SECTION 14 BAIL

What is 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.
What are the forms of bail?
Bail may be in the form of:
1. corporate surety
2. property bond
3. cash deposit
4. recognizance
What is recognizance?
Recognizance is an obligation of record, entered into before a court or magistrate
duly authorized to take it, with the condition to do some particular act, the most
usual condition in criminal cases being the appearance of the accused for trial.
When is bail a matter of right and when is it a matter of discretion?
In the MTC, it is a matter of right before or after conviction, regardless of the
offense.
In the RTC, it is a matter of right before conviction, except for offenses
punishable by death, reclusion perpetua, or life sentence and the evidence of
guilt is strong, in which case it is discretionary. After conviction, bail is a matter of
discretion regardless of the offense. The application for bail may be filed and
acted upon by the trial court as long as the original record of the case has not
been transmitted to the appellate court. However, if the decision of the trial court
changed the nature of the offense from non-bailable to bailable, the application
should be addressed and resolved by the appellate court.
When can the prosecution move for the cancellation or denial of bail of the
accused?
If the penalty imposed by the trial court is imprisonment greater than 6 years, the
prosecution may move for denial or cancellation of the bail of the accused, with
notice to the accused, upon showing of the following circumstances:
1. That he is a recidivist, quasi-recidivist, habitual delinquent, or committed the
offense with the aggravating circumstance of reiteracion.
2. The he has previously escaped from legal confinement, evaded sentence, or
violated the conditions of his bail without valid justification.
3. That he committed the offense while on probation, parole or conditional pardon
4. That the circumstances of his case indicate the probability of flight if released
on bail; or
5. That there is undue risk that he may commit another crime during the
pendency of the appeal.

If there is a likelihood that the accused would jump bail, what should the court
do?
1. Increase the amount of bail
2. Require periodic reports of the accused to court
3. Warn him that the trial may proceed in absentia
What is a capital offense?
A capital offense is an offense which, under the law existing at the time of its
commission and of the application for admission to bail, may be punished with
death.
What are the duties of the trial judge in case an application for bail is filed?
1. Notify the prosecutor of the hearing or require him to submit his
recommendation
2. Conduct a hearing
3. Decide whether the evidence of guilt is strong based on the summary of
evidence of the prosecution
4. If the guilt of the accused is not strong, discharge the accused upon the
approval of the bailbond. If evidence of guilt is strong, the petition should be
denied.
What are the guidelines in setting the amount of bail?
1. Financial ability of the accused
2. Nature and circumstances of the offense
3. Penalty for the offense
4. Character and reputation of the accused
5. Age and health of the accused
6. Weight of evidence against the accused
7. Probability of the accused appearing at the trial
8. Forfeiture of other bail
9. The fact that he was a fugitive from the law when arrested
10. Pendency of other cases where the accused is on bail
Where should bail be filed?
It may be filed with the court where the case is pending. In the absence of the
judge thereof, bail may be filed with any RTC or MTC judge in the province, city,
or municipality. If the accused is arrested in a province, city, or municipality other
than where the case is pending, bail may also be filed with and RTC of said
place, or if no judge is available, with any MTC judge therein.
But where bail is a matter of discretion or where the accused seeks to be
released on recognizance, bail may only be filed in the court where the case is
pending.
Any person in custody who is not yet charged may apply for bail with any court in
the province, city or municipality where he is held.
What is the remedy of the accused if he is denied bail?

When is a bail hearing necessary?

He should file a special civil action in the CA, not the SC within 60 days.

Bail hearing is mandatory when bail is a matter of discretion. It is incumbent upon

the prosecution to show that the evidence of guilt is strong. Even if the
prosecution is absent or refuses to present evidence, the court cannot grant bail
without conducting a hearing. The court must first be convinced that the evidence
does not warrant the denial of bail

Does an application for bail bar the accused from questioning the validity or his
arrest, the validity of the warrant, or the manner of conducting the preliminary
investigation?
No, provided that he raises these questions before plea.

What is required of the judge who denies an application for bail?

The order should contain a summary of the evidence presented and the reason
for the denial, otherwise it shall be void. This is in order to safeguard the
constitutional right to presumption of innocence and also because there is a need
for clear grounds before a person can be denied of his liberty.

RULE 115 RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED

What are the rights of the accused in criminal prosecutions?
1. To be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved beyond reasonable
doubt;

2. To be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him;

3. To be present and defend in person and by counsel at every stage of the
proceedings, from arraignment to promulgation of
judgment;
4. To testify as a witness in his own behalf but subject to cross-examination on
matters covered by direct examination;
5. To be exempt from being compelled to be a witness against himself;
6. To confront and cross-examine the witnesses against him at the trial;
7. To have compulsory process issued to secure the attendance of witnesses and
production of other evidence in his behalf;
8. To have a speedy, impartial, and public trial;
9. To appeal in all cases allowed and in the manner prescribed by law.
Due Process
What are the two aspects of the right to due process?
1. Substantive due process this refers to the intrinsic validity of the law
2. Procedural due process one that hears before it condemns, proceeds upon
inquiry, and renders judgment only after trial and based on the evidence
presented therein.
Is it necessary to have trial-type proceedings in order to satisfy the requirement
of due process?
No. There is no need for trial-type proceedings in order to satisfy due process.
What is important is that there was an opportunity to be heard. Notice and
hearing are the minimum requirements of due process.
In general, what are the requirements of procedural due process?
1. There must be an impartial and competent court with judicial power to hear
and determine the matter before it;
2. Jurisdiction must be lawfully acquired over the person of the defendant or over
the property subject of the proceeding;
3. The defendant must be given an opportunity to be heard;
4. Judgment must be rendered upon lawful hearing.
In criminal cases, what are the requirements of procedural due process?
The requirements in criminal cases are more stringent. They are:
1. The accused must have been heard by a court of competent jurisdiction;
2. He must have been proceeded against under orderly processes of the law;
3. He may be punished only after inquiry and investigation;
4. There must be notice to the accused;
5. The accused must be given an opportunity to be heard;
6. Judgment must be rendered within the authority of a constitutional law.

b. Persons in possession of recently stolen goods are presumed guilty of the

offense in connection with the goods.
2. Self-Defense One who invokes self-defense is presumed guilty. The burden
of proving the elements of self-defense (unlawful aggression, reasonable
necessity of the means used to prevent or repel it; lack of sufficient provocation
on the part of the one defending himself) belongs to the accused.
What is a reverse trial?
Usually, the prosecution presents its evidence to establish the guilt of the
accused first. But a reverse trial happens if the accused admits the killing but
claims self-defense. He must first establish the elements of self-defense in order
to overturn the presumption that he was guilty of the offense.
Right to be present at the trial
What are the requisites of a valid trial in absentia?
1. The accused has already been arraigned;
2. He has been duly notified of the trial
3. His failure to appear at the trial is unjustifiable.
Can the right to be present at the trial be waived?
Yes, except in the following situations, where the presence of the accused at the
trial is required:
1. 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 necessary for purposes of
identification, unless he admits beforehand that he is the same person charged.
Right to Counsel
Is there a difference between the right to counsel during custodial investigation
and the right to counsel during the trial?
Yes. In custodial investigation, the right to counsel can only be waived in writing
AND with the assistance of counsel. The counsel required in custodial
investigation is competent and independent counsel, preferably of his own (the
suspects) choice.
During the trial, the right to counsel means the right to effective counsel.
The requirement is stricter during custodial investigation because a trial is done
in public, while custodial investigation is not. The danger that confessions will be
extracted against the will of the defendant during custodial investigation does not
really exist during trial.

Presumption of Innocence

During trial the purpose of counsel is not so much to protect him from being
forced to confess but to defend the accused.

What is the meaning of the right of presumption of innocence?

Why is the right to counsel afforded during trial?

The right means that the presumption must be overcome by evidence of guilt
beyond reasonable doubt. Guilt beyond reasonable doubt means that there is
moral certainty as to the guilt of the accused. Conviction should be based on the
strength of the prosecution and not on the weakness of the defense. The
significance of this is that accusation is not synonymous with guilt.

The right to counsel is embraced in the right to be heard.

What are the exceptions to the constitutional presumption of innocence?

1. Presumptions If there is a reasonable connection between the fact
presumed and the fact ultimately proven from such fact
Examples:
a. When an accountable public officer fails to account for funds or property that
should be in his custody, he is presumed to be guilty of malversation;

When should the right to counsel be invoked?

The right to counsel may be invoked at any stage of the proceedings, even on
appeal. However, it can also be waived. The accused is deemed to have waived
his right to counsel when he voluntarily submits himself to the jurisdiction of the
Court and proceeds with his defense.
But in US v. Escalante and People v. Nang Kay (p. 532 of Herrera Textbook), the
Court held that the defendant cannot raise the question of his right to have an
attorney for the first time on appeal. If the question is not raised in the trial court,
the prosecution may go to trial. The question will not be considered in the
appellate court for the first time when the accused fails to raise it in the lower
court.

Is the duty of the court to appoint counsel-de-oficio mandatory at all times?

No. The duty to appoint counsel-do-oficio is mandatory only up to arraignment.
Does the mistake of counsel bind the client?
As a rule, the mistake of counsel binds the client. Therefore, the client cannot
question a decision on the ground that counsel was an idiot. However, an
exception to this is if counsel misrepresents himself as a lawyer, and he turns out
to be a fake lawyer. In this case, the accused is entitled to a new trial because
his right to be represented by a member of the bar was violated. He was thus
denied of his right to counsel and to due process.
Is the right to counsel absolute?

cannot refuse to answer questions during cross-examination by claiming that the

answer that he will give could incriminate him for the crime with which he was
charged.
However, if the question during cross-examination relates to a crime different
from that with which he was charged, he can still invoke the right and refuse to
answer.
Can the accused or witness invoke the right against self-incrimination if he is
asked about past criminality?
It depends. If he can still be prosecuted for it, questions about past criminal
liability are still covered by the protection of the right against self-incrimination.
But if he cannot be prosecuted for it anymore, he cannot invoke the right.

No. The right of choice must be reasonably exercised. The accused cannot insist
on counsel that he cannot afford, one who is not a member of the bar, or one
who declines for a valid reason, such as conflict of interest. Also, the right of the
accused to choose counsel is subject to the right of the state to due process and
to speedy and adequate justice.

What are the rights of the accused in the matter of testifying or producing
evidence?

When can the accused defend himself in person?

a. the right to be informed of

b. his right to remain silent and to counsel
c. the right not to be subjected to force, violence, threat, intimidation, or any other
means which vitiate free will
d. the right to have evidence obtained in violation of these rights rejected

The accused can defend himself in person only if the court is convinced that he
can properly protect his rights even without the assistance of counsel.
Right to be a Witness on His Own Behalf
What is the weight of the testimony of an accused who testifies on his own behalf
but refuses to be cross-examined?
The testimony will not be given weight. It will not have probative value because
the prosecution was not given a chance to test the credibility of the testimony
through cross-examination.
Right Against Self-Incrimination
What is the scope of the right against self-incrimination?
The right against self-incrimination covers testimonial compulsion only and the
compulsion to produce incriminating documents,
papers, and chattels. It does not cover the compulsion to produce real or
physical evidence using the body of the accused.
Is there an exception to the right against self-incrimination?

1. Before the case is filed in Court but after he has been taken into custody or
otherwise deprived of his liberty

2. After the case is filed in court

a. to refuse to be a witness
b. not to have any prejudice whatsoever result to him by such refusal
c. to testify in his own behalf subject to cross-examination by the prosecution
d.while testifying, to refuse to answer a specific question which tends to
incriminate his for some crime other than that for which he is being prosecuted.
What are immunity statutes?
The immunity statutes are classified into two use immunity statutes and
transactional immunity statutes.
Use immunity prohibits the use of a witness compelled testimony and its fruits in
any manner in connection with the criminal prosecution of the witness.
(Therefore, the witness can still be prosecuted, but the compelled testimony
cannot be used against him.)

What is the rationale for protecting the right against self-incrimination?

Transactional immunity grants immunity to the witness from prosecution for an

offense to which his compelled testimony relates. (Here, the witness cannot be
prosecuted at all.) Examples are state witnesses and those who furnish
information about violations of the Internal Revenue Code, even if they
themselves offered bribes to the public official.

There are two reasons:

What is the effect of the refusal of the accused to refuse to testify in his behalf?

1. For humanitarian reasons: To prevent the State, with all its coercive powers,
from extracting testimony that may convict the accused.

As a general rule, the silence of the accused should not prejudice him.

The right cannot be invoked when the State has the right to inspect documents
under its police power, such as documents of corporations.

2. For practical reasons: The accused is likely to commit perjury if he were

compelled to testify against himself.
Who may invoke the right against self-incrimination, and when can they invoke
the right?
1. An ordinary witness may invoke the right, but he may only do so as each
incriminating question is asked.
2. The accused himself may invoke the right, and unlike the ordinary witness, he
may altogether refuse to take the witness stand and refuse to answer any and all
questions.
But, once the accused waives his right and chooses to testify in his own behalf,
he may be cross-examined on matters covered in his direct examination. He

However, in the following cases, an unfavorable inference is drawn from the

failure of the accused to testify:
1. If the prosecution has already established a prima facie case, the accused
must present proof to overturn the evidence of the prosecution.
2. If the defense of the accused is alibi and he does not testify, the inference is
that the alibi is not believable.
Is DNA testing covered by the right against self-incrimination?
No (recent SC ruling).
Right of Confrontation
What is the meaning of the right of confrontation?

It means that the accused can only be tried using those witnesses that meet him
face to face at the trial who give testimony in his presence, with the opportunity
to cross-examine them.

1. File a motion to dismiss on the ground of violation of his right to speedy trial.
(For purposes of double jeopardy, this has the same effect as an acquittal.)This
must be done prior to trial, or else, it is deemed a waiver of the right to dismiss.

What are the reasons for the right?

2. File for mandamus to compel a dismissal of the information.

3. If he is restrained of his liberty, file for habeas corpus.
4. Ask for the trial of the case.

1. To allow the court to observe the demeanor of the witness while testifying.
2. To give the accused the opportunity to cross-examine the witness in order to
test their recollection and credibility.
Can the right of confrontation be waived?
Yes, it can be waived either expressly or impliedly. It is waived impliedly when an
accused waives his right to be present at the trial. The right of confrontation may
also be waived by conduct amounting to a renunciation of the right to crossexamine. When the party was given an opportunity to confront and crossexamine an opposing witness but failed to take advantage of it for reasons
attributable to himself alone, he is deemed to have waived the right.
What happens to the testimony of a witness who dies or becomes unavailable?
It depends. If the other party had the opportunity to cross-examine the witness
before he died or became unavailable, the testimony may be used as evidence.
However, if the other party did not even have the opportunity to cross-examine
before the subsequent death or unavailability of the witness, the testimony will
have no probative value. (Anopportunity to cross-examine is all that is necessary
in order to allow the use of the testimony of the witness. There need not be an
actual cross-examination, as long as there was an opportunity to do so.)
Right to Compulsory Process

What is the limitation on the right of an accused to a speedy trial?

The limitation is that the State should not be deprived of its day in court. The right
of the State/the prosecution to due process should be respected.
The prosecution and the complainant fail to attend the first hearing. The court
postpones the hearing to another date.
Is there a violation of the right to speedy trial?
No. The right to speedy trial is violated when there are unjustified postponements
of the trial, and a long period of time is allowed to elapse without the case being
tried for no justifiable reason.
What is the meaning of the right to a public trial?
It means that anyone interested in observing the manner that a judge conducts
the proceedings in his courtroom may do so.
Why should a trial be conducted in public?
The trial should be public in order to prevent abuses that may be committed by
the court to the prejudice of the defendant.

What is the right to compulsory process?

Moreover, the accused is entitled to the moral support of his friends and
relatives.

It is the right of the accused to have a subpoena and/or a subpoena duces tecum
issued in his behalf in order to compel the attendance of witnesses and the
production of other evidence.

Is there an exception to the requirement of publicity?

What happens if a witness refuses to testify when required?

Yes. The court may bar the public in certain cases, such as when the evidence to
be presented may be offensive to decency or public morals, or in rape cases,
where the purpose of some persons in attending is merely to ogle at the parties.

The court should order the witness to give bail or even order his arrest, if
necessary. Failure to obey a subpoena amounts to contempt of court.

Is it okay to hold the trial in the chambers of the judge?

Right to Speedy, Public, and Impartial Trial

Yes. There is no violation of the right to a public trial, since the public is not
excluded from attending the trial.

How should the trial be conducted?

The trial should be speedy, public, and impartial.
What is the meaning of the right to speedy trial?
The right means that the trial should be conducted according to the law of
criminal procedure and the rules and regulations, free from vexations, capricious,
and oppressive delays.

In so-called trials by publicity, when can the publicity be considered prejudicial to

the accused?
To warrant a finding of prejudicial publicity, there must be allegations and proof
that the judges have been unduly influenced, not simply that they might be, by
the barrage of publicity.
Right to Appeal, When Allowed

When should the arraignment and pre-trial be held?

Is the right to appeal a fundamental right?

According to the Speedy Trial Act and Circular 38-98, arraignment and pre-trial if
the accused pleads not guilty should be held within

No. The right to appeal is a statutory right, except in the case of the minimum
appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court granted by the Constitution. Anyone
who seeks to exercise the right to appeal must comply with the requirements of
the rules.

30 days from the date the court acquires jurisdiction of the person of the
accused.
Within how many days should the trial be completed?
In no case shall the entire period exceed 180 days from the first day of trial,
except as otherwise authorized by the Court Administrator.
What is the remedy of an accused whose right to speedy trial is violated?
The accused has the following remedies:

Can the right to appeal be waived?

Yes, it can be waived expressly or impliedly.
What is the effect of the flight of the accused on his right to appeal?
When the accused flees after the case has been submitted to the court for
decision, he will be deemed to have waived his right to appeal from the judgment
rendered against him.

During the arraignment, is the judge duty-bound to point out that an information
is duplicitous?

RULE 116 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA

Where should the accused be arraigned?
The accused must be arraigned before the court where the complaint was filed or
assigned for trial.
How is arraignment made?
Arraignment is made:

No. The judge has no obligation to point out the duplicitousness or any other
defect in an information during arraignment. The obligation to move to quash a
defective information belongs to the accused, whose failure to do so constitutes
a waiver of the right to object.
X was tried for murder without having been arraigned. At the trial, Xs counsel
presented witnesses and cross- examined the prosecution witnesses. It was only
after the case was submitted for decision that X was arraigned. X was convicted.
Can X invoke the failure of the court to arraign him before trial as a ground for
questioning the conviction?

1. in open court
2. by the judge or clerk
3. by furnishing the accused with a copy of the complaint or information
4. reading it in the language or dialect known to him, and
5. asking him whether he pleads guilty or not guilty.

No. The failure of the court to arraign X before trial was conducted did not
prejudice the rights of X since he was able to present evidence and crossexamine the witnesses of the prosecution. The error was cured by the
subsequent arraignment.

Can there be an arraignment without the presence of the accused?

Is the accused presumed to have been arraigned in the absence of proof to the
contrary?

No. The accused must be present at the arraignment and must personally enter
his plea.

If the accused refuses to plead or makes a conditional plea, a plea of not guilty
shall be entered for him.

Yes. In view of the presumption of regularity in the performance of official duties,

it can be presumed that a person accused of a crime was arraigned, in the
absence of proof to the contrary. However, the presumption of regularity is not
applied when the penalty imposed is death. When the life of a person is at stake,
the court cannot presume that there was an arraignment; it has to be sure that
there was one.

X is charged with homicide. He pleads guilty but presents evidence to establish

self-defense. What should the court

Is the accused entitled to know in advance the names of all of the prosecution
witnesses?

do?

No. The success of the prosecution might be endangered if this right were
granted to the accused. The witnesses might be subjected to pressure or
coercion. The right time for the accused to know their identities is when they take
the witness stand.

What is the effect of the refusal of the accused to enter a plea?

The court should withdraw the plea and enter a plea of not guilty.
When should the arraignment be held?
The general rule is that the accused should be arraigned within 30 days from the
date the court acquires jurisdiction over the person of the accused. The time of
the pendency of a motion to quash or for a bill of particulars or other causes
justifying suspension of the arraignment shall be excluded in computing the
period.
However, in the following cases, the accused should be arraigned with a shorter
period:
1. Where the complainant is about to depart from the Philippines with no definite
date of return, the accused should be arraigned without delay and his trial should
commence within 3 days from arraignment.
2. The trial of cases under the Child Abuse Act requires that the trial should be
commenced within 3 days from arraignment.
3. When the accused is under preventive detention, his case shall be raffled and
its records transmitted to the judge to whom the case was raffled within 3 days
from the filing of the information or complaint. The accused shall be arraigned
within 10 days from the date of the raffle.

Can the prosecution call witnesses that are not listed in the information?
Yes. The prosecution may call at the trial witnesses other than those named in
the complaint or information.
X was charged with homicide. He entered a plea of guilty. He was later allowed
to testify in order to prove the mitigating circumstance of incomplete self-defense.
At the trial, he presented evidence to prove that he acted in complete selfdefense. The court acquitted him. Later, X was again charged with physical
injuries. X invoked double jeopardy. Can X be prosecuted again for physical
injuries?
Yes. There was no double jeopardy. In order for double jeopardy to attach, there
must have been a valid plea to the first offense. In this case, the presentation by
X of evidence to prove complete self-defense had the effect of vacating his plea
of guilt. When the plea of guilt was vacated, the court should have ordered him to
plead again, or at least should have directed that a new plea of not
guilty be entered for him. Because the court did not do this, at the time of the
acquittal, there was actually no standing plea for
X. Since there was no valid plea, there can be no double jeopardy.

Can the lawyer of the accused enter a plea for him?

Can a person who pleaded guilty still be acquitted?
No. The accused must personally enter his plea.
What is the importance of arraignment?
Arraignment is the means for bringing the accused into court and informing him
of the nature and cause of the accusation against him. During arraignment, he is
made fully aware of possible loss of freedom or life. He is informed why the
prosecuting arm of the State is mobilized against him. It is necessary in order to
fix the identity of the accused, to inform him of the charge, and to give him an
opportunity to plead.

Yes. When an accused pleads guilty, it does not necessarily follow that he will be
convicted. Additional evidence independent of the guilty plea may be considered
by the judge to ensure that the plea of guilt was intelligently made. The totality of
evidence should determine whether the accused should be convicted or
acquitted.
When can the accused plead guilty to a lesser offense?

At arraignment, the accused may plead guilty to a lesser offense which is

necessarily included in the offense charged, provided that the offended party and
the prosecutor give their consent.
After arraignment BUT BEFORE TRIAL, the accused may still be allowed to
plead guilty to a lesser offense, after he withdraws his plea of not guilty. In such a
case, the complaint or information need not be amended.
When the penalty imposable for the offense is at least 6 years and 1 day or a fine
exceeding P12,000, the prosecutor must first submit his recommendation to the
City or Provincial Prosecutor or to the Chief State Prosecutor for approval. If the
recommendation is approved, the trial prosecutor may then consent to the plea
of guilty to a lesser offense.
What should the court do when the accused pleads guilty to a capital offense?
The court should:
1. conduct a searching inquiry into the voluntariness and full comprehension of
the consequences of the plea.
2. require the prosecution to present evidence to prove the guilt and the precise
degree of culpability of the accused for the purpose of imposing the proper
penalty.
3. ask the accused if he desires to present evidence in his behalf and allow him
to do so if he desires.
Does a plea of guilty mean an admission even of the aggravating
circumstances?
Yes. A plea of guilty results in the admission of all the material facts in the
complaint or information, including the aggravating circumstances. Because of
this, the court should only accept a clear, definite, and unconditional plea of
guilty.
When can the plea of guilty be considered a mitigating circumstance?
It is mitigating if made before the prosecution starts to present evidence.
What is the meaning of the duty of the judge to conduct a searching inquiry?
In all cases, the judge must convince himself: (1) that the accused is entering the
plea of guilty voluntarily and intelligently; and (2)
that he is truly guilty and that there exists a rational basis for a finding of guilt
based on his testimony.
In addition, the judge must inform the accused of the exact length of
imprisonment and the certainty that he will serve it at the national penitentiary or
a penal colony. The judge must dispel any false notion that the accused may
have that he will get off lightly because of his plea of guilt.
Is it mandatory for the prosecution to present proof of aggravating
circumstances?
Yes. It is mandatory in order to establish the precise degree of culpability and the
imposable penalty. Otherwise, there is an improvident plea of guilty.
Can a court validly convict an accused based on an improvident plea of guilty?
Yes. If there is adequate evidence of the guilt of the accused independent of the
improvident plea of guilty, the court may still convict the accused. The conviction
will be set aside only if the plea of guilt is the sole basis of the judgment.

When can the validity of a plea of guilty be attacked?

Generally, a plea of guilty cannot be attacked if it is made voluntarily and
intelligently. It can only be attacked if it was induced by threats,
misrepresentation, or bribes. When the consensual character of the plea is called
into question or when it is shown that the defendant was not fully apprised of its
consequences, the plea can be challenged.
Can an improvident plea of guilty be withdrawn as a matter of right?
No. The withdrawal of the plea of guilty is not a matter of strict right to the
accused but is within the discretion of the court. The reason for this is that trial
has already commenced; withdrawal of the plea will change the theory of the
case and will put all of the past proceedings to waste. Therefore, it may only be
withdrawn with permission of the court.
Moreover, there is a presumption that the plea was made voluntarily. The court
must decide whether the consent of the accused was, in fact, vitiated when he
entered his plea.
X is charged with homicide. He pleads guilty, but tells the judge hindi ko
sinasadya. Is his plea valid?
No. In order to be valid, the plea of guilty must be unconditional. In this case,
when X said hindi ko sinasadya, he made a qualified plea of guilty. This is not a
valid plea of guilty. A plea of not guilty should be entered instead.
When a defendant appears without an attorney during arraignment, what should
the court do?
The court has a four-fold duty:
1. It must inform the defendant that he has a right to an attorney before being
arraigned;
2. After informing him, the court must ask the defendant if he desires to have the
aid of an attorney;
3. If he desires and is unable to employ an attorney, the court must assign an
attorney de oficio to defend him;
4. If the accused desires to procure an attorney of his own, the court must grant
him a reasonable time therefor.
What is the reason for this four-fold duty?
The right to be heard would be of little avail if it does not include the right to be
heard by counsel.
What is the effect of the failure of the court to comply with these duties?
It is a violation of due process.
What is a counsel de oficio?
Counsel de oficio is counsel appointed by the court to represent and defend the
accused in case he cannot afford to employ one himself.
Who can be appointed as counsel de oficio?
The court, considering the gravity of the offense and the difficulty of the questions
that may arise shall appoint as counsel de oficio:
1. such members of the bar in good standing
2. who by reason of their experience and ability, can competently defend the
accused.

What should the court do when the accused pleads guilty to a non-capital
offense?

But, in localities where such members of the bar are not available, the court may
appoint any person who is:

The court may receive evidence from the parties to determine the penalty to be
imposed. Unlike in a plea of guilty to a capital offense, the reception of evidence
in this case is not mandatory. It is merely discretionary on the court.

1. a resident of the province

2. and of good repute for probity and ability to defend the accused.

What is the difference between the duty of the court to appoint counsel de oficio
during arraignment and during trial?

inspect, copy, or photograph any evidence of the prosecution in its possession

after obtaining permission of the court.

During arraignment, the court has the affirmative duty to inform the accused of
his right to counsel and to provide him with one in case he cannot afford it. The
court must act on its own volition, unless the right is waived by the accused.

What is the purpose of this right?

On the other hand, during trial, it is the accused who must assert his right to
counsel. The court will not act unless the accused invokes his rights.
Can a non-lawyer represent the accused during arraignment?
No. During arraignment, it is the obligation of the court to ensure that the
accused is represented by a lawyer because it is the first time when the accused
is informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him. This is a task
which only a lawyer can do.

The purpose is to prevent surprise to the accused and the suppression or

alteration of evidence.
Is this right available during preliminary investigation?
Yes, when indispensable to protect his constitutional right to life, liberty, and
property. (Webb v. de Leon)
What are the grounds for suspending arraignment?

But during trial, there is no such duty. The accused must ask for a lawyer, or else,
the right is deemed waived. He can even defend himself personally.

1. If the accused appears to be suffering from an unsound mental condition,

which renders him unable to fully understand the charge against him and to
plead intelligently thereto. The court should order his mental examination and his
confinement, if necessary.

May an accused be validly represented by a non-lawyer at the trial?

2. If there exists a prejudicial question.

If the accused knowingly engaged the services of the non-lawyer, he is bound by

the non-lawyers actions. But if he did not know that he was being represented by
a non-lawyer, the judgment is void because of the misrepresentation.

3. If a petition for review of the resolution of the prosecutor is pending either at

the DOJ or the Office of the President.

What are the duties of the pubic attorney if the accused assigned to him is
imprisoned?
1. He 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 advise the prisoner of his right to demand trial.
2. Upon receipt of that notice, the person having custody of the prisoner shall
promptly advise the prisoner of the charge and of his right to demand trial. It at
anytime thereafter, the prisoner informs his custodian that he demands such trial,
the latter shall cause notice to that effect to be sent promptly to the public
attorney.

However, the period of suspension shall not exceed 60 days counted from the
filing of the petition for review.
What is the test to determine whether the insanity of the accused should warrant
the suspension of the proceedings?
The test is whether the accused will have a fair trial with the assistance of
counsel, in spite of his insanity. Not every aberration of the mind or exhibition of
mental deficiency is sufficient to justify suspension.

RULE 117 MOTION TO QUASH

When can the accused file a motion to quash?

3. Upon receipt of such notice, the public attorney shall promptly seek to obtain
the presence of the prisoner for trial.

At any time before entering his plea, the accused may move to quash the
complaint or information.

4. When the person having custody of the prisoner receives from the public
attorney a properly supported request for the availability of the prisoner for
purposes of the trial, the prisoner shall be made available accordingly.

What is the form required for a motion to quash?

What is a bill of particulars?

It is a more specific allegation. A defendant in a criminal case who believes or
feels that he is not sufficiently informed of the crime with which he is charged and
not in a position to defend himself properly and adequately could move for a bill
or particulars or specifications.
What is the purpose of a bill of particulars?
It is to allow the accused to prepare for his defense.
When can the accused move for a bill of particulars?
The accused must move for a bill of particulars before arraignment. Otherwise,
the right is deemed waived.
What should be contained in the motion for a bill or particulars?
It should specify the alleged defects of the complaint or information and the
details desired.
What is the right to modes of discovery?
It is the right of the accused to move for the production or inspection or material
evidence in the possession of the prosecution. It authorizes the defense to

1. It must be in writing.
2. It must be signed by the accused or his counsel.
3. It must specify its factual and legal grounds.
Can the court dismiss the case based on grounds that are not alleged in the
motion to quash?
As a general rule, no. The court cannot consider any ground other than those
stated in the motion to quash. The exception is lack of jurisdiction over the
offense charged. If this is the ground for dismissing the case, it need not be
alleged in the motion to quash since it goes into the very competence of the court
to pass upon the case.
What are the grounds that the accused may invoke to quash a complaint or
information?
1. That the facts charged do not constitute an offense;
2. That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the offense charged;
3. That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the person of the
accused;
4. That the officer who filed the information had no authority to do so;
5. That it does not conform substantially to the prescribed form;
6. That more than one offense is charged except when a single punishment for
various offenses is prescribed by law (duplicitous);
7. That the criminal action or liability has been extinguished;

8. That it contains averments which, if true, would constitute a legal excuse or

justification;
9. That the accused has been previously convicted or acquitted of the offense
charged, or the case against him was dismissed or otherwise terminated without
his express consent. (double jeopardy)
X filed a motion to quash an information on the ground that he was in the US
when the crime charged was committed. Should the motion be granted?
The motion should be denied. The accused is already making a defense. Matters
of defense are generally not a ground for a motion to quash. They should be
presented at the trial.
What is meant by the statement that a motion to quash hypothetically admits
allegations of fact in the information?
It means that the accused argues that assuming that the facts charged are true,
the information should still be dismissed based on the ground invoked by the
defendant. Therefore, since the defendant assumes that the facts in the
information are true, only these facts should be taken into account when the
court resolves the motion to quash. Other facts, such as matters of defense,
which are not in the information should not be considered. Exceptions to this rule
are when the grounds invoked to quash the information are extinction of criminal
liability, prescription, and former jeopardy. In these cases, additional facts are
allowed.

3. amnesty;
4. absolute pardon;
5. prescription of the crime;
6. prescription of the penalty;
7. marriage of the offended woman, as provided in Article 344 of the RPC.
X and Y were charged with adultery. While the case was being tried, X died.
What happens to the criminal liability of X and Y?
The criminal liability of X is extinguished. The criminal liability of Y subsists. The
death of one of several accused will not be a cause for dismissal of the criminal
action as against the other accused.
What is the effect of the death of the offended party on the criminal liability of the
accused?
Where the offense charged in a criminal complaint or information is one against
the state, involving peace and order, the death of the offended party before final
conviction of the defendant will not abate the prosecution. Neither does the death
of the offended party in private crimes abate the prosecution.
What are the means by which criminal liability is partially extinguished?
1. Conditional pardon

Can the accused move to quash on the ground that he was denied due process?

2. Commutation of sentence

No. Denial of due process is not one of the grounds for a motion to quash.

3. For good conduct, allowances which the culprit may earn while he is serving
his sentence

X filed a motion to quash on the following grounds: that the court lacked
jurisdiction over the person of the accused and that the complaint charged more
than one offense. Can the court grant the motion on the ground of lack of
jurisdiction over the person of the accused?
No. A motion to quash on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the person of the
accused must be based only on this ground. If other grounds are included, there
is a waiver, and the accused is deemed to have submitted himself to the
jurisdiction of the court.
What is the effect of an information that was signed by an unauthorized person?
It is a VALID information signed by a competent officer which, among other
requisites, confers jurisdiction over the person of the accused and the subject
matter of the accusation. Thus, an infirmity in the information such as lack of
authority of the officer signing it cannot be cured by silence, acquiescence,
express consent, or even amendment.
What happens if the defendant enters his plea before filing a motion to quash?
By entering his plea before filing the motion to quash, the defendant waives
FORMAL objections to the complaint or information.
But if the ground for the motion is any of the following, there is no waiver. The
ground may be raised at any stage of the proceeding:
1. failure to charge an offense
2. lack of jurisdiction over the offense
3. extinction of criminal liability

What are the distinctions between pardon and amnesty

Can the accused still raise prescription as a defense even after conviction? Can
the defense of prescription be waived?
The accused can still raise prescription as a defense even after conviction. The
defense cannot be waived. This is because the criminal action is totally
extinguished by the expiration of the prescriptive period. The State thereby loses
or waives its right to prosecute and punish it.
What is the proper action of the court when the accused raises the defense of
prescription?
The proper action for the court is to exercise its jurisdiction and to decide the
case upon the merits, holding the action to have prescribed and absolving the
defendant. The court should not inhibit itself because it does not lose jurisdiction
over the subject matter or the person of the accused by prescription.
What is the effect of prescription of the offense on the civil liability of the
accused?
The extinction of the penal action does not carry with it the extinction of the civil
action to enforce civil liability arising from the offense charged, unless the
extinction proceeds from a declaration in a final judgment that the fact from which
the civil liability might arise did not exist.

4. double jeopardy

What should the court do if the accused moves to quash the complaint or
information on grounds that can be cured by amendment (ex: duplicitous)?

How is criminal liability extinguished?

The court should order that the amendment be made.

Under Article 89 of the RPC, criminal liability is extinguished by:

What should the court do if the accused moves to quash on the ground that the
facts charged do not constitute an offense?

1. death of the convict, and as to pecuniary penalties, liability therefor is

extinguished only when the death of the offender occurs before final judgment;
2. service of sentence;

The court should give the prosecution the opportunity to correct the defect by
amendment. If the prosecution fails to make the amendment, or if, after it makes
the amendment, the complaint or information still suffers from the same defect,
the court should grant/sustain the motion to quash.

What is the effect if a motion to quash is sustained?

The court may order that another complaint or information be filed against the
accused for the same offense, except if the ground for sustaining the motion to
quash is either:
1. extinguishment of the criminal liability of the accused, or
2. double jeopardy.
The grant of a motion to quash on these two grounds is a bar to another
prosecution for the same offense.
If the order is made, the accused, if in custody, shall not be discharged unless
admitted to bail.
If no order is made, or if no new information was filed within the time specified by
the court, the accused, if in custody, shall be discharged.
What is the remedy of the accused if the court denies his motion to quash?
The accused cannot appeal an order overruling his motion to quash. This is
because an order denying a motion to quash is interlocutory; it does not dispose
of the case upon its merits. The accused should go to trial and raise it as an error
on appeal later.
What are the two kinds of jeopardy?
1. No person shall be twice put in jeopardy for the same offense.
2. When an act is punished by a law and an ordinance, conviction or acquittal
under either shall constitute a bar to another prosecution for the same act.
What are the requisites for the accused to raise the defense of double jeopardy?
To raise the defense of double jeopardy, the following requisites must be present:
1. a first jeopardy must have attached prior to the second;
2. the first jeopardy must have been validly terminated;
3. the second jeopardy must be for the same offense or the second offense
includes or is necessarily included in the offense charged in the first information,
or is anat tempt or afrus tration thereof.
What are the requisites for the first jeopardy to attach?
1. Valid complaint or information
2. Court of competent jurisdiction
3. Arraignment
4. Valid plea

X was charged with qualified theft. X moved to dismiss on the ground of

insufficiency of the information. The case was dismissed. Subsequently, the
prosecution filed a corrected information. Can X plead double jeopardy?
No. The first jeopardy did not attach because the first information was not valid.
X was charged with theft. During the trial, the prosecution was able to prove
estafa. X was acquitted of theft. Can X be prosecuted for estafa later without
placing him in double jeopardy?
Yes. For jeopardy to attach, the basis is the crime charged in the complaint or
information, and not the one proved at the trial. In this case, the crime charged in
the first information was theft. X was therefore placed in jeopardy of being
convicted of theft. Since estafa is not an offense which is included or necessarily
includes theft, X can still be prosecuted for estafa without placing him in double
jeopardy.
The estafa case against X was dismissed, but the dismissal contained a
reservation of the right to file another action.
Can another estafa case be filed against X without placing him in double
jeopardy?
Yes. To raise the defense of double jeopardy, the firs jeopardy must have been
validly terminated. This means that there must have been either a conviction or
an acquittal, or an unconditional dismissal of the case. A provisional dismissal,
such as this one, does not validly terminate the first jeopardy.
Note, however, that in the second kind of jeopardy (one act punished by a law
and an ordinance), the first jeopardy can only be terminated either by conviction
or acquittal, and not by dismissal of the case without the express consent of the
accused.
X was charged with theft. On the day of the trial, the prosecution could not go to
trial because important witnesses were unable to appear. Counsel for the
accused moved to dismiss the case. The court dismissed the case provisionally.
Subsequently, X was charged with theft again. Can X invoke double jeopardy?
No. The case was dismissed upon motion of counsel for the accused, so it was
not dismissed without his express consent. Moreover, the dismissal was only
provisional, which is not a valid termination of the first jeopardy. In order to validly
terminate the first jeopardy, the dismissal must have been unconditional.
X was charged with slight physical injuries. On his motion, the case was
dismissed during the trial. Another case for assault upon a person in authority
was filed against him. Can X invoke double jeopardy?
No. The first jeopardy was not terminated through either conviction, acquittal, or
dismissal without the express consent of X. The first case was dismissed upon
motion of X himself. Therefore, he cannot invoke double jeopardy.
X was charged with theft. During trial, the evidence showed that the offense
committed was actually estafa. What should the judge do?

5. The defendant was acquitted, convicted, or the case was dismissed without
his express consent.

The judge should order the substitution of the complaint for theft with a new one
charging estafa. Upon filing of the substituted complaint, the judge should
dismiss the original complaint.

A crime was committed in Makati. The case was filed in Pasay. When the
prosecution realized that the complaint should have been filed in Makati, it filed
the case in Makati. Can the accused invoke double jeopardy?

If it appears at any time before judgment that a mistake has been made in
charging the proper offense, the court shall dismiss the original complaint or
information upon the filing of a new one charging the proper offense.

No. The court in Pasay had no jurisdiction; therefore, the accused was in no
danger of being placed in jeopardy. The first jeopardy did not validly attach.

What are the requisites for a valid substitution of a complaint or information?

For purposes of double jeopardy, when is a complaint or information valid?

A complaint or information is valid if it can support a judgment of conviction. It the
complaint or information is not valid, it would violate the right of the accused to
be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him. If he is
convicted under this complaint or information, the conviction is null and void. If
the conviction is null and void, there can be no first jeopardy.

1. No judgment has been rendered;

2. The accused cannot be convicted of the offense charged or any other offense
necessarily included in the offense charged;
3. The accused will not be placed in double jeopardy.
X was charged with homicide. On the first day of trial, the prosecution failed to
appear. The court dismissed the case on the ground of violation of the right of the

accused to speedy trial. X was later charged with murder. Can X invoke double
jeopardy?
No. The first jeopardy was not validly terminated. The judge who dismissed the
case on the ground of violation of the right of X to speedy trial committed grave
abuse of discretion in dismissing the case after the prosecution failed to appear
once. This is not a valid dismissal because it deprives the prosecution of due
process. When the judge gravely abuses his discretion in dismissing a case, the
dismissal is not valid. Therefore, X cannot invoke double jeopardy.
Distinguish between dismissal and acquittal.
Acquittal is always based on the merits. The accused is acquitted because the
evidence does not show his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Dismissal does not
decide the case on the merits, nor does it determine that the accused is not
guilty. Dismissals terminate the proceedings, either because the court is not a
court of competent jurisdiction or the evidence does not show that the offense
was committed within the territorial jurisdiction of the court, or the complaint or
information is not valid or sufficient in form and substance.

The prosecutor filed an information against X for homicide. Before X could be

arraigned, the prosecutor withdrew the information, without notice to X. The
prosecutor then filed an information against X for murder. Can X invoke double
jeopardy?
No. X has not yet been arraigned under the first information. Therefore, the first
jeopardy did not attach. A nolle prosequi or dismissal entered before the accused
is placed on trial and before he pleads is not equivalent to an acquittal and does
not bar a subsequent prosecution for the same offense.
If the accused fails to object to the motion to dismiss the case filed by the
prosecution, is he deemed to have consented to the dismissal? Can he still
invoke double jeopardy?
No. Silence does not mean consent to the dismissal. If the accused fails to object
or acquiesces to the dismissal of the case, he can still invoke double jeopardy,
since the dismissal was still without his express consent. He is deemed to have
waived his right against double jeopardy if he expressly consents to the
dismissal.

When is a dismissal of the case, even with the express consent of the accused,
equivalent to an acquittal, which would constitute a bar to a second jeopardy?
When is it not a bar to a second jeopardy?

X was charged with murder. The prosecution moved to dismiss the case.
Counsel for X wrote the words No objection at the bottom of the motion to
dismiss and signed it. Can X invoke double jeopardy later on?

A dismissal upon motion of the accused or his counsel negates the application of
double jeopardy because the motion of the accused amounts to express
consent, EXCEPT:

No. X is deemed to have expressly consented to the dismissal of the case when
his counsel wrote No objection at the bottom of the motion to dismiss. Since the
case was dismissed with his express consent, X cannot invoke double jeopardy.

1. if the ground is insufficiency of evidence of the prosecution (demurrer to

evidence), or

X was charged with murder. After the prosecution presented its evidence, X filed
a motion to dismiss on the ground that the prosecution failed to prove that the
crime was committed within the territorial jurisdiction of the court. The court
dismissed the case. The prosecution appealed. Can X invoke double jeopardy?

2. denial of the right to speedy trial.

In these two cases, even upon motion of the accused, the dismissal amounts to
an acquittal and would bar a second jeopardy.
But if the accused moves to dismiss on the following grounds, he can still be
prosecuted for the same offense because he is deemed to have waived his right
against a second jeopardy:
1. Lack of jurisdiction (Why? Because if you move to dismiss on the ground of
lack of jurisdiction, it means that you could not have been validly convicted by
that court. You are later estopped from claiming that you were in danger of
conviction).
2. Insufficiency of complaint or information (Same reason. You could not have
been validly convicted under that defective information, so you are estopped
from claiming that there was a first jeopardy).

No. X cannot invoke double jeopardy. The dismissal was upon his own motion,
so it was with his express consent. Since the dismissal was with his express
consent, he is deemed to have waived his right against double jeopardy. The
only time when a dismissal, even upon motion of the accuse, will bar a second
jeopardy is if it is based either on insufficiency of evidence or denial of the right of
the accused to speedy trial. These are not the grounds invoked by X, so he
cannot claim double jeopardy.
X was charged with homicide. X moved to dismiss on the ground that the court
had no jurisdiction. Believing that it had no jurisdiction, the judge dismissed the
case. Since the court, in fact, had jurisdiction over the case, the prosecution filed
another case in the same court. Can X invoke double jeopardy?
No. X is estopped from claiming that he was in danger of being convicted during
the first case, since he had himself earlier alleged

When will dismissal or termination of the first case not bar a second jeopardy?

that the court had no jurisdiction.

The conditions when dismissal or termination will not place the accused in
double jeopardy are:

X was charged with homicide. The court, believing that it had no jurisdiction,
motu propio dismissed the case. The

1. The dismissal must be sought by the defendant personally or through his

counsel; and

prosecution appealed, claiming that the court, in fact, had jurisdiction. Can X
invoke double jeopardy?

2. Such dismissal must not be on the merits and must not necessarily amount to
an acquittal.

Yes. When the trial court has jurisdiction but mistakenly dismisses the complaint
or information on the ground of lack of it, and the

Before the prosecution could finish presenting its evidence, the accused filed a
demurrer to evidence. The court granted the motion and dismissed the case on
the ground of insufficiency of evidence of the prosecution. Can the accused be
prosecuted for the same offense again?

dismissal was not at the request of the accused, the dismissal is not appealable
because it will place the accused in double jeopardy.

Yes. There was no double jeopardy because the court exceeded its jurisdiction in
dismissing the case even before the prosecution could finish presenting
evidence. It denied the prosecution of its right to due process. Because of this,
the dismissal is null and void and cannot constitute a proper basis for a claim of
double jeopardy.

X was charged with rape. X moved to dismiss on the ground that the complaint
was insufficient because it did not allege lewd designs. The court dismissed the
case. Later, another case for rape was filed against X. Can X invoke double
jeopardy?
No. Like the previous problem, X is estopped from claiming that he could have
been convicted under the first complaint. He himself moved to dismiss on the

ground that the complaint was insufficient. He cannot change his position and
now claim that he was in danger of being convicted under that complaint.
X was charged with murder, along with three other people. X was discharged as
a state witness. Can X be prosecuted again for the same offense?
It depends. As a general rule, an order discharging an accused as a state
witness amounts to an acquittal, and he is barred from being prosecuted again
for the same offense. However, if he fails or refuses to testify against his coaccused in accordance with his sworn statement constituting the basis for the
discharge, he can be prosecuted again.

X was charged with frustrated homicide. There was nothing to indicated that the
victim was going to die. X was arraigned. Before trial, the victim dies. Can X be
charged with homicide?
It depends. If the death of the victim can be traced to the acts of X, and the victim
did not contribute to his death with his negligence, X can be charged with
homicide. This is a supervening fact. But if the act of X was not the proximate
cause of death, he cannot be charged with homicide.
X was charged with reckless imprudence resulting in homicide and was
acquitted. The heirs of the victim appealed

Can a person accused of estafa be charged with violation of BP22 without

placing him in double jeopardy?

the civil aspect of the judgment. X claims that the appeal will place him in double
jeopardy. Is X correct?

Yes. Where two different laws define two crimes, prior jeopardy as to one of the
is no obstacle to a prosecution of the other although both offenses arise from the
same facts, if each crime involves some important act which is not an essential
element of the other. Other examples: Illegal recruitment and estafa, illegal
fishing and illegal possession of explosives, alarm and scandal and illegal
discharge of firearms, brigandage and illegal possession of firearms, consented
abduction and qualified seduction.

No. There was no second jeopardy. What was elevated on appeal was thecivil
aspect of the case, not the criminal aspect. The extinction of criminal liability
whether by prescription or by the bar of double jeopardy does not carry with it the
extinction of civil liability arising from the offense charged.

But take note of the following:

No. The prosecution cannot appeal the acquittal, since it would place the
accused in double jeopardy.

Possession of a shotgun and a revolver by the same person at the same time is
only one act of possession, so there is only one violation of the law.
Conviction for smoking opium bars prosecution for illegal possession of the pipe.
He cannot smoke the opium without the pipe.
Theft of 13 cows at the same time and in the same place is only one act of theft.
Conviction for less serious physical injuries bars prosecution for assault upon a
person in authority.

X was charged with murder and was acquitted. Can the prosecution appeal the
acquittal?

Even if the decision of acquittal was erroneous, the prosecution still cannot
appeal the decision. It would still place the accused in double jeopardy.
When can the prosecution appeal despite the dismissal or termination of the
case?

Reckless imprudence resulting in damage to property and serious or less serious

physical injuries is only one offense. If it is slight physical injuries, it can be
broken down into two offenses,since a light offense cannot be complexed.

As a general rule, the dismissal or termination of the case after arraignment and
plea of the defendant to a valid information shall be a bar to another prosecution
for the same offense, an attempt or frustration thereof, or one included or which
includes the previous offense. The exceptions are:

X installed a jumper cable which allowed him to reduce his electricity bill. He was
prosecuted for violating a municipal ordinance against unauthorized installation
of the device. He was convicted. Can he still be prosecuted for theft?

1. if the dismissal of the first case was made upon motion or with the express
consent of the defendant, unless the grounds are insufficiency of evidence or
denial of the right to speedy trial;

No. Under the second type of jeopardy, when an act is punished by a law and an
ordinance, conviction or acquittal under once will bar a prosecution under the
other. (But remember, that there has to be either conviction or acquittal.
Dismissal without the express consent of the accused is not sufficient).

2. if the dismissal is not an acquittal or based upon consideration of the evidence

or of the merits of the case; and

What are the exceptions to double jeopardy? When can the accused be charged
with a second offense which necessarily includes the offense charged in the
former complaint or information?
The conviction of the accused shall not be a bar to another prosecution for an
offense which necessarily includes the offense charged in the former complaint
or information under any of the following circumstances;
1. the graver offense developed due to supervening facts arising from the same
act or omission constituting the former charge;
2. the facts constituting the graver charge became known or were discovered
only after a plea was entered in the former complaint or information;
3. the plea of guilty to the lesser offense was made without the consent of the
prosecutor and the offended party except if the offended party fails to appear at
the arraignment.
What is the doctrine of supervening fact?
If, after the first prosecution, a new fact supervenes on which the defendant may
be held liable, altering the character of the crime and giving rise to a new and
distinct offense, the accused cannot be said to be in second jeopardy if indicted
for the new offense.

3. the question to be passed upon by the appellate court is purely legal so that
should the dismissal be found incorrect, the case would have to be remanded to
the court of origin for further proceedings to determine the guilt or innocence of
the accused.
What is the effect of the appeal by the accused?
If the accused appeals, he waives his right against double jeopardy. The case is
thrown wide open for review and a penalty higher than that of the original
conviction could be imposed upon him.
What should the accused do if the court denies the motion to quash on the
ground of double jeopardy?
He should plead not guilty and reiterate his defense of former jeopardy. In case
of conviction, he should appeal from the judgment, on the ground of double
jeopardy.
When can a case be provisionally dismissed?
A case can only be dismissed provisionally if the accused expressly consents,
and with notice to the offended party. Provisional dismissal does not place the
accused in double jeopardy. But, ff the accused objects to the provisional
dismissal, a revival of the case would place him in double jeopardy.
When does the provisional dismissal become final?

The provisional dismissal of offenses punishable by imprisonment exceeding 6

years or a fine of any amount shall become permanent after 1 year without the
case having been revived.
For offenses punishable by imprisonment of more than 6 years, the provisional
dismissal shall become permanent after 2 years without the case having been
revived.
After the provisional dismissal becomes final, the accused cannot be prosecuted
anymore.

RULE 118 PRE-TRIAL

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.

When is plea bargaining not allowed?

It is not allowed under the Dangerous Drugs Act where the imposable penalty is
reclusion perpetua to death