOUS TRIAL SYSTE! 1. Adhere faithfully to the session hours prescribed by laws 2. Maintain full control of the proceedings 3. Efciently allocate and use time and court resources to avoid court delays
IS THE TIE LIIT ABSOLUTE! > No
IN WHICH CASES IS THE TIE LIITATION NOT APPLICABLE! 1. CRIMINAL CASES COVERED BY THE RULES ON SUMMARY PROCEDURE OR THOSE WHERE THE PENALTY DOESNT EXCEED 6 MONTHS IMPRISONMENT OR A FINE OF P1000: governed by the rules on summary procedure 2. WHEN THE OFFENDED PARTY IS ABOUT TO DEPART WITH NO DEFINITE DATE OF RETURNtrial shall commence within 3 days from the date of arraignment, and cannot be postponed except on grounds over which the accused has no control 3. CHILD ABUSE CASEStrial shall commence within 3 days from arraignment and cannot be postponed except on grounds of illness of the accused or other grounds beyond his control 4. VIOLATIONS OF DANGEROUS DRUGS LAWtrial shall be fnished within 3 months from the fling of the information 5. KIDNAPPING, ROBBERY IN A BAND, ROBBERY AGAINST A BANKING OR FINANCIAL INSTITUTION, VIOLATION OF THE CARNAPPING ACT, AND OTHER HEINOUS CRIMEStrial shall be fnished within 60 days from the frst day of trial Sec. 4. Factors for granting continuance. The following factors, among others, shall be considered by a court in determining whether to grant a continuance under section 3(f) of this Rule.
(a) Whether or not the failure to grant a continuance in the proceeding would likely make a continuation of such proceeding impossible or result in a miscarriage of justice; and
(b) Whether or not the case taken as a whole is so novel, unusual and complex, due to the number of accused or the nature of the prosecution, or that it is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation within the periods of time established therein.
In addition, no continuance under section 3(f) of this Rule shall be granted because of congestion of the courts calendar or lack of diligent preparation or failure to obtain available witnesses on the part of the prosecutor. WHAT IS A CONTINUANCE! A continuance is a postponement of trial
WHAT ARE THE $ACTORS $OR GRANTING A CONTINUANCEBPOSTPONEENT S! 1. Whether or not the failure to grant a continuance in the proceeding would likely make a continuation of such proceeding impossible or result in a miscarriage of justice; and 2. Whether or not the case taken as a whole is so novel, unusual and complex, due to the number of accused or the nature of the prosecution, or that it is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation within the periods of time established therein. No continuance under section 3(f) of this Rule shall be granted because of congestion of the courts calendar or lack of diligent preparation or failure to obtain available witnesses on the part of the prosecutor.
IS THE GRANT O$ A OTION $OR CONTINUANCE OR POSTPONEENT A ATTER O$ RIGHT! It is a matter of discretion on the part of the court IS THERE A DI$$ERENCE BETWEEN THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL DURING THE CUSTODIAL IN"ESTIGATION AND THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL DURING TRIAL! >Yes. During the trial, the right to counsel means the right to efective counsel. During trial, the purpose of the counsel is not so much to protect the accused from being forced to confess, but rather is to defend the accused. > On the other hand, a custodial investigation has stricter requirements. A custodial investigation requires the presence of a competent and independent counsel, who is preferably the accuseds own choice. Furthermore, the right to counsel could only be waived in writing and in the presence of counsel. > A custodial investigation take note is not done in public, hence the danger that confessions will be extracted against the will of the defendant during the custodial investigation. This danger doesn't really exist during trial since the latter is done in public.
WHY IS THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL A$$ORDED DURING TRIAL! > The right to counsel aforded during trial because this right is embraced in ones right to be heard
WHEN SHOULD THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL BE IN"OAED! > The right to counsel can be invoked at any stage of the proceedings, even on appeal > However, it can also be waived > The accused is deemed to have waived his right to counsel when he voluntarily submits himself to the jurisdiction of the Court and and proceeds with his defense > But in two cases, the Court held that the defendant cannot raise for the frst time on appeal his right to have an attorney. If the question is not raised in the trial court, the prosecution may go to trial. The question will not be considered in the appellate court for the frst time when the accused fails to raise it in the lower court.
IS IT THE DUTY O$ THE COURT TO APPOINT COUNSEL DE O$$ICIO ANDATORY AT ALL TIES! > No, the duty to appoint counsel de ofcio is mandatory only up to the time of arraignment
DOES THE ISTAAE O$ COUNSEL BIND THE CLIENT! > As a rule, the mistake of counsel binds the client > Therefore, the client cannot question a decision on the ground that his counsel was an idiot > However, an exception to this if counsel misrepresents himself as a lawyer, and he turns out to be a fake lawyer. In this case, the accused is entitled to new trial because his right to be represented by a member of the bar was violated. He was thus denied of his right to counsel and due process.
IS THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL ABSOLUTE! > No since the right of choice must be exercised in a reasonable manner within reasonable time. > The accused cannot insist on counsel that he cannot aford, one who is not a member of the bar, or one who declines for a valid reason. > Also the right of the accused to choose counsel is subject to the right of the state to due process and adequate justice.
WHEN CAN THE ACCUSED DE$END HISEL$ IN PERSON! > The accused can defend himself in person only if the court is convinced that he can properly protect his rights even without the assistance of counsel. Noti*e O) App(i*ation To Prose*'tor WHY IS NOTICE TO THE PROSECUTOR RE#UIRED! > Such notice is required because the burden of showing that the evidence of guilt is strong is on the prosecution Sec. 18. Notice of application to prosecutor. In the application for bail under section 8 of this Rule, the court must give reasonable notice of the hearing to the prosecutor or require him to submit his recommendation. WHAT IS HABEAS CORPUS! Habeas corpus means having it brought plus body To inquire into the legality of the detention of a person A writ or order requiring that a prisoner be brought before a judge or into court to decide whether he is being held lawfully.
WHY IS HABEAS CORPUS CONSIDERED AN E%CEPTION TO THE E%CEPTION! Because it is a prerogative writ and therefore must be decided upon immediately by the court The habeas corpus proceeding must take precedence over all other cases because it involves the liberty of the person
WITHIN HOW ANY HOURS SHOULD A ?UDGE RESOL"E A HABEAS CORPUS PROCEEDING! Within 48 hours or 2 days
WHAT ARE THE DUTIES O$ THE PUBLIC ATTORNEY I$ THE ACCUSED ASSIGNED TO HI IS IPRISONED! 1. He shall promptly undertake to obtain the presence of the prisoner for trial, or cause a notice to be served on the person having custody of the prisoner, requiring such person to advise the prisoner of his right to demand trial 2. Upon receipt of that notice, the person having custody of the prisoner shall promptly advise the prisoner of the charge and his right to demand trial. If at anytime thereafter, the prisoner informs the custodian that he demands such trial, the latter shall cause notice to that efect to be sent promptly to the public attorney 3. Upon receipt of such notice, the public attorney shall promptly seek to obtain the presence of the prisoner for trial 4. When the person having custody of the prisoner receives from the public attorney a properly supported request for the availability of the prisoner for purposes of trial, the prisoner shall be made available accordingly. Right to Counsel De Parte Is Not Absolute "ccordingly, an accused may e@ercise his right to counsel by electing to be represented either by a court+ appointed lawyer or by one of his own choice. &hile his right to be represented by counsel is immutable, his option to secure the services of counsel de parte, however, is not absolute. The court is obliged to balance the privilege to retain a counsel of choice against the statesBs and the o#ended partyBs e'ually important right to speedy and ade'uate 0ustice. Thus, the court may restrict the accusedBs option to retain a counsel de parte if the accused insists on an attorney he cannot a#ord, or the chosen counsel is not a member of the bar, or the attorney declines to represent the accused for a valid reason, e.g. conIict of interest and the li%e. J5KL "lso, the right to counsel de parte is, li%e other personal rights, waivable J7?L so long as F3G the waiver is not contrary to law, public order, public policy, morals or good customs, or pre0udicial to a third person with a right recogniCed by law J73L and F5G the waiver is une'uivocally, %nowingly and intelligently made. J75L n Sayson vs. People, J77L this 4ourt held that the duty of the court to appoint a counsel de ofcio is not mandatory where the accused has proceeded with the arraignment and the trial with a counsel of his choice but, when the time for the presentation of the evidence for the defense was due, he appears by himself alone because of the ine@cusable absence of his counsel. n another case, this 4ourt held that the right to be heard and to reopen the case Fand send it to trial anewG could not be allowed if doing so would sanction a plainly dilatory tactic and a reprehensible triIing with the orderly administration of 0ustice. J7)L n the present case, appellant claims that he was not given suDcient time to engage a counsel de parte, thereby preventing him from presenting evidence in his defense. n his 1rief he adds, but without giving particulars or proof, that allegedly his counsels de ofcio did not e@ert their Mutmost e#ortsN in representing him, thus: J7:L M@ @ @ FTGhe lower court a#orded the accused the assistance of counsel de o2cio as early as the arraignment stage but failed to show that utmost e#orts were e@erted by said counsel to defend the life and liberty of the accused. The duty of the court is not ended with such appointment, however, as it should also see to it that the counsel does his duty by the defendant. 4ounsel de o2cio should not merely ma%e the motions of defending the accused but e@ert his utmost e#orts as if he were representing a paying client.N The (olicitor $eneral, in his eleven+page 1rief, J7OL rebuts this, arguing that appellantBs actions during the trial showed instead a Mlac%adaisical stance on his own defense.N "ppellant had been given ample time to secure the services of a counsel de parte, but his subse'uent appearances in court without such counsel and his act of allowing this situation to continue until the presentation of his evidence betrays his lac% of intention to do so. t even appears that he was merely delaying his own presentation of evidence on purpose to the pre0udice of the o#ended party, the trial court and the orderly administration of 0ustice. ;urthermore, appellant did not demonstrate in what way the services of his counsels de ofcio were unsatisfactory. <e did not cite any instance substantiating his claim that he was not e#ectively represented. n short, he was a#orded a chance to be heard by counsel of his own choice, but by his own neglect or mischief, he e#ectively waived such right. t ta@es the mind to thin% that, almost two years J7PL since appellant 2rst invo%ed his right to be represented by counsel de parte, he still could not 2nd one who would suit his needs and desires. Neither did he cooperate with his court+named lawyers. The facts of this case do not constitute a deprivation of appellantBs constitutional right to counsel because he was ade'uately represented by three court+appointed lawyers: "tty. 8ina+ac, "tty. "ntonano and "tty. $arcia. 4ourts are not re'uired to await inde2nitely the pleasure and convenience of the accused as they are also mandated to promote the speedy and orderly administration of 0ustice. Nor should they countenance such an obvious triIing with the rules. ndeed, public policy re'uires that the trial continue as scheduled, considering that appellant was ade'uately represented by counsels who were not shown to be negligent, incompetent or otherwise unable to represent him. If the accu!ed appear! without a lawyer during arraignment# the court appoint! a Fcoun!el de oGcioH from among the lawyer! pre!ent in the courtroom to a!!i!t him."ny lawyer the 0udge chooses cannot refuse since the appointment as Mcounsel de oDcioN is for purposes of arraignment only. =eteran lawyers always manifest for e@ample, M6espectfully appearing as counsel de oDcio for purposes of arraignment only.N ;or new bar passers who wish to gain trial e@perience however, it is a good idea to ta%e on clients on a de oDcio basis not only for the arraignment but for the whole trial. The court sta# records the name of the Mcounsel de oDcioN and as%s himQher to sign. This is to prevent the accused from later on claiming that he has not been arraigned and that therefore the court has no 0urisdiction over him.