What is the purpose of pre-trial?

To expedite proceedings
When is Pre –trial required?
Pre-trial is mandatory in all criminal cases cognizable by the
Sandiganbayan, RTC, MTCs and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts.
When should it be conducted?
After arraignment and within 30 days from the date the court acquires
jurisdiction over the person of the accused.
What happens during pre-trial?

The following things are considered:

1. plea bargaining
2. stipulation of facts
3. marking for identification of evidence of the parties
4. waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence
5. modification of the order of trial if the accused admits the charge but
interposes a lawful defense
6. other matters that will promote a fair and expeditious trial of the criminal
and civil aspects of the case
What is the form required for the pre-trial agreement?

Any agreement or admission entered into during the pre-trial conference

should be:

1. in writing
2. signed by the accused
3. signed by counsel
Otherwise, it cannot be used against the accused.
What is a pre-trial order?

It is an order issued by the court after the pre-trial conference containing:

1. a recital of the actions taken,

2. the facts stipulated, and
3. the evidence marked.

The pre-trial order binds the parties, limits the trial to matters not disposed of, and
controls the course of the action during the trial, unless modified by the court to
prevent manifest injustice.
What is plea bargaining? Why is it encouraged?

It is the disposition of criminal charges by agreement between the

prosecution and the accused. It is encouraged because it leads to prompt and final
disposition of most criminal cases. It shortens the time between charge and
disposition and enhances whatever may be the rehabilitative prospects of the guilty
when they are ultimately imprisoned.
How much time does the accused have to prepare for trial?

After he enters his plea of not guilty, the accused shall have at least 15 days to
prepare for trial. The trial shall commence within 30 days from receipt of the pre-trial
order. The entire trial period should not exceed 180 days from the first day of trial, except
if authorized by the Supreme Court.

What are the duties of the presiding judge under the continuous trial system?
The judge should:

1. adhere faithfully to the session hours prescribed by laws;

2. maintain full control of the proceedings;
3. efficiently allocate and use time and court resources to avoid court delays.
In which cases is the time limitation not applicable?

1. Criminal cases covered by the Rule on Summary Procedure or those where

the penalty does not exceed 6 months imprisonment or a fine of P1,000: governed by
the Rules on Summary Procedure

2. When the offended party is about to depart with no definite date or return:
trial shall commence within 3 days from the date of arraignment, and cannot be
postponed except on grounds of illness of the accused or other grounds over which
the accused has no control
3. Child abuse cases: trial shall commence within 3 days from arraignment and
cannot be postponed except on grounds of illness of the accused or other grounds
beyond his control
4. Violations of Dangerous Drugs Law: trial shall be finished within 3 months
from filing of the information.
5. Kidnapping, Robbery in a band, Robbery against a Banking or Financial
Institution, Violation of the Carnapping Act, and other heinous crimes: trial shall be
finished within 60 days from the first day of trial.
 What are the periods that should be excluded in computing the time within which trial
must commence?
1. Any period of delay resulting from other proceedings concerning the accused
2. Any period resulting from the absence or unavailability of an essential witness.
3. Any period of delay resulting from mental incompetence or physical inability of
the accused to stand trial.
4. 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. (say what?)
5. 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 not motion for separate trial has been granted.
6. Any period of delay from a continuance granted by any court motu propio, or on
motion of either the accused or his counsel, or the prosecution, if the court granted it on
the basis of finding that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the
best interest of the public and the accused in a speedy trial.
Instances when presence of accused is required by law
(1) The only instances when the presence of the accused is required by law and
when the law may forfeit the bond if he fails to appear are:
(a) On arraignment;
(b) On promulgation of judgment except for light offenses;
(c) For identification purposes;
(d) When the court with due notice requires so (Marcos vs. Ruiz, Sept. 1, 1992).
Trial in absentia is a stage in a criminal proceeding where the trial is being
held even without the physical presence of the accused. Trial in absentia is allowed
in our jurisdiction and is indeed authorized by the Constitution. Section 14 (2),
Article III of the 1987 Constitution provides:

“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until the
contrary is proved, and shall enjoy the right to be heard by himself and counsel, to
be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him, to have a speedy,
impartial, and public trial, to meet the witnesses face to face, and to have
compulsory process to secure the attendance of witnesses and the production of
evidence in his behalf. However, after arraignment, trial may proceed
notwithstanding the absence of the accused: Provided, that he has been duly notified
and his failure to appear is unjustifiable.”
Before a trial in absentia may be had, the following requisites must be present:

 that there has been an arraignment;

 that the accused has been notified; and
 that his failure to appear is unjustified.
Can the right of the accused to be present be waived?
Yes, except in the following situations where the presence of the accused at the trial
is required
 1. During arraignment
 2. During promulgation of judgment, except if it is for a light offense
 3. When the presence of the accused at the trial is required for purposes of
identification, unless he admits beforehand that he is the same person charged
What is the order of trial?

The trial proceeds in the following order:

1. The prosecution shall present evidence to prove the charge and civil liability,
if proper.
2. the accused may present evidence to prove his defense and damages, if any,
arising from the issuance of a provisional remedy in the case.
3. 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.
4. 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.
However, when the accused admits the act or omission charged in the complaint or
information, but interposes a lawful defense, there will be a reverse trial.
What is a reverse trial?
 Usually in most cases, the prosecution first presents its evidence to establish the
guilt of the accused, and the defense follows thereafter

 But this is reversed when the accused admits the killing but claims self-defense

 A reverse trial happens

 The accused must first establish the elements of self-defense in order to

overturn the presumption that he was guilt of the offense
Distinguish between a negative defense and an affirmative defense.

A negative defense requires the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused
beyond reasonable doubt. In a negative defense, the accused claims that one of the
elements of the offense charged is not present. It is incumbent upon the prosecution
to prove the existence of this element. For example, in illegal possession of firearms,
the accused may interpose the negative defense that he had a license to carry the
firearm. He cannot be compelled by the prosecution to present the license. It is the
duty of the prosecution to prove the absence of the license, which is an essential
element of the offense charged.

On the other hand, in an affirmative defense, the accused admits the act or
omission charged, but interposes a defense, which if proven, would exculpate him.
For example, the accused admits killing the victim, but he claims that he did it in self-
defense. In this case, the burden of proving the elements of self-defense belong to
the accused. There will be a reverse trial in which the accused will prove the
elements of self-defense. This is because the accused admits the act or omission
already. The prosecution need not prove it anymore. The accused must now present
evidence to justify the commission of the act.
If there are two or more accused, should they be tried jointly or separately?

As a general rule, when two or more accused are jointly charged with an
offense, they should also be tried jointly. However, the court, in its discretion and
upon motion of the prosecutor or any accused, may order separate trial for one of
the accused.

When a separate trial is demanded and granted, it is the duty of the

prosecution to repeat and produce all its evidence at each and every trial, unless it
has been agreed by the parties that the evidence for the prosecution wouldn’t
have to be repeated at the second trial and all the accused had been present
during the presentation of the evidence of the prosecution and their attorney had
the opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses for the prosecution
X, a public officer, was charged with malversation of public funds in conspiracy with
Y, a civilian. Should they both be tried in the Sandiganbayan?

Yes. In case private individuals are charged as co-principals, accomplices,

or accessories with public officers, they shall be tried jointly with said public officers
in the proper courts which shall exercise exclusive jurisdiction over them.
 What is a state witness?

A state witness is one of two or more persons jointly charged with the
commission of a crime but who is discharged with his consent as such accused so that he
may be a witness for the State.

When should the application for discharge of the state witness be made?
It should be made upon motion of the prosecution before resting its case.

What are the effects of the discharge?

1. Evidence in support of the discharge become part of the trial. But if the court
denies the motion to discharge, his sworn statement shall be inadmissible in evidence.
2. Discharge of the accused operates as an acquittal and bar to further prosecution
for the same offense,
EXCEPT if he fails or refuses to testify against his co-accused in accordance with his
sworn statement constituting the basis of the discharge. In this case, he can be
prosecuted again AND his admission can be used against him.
What are the requisites in order for a person to be discharged as a state witness?

1. There is absolute necessity for the testimony of the accused whose

discharge is requested;
2. There is no direct evidence available for the proper prosecution of the
offense committed, except the testimony of the said accused;
3. The testimony of said accused can be substantially corroborated in its
material points;
4. Said accused does not appear to be the most guilty;
5. Said accused has not at any time been convicted of any offense involving
moral turpitude
What is the meaning of “absolute necessity” of the testimony of the proposed state
witness?

It means that there is no other evidence to establish the offense other than
the testimony of the accused. For example, where an offense is committed in
conspiracy and clandestinely, the discharge of one of the conspirators is necessary
in order to provide direct evidence of the commission of the crime. No one else
other than one of the conspirators can testify on what happened among them.
 What is the procedure?

 1. Before resting its case, the prosecution should file a motion to discharge the
accused as state witness with his consent.

 2. The court will require the prosecution to present evidence and the sworn
statement of the proposed state witness at a hearing in order to support the discharge.

 3. The court will determine if the requisites of giving the discharge are present.
Evidence adduced in support of the discharge shall automatically form part of the trial.

 4. If the court is satisfied, it will discharge the state witness. The discharge is
equivalent to an acquittal, unless the witness later fails or refuses to testify.

 5. If the court denies the motion for discharge, his sworn statement shall be
inadmissible as evidence.
Can the other conspirators be convicted solely on the basis of the testimony of the
discharged state witness?

No. There must be other evidence to support his testimony. The testimony of
a state witness comes from a polluted source and must be received with caution. It
should be substantially corroborated in its material points.

As an exception however, the testimony of a co-conspirator, even if

uncorroborated, will be considered sufficient if given in a straightforward manner
and it contains details which could not have been the result of deliberate
afterthought.
Demurrer to evidence
It is a motion to dismiss the case filed by the defense after the prosecution
rests on the ground of insufficiency of the evidence of the prosecution.
(instead of presenting the evidence of the defense, the defense opts to file a
demurrer)

What are the ways by which a case may be dismissed on the basis of insufficiency of
evidence of the prosecution?
There are two ways:

1. the court may dismiss the case on its own initiative after giving the
prosecution the right to be heard; or
2. upon demurrer to evidence filed by the accused with or without leave of
court.
It is now emphasized in Section 23, Rule 119 that a demurrer may be filed with or
without leave of court. If you file demurrer with or without leave and it is granted,
then you have no problem because the accused will be acquitted.

The problem is, if your demurrer is denied. Meaning, the court says that there is
sufficient evidence to prove at least the guilt of the accused. If the demurrer was filed
with prior leave of court and it is subsequently denied, the accused is allowed to
present evidence to prove his defense.

But if he filed the demurrer without prior leave of court and the demurrer is denied,
then you are already convicted because the accused has forfeited his right to
present evidence. It is practically equivalent to a waiver of his right to present
evidence.
Criminal
Demurrer with LOC - granted = acquitted (an appeal of the dismissal/refiling would
constitute double jeopardy)
Demurrer with LOC – not granted = can still present evidence in his defense
Demurrer without LOC – no granted = cannot present evidence in his defense
anymore (trial on merits based on evidence presented by the prosecution)
Civil
Demurrer granted = case dismissed = plaintiff may appeal
Demurrer denied = interlocutory order = rule 65 (GAD)
Demurrer denied = defendant may present evidence or file an MR on the denial, if
denied again, then a petition for certiorari under rule 65
In Civil case, what is the implication of the denial of the demurrer to evidence? What
is the remedy of the defendant in case of denial?
From the point of view of the court, the evidence of plaintiff is sufficient
prima facie to support his case. Hence, the remedy of the defendant is to present his
evidence. The court should set the date for the reception of the defendant’s
evidence-in-chief (Northwest Airlines vs. CA, G.R. No. 120334. January 20, 1998)

What is the effect of the reversal order of dismissal on the right of defendant to
present his evidence?

Defendant cannot present his evidence, because by electing to file a

demurrer to evidence, he, in effect, submitted the case for decision solely on the
basis of the evidence of the plaintiff.
In the case of reversal, the appellate court shall resolve the case and render
judgment on the merits based on the available evidence.
It is not correct for the appellate court reversing the order granting the
demurrer to remand the case to the trial court for further proceedings. The appellate
court should, instead of remanding the case, render judgment on the basis of the
evidence submitted by the plaintiff (Radiowealth Finance Corp. vs. Del Rosario, G.R.
No. 138739. July 6, 2000).
Demurrer to evidence vs. motion to dismiss

1. When to file. A motion to dismiss is filed before a responsive pleading is made by

the defendant. A demurrer to evidence is filed after plaintiff has rested its case.

2. Grounds. Motion to dismiss is grounded on preliminary objections enumerated

under Rule 16. Demurrer to evidence is based on insufficiency of evidence.
Thank YOU…………