Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Arraignment and Plea Transcript
Arraignment and Plea Transcript
Q: What is arraignment?
A: It is the formal mode and manner of the implementing the accused
constitutional right of an accused to be informed of the nature and cause
of the accusation against him
Q: From rule 110 - 115 can you cite procedures that requires arraignment?
Since the beginning we have been discussing about arraignment and I
wanted to know what specific procedure from rule 110 - 115 has this
concept we discuss
A: Preliminary Investigation?
ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
Q: so class that is another concept where you can question the legality of
the warrant of arrest before the accused enters its plea. Okay now last
procedure?
A: search warrant?
Q: no. This has been discuss in rule 110. Arraignment is also important in
determining the sufficiency of the information because that is the last
time when they would be able to question the sufficiency of the
information before arraignment afterwards after you enter the plea you
cannot anymore question the validity or sufficiency of the information for
it is deem waived.
Q: Why do you waived the right to question the arrest and sufficiency of
the information upon arraignment, upon entering the plea during
arraignment?
A: because upon there is a failure upon the part of the dependent to raise
such irregularities
Q: why not during pre trial or trial why not in joining bill of particulars
why is in arraignment why is it that the reckoning point of the waiver is
arraignment?
ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
A: Because arraignment is the time where the accused is fully informed
of everything in regards to the crime. This is the time where he has the
full opportunity po to exercise such rights
Q: Arraignment is the only official time when the accused will give
positive reaction to the court. What is this positive action while entering
his plea what is the significance of this positive action by entering his
plea in court. It means that you are accepting the jurisdiction and
authority of the court that is why upon arraignment entering of plea you
now waived the defects in the information and warrant of arrest because
you have accepted the jurisdiction and authority of the court from
entering your plea
Q: so all cases you will have arraignment 30 days from acquiring the
jurisdiction over the person of the accused
A: there is this exception of 30 days from making the arraignment if it is
provided by the special law
Q: what?
A: there is an exception
Q: so when one would leave for another country there would be shorter
period to arraign?
A: yes sir
Q: Really?
A: and when there is a violation of child abuse acts and when the accused
is in preventive detention
Q: in how many days? *nag comment siya na wag daw tumingin sa note*
A: I don’t know how many days sir
Q: can you read section 1 of rule 116? what happens during arraignment?
A: the accused must be arraign before the court where the complaint or
information was filed or assigned in trial the arraignment shall be made in
open court
Q: Suppose the court did not read the complaint or information to the
accused is it valid?
A: it is not necessarily invalid
Q: so you can see such exception in section 1 rule 116 the why are you
making such rules
A: the supreme court
Q: the supreme court make such rules? yet it is stated that the information
shall be read for the accused so if the court does not read the information
to the accused during arraignment what happens
A: if the court did not read the information against the accused during the
arraignment the accused would be deprived of the constitutional right to
be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him
therefore
Q: okay class I will tell you a story this happened to me when I was a
student intern in law school so I attend my first arraignment in my 3rd
year as a legal intern. So I attend the first hearing and it was called 8:30
am and it is an arraignment the charge against the accused is violation
(hindi ko po maintindihan yung english term na sinsabi niya basta yung
pag tambay daw po) the penalty for the “pagtambay” is one month
imprisonment to arresto minor so the accused who is obviously a tambay
goes to court and then he was furnished a copy of the information that is
written in english so I have memorized section1 rule 116 and I know the
next step after furnishing the copy of the information the step is the
reading of the information in open court and you know what happen class
the judge ask guilty or not guilty is that correct. I was looking in the court
room and thinking that he was committing a mistake for it was stated in
rule 116 sec 1 that the information should be read in open court then why
is it the clerk of court is not reading the information. Apparently what has
been stated in the rules of court may not actually reflect what happens in
real life so in that case class you only read the information to the accused
in open court if the accused invokes his right to be read the information if
not then the court will presume that the accused has sufficiently read the
information by himself the reason is because of the number of cases read
before the court if you have visited one of the courts I don’t know here in
lipa city but in metro manila we have 30 cases 40 cases in one morning so
to read all those information would cause so much time so the reason is
for speedy trial non reading of the information in open court is not grave
violation of the rules of court but then again personally I disagree because
it is written in section 1 of rule 116 that it should be read in open court so
ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
why are you making an exception. So you know what happen to that case
so the judge ask him of guilty or not guilty the accused said ahh and the
judge said according to the information tumambay ka daw sa ilalim ng C5
bridge totoo ba yun o hindi? Judge 2 months na po akong nakakulong
anong penalty nung violation ng ordinance 1 month okay so if you plead
guilty you will now be released if you do not plead guilty you will remain
in detention even though you have served the maximum period so what
will you say. Sabi nung accused guilty na lang judge then the judge said
oh PAO talk to your client explain first what will be the impact if the
accused would plead guilty. So thats what happen in actual court trial
even if the rules of court is very perfect the actual thing is not actually
letter per letter followed in actual practice.
Q: How about before arraignment what is the duty of the court. Because
during arraignment it must be done in open court furnish a copy of the
information to the accused read the information and ask him whether he
is guilty or not guilty. Before the actual procedure for arraignment what
happens
A: the duty of the court before arraignment is to provide for a counsel de
officio
Q: thats not like that the duty of the court is to inform the accused that he
has right to counsel whats the second duty of the court
A: the second duty when the accused has no counsel of his choice then
the court shall provide for a counsel de officio coming from the member
of the bar which is in good standing
Q: that is not 100% correct you will ask whether he wants a counsel and
the third one is if the accused said he wants a counsel then it is the only
time that he would be provided by a counsel de officio. When can an
accused represent himself without a counsel
A: When he waives po his right to counsel
Q: When nga? When can the accused represent himself without a counsel
so suppose the crime charge is rape with homicide can you waive your
ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
right to counsel. So judge I wont be represented by a counsel I will
defend myself can he do that?
A: no po
Q: is the counsel of the accused allowed to represent him during his plea?
A: no po.
Q: why not
ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
A: because it is merely stated in the rules of court that the accused should
personally enter his plea
Q: what is the purpose again of arraignment
A: to inform the accused po of the nature and causes of the accusation or
charged against him
Q: so let say the counsel appears in the arraignment and the charges
against his clients was read in open court then the counsel texted the
allegation to the accused with legal basis and legal interpretation.
Therefore the accused is actually informed of the nature and causes of the
accusation against him thus complying with the purpose of arraignment is
that allowed?
A: no po because it is the duty of the court po to that the accused is
inform of the
Q: yes the accused was informed through text then the counsel would tell
the judge that he had already informed the accused therefore the purpose
of the arraignment has already been complied with which is to inform the
accused of the nature and causes of action against him
A: No po
Q: why not
A: because the accused should personally appear
Q: so we will _______ the wills of justice because the accused evaded the
police operatives
A: it is stated po that if no
Q: so you can easily evade criminal cases before arraignment. Is that fair?
It is actually fair because before arraignment there is no jurisdiction over
the person of the accused. If there is no jurisdiction over the person of the
accused then the courts have no authority in the criminal case.
Q: what are these other instance when the presence of the offended party
is required? We actually discuss this during rule 110 and 111
A: during the reimbursement po
Q: those the rules of court required that the offended party be present
during the substitution. Alright the other instance when the offended
party is required by the court to be present under rule 111 when there is a
compromise when it comes to the civil liability of the offended party so
you do not determine anymore the civil liability because the parties had
already compromise with each other in that instance class the offended
party is required to be present in open court
Q: so what happens when the offended party refuses to appear despite due
notice given by the court during arraignment ?
A: when the offended party
Q: what is the effect if the offended party did not appear in the
arraignment despite due notice
A: it will continue po in absentia
Q: the court will ask the accused whether he would plea guilty or not
guilty however it is not as simple as that because there are types of plea
can you give me atleast 4 types of plea. The first two is already bonus
guilty or not guilty give me the 2 more
A: a plea for lesser offense po and plea of guilty for a capital offense
ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
Q: give me an example
A: rather than murder the accused would plea guilty for homicide
Q: when does the accused refuse to enter his plea? Why and when is it
allowed. What is the reason behind this provision? It is because of free
ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
will the court cannot force a person to answer otherwise it would be
involuntary servitude. Can you give me an example when the accused
would refuse to enter his plea
A: when an accused was ask to plea but he did not plea
Q: did you say evidences? Its pieces of evidence. Can you give me an
example? In your criminal law 1 I assume you have discuss exculpatory
circumstances
A: An example of exculpatory evidence is fingerprint or dna
Q: the question is may the accused present evidence when he plead guilty?
A: Yes po
Q: so if you plead guilty in an offense you also suffer the penalty of the
aggravating circumstance. So for example you plead guilty on a crime of
murder the you would suffer the aggravating circumstance of treachery,
evident premeditation therefore you will be punish with reclusion
perpetua? Alright again if you plead guilty just like in mitigating you can
still present evidence or you can refute evidence with respect to the other
one is aggravating circumstance and the reason behind it is because the
plea of guilty to a non capital offense you still have the right to counter
the evidence of aggravating circumstance. It that instance you could still
actually question the treachery, evident premeditation even if plead guilty
to that offense
Q: so there must first be a law, the law merely suspend it and the law can
lift the suspension
A: yes attorney
ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
Q: in your criminal law 1 it is already discuss the law ra 9341 has abolish
death penalty not merely suspended it. Again it is abolish not suspended
because if it is suspended it can be easily lift by the congress if it is
abolish it must go to the rigorous process of law making power
Q: is that fair?
A: yes po
Q: its not fair actually thats why I tell you last time and I will tell you
again AM no. 15- 08- 02-sc it that circular the supreme court stated that
when the penalty for example for qualified rape is reclusion perpetua it is
not in the same level as a simple rape the difference is it would now be
reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parol. So in simple rape it can be
subject to pardon within for example 20 years he could avail pardon. If it
is qualified rape were in the penalty is reclusion perpetua without
eligibility for parol you cannot have a pardon from 1 st year until 40 year
that the difference
ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
Q: so the effect of the improvident plea of guilt would be to set aside the
plea because it is a plea which is given without the accused consent.
Supposed there is a plea of guilt in a capital offense what is the duty of
the court?
A: the duty of the court is to conduct searching inquiry to the
voluntariness of the plea and to determine whether the accused is given
the full comprehension and the prosecutors duty is to determine the guilt
of the accused and the particularity of his plea
Q: we are talking about the discretion of the court? If the court has
discretion to set aside the voluntary agreement of the parties to plea to a
lesser offense
A: yes sir
Q: when there is a plea for lesser offense is the parties allowed to present
evidence for example to prove the mitigating and aggravating
circumstance
A: yes po
ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
Q: is it provided in the rules of court. What rianon stated is presenting
evidence when there is a plea of guilty but what if there is a plea for a
lesser offense
A: the court is still mandated to determine whether or not the offense has
been actually committed
Q: we are not talking the offense we are talking about the aggravating and
mitigating circumstance if they could still present evidence
A: yes sir it is the right of the party to present evidence….. (hindi ko na
naman po maintindihan sinsabi ni lian)
Q: it is provided in the rules of court that they may still provide evidence
when there is a plea for lesser offense? Actually there is non there is
nothing in the rules which states that the parties can present additional
evidence when there is a plea for a lesser offense what the rules of court
provides that they could present evidence when there is a plea of guilty
but if it is a plea of guilty for a lesser offense the rules is very silent one
school of thought states that there must be a presentation of evidence
because thats the right of the parties another school of thought states that
they could no longer present evidence because pressingly the parties
already agreed on the lesser offense charge which includes the mitigating
and aggravating circumstance so if you allow additional presentation of
evidence then you defeat the purpose of the voluntary agreement of the
parties for the lesser offense. So which school of thought was applied by
the supreme court the answer that is it still pending in the court. So we
will know in the near future the ruling of the court
Q: what again are the requisites for the plea of lesser offense
A: the lesser offense must be necessarily included in the offense
originally charge. Then if the plea to the lesser offense is done at
arraignment there must be a consent of the parties and the prosecutor.
Then if such plea is done after arraignment but before trial there must be
the withdrawal of the previous plea
Q: alright lets go to the first requisite can you give me an example of an
offense included in another offense
ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
A: for example po ay robber and theft
Q: so when you are charge with robbery you can plead a lesser offense of
theft?
A: yes po if there is no … (hindi ko marinig yung last word)
Q: how about after trial can you make a plea for lesser offense
A: No
Q: jurisprudence allows the enter of plea for lesser offense even during or
after trial when there are exceptional circumstance because it expedite
everything. Actually class there are two reason why it is allowed for a
ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
plea of lesser offense 1. is for speedy trial 2. if the prosecution is
convince that they could not convict the accused in the greater offense so
they would just convict him for a lesser offense. A classic example of a
plea for lesser offense is when there has been a drug raid and during the
drug raid the police the sees/seized the shabu and paraphernalia it is very
difficult to follow the chain of custody so during trial they would present
the shabu the shabu will be invalidated due to the violation of the chain of
custody so they would have now the remaining drug paraphernalia so the
prosecution would do as it could not prove the possession of the shabu
then they would only proved for the possession of the drug paraphernalia
ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
to expiated that he would plea for a lesser offense of possession of drug
paraphernalia. In that instance we reduce court docket, we convict the
accused at the same time we have reach a amicable settlement between
the parties. That is the purpose of a plea to a lesser offense
Q: you did not read the case ano? The case is very interesting it is so well
written from those other cases of justice peralta. In this case class the
supreme court and the rules of court prevails over the law. Why is that
ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
because plea bargaining is a matter of procedure and under section 5
article 5 of the constitution only the supreme court has the sole and only
jurisdiction to promulgate rules on procedure including plea bargaining
the congress has no authority what so ever to impose or prevent rules of
procedure before the supreme court so therefore the court may allow plea
bargaining in drug cases. The reason why that is the ruling of the SC the
advent of the current administration we pay big focus on drug cases
before the court so much it consist of 600% of the drug cases increase
because of the present administration. And what happen there is that there
is so many cases and there are so may accused detained as you can see on
the television. So the reform is to allow plea bargaining, so there is plea
bargaining in drug cases who is that possible just like what I have stated
earlier when there is possession of drugs and you cannot prove the chain
of custody then you would resort into plea bargaining for a lesser offense
of possession of paraphernalia so from 12 years to 20 years then it would
be lessen to 4 months to 6 months imprisonment is that a win win
situation? I believe so because you expedite court cases at the same time
it would ensure that the offenders are place behind bars although not for a
very long time but atleast they are put behind bars for order for them to
reform, be given a chance to reform in the future. And you know what
happen class after that ruling? President duterte is very angry with that
ruling because many drug offender would be release to the public but
thankfully he still choose Justice peralta as his new chief justice
Q: you can nullify a criminal case not just base on the rules of court but
also base in the constitution if you deprive him of any of the
constitutional rights of the accused then it is a valid ground to null and set
aside the criminal case. When there is no arraignment class there is a
violation of his constitutional right of the accused to be inform of the
nature and causes of the accusation charged against him thats why when
there is no arraignment of the case it shall be dismiss. And it is void so it
can be dismiss in any case of the proceeding.
Q: if you have read the rules of court, the accused of unsound mind at the
time of the arraignment only, if the unsound mind is only during the
arraignment then would be suspended until the accused would be in his
lucid interval to be available for arraignment. You cannot just state that
the arraignment would be suspended if the accused is of unsound mind
otherwise that is an exempting circumstance. Next
A: there is pending petition for review if there is pending motion to quash
and motion to move for a bill of particular and
Q: what is the difference between bill of particular and a motion for a bill
of particular. The motion for a bill of particular is asking for further
details for the prosecution as to the allegation in the information or in the
complaint. The bill of particular is the list of the details in the allegations
Q: the motion for bill of particular is filed by the accused and the bill of
particular is filed by the prosecutor. A motion for a bill of particular
under rule 116 it is the motion of the accused to imposed the prosecutor
to clarify the matters alleged in the information. On the other hand the bill
of particular is the compliance to the motion of a bill of particulars, the
compliance clarifying what are alleged defects in the information
A: not the over all defect of the information basically the filling of the
motion of a bill of particular the information is still sufficient
Q: so the information is sufficient but there are defects is that what you
mean? It is very difficult to differentiate the difference between a motion
for a bill of particular and a motion to quash. The difference is in a
motion to quash you are attacking the sufficiency of the information
therefore you are attacking the 6 parts of the information. Anything other
than that is covered by the bill of particular. So when do you file a motion
to quash and when do you file a motion for a bill of particular? Again it is
a trial technique which was used by senator enrile again. Again in the
plunder case of senator enrile he filed a motion of a bill of particular
questioning the defects in the information. Why not a motion to quash it
is because he had already filed an earlier motion to quash and he wanted
to follow it up with a motion for a bill of particular he therefore questions
the allegations in the information not only upon the sufficiency of the 6
parts of the information but also the other matters in the information that
is a trial technique to question everything in the information
Q: the answer to that class is because to fully infom the accused of all the
charges and accusation against him. It is to inform the accused about the
written statement which could be use against him and other relevant
evidence which can be used against him. It is a strong remedy for the
accused can ask or demand a copy or inspection of this important
documents to be fully informed of the accusations against him
ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA