Criminal Procedure

Atty. George Aquino

RULE 118
Pre-Trial
Section 1. Pre-trial; mandatory in criminal cases. — In all criminal cases
cognizable by the Sandiganbayan, Regional Trial Court, Metropolitan Trial
Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Municipal Trial Court and Municipal
Circuit Trial Court, the court shall after arraignment and within thirty (30)
days from the date the court acquires jurisdiction over the person of the
accused, unless a shorter period is provided for in special laws or circulars
of the Supreme Court, order a pre-trial conference to consider the
following:
(a) plea bargaining;
(b) stipulation of facts;
(c) marking for identification of evidence of the parties;
(d) waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence;
(e) modification of the order of trial if the accused admits the charge but
interposes a lawful defense; and
(f) such other matters as will promote a fair and expeditious trial of the
criminal and civil aspects of the case.
4. Consider other matters as may aid in the prompt disposition of the
case
Recording of the Minutes: proceedings DURING PRELIMINARY
CONFERENCE shall be recorded in the MINUTES OF PRELIMINARY
CONFERENCE and must be signed by both parties and counsel shall be
attached to the case record before the pre-trial
Duty of the Judge before the Pre-trial Conference: study the
allegations in the information, the statements in the affidavits of witnesses
and other documents which form p[art of the record of the PI
Duty of the Judge when plea-bargaining is agreed upon:
1. GR: The trial judge should consider the plea-bargaining
arrangements; XPN: Violation of Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs
Act
2. If plea bargaining is agreed upon, the court shall:
a. Issue an order to that effect
b. Proceed to receive evidence on the civil aspect of the case
c. Render and promulgate judgment of conviction, including the civil
liability or damages duly established by evidence
Duty of the judge when plea bargaining fails: the judge shall:

Section 2. Pre-trial agreement. — All agreements or admissions made or 1. adopt the minutes of the preliminary conference as part of the pre-
entered during the pre-trial conference shall be reduced in writing and trial proceedings;
signed by the accused and counsel, otherwise, they cannot be used against 2. confirm the markings of exhibits, admissions of genuineness and due
the accused. The agreements covering the matters referred to in section execution of documents
1 of this Rule shall be approved by the court. 3. list object and testimonial evidence
4. scrutinize every allegation in the information
Section 3. Non-appearance at pre-trial conference. — If the counsel for 5. define factual issues
the accused or the prosecutor does not appear at the pre-trial conference 6. ask parties to agree on specific dates for the trial
and does not offer an acceptable excuse for his lack of cooperation, the 7. require the parties to submit the names, addresses, and contact
court may impose proper sanctions or penalties. numbers of witnesses to be summoned
Section 4. Pre-trial order. — After the pre-trial conference, the court shall 8. consider modification of the trial, if the accused admits the charge but
issue an order reciting the actions taken, the facts stipulated, and evidence interposes a lawful defense
marked. Such order shall bind the parties, limit the trial to matters not Asking questions during pre-trial: the judge shall ask questions on
disposed of, and control the course of the action during the trial, unless issues raised therein and all questions must be directed to him to avoid
modified by the court to prevent manifest injustice. hostilities
Pre-trial agreements; signing of admissions made:
BOOK DISCUSSION 1. All agreements and admissions shall be: a) reduced in writing; b)
Purpose of Pre-trial: signed by the accused and counsel; otherwise, it cannot be used
against the accused
1. It is done to consider the following: 2. All proceeding shall be recorded, transcripts prepared and minutes
a. plea bargaining; signed by the parties and/or their counsel
b. stipulation of facts;
c. marking for identification of evidence of the parties; Pre-trial order; effect
d. waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence; 1. WITHIN 10 DAYS after termination of the pre-trial, the judge shall
e. modification of the order of trial if the accused admits the charge issue a PRE-TRIAL ORDER setting forth: (A) the actions taken during
but interposes a lawful defense; and the pre-trial conference; (B) the facts stipulated; (C) the admissions
f. such other matters as will promote a fair and expeditious trial of made; (D) the evidence marked; (E) the number of witnesses to be
the criminal and civil aspects of the case. presented; and (F) the schedule of trial
2. GR: if the evidence is not identified and marked during trial, it cannot 2. The order shall bind the parties and in effect limits the trial to matters
be allowed to be presented during trial; XPN: If allowed by the court not disposed of and control the course of the action during trial,
for good cause modified by the court to prevent MANIFEST INJUSTICE
Courts where pre-trial is mandatory Pre-trial in a civil case Pre-trial in a Criminal Case
1. It is mandatory in both civil and criminal cases Preceded by a motion ex parte Motion is not required from the
2. It is mandatory in all criminal cases if cognizable by: (a) filed by the plaintiff to set the case prosecution
Sandiganbayan; (b) RTC; and (c) MeTC, MTCC, MTC, MCTC for pre-trial
When pre-trial shall be held: Within 30 DAYS after arraignment or Set after the requisite motion and It shall be ordered after
within 10 DAYS if the accused is under preventive suspension; If the direct all pleadings have been served arraignment and within 30 days
testimonies of the witnesses are to be presented thru judicial affidavits, from the date the court acquires
and filed
the court shall give the prosecution not more than 30 days from jurisdiction over the accused,
arraignment to prepare and submit their judicial affidavits in time for the
unless a shorter period is provided
pre-trial conference
To reach an amicable settlement Not included as one of the
Consequences of non-appearance at pre-trial: If the counsel of the
purposes therein; an offer of
accused or the prosecutor is absent without justifiable cause, the court
compromise by the accused is an
MAY impose proper sanctions and penalties
implied admission of guilt except
Duty of the Branch Clerk of Court: during preliminary conference, he in case of quasi-offenses or when
shall: compromise is allowed; only in the
civil liability aspect of the case can
1. Assist the parties in reaching a settlement of the civil aspect of the
case there be a compromise
2. Mark the documents to be presented as exhibits and copies thereof Sanction for non-appearance is Sanction for non-appearance is
attached to the records after comparison imposed on the party imposed on the counsel of the
3. Ascertain from the parties the undisputed facts and admissions on the accused or the prosecutor
genuine ness and due execution of documents marked as exhibits
 Criminal Procedure
Atty. George Aquino
Parties are required to submit pre- No need to submit pre-trial briefs
trial briefs
Requires all proceedings to be Requires all proceedings to be
recorded; agreements and recorded; agreements and
admissions must be in writing and admissions must be in writing and
signed by the accused signed by the accused,
OTHERWISE, it cannot be used
against the accused
Judicial Dispute Resolution; Purposes
1. Most judges opt to explore settlement for various reasons, and the
JURIS PROJECT seeks to prioritize these procedures
2. It hopes that mediation and conciliation would contribute to the
resolution of mediatable cases, thereby increasing the satisfaction of
litigants in the court process and help deco nest the dockets of the
court
3. To strengthen conciliation during the pre-trial stage to expedite the
resolution of cases
Stages in Judicial proceedings with JDR; confidentiality:
1. Judicial proceedings shall be divided into 2 stages:
a. Filing of the complaint to conduct Court-Annexed Mediation and
JDR during pre-trial stage
b. Pre-trial proper to trial and judgement
2. Generally, the JDR judge shall not preside over the trial of the same
case when mediation does not succeed; to allow the parties to be
more spontaneous
3. Judge facilitates the settlements discussions and tries to reconcile
their differences; assesses the relative strengths and weaknesses of
each party’s case and make a non-binding and impartial evaluation of
the chances of each party’s success; he tries to persuade the parties
to reconsider their reluctance to amicably settle
4. The mediation process is confidential; the JDR judge shall not pass on
any info obtained to any other person; the conferences shall be
conducted in private; but he may confer with the mediator to
determine unresolved issues
Cases subject of mediation for JDR
(a) All civil cases, settlement of estates, and cases covered by the Rule
on Summary Procedure, except those which by law may not be
compromised;
Criminal cases like violation of traffic rules and regulations and
violation of municipal or city ordinances although included in the list
of cases under summary procedure should not be mediated because
they cannot be compromised and might be a source of corruption if
mediation pushes through.
(b) Cases cognizable by the Lupong Tagapamayapa under the
Katarungang Pambarangay Law;
(c) The civil aspect of B.P. Big. 22 cases;
(d) The civil aspect of quasi-offenses under Title 14 of the Revised Penal
Code.
(e) The civil aspect of estafa and libel under the proposed circular
amending A.M. No. 04-1-12-SC;
(f) The civil aspect of theft, under Art. 308 of the Revised Penal Code,
as part of the cases for referral to mediation.
Discovery Procedures in Criminal Cases
1. No rule which precludes the use of relevant modes of discovery in a
criminal case; though it only applies to civil proceedings, which
necessarily include the civil aspect of the criminal case, there is no
reason to exclusively confine the use of modes of discovery to civil
cases
2. Example: (1) Production and inspection of material evidence in
possession of prosecution; (2) Ordering a mental examination of the
accused and order his confinement; (3) depositions allow the
perpetuation of testimony regarding any matter that may be
cognizable in any PH court
3. Conditional Examination of Witnesses of both the defense and the
prosecution before trial if:
a. The witness is sick or infirm to have a reasonable ground for his
absence
b. Resides more than 100 km from the place of trial and has no means
to attend the same
c. Similar circumstances that would make him unavailable or prevent
him from attending trial
d. Has to leave the PH with no definite date of returning
BAYAS v. SANDIGANBAYAN
FACTS: Three inforamtions were filed before the Sandiganbayan charging
Matuday and Bayas with violation of Section 3(e) of RA 3019 and 2 counts
of MALVERSATION THRU FALISIFICATION. They were charged as the
MUNICIPAL MAYOR and TREASURER of Kabayan, Benguet.
During arraignment, both pled NOT GUILTY. On the scheduled pre-trial
conference, it was reset and rescheduled because Atty. Molintas, the
counsel for the accused, was not prepared. On the re-scheduled pretrial,
Atty. Molintas was absent because he had a flu.
On the resumption of pretrial, the parties submitted a JOINT STIPULATION
OF FACTS AND DOCUMENTS signed by Atty. Molintas and Prosecutor
Lucero.
On another scheduled pretrial conference, it did not pish thru because of
Atty. Molintas’ absence. Atty. Molintas MOVED TO WITHDRAW AS
COUNSEL for the accused. It was granted. Pretrial was rescheduled after
more than 1 month to give the accused some time to employ new counsel.
The accused, thru Atty. Cinco, moved to withdraw the JOINT STIPULATION
OF FACTS AND DOCUMENTS as they invoked their right to be presumed
innocent, especially the following:
1. Stipulation 1(b) which states, “Both the accused admit the
disbursement of the amount of P510,000.00 and P55,000.00.”
2. Exhibits 1 to 8-a
The Motion was denied by the Sandiganbayan claiming that there was no
fraud or mistake that vitiated the consent of the accused
ISSUE: WoN the Motion to Withdraw the Joint Stipulation of Facts and
documents is proper
HELD: NO. The new Rules on Criminal Procedure mandate parties to agree
on matters of facts, issues and evidence. Such stipulations are greatly
favored because they simplify, shorten or settle litigations in a faster and
more convenient manner. They save costs, time and resources of the
parties and, at the same time, help unclog court dockets. Once validly
entered into, stipulations will not be set aside unless for good cause.
Though the accused wish to be relieved from the stipulation, they do not
allege that that it was false or misleading; they do not dispute that there
was not fraud or mistake which vitiated their consent.
They heavily rely on their claim on the incompetence of Atty. Molintas.
However, parties are bound by the action or the inaction of their counsel;
the acts of a lawyer in the defense or the prosecution of a case are the
acts of the client.
The accused claims that their right to be presumed innocent was violated
cannot be upheld. Their arguments are couched in general terms.
According to jurisprudence, stipulating facts is an accepted practice. There
is nothing irregular or unlawful in stipulating facts in criminal cases.
A stipulation of facts is similar to a waiver, wherein it is solely for the
benefit and protection of the individual in his private capacity, if it can be
dispensed with and relinquished without infringing on any public right and
without detriment to the community at large.
In this case, the Joint Stipulation was a waiver of the right to present
evidence on the facts and the documents freely admitted by them. The
waiver was voluntary, with the assistance of counsel, and made in
accordance with the Rules.
LASTLY, based on Sec. 2 of Rule 118, for a pretrial agreement to be binding
on the accused, it must satisfy the following conditions: (1) the agreement
or admission must be in writing, and (2) it must be signed by both the
accused and their counsel.
The court's approval is not needed to make the stipulations binding on the
parties. Such approval is necessary merely to emphasize the supervision
by the court over the case and to enable it to control the flow of the
proceedings.
Once the stipulations are reduced into writing and signed by the parties
and their counsels, they become judicial admissions of the facts stipulated.
The Court also notes that the SBN cannot be faulted for its failure to
approve expressly the stipulations. It had the opportunity to rule on the
matter only when the accused, through their new counsel, Atty. Cecilia L.
Cinco, moved to withdraw their stipulations. It was Atty. Molintas who
caused such problem due to his continued absence.
In pretrial, if the counsel for the accused and/or the prosecutor do not
appear at the pretrial and do not offer an acceptable excuse for their lack
of cooperation, the court may impose proper sanctions or penalties.
 Criminal Procedure
Atty. George Aquino
In this case, however, the parties were the ones who volunteered to make
the Joint Stipulation of the facts of the case. Thus, the anti-graft court can
rightfully expect that both parties arrived upon it with fairness and
honesty.
CONCLUSION: The Sandiganbayan was correct in denying the Motion to
Withdraw the Joint Stipulation of Facts and Documents
RULE 119
Trial
Section 1. Time to prepare for trial. — After a plea of not guilty is entered,
the accused shall have at least fifteen (15) days to prepare for trial. The
trial shall commence within thirty (30) days from receipt of the pre-trial
order. (sec. 6, cir. 38-98)
Section 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. (2a)
The court shall, after consultation with the prosecutor and defense
counsel, set the case for continuous trial 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 first day of trial, except as otherwise authorized by the Supreme
Court. (sec. 8, cir. 38-98).
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. (n)
Section 3. Exclusions. — The following periods of delay shall be excluded
in computing the time within which trial must commence:
(a) Any period of delay resulting from other proceedings concerning the
accused, including but not limited to the following:
(1) Delay resulting from an examination of the physical and mental
condition of the accused;
(2) Delay resulting from proceedings with respect to other criminal charges
against the accused;
(3) Delay resulting from extraordinary remedies against interlocutory
orders;
(4) Delay resulting from pre-trial proceedings; provided, that the delay
does not exceed thirty (30) days;
(5) Delay resulting from orders of inhibition, or proceedings relating to
change of venue of cases or transfer from other courts;
(6) Delay resulting from a finding of the existence of a prejudicial question;
and
(7) Delay reasonably attributable to any period, not exceed thirty (30)
days, during which any proceeding which any proceeding concerning the
accused is actually under advisement.
(b) Any period of delay resulting from the absence or unavailability of an
essential witness.
For purposes of this subparagraph, an essential witness shall be
considered absent when his whereabouts are unknown or his whereabouts
cannot be determined by due diligence. He shall be considered unavailable
whenever his whereabouts are known but his presence for trial cannot be
obtained by due diligence.
(c) Any period of delay resulting from the mental incompetence or physical
inability of the accused to stand trial.
(d) If the information is dismissed upon motion of the prosecution and
thereafter a charge is filed against the accused for the same offense, any
period of delay from the date the charge was dismissed to the date the
time limitation would commence to run as to the subsequent charge had
there been no previous charge.
(e) A reasonable period of delay when the accused is joined for trial with
a co-accused over whom the court has not acquired jurisdiction, or, as to
whom the time for trial has not run and no motion for separate trial has
been granted.
(f) Any period of delay resulting from a continuance granted by any
court motu proprio, or on motion of either the accused or his counsel, or
the prosecution, if the court granted the continuance on the basis of its
findings set forth in the order that the ends of justice served by taking
such action outweigh the best interest of the public and the accused in a
speedy trial. (sec. 9, cir. 38-98)
Section 4. Factors for granting continuance. — The following factors,
among others, shall be considered by a court in determining whether to
grant a continuance under section 3(f) of this Rule.
(a) Whether or not the failure to grant a continuance in the proceeding
would likely make a continuation of such proceeding impossible or result
in a miscarriage of justice; and
(b) Whether or not the case taken as a whole is so novel, unusual and
complex, due to the number of accused or the nature of the prosecution,
or that it is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation within the
periods of time established therein.
In addition, no continuance under section 3(f) of this Rule shall be granted
because of congestion of the court's calendar or lack of diligent preparation
or failure to obtain available witnesses on the part of the prosecutor. (sec.
10, cir. 38-98)
Section 5. Time limit following an order for new trial. — If the accused is
to be tried again pursuant to an order for a new trial, the trial shall
commence within thirty (30) days from notice of the order, provided that
if the period becomes impractical due to unavailability of witnesses and
other factors, the court may extend it but not to exceed one hundred
eighty (180) days from notice of said order for a new trial. (sec. 11, cir.
38-98)
Section 6. Extended time limit. — Notwithstanding the provisions of
section 1(g), Rule 116 and the preceding section 1, for the first twelve-
calendar-month period following its effectivity on September 15, 1998, the
time limit with respect to the period from arraignment to trial imposed by
said provision shall be one hundred eighty (180) days. For the second
twelve-month period, the limit shall be one hundred twenty (120) days,
and for the third twelve-month period, the time limit shall be eighty (80)
days. (sec. 7, cir. 38-98)
Section 7. Public attorney's duties where accused is imprisoned. — If the
public attorney assigned to defend a person charged with a crime knows
that the latter is preventively detained, either because he is charged with
a bailable crime but has no means to post bail, or, is charged with a non-
bailable crime, or, is serving a term of imprisonment in any penal
institution, it shall be his duty to do the following:
(a) 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 so advise the prisoner of his right to
demand trial.
(b) Upon receipt of that notice, the custodian of the prisoner shall promptly
advise the prisoner of the charge and of his right to demand trial. If at
anytime thereafter the prisoner informs his custodian that he demands
such trial, the latter shall cause notice to that effect to sent promptly to
the public attorney.
(c) Upon receipt of such notice, the public attorney shall promptly seek to
obtain the presence of the prisoner for trial.
(d) When the custodian 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. (sec.
12, cir. 38-98)
Section 8. Sanctions. — In any case in which private counsel for the
accused, the public attorney, or the prosecutor.
(a) Knowingly allows the case to be set for trial without disclosing that a
necessary witness would be unavailable for trial;
(b) Files a motion solely for delay which he knows is totally frivolous and
without merit;
(c) Makes a statement for the purpose of obtaining continuance which he
knows to be false and which is material to the granting of a continuance;
or
(d) Willfully fails to proceed to trial without justification consistent with the
provisions hereof, the court may punish such counsel, attorney, or
prosecution, as follows:
(1) By imposing on a counsel privately retained in connection with the
defense of an accused, a fine not exceeding twenty thousand pesos
(P20,000.00);
(2) By imposing on any appointed counsel de oficio, public attorney, or
prosecutor a fine not exceeding five thousand pesos (P5,000.00); and
 Criminal Procedure
Atty. George Aquino
(3) By denying any defense counsel or prosecutor the right to practice
before the court trying the case for a period not exceeding thirty (30) days.
The punishment provided for by this section shall be without prejudice to
any appropriate criminal action or other sanction authorized under these
rules. (sec. 13, cir. 38-98)
Section 9. Remedy where accused is not brought to trial within the time
limit. — If the accused is not brought to trial within the time limit required
by Section 1(g), Rule 116 and Section 1, as extended by Section 6 of this
rule, the information may be dismissed on motion of the accused on the
ground of denial of his right of speedy trial. The accused shall have the
burden of proving the motion but the prosecution shall have the burden of
going forward with the evidence to establish the exclusion of time under
section 3 of this rule. The dismissal shall be subject to the rules on double
jeopardy.
Failure of the accused to move for dismissal prior to trial shall constitute a
waiver of the right to dismiss under this section. (sec. 14, cir. 38-98)
Section 10. Law on speedy trial not a bar to provision on speedy trial in
the Constitution. — No provision of law on speedy trial and no rule
implementing the same shall be interpreted as a bar to any charge of
denial of the right to speedy trial guaranteed by section 14(2), article III,
of the 1987 Constitution. (sec. 15, cir. 38-98)
Section 11. Order of trial. — The trial shall proceed in the following order:
(a) The prosecution shall present evidence to prove the charge and, in the
proper case, the civil liability.
(b) The accused may present evidence to prove his defense, and damages,
if any, arising from the issuance of a provisional remedy in the case.
(c) The prosecution and the defense may, in that order, present rebuttal
and sur-rebuttal evidence unless the court, in furtherance of justice,
permits them to present additional evidence bearing upon the main issue.
(d) Upon admission of the evidence of the parties, the case shall be
deemed submitted for decision unless the court directs them to argue
orally or to submit written memoranda.
(e) When the accused admits the act or omission charged in the complaint
or information but interposes a lawful defense, the order of trial may be
modified. (3a)
Section 12. Application for examination of witness for accused before
trial. — When the accused has been held to answer for an offense, he may,
upon motion with notice to the other parties, have witnesses conditionally
examined in his behalf. The motion shall state: (a) the name and residence
of the witness; (b) the substance of his testimony; and (c) that the witness
is sick or infirm as to afford reasonable ground for believing that he will
not be able to attend the trial, or resides more than one hundred (100)
kilometers from the place of trial and has no means to attend the same,
or that other similar circumstances exist that would make him unavailable
or prevent him from attending the trial. The motion shall be supported by
an affidavit of the accused and such other evidence as the court may
require. (4a)
Section 13. Examination of defense witness; how made. — If the court is
satisfied that the examination of a witness for the accused is necessary,
an order will be made directing that the witness be examined at a specified
date, time and place and that a copy of the order be served on the
prosecutor at least three (3) days before the scheduled examination. The
examination shall be taken before a judge, or, if not practicable, a member
of the Bar in good standing so designated by the judge in the order, or if
the order be made by a court of superior jurisdiction, before an inferior
court to be designated therein. The examination shall proceed
notwithstanding the absence of the prosecutor provided he was duly
notified of the hearing. A written record of the testimony shall be taken.
(5a)
Section 14. Bail to secure appearance of material witness. — When the
court is satisfied, upon proof or oath, that a material witness will not testify
when required, it may, upon motion of either party, order the witness to
post bail in such sum as may be deemed proper. Upon refusal to post bail,
the court shall commit him to prison until he complies or is legally
discharged after his testimony has been taken. (6a)
Section 15. Examination of witness for the prosecution. — When it
satisfactorily appears that a witness for the prosecution is too sick or infirm
to appear at the trial as directed by the order of the court, or has to leave
the Philippines with no definite date of returning, he may forthwith be
conditionally examined before the court where the case is pending. Such
examination, in the presence of the accused, or in his absence after
reasonable notice to attend the examination has been served on him, shall
be conducted in the same manner as an examination at the trial. Failure
or refusal of the accused to attend the examination after notice shall be
considered a waiver. The statement taken may be admitted in behalf of or
against the accused. (7a)
Section 16. Trial of several accused. — When two or more accused are
jointly charged with any offense, they shall be tried jointly unless the court,
in its discretion and upon motion of the prosecutor or any accused, orders
separate trial for one or more accused. (8a)
Section 17. Discharge of accused to be state witness. — When two or
more persons are jointly charged with the commission of any offense, upon
motion of the prosecution before resting its case, the court may direct one
or more of the accused to be discharged with their consent so that they
may be witnesses for the state when, after requiring the prosecution to
present evidence and the sworn statement of each proposed state witness
at a hearing in support of the discharge, the court is satisfied that:
(a) There is absolute necessity for the testimony of the accused whose
discharge is requested;
(b) The is no other direct evidence available for the proper prosecution of
the offense committed, except the testimony of said accused;
(c) The testimony of said accused can be substantially corroborated in its
material points;
(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
involving moral turpitude.
Evidence adduced in support of the discharge shall automatically form part
of the trial. If the court denies the motion for discharge of the accused as
state witness, his sworn statement shall be inadmissible in evidence. (9a)
Section 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
offense, unless the accused fails or refuses to testify against his co-
accused in accordance with his sworn statement constituting the basis for
the discharge. (10a)
Section 19. When mistake has been made in charging the proper offense.
— When it becomes manifest at any time before judgment that a mistake
has been made in charging the proper offense and the accused cannot be
convicted of the offense charged or any other offense necessarily included
therein, the accused shall not be discharged if there appears good cause
to detain him. In such case, the court shall commit the accused to answer
for the proper offense and dismiss the original case upon the filing of the
proper information. (11a)
Section 20. Appointment of acting prosecutor. — When a prosecutor, his
assistant or deputy is disqualified to act due to any of the grounds stated
in section 1 of Rule 137 or for any other reasons, the judge or the
prosecutor shall communicate with the Secretary of Justice in order that
the latter may appoint an acting prosecutor. (12a)
Section 21. Exclusion of the public. — The judge may, motu proprio,
exclude the public from the courtroom if the evidence to be produced
during the trial is offensive to decency or public morals. He may also, on
motion of the accused, exclude the public from the trial, except court
personnel and the counsel of the parties. (13a)
Section 22. Consolidation of trials of related offenses. — Charges for
offenses founded on the same facts or forming part of a series of offenses
of similar character may be tried jointly at the discretion of the court. (14a)
Section 23. Demurrer to evidence. — After the prosecution rests its case,
the court may dismiss the action on the ground of insufficiency of evidence
(1) on its own initiative after giving the prosecution the opportunity to be
heard or (2) upon demurrer to evidence filed by the accused with or
without leave of court.
If the court denies the demurrer to evidence filed with leave of court, the
accused may adduce evidence in his defense. When the demurrer to
evidence is filed without leave of court, the accused waives the right to
present evidence and submits the case for judgment on the basis of the
evidence for the prosecution. (15a)
The motion for leave of court to file demurrer to evidence shall specifically
state its grounds and shall be filed within a non-extendible period of five
(5) days after the prosecution rests its case. The prosecution may oppose
the motion within a non-extendible period of five (5) days from its receipt.
If leave of court is granted, the accused shall file the demurrer to evidence
within a non-extendible period of ten (10) days from notice. The
prosecution may oppose the demurrer to evidence within a similar period
from its receipt.
 Criminal Procedure
Atty. George Aquino
The order denying the motion for leave of court to file demurrer to
evidence or the demurrer itself shall not be reviewable by appeal or
by certiorari before judgment. (n)
Section 24. Reopening. — At any time before finality of the judgment of
conviction, the judge may, motu proprio or upon motion, with hearing in
either case, reopen the proceedings to avoid a miscarriage of justice. The
proceedings shall be terminated within thirty (30) days from the order
grating it.
BOOK DISCUSSION
When trial shall commence: it shall be set not alter than 30 days from
the termination of the pre-trial conference
Time to prepare for trial: If the accused enters a plea of not guilty, he
shall have AT LEAST 15 days to prepare
Effect of not bringing the accused to trial within the prescribed
period: (refer to Sec. 6)
1. The Information may be dismissed upon motion of the accused based
on the denial of his right to a speedy trial; he has to burden of proving
the ground for his motion and the prosecution has the burden of
proving that the delay belongs to the exclusion of time mentioned
2. Motion for dismissal must be made prior to trial, otherwise, it is
deemed a waiver (refer to Sec. 9)
Delays to be excluded in computing the period for commencement
of the trial: (refer to Sec. 3)
When delay or suspension of trial is justified by reason of absence
of a witness:
1. Exclusions justify the suspension of trial
2. In case of absence or unavailability of essential witnesses, the witness
must be indispensable, necessary, or important in the highest degree
3. An essential witness is absent if: (a) his whereabouts ae unknown;
(b) his whereabouts cannot be determined by due diligence
4. Witness is unavailable: his whereabouts are known but his presence
cannot be obtained by due diligence
Continuous trial: once commence, the trial shall continue from DAY TO
DAY as far as practicable until terminated, but may be postponed for a
reasonable period of time for good cause; setting the case for continuous
trial on a weekly or other short-term trail calendar at the shortest possible
time after consulting the prosecutor and the defense counsel
Trial period: it should not exceed 180 days from the first day of trial,
except if authorized by the SC
Postponement or Continuance: may be granted if continuing the
proceeding is IMPOSSIBLE or would result in the MISCARRIAGE OF
JUSTICE
Factors to be considered for granting continuances or
postponements: it is discretionary; the following factors shall be
considered:
(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
Prohibited grounds for a continuance:
1. Congestion of court’s calendar
2. Lack of diligent preparation
3. Failure to obtain available witnesses on the part of the prosecutor
How to secure appearance of a material witness:
1. Upon motion of either party, they may secure an order from the court
for a MATERIAL WITNESS to post bail, if the court is satisfied either
by proof or oath he will not testify when required
2. If he refuses to post bail, the court may commit him to prison until
he complies or after he testifies
Discharge of accused to be a state witness
1. GR: if 2 or more accused are jointly charged the shall be tried jointly;
XPN: the court, upon motion of the prosecutor, orders a separate trial
2. One or more of the accused may be discharged WITH THEIR CONSENT
so that they may be witnesses of the state; the prosecutor must: (a)
file a motion for the discharge of the accused; (b) file a motion before
the prosecution rests its case
3. The court, upon receipt of the motion, shall require the prosecution to
present evidence and the sworn statement of each proposed state
witness; a hearing is necessary for the discharge
4. The following conditions must be present
a. Two or more accused are jointly charged with the commission of an
offense
b. The motion for discharge is filed by the prosecution before it rests
its case
c. The prosecution presents evidence and the sworn statements of
each proposed state witness at the hearing for the discharge
d. Accused consented to be a state witness
e. Trial court is satisfied that:
(i) There is absolute necessity for the testimony of the accused
whose discharge is requested;
(ii) The is no other direct evidence available for the proper
prosecution of the offense committed, except the testimony of said
accused;
(iii) The testimony of said accused can be substantially corroborated
in its material points;
(iv) Said accused does not appear to be the most guilty; and
(v) Said accused has not at any time been convicted of any offense
involving moral turpitude.
5. The public prosecutor has the decision to employ the accused as a state
witness to obtain a successful prosecution of the accused
Evidence adduced during the discharge hearing
1. They automatically form part of the trial
2. if the court denies the motion, his sworn statement shall be
inadmissible in evidence
Effect of discharge of an accused to be a state witness: it amounts
to an acquittal and shall bar another prosecution for the same offense,
EXCEPT if he fails or refuse to testify against his co-accused in accordance
with his sworn statement; the motion is denied he shall be prosecuted
accordingly
Mistake in charging the proper offense: if it becomes manifest before
judgement, the accused cannot be convicted of the offense charged or any
offense necessarily included therein, then the court shall dismiss the
original case and order the filing of a new information; he shall not be
discharged if there is good case to detain him
Order of Trial:
(a) The prosecution shall present evidence to prove the charge and, in the
proper case, the civil liability.
(b) The accused may present evidence to prove his defense, and damages,
if any, arising from the issuance of a provisional remedy in the case.
(c) The prosecution may present rebuttal evidence unless the court,
permits them to present additional evidence bearing upon the main issue.
(d) The defense may present sur-rebuttal evidence unless the court
permits them to present additional evidence bearing upon the main issue.
(e) upon submission of the evidence of the parties, the case shall be
deemed submitted for decision, unless the court direct them to argue
orally or submit written memoranda
Modification of the order of trial; reverse trial: If the accused admits
the act or omission charged, but interposes a lawful defense
Reopening of the proceedings
1. Any time before the FINALITY of JUDGEMENT of CONVICTION, the
judge may MOTU PROPIO or UPON MOTION, with hearing, re-open the
proceedings to avoid a miscarriage of justice; proceedings shall be
terminated within 30 days from the order granting it
2. Requirements of re-opening a case
a. Must be before the finality of judgement of conviction
b. The order is issued by the judge on his own initiative or upon motion
c. It intends to prevent a miscarriage of justice
d. Presentation of additional or further evidence should be terminated
within 30 days from the issuance of the order
Trial in Absentia
1. Accused need not always be present in every hearing , although he has
the right to be present, if he desires
2. Accused may be tried in absentia if the following concur:
a. He has been arraigned
 Criminal Procedure
Atty. George Aquino
b. He has been duly notified of the trial or hearings Not every motion to dismiss is a demurrer to evidence
c. Absence or failure to appear is unjustified
1. A demurrer must refer to the insufficiency of evidence of the
Instances when the presence of the accuse is required: prosecution and to the evidence on record; A motion to dismiss not
grounded on such is not a demurrer
1. Presence of the accused is required: (a) at arraignment and plea; (b)
2. Example of other grounds: Motion to dismiss for violation of right to
for identification purposes; (c) at promulgation of sentence unless if
speedy trial
it is for a light offense, he may appear by counsel or representative
Granting of demurrer is acquittal:
Comments and questions of the judge during trial:
1. It calls for an appreciation of the evidence adduced by the prosecution
1. The judge can question the witnesses regarding material issues raised
and its sufficiency to warrant conviction beyond reasonable doubt,
during trial; but it should be limited to clarificatory questions and
resulting in a DISMISSAL OF THE CASE BASED ON THE MERIT, which
should be sparingly and judiciously used as the court should not, as
amounts to an acquittal, which cannot be appealed as it would violate
much as possible, interfere in the conduct of trial in accordance with
the right against double jeopardy
the neutrality and impartiality of a judge
2. Improper remarks of a judge does not amount to a denial of due Review of order granting demurrer: It may be reviewed under
process or the right to an impartial tribunal; sarcasm does not mean CERTIORARI under RULE 65 or based on grave abuse of discretion
that the judge favors the prosecution
Demurrer to evidence in a demurrer to evidence in a
Lack of formal offer of evidence during trial civil case criminal case
1. GR: The court shall not consider evidence which has not been formally Failure of the plaintiff to show that Insufficiency of evidence
offered AND accepted by the court in evidence; the formal offer of he is entitled to relief
evidence allows the parties to object to the presentation of an
evidence which may not be admissible Requires no prior leave of court May be filed with or without leave
2. Documents identified and marked as exhibits during pre-trial or trial of court
but were not formally offered as evidence cannot be treated as If denied, the defendant does not If denied but with leave of court,
evidence; thus, they cannot have any evidentiary weight or probative lose his right to present evidence the accused can still adduce
value and must be excluded and rejected evidence; if filed without leave of
When formal offer of evidence is not necessary: court, it amounts to a waiver to
present evidence
1. The rules are relaxed if the following concur:
a. The evidence was duly identified by testimony duly recorded If granted, the plaintiff may No appeal is allowed
b. Evidence was incorporated in the records of the case appeal; and if reversed, the
2. The court takes judicial notice of adjudicative facts; or where the court defendant is deemed to have
relies on judicial admissions or draws inference from such judicial waived his right to present
admissions; or where the trail court, in judging the demeanor of the evidence
witnesses, determines their credibility even without the offer of the Defendant invokes the demurrer; Court may motu propio dismiss
demeanor as evidence court cannot do so on its own the action, provided the
Demurrer to evidence: prosecution is given the
opportunity to be heard
1. It is actually a motion to dismiss filed by the accused after the
prosecution has rested its case; may be filed in civil cases or in special
proceedings JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT RULE
2. If filed before the prosecution rests, it is premature; it is an objection
that the evidence is insufficient to make out a case or sustain the A.M. No. 12-8-8-SC
issue; it challenges the sufficiency of the prosecution’s evidence in Whereas, case congestion and delays plague most courts in cities, given the
sustaining the indictment or verdict of guilt huge volume of cases filed each year and the slow and cumbersome adversarial
3. The court is required to ascertain whether there is competent or syste1n that the judiciary has in place;
sufficient evidence to sustain the indictment or support a verdict of Whereas, about 40% of criminal cases are dismissed annually owing to the fact
guilt; to be considered sufficient, the evidence must prove: (a) the that complainants simply give up con1ing to court after repeated
commission of the crime; (b) the degree of participation by the postponements;
accused
Whereas, few foreign businessmen make long-term investments in the
4. Grant or denial is discretionary and cannot be disturbed if not for
Philippines because its courts are unable to provide ample and speedy
grave abuse of discretion; it amounts to an acquittal and cannot be
protection to their investments, keeping its people poor;
appealed, otherwise, it would violate the right against double
jeopardy Whereas, in order to reduce the time needed for completing the testimonies of
witnesses in cases under litigation, on February 21, 2012 the Supreme Court
Demurrer to evidence by the court: on its own initiative, the court may approved for piloting by trial courts in Quezon City the compulsory use of judicial
dismiss the action without waiting for a motion from the accused on the affidavits in place of the direct testimonies of witnesses;
ground of insufficiency of evidence, provided that the prosecution has the
Whereas, it is reported that such piloting has quickly resulted in reducing by
opportunity to be heard
about two-thirds the time used for presenting the testimonies of witnesses, thus
Demurrer to evidence by the accused with leave of court: speeding up the hearing and adjudication of cases;
1. Trial court has discretion to grant or deny the demurrer; to determine Whereas, the Supreme Court Committee on the Revision of the Rules of Court,
if the accused is merely stalling the proceedings headed by Senior Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio, and the Sub-Committee
2. The motion should specifically state its grounds and filed within 5 days on the Revision of the Rules on Civil Procedure, headed by Associate Justice
after the prosecutions rests; prosecution may oppose within 5 days Roberto A. Abad, have recommended for adoption a Judicial Affidavit Rule that
from receipt will replicate nationwide the success of the Quezon City experience in the use
of judicial affidavits; and
3. If the LEAVE TO FILE A DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE is granted, the
accused shall file the demurrer within 10 days from notice; Whereas, the Supreme Court En Banc finds merit in the recommendation;
prosecution may oppose within the same period from receipt NOW, THEREFORE, the Supreme Court En Banc hereby issues and
4. If the court grants the demurrer, the accused may adduce evidence promulgates the following:
in his defense
Section 1. Scope. - (a) This Rule shall apply to all actions, proceedings, and
5. If denied, he must present evidence; if convicted, he can appeal; the
incidents requiring the reception of evidence before:
denial is not reviewable by appeal or certiorari
(1) The Metropolitan Trial Courts, the Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, the
Demurrer to evidence by the accused without leave of court Municipal Trial Courts, the Municipal Circuit Trial Courts, and the Shari' a Circuit
1. If granted, the case is dismissed and is in effect an acquittal Courts but shall not apply to small claims cases under A.M. 08-8-7-SC;
2. If denied, the accused waive the right to present evidence and submits (2) The Regional Trial Courts and the Shari'a District Courts;
the case for judgement based in the evidence of the prosecution
3. The waiver of the right to present defense evidence is unqualified
 Criminal Procedure
Atty. George Aquino
(3) The Sandiganbayan, the Court of Tax Appeals, the Court of Appeals, and
the Shari'a Appellate Courts;
(4) The investigating officers and bodies authorized by the Supreme Court to
receive evidence, including the Integrated Bar of the Philippine (IBP); and
(5) The special courts and quasi-judicial bodies, whose rules of procedure are
subject to disapproval of the Supreme Court, insofar as their existing rules of
procedure contravene the provisions of this Rule.1
(b) For the purpose of brevity, the above courts, quasi-judicial bodies, or
investigating officers shall be uniformly referred to here as the "court."
Section 2. Submission of Judicial Affidavits and Exhibits in lieu of direct
testimonies. - (a) The parties shall file with the court and serve on the adverse
party, personally or by licensed courier service, not later than five days before
pre-trial or preliminary conference or the scheduled hearing with respect to
motions and incidents, the following:
(1) The judicial affidavits of their witnesses, which shall take the place of such
witnesses' direct testimonies; and
(2) The parties' docun1entary or object evidence, if any, which shall be attached
to the judicial affidavits and marked as Exhibits A, B, C, and so on in the case
of the complainant or the plaintiff, and as Exhibits 1, 2, 3, and so on in the case
of the respondent or the defendant.
(b) Should a party or a witness desire to keep the original document or object
evidence in his possession, he may, after the same has been identified, marked
as exhibit, and authenticated, warrant in his judicial affidavit that the copy or
reproduction attached to such affidavit is a faithful copy or reproduction of that
original. In addition, the party or witness shall bring the original document or
object evidence for comparison during the preliminary conference with the
attached copy, reproduction, or pictures, failing which the latter shall not be
admitted.
This is without prejudice to the introduction of secondary evidence in place of
the original when allowed by existing rules.
Section 3. Contents of judicial Affidavit. - A judicial affidavit shall be prepared
in the language known to the witness and, if not in English or Filipino,
accompanied by a translation in English or Filipino, and shall contain the
following:
(a) The name, age, residence or business address, and occupation of the
witness;
(b) The name and address of the lawyer who conducts or supervises the
examination of the witness and the place where the examination is being held;
(c) A statement that the witness is answering the questions asked of him, fully
conscious that he does so under oath, and that he may face criminal liability for
false testimony or perjury;
(d) Questions asked of the witness and his corresponding answers,
consecutively numbered, that:
(1) Show the circumstances under which the witness acquired the facts upon
which he testifies;
(2) Elicit from him those facts which are relevant to the issues that the case
presents; and
(3) Identify the attached documentary and object evidence and establish their
authenticity in accordance with the Rules of Court;
(e) The signature of the witness over his printed name; and
(f) A jurat with the signature of the notary public who administers the oath or
an officer who is authorized by law to administer the same.
Section 4. Sworn attestation of the lawyer. - (a) The judicial affidavit shall
contain a sworn attestation at the end, executed by the lawyer who conducted
or supervised the examination of the witness, to the effect that:
(1) He faithfully recorded or caused to be recorded the questions he asked and
the corresponding answers that the witness gave; and
(2) Neither he nor any other person then present or assisting him coached the
witness regarding the latter's answers.
(b) A false attestation shall subject the lawyer mentioned to disciplinary action,
including disbarment.
Section 5. Subpoena. - If the government employee or official, or the requested
witness, who is neither the witness of the adverse party nor a hostile witness,
unjustifiably declines to execute a judicial affidavit or refuses without just cause
to make the relevant books, documents, or other things under his control
available for copying, authentication, and eventual production in court, the
requesting party may avail himself of the issuance of a subpoena ad
testificandum or duces tecum under Rule 21 of the Rules of Court. The rules
governing the issuance of a subpoena to the witness in this case shall be the
same as when taking his deposition except that the taking of a judicial affidavit
shal1 be understood to be ex parte.
Section 6. Offer of and objections to testimony in judicial affidavit. - The party
presenting the judicial affidavit of his witness in place of direct testimony shall
state the purpose of such testimony at the start of the presentation of the
witness. The adverse party may move to disqualify the witness or to strike out
his affidavit or any of the answers found in it on ground of inadmissibility. The
court shall promptly rule on the motion and, if granted, shall cause the marking
of any excluded answer by placing it in brackets under the initials of an
authorized court personnel, without prejudice to a tender of excluded evidence
under Section 40 of Rule 132 of the Rules of Court.
Section 7. Examination of the witness on his judicial affidavit. - The adverse
party shall have the right to cross-examine the witness on his judicial affidavit
and on the exhibits attached to the same. The party who presents the witness
may also examine him as on re-direct. In every case, the court shall take active
part in examining the witness to determine his credibility as well as the truth of
his testimony and to elicit the answers that it needs for resolving the issues.
Section 8. Oral offer of and objections to exhibits. - (a) Upon the termination
of the testimony of his last witness, a party shall immediately make an oral offer
of evidence of his documentary or object exhibits, piece by piece, in their
chronological order, stating the purpose or purposes for which he offers the
particular exhibit.
(b) After each piece of exhibit is offered, the adverse party shall state the legal
ground for his objection, if any, to its admission, and the court shall immediately
make its ruling respecting that exhibit.
(c) Since the documentary or object exhibits form part of the judicial affidavits
that describe and authenticate them, it is sufficient that such exhibits are simply
cited by their markings during the offers, the objections, and the rulings,
dispensing with the description of each exhibit.
Section 9. Application of rule to criminal actions. - (a) This rule shall apply to
all criminal actions:
(1) Where the maximum of the imposable penalty does not exceed six years;
(2) Where the accused agrees to the use of judicial affidavits, irrespective of
the penalty involved; or
(3) With respect to the civil aspect of the actions, whatever the penalties
involved are.
(b) The prosecution shall submit the judicial affidavits of its witnesses not later
than five days before the pre-trial, serving copies if the same upon the accused.
The complainant or public prosecutor shall attach to the affidavits such
documentary or object evidence as he may have, marking them as Exhibits A,
B, C, and so on. No further judicial affidavit, documentary, or object evidence
shall be admitted at the trial.
(c) If the accused desires to be heard on his defense after receipt of the judicial
affidavits of the prosecution, he shall have the option to submit his judicial
affidavit as well as those of his witnesses to the court within ten days from
receipt of such affidavits and serve a copy of each on the public and private
prosecutor, including his documentary and object evidence previously marked
as Exhibits 1, 2, 3, and so on. These affidavits shall serve as direct testimonies
of the accused and his witnesses when they appear before the court to testify.
Section 10. Effect of non-compliance with the judicial Affidavit Rule. - (a) A
party who fails to submit the required judicial affidavits and exhibits on time
shall be deemed to have waived their submission. The court may, however,
allow only once the late submission of the same provided, the delay is for a
valid reason, would not unduly prejudice the opposing party, and the defaulting
party pays a fine of not less than P 1,000.00 nor more than P 5,000.00 at the
discretion of the court.
(b) The court shall not consider the affidavit of any witness who fails to appear
at the scheduled hearing of the case as required. Counsel who fails to appear
without valid cause despite notice shall be deemed to have waived his client's
right to confront by cross-examination the witnesses there present.
(c) The court shall not admit as evidence judicial affidavits that do not conform
to the content requirements of Section 3 and the attestation requirement of
Section 4 above. The court may, however, allow only once the subsequent
submission of the compliant replacement affidavits before the hearing or trial
provided the delay is for a valid reason and would not unduly prejudice the
opposing party and provided further, that public or private counsel responsible
for their preparation and submission pays a fine of not less than P 1,000.00 nor
more than P 5,000.00, at the discretion of the court.
Section 11. Repeal or modification of inconsistent rules. - The provisions of the
Rules of Court and the rules of procedure governing investigating officers and
bodies authorized by the Supreme Court to receive evidence are repealed or
modified insofar as these are inconsistent with the provisions of this
Rule.1âwphi1
The rules of procedure governing quasi-judicial bodies inconsistent herewith are
hereby disapproved.
Section 12. Effectivity. - This rule shall take effect on January 1, 2013 following
its publication in two newspapers of general circulation not later than September
15, 2012. It shall also apply to existing cases.
 Criminal Procedure
Atty. George Aquino
Continuous Trial Rule
A.M. No. 15-06-10-Sc
Sec. 2(c) Meritorious Motions.
Motions that allege plausible grounds supported by relevant documents and/or
competent evidence, except those that are already covered by the Revised
Guidelines, are meritorious motions, such as:
i. Motion to withdraw information, or to downgrade the charge in the original
information, or to exclude an accused originally charged therein, filed by the
prosecution as a result of a reinvestigation, reconsideration, and review;
ii. Motion to quash warrant of arrest;
iii. Motion to suspend arraignment on the ground of an unsound mental
condition under Sec. 11(a), Rule 116;
iv. Motion to suspend proceedings on the ground of a prejudicial question where
a civil case was filed prior to the criminal case under Sec. 11(b), Rule 116;
v. Motion to quash information on the grounds that the facts charged do not
constitute an offense, lack of jurisdiction, extinction of criminal action or liability,
or double jeopardy under Sec. 3, par. (a), (b), (g), and (i), Rule 117;
vi. Motion to discharge accused as a state witness under Sec. 17, Rule 119;
vii. Motion to quash search warrant under Sec. 14, Rule 126, or motion to
suppress evidence; and
viii. Motion to dismiss on the ground that the criminal case is a Strategic Law
Suit Against Public Participation (SLAPP) under Rule 6 of the Rules of Procedure
for Environmental Cases.
The comment of the adverse party shall be filed within a non-extendible period
of ten (10) calendar days from notice/receipt of the order of the court to file the
same, and the court shall resolve the motion within a non-extendible period of
ten (10) calendar days from the expiration of the ten (10)-day period, with or
without comment. The court, at its discretion, may set the motion for hearing
within a non-extendible period of ten (10) calendar days from the expiration of
the ten (10)-day period to file comment, in which case the same shall be
submitted for resolution after the termination of the hearing, and shall be
resolved within a non-extendible period of ten (10) calendar days thereafter.
Reply and memorandum need not be submitted.
In case of a motion to discharge accused as state witness under Sec. 17, Rule
119, where the prosecution is required to present evidence in support thereof,
such motion shall be submitted for resolution from the termination of the
hearing, and shall be resolved within a non-extendible period of ten (10)
calendar days thereafter.
The motion for reconsideration of the resolution of a meritorious motion shall
be filed within a non-extendible period of five (5) calendar days from receipt of
such resolution, and the adverse party shall be given an equal period of five (5)
calendar days from receipt of the motion for reconsideration within which to
submit its comment. Thereafter, the motion for reconsideration shall be
resolved by the court within a non-extendible period of five (5) calendar days
from the expiration of the five (5)-day period to submit the comment.
Motions that do not conform to the requirements stated above shall be
considered unmeritorious and shall be denied outright.
Sec. 2(d) Motion for postponement.
A motion for postponement is prohibited, except if it is based on acts of God,
force majeure or physical inability of the witness to appear and testify. If the
motion is granted based on such exceptions, the moving party shall be warned
that the presentation of its evidence must still be finished on the dates
previously agreed upon.
A motion for postponement, whether written or oral, shall at all times be
accompanied by the original official receipt from the Office of the Clerk of Court
evidencing payment of the postponement fee under Sec. 21 (b), Rule 141, to
be submitted either at the time of the filing of said motion or not later than the
next hearing date. The Clerk of Court shall not accept the motion unless
accompanied by the original receipt.
Sec. 11. Form of Testimony
1. For First Level Courts
In all criminal cases, including those covered by the Rule on Summary
Procedure, the testimonies of witnesses shall consist of the duly subscribed
written statements given to law enforcement or peace officers or the affidavits
or counter-affidavits submitted before the investigating prosecutor, and if such
are not available, testimonies shall be in the form of judicial affidavits, subject
to additional direct and cross-examination questions.
The trial prosecutor may dispense with the sworn written statements submitted
to the law enforcement or peace officers and prepare the judicial affidavits of
the affiants or modify or revise the said sworn statements before presenting it
as evidence.
2. For Second Level Courts, Sandiganbayan and Court of Tax Appeals
In criminal cases where the demeanor of the witness is not essential in
determining the credibility of said witness, such as forensic chemists, medico-
legal officers, investigators, auditors, accountants, engineers, custodians,
expert witnesses and other similar witnesses, who will testify on the
authenticity, due execution and the contents of public documents and reports,
and in criminal cases that are transactional in character, such as falsification,
malversation, estafa, or other crimes where the culpability or innocence of the
accused can be established through documents, the testimonies of the
witnesses shall be the duly subscribed written statements given to law
enforcement or peace officers or the affidavits or counter-affidavits submitted
before the investigating prosecutor, and if such are not available, testimonies
shall be in the form of judicial affidavits, subject to additional direct and cross-
examination questions.
In all other cases where the culpability or the innocence of the accused is based
on the testimonies of the alleged eyewitnesses, the testimonies of these
witnesses shall be in oral form.
12. Stipulations
During pre-trial/ preliminary conference, the court shall require the parties to
enter into stipulations on the subject of both direct and cross-examinations of
witnesses who have no personal knowledge of the material facts constituting
the crimes, such as forensic chemists, medico-legal officers, investigators,
auditors, accountants, engineers, custodians, expert witnesses and other
similar witnesses, who will testify on the authenticity, due execution and the
contents of public documents and reports; corroborative witnesses; and those
who will testify on the civil liability.
This rule is without prejudice to allowing additional direct and cross-examination
questions.
If stipulations cannot be had in full, where the adverse party does not waive the
right to cross-examination, the subject of the direct testimony of these
witnesses should be stipulated upon, without prejudice to additional direct and
cross-examination questions.
13. Trial
(a) The court shall encourage the accused and the prosecution to avail of:
i. For the accused – Secs. 12 and 13, Rule 119 on the application for
examination of witness for accused before trial and how it is made; and
ii. For the prosecution – Sec. 15, Rule 119 on the conditional examination of
witness for the prosecution.
(b) Absence of counsel de parte.
In the absence of counsel de parte, the hearing shall proceed upon appointment
by the court of a counsel de officio.
(c) Offer of evidence.
The offer of evidence, the comment/objection thereto, and the court ruling shall
be made orally. A party is required to make his/her oral offer of evidence on the
same day after the presentation of his/her last witness, and the opposing party
is required to immediately interpose his/her oral comment/objection thereto.
Thereafter, the court shall make a ruling on the offer of evidence in open court.
In making the offer, the counsel shall cite the specific page numbers of the court
record where the exhibits being offered are found, if attached thereto. The court
shall ensure that all exhibits offered are submitted to it on the same day of the
offer.
If the exhibits are not attached to the record, the party making the offer must
submit the same during the offer of evidence in open court.
(d) Demurrer to Evidence.
After the prosecution has rested its case, the court shall inquire from the
accused if he/she desires to move for leave of court to file a demurrer to
evidence, or to proceed with the presentation of his/her evidence. (See Annex
9)
If the accused orally moves for leave of court to file a demurrer to evidence, the
court shall orally resolve the same. If the motion for leave is denied, the court
shall issue an order for the accused to present and terminate his/her evidence
on the dates previously scheduled and agreed upon, and to orally offer and rest
his/her case on the day his/her last witness is presented.
If despite the denial of the motion for leave, the accused insists on filing the
demurrer to evidence, the previously scheduled dates for the accused to present
evidence shall be cancelled.
The demurrer to evidence shall be filed within a non-extendible period of ten
(10) calendar days from the date leave of court is granted, and the
corresponding comment shall be filed within a non-extendible period of ten (10)
calendar days counted from date of receipt of the demurrer to evidence. The
demurrer shall be resolved by the court within a non-extendible period of thirty
(30) calendar days from date of the filing of the comment or lapse of the ten
(10)-day period to file the same.
If the motion for leave of court to file demurrer to evidence is granted, and the
subsequent demurrer to evidence is denied, the accused shall likewise present
 Criminal Procedure
Atty. George Aquino
and terminate his/her evidence (one day apart, morning and afternoon) and or re-cross examination. Should the affiant fail to testify, his affidavit shall not
shall orally offer and rest his/her case on the day his/her last witness is be considered as competent evidence for the party presenting the affidavit, but
presented. The court shall rule on the oral offer of evidence of the accused and the adverse party may utilize the same for any admissible purpose.
the comment or objection of the prosecution on the same day of the offer. If
Except in rebuttal or sur-rebuttal, no witness shall be allowed to testify unless
the court denies the motion to present rebuttal evidence because it is no longer
his affidavit was previously submitted to the court in accordance with Section
necessary, it shall consider the case submitted for decision. (See Annex 10).
12 hereof.
(e) Presentation of Rebuttal and Sur-rebuttal Evidence.
However, should a party desire to present additional affidavits or counter-
If the court grants the motion to present rebuttal evidence, the prosecution shall affidavits as part of his direct evidence, he shall so manifest during the
immediately proceed with its presentation after the accused had rested his/her preliminary conference, stating the purpose thereof. If allowed by the court,
case, and orally rest its case in rebuttal after the presentation of its last rebuttal the additional affidavits of the prosecution or the counter-affidavits of the
witness. Thereafter, the accused shall immediately present sur-rebuttal defense shall be submitted to the court and served on the adverse party not
evidence, if there is any, and orally rest the case in sur-rebuttal after the later than three (3) days after the termination of the preliminary conference. If
presentation of its last sur-rebuttal witness. Thereafter, the court shall submit the additional affidavits are presented by the prosecution, the accused may file
the case for decision. (See Annexes 11 to 13). his counter-affidavits and serve the same on the prosecution within three (3)
days from such service.
(f) One-day examination of witness rule.
Sec. 16. Arrest of accused. — The court shall not order the arrest of the
The court shall strictly adhere to the rule that a witness has to be fully examined
accused except for failure to appear whenever required. Release of the person
in one (1) day.
arrested shall either be on bail or on recognizance by a responsible citizen
14. Memoranda acceptable to the court.
The submission of memoranda is discretionary on the part of the court, which Sec. 17. Judgment. — Where a trial has been conducted, the court shall
in no case shall exceed twenty-five (25) pages in length, single-spaced, on legal promulgate the judgment not later than thirty (30) days after the termination
size paper, using size 14 font. The period to submit memoranda shall be non- of trial.
extendible and shall not suspend the running of the period of promulgation of
AM 12-11-2-SC
the decision; thus, with or without memoranda, the promulgation shall push
through as scheduled.
15. Lack of Stenographic Notes
Judges who conducted the trial and heard the testimonies of some or all of the
witnesses shall not defer the submission of the case for decision on the ground
of incomplete or missing transcript of stenographic notes. If the case was heard
completely by another judge, not the judge tasked to write the decision, the
latter shall direct the stenographers concerned to submit the complete
transcripts within a period of thirty (30) calendar days from date of his/her
assumption to office.

Rules on Summary Procedure

Criminal Cases
Sec. 11. How commenced. — The filing of criminal cases falling within the
scope of this Rule shall be either by complaint or by information: Provided,
however, that in Metropolitan Manila and in Chartered Cities. such cases shall
be commenced only by information, except when the offense cannot be
prosecuted de oficio.
The complaint or information shall be accompanied by the affidavits of the
compliant and of his witnesses in such number of copies as there are accused
plus two (2) copies for the court's files. If this requirement is not complied with
within five (5) days from date of filing, the care may be dismissed.
Sec. 12. Duty of court. —
(a) If commenced by compliant. — On the basis of the compliant and the
affidavits and other evidence accompanying the same, the court may dismiss
the case outright for being patently without basis or merit and order the release
of the amused if in custody.
(b) If commenced by information. — When the case is commenced by
information, or is not dismissed pursuant to the next preceding paragraph, the
court shall issue an order which, together with copies of the affidavits and other
evidence submitted by the prosecution, shall require the accused to submit his
counter-affidavit and the affidavits of his witnesses as well as any evidence in
his behalf, serving copies thereof on the complainant or prosecutor not later
than ten (10) days from receipt of said order. The prosecution may file reply
affidavits within ten (10) days after receipt of the counter-affidavits of the
defense.
Sec. 13. Arraignment and trial. — Should the court, upon a consideration of
the complaint or information and the affidavits submitted by both parties, find
no cause or ground to hold the accused for trial, it shall order the dismissal of
the case; otherwise, the court shall set the case for arraignment and trial.
If the accused is in custody for the crime charged, he shall be immediately
arraigned and if he enters a plea of guilty, he shall forthwith be sentenced.
Sec. 14. Preliminary conference. — Before conducting the trial, the court shall
call the parties to a preliminary conference during which a stipulation of facts
may be entered into, or the propriety of allowing the accused to enter a plea of
guilty to a lesser offense may be considered, or such other matters may be
taken up to clarify the issues and to ensure a speedy disposition of the case.
However, no admission by the accused shall be used against him unless reduced
to writing and signed by the accused and his counsel. A refusal or failure to
stipulate shall not prejudice the accused.
Sec. 15. Procedure of trial. — At the trial, the affidavits submitted by the
parties shall constitute the direct testimonies of the witnesses who executed the
same. Witnesses who testified may be subjected to cross-examination, redirect
Criminal Procedure
Atty. George Aquino
 Criminal Procedure
Atty. George Aquino
VISBAL v. JUDGE VANILLA
FACTS: Prosecutor Visbal sent a letter to Court Administrator Velasco
charging Judge Vanilla with GRAVE MISCONDUCT and GROSS IGNORANCE
OF THE LAW for archiving a criminal case.
Prosec. Visbal vlaims that at the time Judge Vanilla ordered the case to be
archived, the witnesses for the prosecution were ready to testify, with due
notice to the accused.
The OCA referred the complaint to Judge Vanilla and required him to
comment within 10 days from receipt.
Judge Vanilla explained that the order was to RESET THE HEARING
because of the absence of the second witness and of the accused himself;
on the rescheduled hearing, the subpoena for the accused was not properly
served and the prosecution did not present another witness. The case was
rescheduled. Come day of trial, the subpoena for the accused was not
served because the latter changed his address without informing the court.
Judge Vanilla issued a WARRANT OF ARREST, no hearing was set in the
meantime until the accused was arrested; the case shall be archived and
shall be revived upon arrest of the accused.
The OCA’s recommendation states that Judge Vanilla’s order was
PATENTLY ERRONEOUS.
ISSUE: WoN Judge Vanilla is guilt of gross ignorance of the law
HELD: NO. Archiving of a criminal case is allowed if after the issuance of
the warrant of arrest, the accused remains at large for six (6) months from
delivery of the warrant to the proper peace officer.
However, the court may MOTU PROPIO or upon motion of any party,
archive a criminal case in case of the following reasons:
a. the accused appears to be suffering from an unsound mental condition
which effectively renders him unable to fully understand the charge against
him and to plead intelligently, or to undergo trial, and he has to be
committed to a mental hospital;
b. a valid prejudicial question in a civil action is invoked during the
pendency of the criminal case unless the civil and criminal cases are
consolidated;
c. an interlocutory order or incident in the criminal case is elevated to and
is pending resolution/decision for an indefinite period before a higher court
which has issued a temporary restraining or a writ of preliminary
injunction; and
d. when the accused has jumped bail before arraignment and cannot be
arrested by his bondsman.
This case was did not involve gross ignorance of the law because there
was no malice or bad faith.
CONCLUSION: Judge Vanilla erred in archiving the case, but his
ignorance was not gross.