1) What is the purpose of bail as laid down in Leviste vs CA?

In the opening paragraphs of the decision, the Court defined bail as “the security given by an
accused who is in the custody of the law for his release to guarantee his appearance before any
court.” It further stated that a bail serves as a reconciling mechanism to both the interest of the
accused of a pretrial liberty, and the interest society in assuring the accused’s presence in the
trial.

2) What are the instances where bail is a matter of right?

Section 4, Rule 114 (Bail) enumerates the instances where bail is a matter of right, qualified all
persons in custody availing the bail have sufficient sureties, or released on recognize as provided
by law:

a) before or after conviction by the Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court, Municipal
Trial Court in Cities, or Municipal Circuit Trial Court, and;
b) before conviction by the Regional Trial Court of an offense not punishable by death,
reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment.
3) Is bail applicable in extradition cases? If yes what are the conditions?
4) What is the doctrine laid down in Enrile vs Sandiganbayan as regards the granting of bail to
persons charged with capital offenses?

In this decision by the Court, they held that the general rule, as provided by Section 7 Rule 114
of the Rules of Court that capital offenses committed by the accused and his evidence of guilt is
strong, he may not be admitted to a bail. However, Petitioner Enrile, was granted the same
regardless of his alleged capital offense and evidence guilt; for his poor health justifies his
admission to bail. They cited the principal purpose of a bail: “to guarantee the appearance of
the accused at the trial, or whenever so required by the court.” Besides, Enrile, by surrendering
promptly to the authorities, only proves that his risk fleeing from the Court’s jurisdiction is
unlikely.

5) Can an accused which was convicted by the RTC, who filed a notice of appeal be still allowed to
post bail or continue with the same bail, if he was granted one, pending appeal?

As stated under Section 5, Rule 114 of the Rules of Court, upon the following conditions:

a) Accused is not convicted of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua, or life
imprisonment.
b) Should he however be convicted of any of the offenses with penalty of imprisonment
exceeding six years, the following conditions must be met:
a. That he is a recidivist, quasi-recidivist, or habitual delinquent, or has committed the
crime aggravated by the circumstance of reiteration;
b. That he has previously escaped from legal confinement, evaded sentence, or
violated the conditions of his bail without valid justification;
c. That he committed the offense while under probation, parole, or conditional
pardon;
d. That the circumstances of his case indicate the probability of flight if released on
bail; or
 e. That there is undue risk that he may commit another crime during the pendency of
the appeal.
6) What are the duties of a trial court judce in case an application for bail is filed as outlined in
Cortes vs Catral?

Cortes vs Catral four duties of a trial judge when an application for bail is filed:

a) In all cases, whether bail is a matter of right or of discretion, notify the prosecutor of the
hearing of the application for bail or require him to submit his recommendation (Section 18,
Rule 114 of the Rules of Court as amended);
b) Where bail is a matter of discretion, conduct a hearing of the application for bail regardless
of whether or not the prosecution refuses to present evidence to show that the guilt of the
accused is strong for the purpose of enabling the court to exercise its sound discretion;
(Sections 7 and 8, supra).
c) Decide whether the guilt of the accused is strong based on the summary of evidence of the
prosecution;
d) If the guilt of the accused is not strong, discharge the accused upon the approval of the
bailbond (Section 19, supra) Otherwise petition should be denied.
7) In what cases recognizance is allowed?
8) An Information for homicide was filed against A before RTC BR. 1 of Alabel Sarangani.
Thereafter, the court issued a warrant of arrest against A. A week after, A was arrested in Davao
City by virtue of the said warrant. Where would A post his bail? Would your answer be the same
if he was arrested in GSC?

As partially stated in Section 17, Rule 114 of the Rules of Court, the accused may file bail where
the case is pending (Alabel in this case) or where the accused is arrested in a province, city or
municipality other than when the case is pending (Davao City where he was arrested).

Should he be arrested in Gen. Santos City, he still has these two options, as Gen. Santos City is
not within the same province, city or municipality of Alabel, Sarangani.

9) What is the doctrine laid down in Vicente vs Majaducon as regards posting of bail?
10) A was arrested by the PDEA for violation of sec. 11 Article II of RA 9165 as amended. After
posting bail and prior to arraignment, A filed a motion to quash information on ground that the
court has no jurisdiction over his person due to his illegal arrest. The prosecutor objected
arguing that by posting bail, A submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the Court and that such
objection is already deemed waived. Whose argument is correct?

A’s argument is meritorious.

Section 26, Rule 114 of the Rules of Court provides that an application for bail shall not bar the
accused from challenging the validity of his arrest, provided that he raises them before the
entering of his plea.

Since A raised the validity of his arrest prior to his arraignment, he may contend it validly.