Criminal Procedure

Prepared by:
PLTCOL Hilberth Tacon Balanay

1
 RULE 114
BAIL

2
 Bail

Bail is the security given for the

release of a person in custody of the law,
furnished by him or a bondsman, to
guarantee his appearance before any court
as required under the conditions
hereinafter specified. S1 R114

3
 Constitutional Basis of the Right
to Bail

All persons, except those charged with

offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua
when evidence of guilt is strong, shall, before
conviction, be bailable by sufficient sureties, or
be released on recognizance as may be
provided by law. The right to bail shall not be
impaired even when the privilege of the writ of
habeas corpus is suspended. Excessive bail
shall not be required. S13, Art III, Constitution.

4
 Kinds of Bail
1. Corporate Surety Bond. A bond furnished by a
corporate surety under which the latter guarantees the
State that the accused will appear at subsequent
proceedings.

2. Property Bond. An undertaking constituted as a lien

on the real property given as security for the amount of
the bail.

3. Cash Deposit. An amount deposited with the proper

government officer considered as bail upon condition
that such money will be forfeited if the accused does
not appear before the court requiring his attendance
5
 Kinds of Bail

4. Recognizance. It is an undertaking that

the accused shall appear in court and
comply with its orders. The court may allow
the person in custody to be released on his
own recognizance or that of a responsible
person. (S15, R114).

6
 Bail as a Matter of Right

All persons in custody shall be

admitted to bail as a matter of right, with
sufficient sureties, or released on recognize as
prescribed by law or this Rule (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. (S4, R114)

7
 Bail, When Discretionary

 Admission to bail is discretionary in the

following instances:

1. Before conviction by the RTC of an offense

punishable by death, reclusion perpetua,
or life imprisonment;

2. After conviction by the RTC of an offense

not punishable by death, reclusion
perpetua, or life imprisonment.

8
 When Should Bail be Denied?
Before conviction by the RTC when accused is
charged with an offense punishable by reclusion
perpetua life imprisonment or death and the
evidence of guilt is strong (Section 7)

After conviction by the RTC when penalty

imposed is death reclusion perpetua and life
imprisonment.

Where the judgment of conviction has become

final, unless before finality the accused applies
for probation. S24 R114
9
 When Should Bail be Denied?
After conviction by the RTC and the penalty
imposed is imprisonment exceeding 6 years upon
showing by the prosecution of the following
similar circumstances:

a. RECIDIVIST. The accused is a recidivist, quasi-

residivist, or habitual delinquent, or has
committed the crime aggravated by the
circumstance of reiteration.

b. ESCAPED. The accused has previously escaped

from legal confinement, evaded sentence, or
violated the conditions of his bail without valid
justification.
10
 When Should Bail be Denied?

c. PROBATION. The accused committed the

offense while under the probation, parole, or
conditional pardon.

d. FLIGHT RISK. The circumstances of his case

indicate the probability of flight if released on
bail.

e. CRIME RISK. There is undue risk that the

accused may commit another crime during the
pendency of the appeal. (S5, R114)
11
 Burden of Proof in Bail
Application

At the hearing of an application for

bail filed by a person who is in custody for
the commission of an offense punishable by
death, reclusion perpetua, or life
imprisonment, the prosecution has the
burden of showing that evidence of
guilt is strong. The evidence presented
during the bail hearing shall be considered
automatically reproduced at the trial, but
upon motion of either party, the court may
recall any witness for additional
12
examination unless the latter is dead,
 Evidence in Petition for Bail

 The resolution of petition for bail shall be based

solely on the evidence presented during the
bail proceedings by the prosecution. The
prosecution shall present only pieces of
evidence that are essential in establishing the
evidence of guilt is strong. The accused need
not preset evidence to contradict or rebut the
prosecution's evidence. ( OCA Circular No. 101-
2017, Revised Guidelines for Continuous Trial of
Criminal Cases)

13
 Quantum of Proof for Petition for Bail
In his Separate Opinion in Purganan, then Associate Justice, now Chief Justice
Reynato S. Puno, proposed that a new standard which he termed "clear and
convincing evidence" should be used in granting bail in extradition
cases. According to him, this standard should be lower than proof beyond
reasonable doubt but higher than preponderance of evidence. The potential
extraditee must prove by "clear and convincing evidence" that he is not a
flight risk and will abide with all the orders and processes of the extradition
court.

In this case, there is no showing that private respondent presented evidence

to show that he is not a flight risk. Consequently, this case should be
remanded to the trial court to determine whether private respondent
may be granted bail on the basis of clear and convincing evidence.

WHEREFORE, we DISMISS the petition. This case is REMANDED to the trial

court to determine whether private respondent is entitled to bail on the
basis of "clear and convincing evidence." If not, the trial court should
order the cancellation of his bail bond and his immediate detention; and
thereafter, conduct the extradition proceedings with dispatch. GOVERNMENT
OF HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION vs. Olalia, G.R.
No. 153675, April 19, 2007

14
 Motion for Reconsideration
for Bail

Motion for Reconsideration on the

resolution of petition for bail shall be resolved
within a nonextendible period of 10 calendar
days from the date of the submission of the
motion.( OCA Circular No. 101-2017, Revised
Guidelines for Continuous Trial of Criminal
Cases)

15
 During the trial, may the court consider the
evidence presented during the bail hearing?

Yes. The evidence presented during

the bail hearing shall be considered
automatically reproduced at the trial. But upon
motion of either party, the court may recall any
witness for additional examination unless the
witness is unable to testify. (S8, R114)

16
 Guidelines for the Judge in Fixing the
Amount of the Bail

The judge who issued the warrant or

granted the application shall fix a reasonable
amount of bail considering primarily, but not
limited to the following factors:

a. Financial ability of the accused;

b. Nature and circumstances of the offense;
c. Penalty of the offense charged;
d. Character and reputation of the accused;
e. Age and health of the accused;
17
 Guidelines for the Judge in Fixing the
Amount of the Bail

f. Weight of the evidence against the

accused;
g. Probability of the accused appearing at
the trial;
h. Forfeiture of other bail;
i. The fact that the accused was a fugitive from
justice when arrested;
j. Pendency of other cases where the accused is
on bail

18
Excessive bail shall not be required. (S9 R114)
 Guidelines for the Judge in Fixing the
Amount of the Bail?

The Department of Justice’s Bail

Bond Guide shall be considered but shall not
be controlling. (Sec. 1, AM.No. 12-11-2-SC,
effective 1 May 2014)

19
 Guidelines for the Judge in Fixing the
Amount of the Bail?

The order fixing the amount of bail

shall not be subject to appeal. (Sec. 4,
AM.No. 12-11-2-SC, effective 1 May 2014)

20
 When Bail is Not Required

Bail shall not be required in the following instances:

1. Violation of an ordinance, a light felony, or a

criminal offense punishable by a penalty not
exceeding 6 months imprisonment, and/or a fine of
P2000 where the person is unable to post the
required cash or bail bond. (S1 RA No.6306)

2. Criminal cases covered by the Rules on Summary

Procedure except when the accused failed to
appear when required. (S16, Rule on Summary
Procedure).
21
 When Bail is Not Required

3. When the person has been in custody for a

period equal to or more than the possible
maximum imprisonment prescribed for the
offense charged, he shall be released
immediately, without the prejudice to the
continuation of the trial or the proceedings on
appeal. If the maximum penalty to which the
accused may be sentenced is destierro, he
shall be released after 30 days of preventive
imprisonment (S16 R114)

22
 When Bail is Not Required

4. In cases not requiring preliminary

investigation nor covered by the Rule on
Summary Procedure where the MTC judge is
satisfied that there is no necessity for placing
the accused under custody, in which case he
may issue summons instead of a warrant of
arrest. S8(b) R112

23
 When may a person be released on a
reduced bail or on his own recognizance?

A person in custody for a period equal to

or more than the minimum of the principal
penalty prescribed for the offense charged,
without the application of the Indeterminate
Sentence Law or any modifying circumstance,
shall be released on a reduced bail or on his
own recognizance, at the discretion of the
court. S16 R114

24
 When may a person be released on
recognizance?

1. When the offense charged is for violation of an

ordinance, a light felony or a criminal offense, the
imposable penalty for which does not exceed 6
months of imprisonment and/or P2000 fine. RA 6306

2. When the person has been in custody for a period

equal to or more than the minimum of the principal
penalty prescribed for the offense charged, without
the application of the Indeterminate Sentence Law or
any modifying circumstance, he shall be released
on a reduced bail or on his own recognizance, at the
discretion of the court. S16 R114

25
 When may a person be released on
recognizance?

3. When the accused has applied for probation

pending resolution of the case but no bail was
filed or the accused is incapable of filing one.
S24 R114

4. Where a child is detained, the court shall order

the release of the minor on recognizance to
his/her parents and other suitable persons. S35
RA 9344

26
 When may a person be released on
recognizance?

5. In cases covered by the Rule on Summary

Procedure where the accused has been
arrested for failure to appear when required.
He may be released on recognizance by a
responsible citizen acceptable to the court.
S16 Rule on Summary Procedure

27
 Once the accused is admitted to bail, may
the court increase or reduce its amount?

Yes upon good cause. When increased, the

accused may be committed to custody if he does
not give bail in the increased amount within a
reasonable period.

An accused held to answer a criminal charge,

who is released without bail upon filing of the
complaint or information, may, at any subsequent
stage of the proceedings and whenever a strong
showing of guilt appears to the court, be required to
give bail in the amount fixed, or in lieu thereof,
committed to custody. S20, R114
28
 Filing of Bail

1. Bail in the amount fixed may be filed with the

court where the case is pending, or in the
absence or unavailability of the judge thereof,
with any RTC or MTC judge in the province, city
or municipality.

2. If the accused is arrested in a province, city or

municipality other than where the case is
pending, bail may be filed with any RTC of said
place, or if no RTC judge is available, with any
MTC judge therein.
29
 Filing of Bail

3. Where the grant of bail is discretionary or the

accused seeks to be released on
recognizance, the application may only be
filed in the court where the case is pending,
whether on preliminary investigation, trial, or
on appeal.

4. Any person in custody who is not yet charged

in court may apply for bail with any court in
the province, city, or municipality where he is
held. S17, R114
30
 Filing of Bail After Conviction
1. The conviction by the Regional Trial Court of an offense not
punishable by death, reclusion perpetua, or life
imprisonment, admission to bail is discretionary. The application for
bail may be filed and acted upon by the trial court despite the filing of
a notice of appeal, provided it has not transmitted the original record
to the appellate court;
2. With the appellate court if the original records has already been
transmitted;
3. If the decision of the trial court convicting the accused changed the
nature of the offense from non-bailable to bailable, the
application for bail can only be filed with and resolved by the
appellate court;

Should the court grant the application, the accused may be

allowed to continue on provisional liberty during the
pendency of the appeal under the same bail subject to the consent
of the bondsman. S5, R114

31
 Bail After Conviction
Jose Antonio Leviste was charged with
Murder but he was convicted by the RTC of
Makati City for the lesser crime of homicide
and sentenced to suffer an indeterminate
penalty of six years and one day of prision
mayor as minimum to 12 years and one day of
reclusion temporal as maximum.

He appealed his conviction to the Court

of Appeals. Pending appeal, he filed an urgent
application for admission to bail pending
appeal, citing his advanced age and health
32
condition,
Leviste and
vs. CA, G.R. No. claiming
189122, March the absence of any risk
17, 2010
or possibility of flight on his part but his
 Bail After Conviction
After conviction by the trial court, the presumption of innocence
terminates and, accordingly, the constitutional right to bail
ends. From then on, the grant of bail is subject to judicial discretion. At
the risk of being repetitious, such discretion must be exercised with grave
caution and only for strong reasons. Considering that the accused was in
fact convicted by the trial court, allowance of bail pending appeal should
be guided by a stringent-standards approach. This judicial disposition
finds strong support in the history and evolution of the rules on bail and
the language of Section 5, Rule 114 of the Rules of Court. It is likewise
consistent with the trial court’s initial determination that the accused
should be in prison. Furthermore, letting the accused out on bail despite
his conviction may destroy the deterrent effect of our criminal laws. This is
especially germane to bail pending appeal because long delays often
separate sentencing in the trial court and appellate review. In addition, at
the post-conviction stage, the accused faces a certain prison sentence
and thus may be more likely to flee regardless of bail bonds or other
release conditions. Finally, permitting bail too freely in spite of conviction
invites frivolous and time-wasting appeals which will make a mockery of
our criminal justice system and court processes.

33 Leviste vs. CA, G.R. No. 189122, March 17, 2010

 When may the bail of the
accused be ordered forfeited?

When the presence of the accused is

required by the court or these Rules, his
bondsmen shall be notified to produce him
before the court on a given date and time. If the
accused fails to appear in person as required,
his bail shall be declared forfeited. S21, R114

34
 Remedy for Forfeiture of Bail Bond
 In Belfast Surety, the trial court declared a forfeiture of
cash bond under Rule 114, Section 15 of the 1964 Rules
of Criminal Procedure for failure of the accused to appear
on trial. This Court stated that while appeal would be
the proper remedy from a judgment of forfeiture of
bond, certiorari is still available if the judgment
complained of was issued in lack or excess of
jurisdiction:

 Besides, appeal under the circumstances of the present

case is not an adequate remedy since the trial court had
already issued a writ of execution. Hence, the rule
that certiorari does not lie when there is an appeal is
relaxed where, as in the present case, the trial court had
already ordered the issuance of a writ of
execution. (Citations omitted)
35 Cited in Cruz vs. People, G.R. No. 224974, July 3, 2
017
 Remedy for Forfeiture of Bail Bond

 Inasmuch as the said petition to procure the

cancellation of the bond was denied without
further process of law, it is unquestionable that
the order of court denying it could be appealed
from, for the reason that if this last decision
were not appealable, it would become final,
without ulterior remedy, and would work
irreparable injury to the petitioner.

36 Cited in Cruz vs. People, G.R. No. 224974, July 3, 2

017
 When may Bail be Cancelled?

Upon application of the bondsmen, with

due notice to the prosecutor, the bail may be
cancelled upon surrender of the accused or
proof of his death.

The bail shall be deemed automatically

cancelled upon acquittal of the accused,
dismissal of the case, or execution of the
judgment of conviction. S22, R114

37
 Will an application for bail or
admission thereto bar objections to
illegal arrest or lack of or irregularity
of the preliminary investigation?

No. An application for or admission to bail

shall not bar the accused from challenging
the validity of his arrest or legality of the
warrant issued therefore, or from assailing
the regularity or questioning the absence of
preliminary investigation of the charge
against him PROVIDED THAT THE ACCUSED
RAISES THEM BEFORE ENTERING HIS PLEA.
S26, R114
38
 In cases where it is authorized, bail
should be granted before arraignment

 In cases where it is authorized, bail should be granted before arraignment,

otherwise the accused may be precluded from filing a motion to quash. For if the
information is quashed and the case is dismissed, there would then be no need for
the arraignment of the accused. In the second place, the trial court could ensure
the presence of petitioner at the arraignment precisely by granting bail and
ordering his presence at any stage of the proceedings, such as arraignment. Under
Rule 114, 2(b) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, one of the conditions of bail is
that "the accused shall appear before the proper court whenever so required by the
court or these Rules," while under Rule 116, 1(b) the presence of the accused at the
arraignment is required.

 On the other hand, to condition the grant of bail to an accused on his

arraignment would be to place him in a position where he has to choose
between (1) filing a motion to quash and thus delay his release on bail because
until his motion to quash can be resolved, his arraignment cannot be held, and (2)
foregoing the filing of a motion to quash so that he can be arraigned at once and
thereafter be released on bail. These scenarios certainly undermine the accused
constitutional right not to be put on trial except upon valid complaint or
information sufficient to charge him with a crime and his right to bail.
Manolet O. Lavides vs. CA. G.R. No. 129670, February
39 1, 2000
 Filing An
of Motion
arresttowarrant
Post Bailwas
is tantamount to the submission
issued against to the
the petitioner Court’s
but, jurisdiction
before it could
be
served on him, petitioner through counsel, filed on October 28, 1992 a motion for
admission to bail with the trial court which set the same for hearing on November 5,
1992. Petitioner furnished copies of the motion to State Prosecutor Gingoyon, the
Regional State Prosecutor's Office, and the private prosecutor, Atty. Benjamin
Guimong. On November 5, 1992, the trial court proceeded to hear the application
for bail.

As petitioner was then confined at the Cagayan Capitol College General

Hospital due to "acute costochondritis," his counsel manifested that they were
submitting custody over the person of their client to the local chapter
president of the integrated Bar of the Philippines and that, for purposes of
said hearing of his bail application, he considered being in the custody of
the law.

The trial court admitted petitioner to bail in the amount of P200,000.00. The
following day, November 6, 1992, petitioner, apparently still weak but well enough
to travel by then, managed to personally appear before the clerk of court of the trial
court and posted bail in the amount thus fixed. He was thereafter arraigned and in
the trial that ensued, he also personally appeared and attended all the scheduled
court hearings of the case. A subsequent Motion for Reconsideration was filed
regarding
Paderangathe admission to bail.
vs. CA, G.R. No. The Motion was denied by the trial court.
115407
40 August 28, 1995
 On the undisputed facts , the legal principles applicable and the
equities involved in this case, the Court finds for petitioner.

As bail is intended to obtain or secure one's provisional liberty, the same

cannot be posted before custody over him has been acquired by the judicial
authorities, either by his lawful arrest or voluntary surrender. As this Court
has put it in a case "it would be incongruous to grant bail to one who is free."

The rationale behind the rule is that it discourages and prevents resort to the
former pernicious practice whereby an accused could just send another in his
stead to post his bail, without recognizing the jurisdiction of the court by his
personal appearance therein and compliance with the requirements therefor.

As a paramount requisite then, only those persons who have either been
arrested, detained, or otherwise deprived of their freedom will ever have
occasion to seek the protective mantle extended by the right to bail. The
person seeking his provisional release under the auspices of bail
need not even wait for a formal complaint or information to be filed
against him as it is available to "all persons" where the offense is
bailable. The rule is, of course, subject to the condition or limitation that the
applicant is in the custody of the law.

Paderanga vs. CA, G.R. No. 115407

41 August 28, 1995
 On the other hand, a person is considered to be in the custody of
the law (a) when he is arrested either by virtue of a warrant of arrest
issued pursuant to Section 6, Rule 112, or by warrantless arrest under
Section 5, Rule 113 in relation to Section 7, Rule 112 of the revised Rules
on Criminal Procedure, or (b) when he has voluntarily submitted
himself to the jurisdiction of the court by surrendering to the
proper authorities.

In the case of herein petitioner, it may be conceded that he had indeed

filed his motion for admission to bail before he was actually and
physically placed under arrest. He may, however, at that point and in
the factual ambience therefore, be considered as being
constructively and legally under custody. Thus in the likewise
peculiar circumstance which attended the filing of his bail
application with the trail court, for purposes of the hearing
thereof he should be deemed to have voluntarily submitted his
person to the custody of the law and, necessarily, to the
jurisdiction of the trial court which thereafter granted bail as
prayed for. In fact, an arrest is made either by actual restraint of the
arrestee or merely by his submission to the custody of the person making
the arrest. The latter mode may be exemplified by the so-called "house
arrest" or, in case of military offenders, by being "confined to quarters" or
restricted to the military camp area.
Paderanga vs. CA, G.R. No. 115407
42 August 28, 1995