You are on page 1of 10


 In the presence of a counsel of the person

Miranda vs. Arizona – 2 hours interrogation and

under investigation
 1 and 2 cab be waived while 3 cannot be

was able to obtain oral and written admissions
1. Uneducated
2. Mental instability
3. Never informed of his rights to avail the
services of an attorney
4. Not reminded that he has right against
Section 12.Article III of the 1987 Philippine

Exclusionary Rule:
 “Any confession or admission obtained in
violation of this or Section 17 hereof shall
be inadmissible in evidence against him.”
1. Uncounselled confession or admission
2. Coerce confession or admission
What kind of investigation?
 Do not apply Miranda rights to all kinds

1. To remain silent – actions such as
reenacting demonstrating, writing is not a






intelligence therefore included to the right
2. To have a competent and independent

of investigation


be provided with one – at what stage? In






police level
 Investigated by the police

counsel preferably of his own choice or to
all stages in a criminal investigation,


 Consider





presupposes that a suspect was arrested

independent counsel, their principal is the

without a warrant
 If there is a warrant – no right to

government – interest is adverse
3. To be informed of such right
4. No to be subjected to the use of torture,
force, violence, threat, intimidation or
any other means which vitiates the free
will – RA 9745 – anti Torture Law
5. Not to be held in Secret detention places,
solitary, incommunicado, or other similar
forms of detention are prohibited.





surrendered to the court who issue the
warrant – there is already a probable
 Is any question initiated by a law officers
after a person is taken into custody or
otherwise deprived his freedom of action
(arrest without a warrant)
 Also presupposes that the questioning is

 The rights are available the moment an

not a mere general inquiry
 General inquiry – the policeman is still

arrest, with or without warrant?, are

fishing for evidence and no idea who is

 In writing and

the suspect
 Miranda

Reminded that any statement he made to the barangay hall. When Respondent – before the prosecutor – prosecutor’s level appellant talked with the mayor as a confidant ELEMENTS: uncounseled confession to him did not violate his and not as a law enforcement officer. Even though there is no actual arrest.Police line Up? – QUALIFY – when the Suspect – someone refuted to be involved in a crime. his 1. it is already a custodial investigation – the two requisites not necessarily complement People vs. When a person is invited to the police station he is not yet under custodial investigation voluntarily you and go the to the police talked to private person – extrajudicial confession is admissible and the Miranda rights is not yet applicable When  When police station already asked questions. Entitled to Miranda right? YES. Andan court. Eleven guidelines policeman to follow Barangay tanod caught you. not elicited through questioning by the  When there is custodial investigation authorities. Cannot afford a lawyer. no criminal information filed yet – police police ask a question or there is a combination of level questionings – Miranda rights is applicable Accused – a formal charge was already filed in People vs. No custodial investigation may be undertaken without the presence of a lawyer 6.not a part of preliminary investigation of the prosecutor will be used against him 3. Mahiway outside the police station. There was an arrest or 2. The police start questioning a suspect even People vs.  Cannot invoked the right against private individual  Cannot also be invoked in administrative proceedings and against employer who conduct questioning  Apply only to CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION . The questioning is not a mere general inquiry – aim to a particular suspect constitutional rights. Thus. Ayson Miranda rights not applicable to administrative proceedings each other. Read and recite to the suspect his rights are in a language known to him and able to questioned. and there you Barangay tanod are agent of person in authority. brought you 1. but given in an ordinary manner whereby Miranda rights now applies appellant orally admitted having committed the crime. To be assisted by a lawyer at all times and at all stages 4. there is already a probable caused to The mayor did not know that appellant indict him to a particular crime – court level was going to confess his guilt to him. it has been held that the constitutional procedures on custodial investigation do not apply to a spontaneous statement. Not only to allowed to communicate with his lawyer but also with his family . a lawyer shall be afforded by the police 5. understand it 2.

Process waiver for formal hearing 3. Court decision outside jurisdiction – null and void 2. If the case falls under summary procedure – no requirement of trail type proceeding – mere affidavits will suffice 2. Promulgation of the judgment – 4.relatives doctor priest and other person in aid 7. MTC Jurisdiction – all b. Motion to quash – no ground for trial – Criminal Due Process Elements: 1.Suspect can invoke the right to remain silent any time 11. Impartial court or tribunal – cold neutrality of impartial judge Right of (Formal) Hearing Can be waive? – Not all times 1. Order presentation of evidence to determine . In order the judge: i.Policeman should also explain that any evidence in violation of the Miranda rights are inadmissible as evidence law be – govern by rules on the evidence c. Court of competent jurisdiction a. Sandiganbayan – depends on salary grade – 24 – commit a crime during the performance of their function e. RTC – 6 years and above d. Criminal information could be stop in any time when there is manifest that he does not wish to be question 10. There are already processes of law a. Accused must be given notice and opportunity to be heard Three stages in a criminal trail where the presence of the accused is mandatory 1. He can Waive the right 8. Accused proceeded against orderly processes of law – TRIAL AND HEARING remedial must sentencing and reading the decision RIGHT OF THE ACCUSED stipulations of the parties b. Identification process 3. Reminded that the waiver should be in writing and in the presence of a counsel 9. Require the prosecutor to prove the precise degree of culpability of the accused iii. Jurisdiction – the power to hear and decide a case – not subject to crimes punishable by less than 6 years c. Demurral evidence – saying to the court that the evidence of the prosecutor is not sufficient to prove the guild beyond reasonable doubt 4. If the crime is a heinous crime – hearing is a part of due process b. victim and the state – due process in criminal trial authority of court law 5. Arraignment 2. The judgment rendered was within the When do they operate?  When at the time a criminal case is already filed against the accused  Applicable only to criminal proceedings  As one of the due process  Equally entitled to the right – accused. No such thing as trial by ordeal 3. Searching question to determine the voluntariness of the plea ii. Arraignment – accused plea of guilt does it mean there will be no hearing? a.

Sandiganbayan below  Jeopardy will not attack  First trail is a sham (mock trial)  Violative of due process on the part of the  RTC not punishable by death. property. life imprisonment or reclusion Perpetua – bail a Alonte vs. surety  Murder  Demurrer of evidence – denied by the judge opined elements sufficient to the conviction for the crime of homicide and not murder  BAIL? Yes – homicide – bailable Who can invoke?  Even if no formal charge yet as long as there is deprivation of freedom  Warrantless arrest – article 125 of the RPC Extradition Treaty Two decisions: 1. reclusion perpertua and death – bail not available if evidence of guilt is strong  If there is petition and capital punishment is involve hearing is mandatory and necessary (basco and baylon) 2. Court martial proceedings administrative proceedings 2. Hong Kong vs. Judge Purganan – bail is not available because it is sui generis (class of its own) not a civil. prosecutor for they don’t have the chance Matter of discretion – RTC to CA (appeal). RTC to prove the guilt of the accused reclusion Perpetua and life imprisonment – a matter of right convicted of a crime not punished by death. Olalia – deprived of liberty – right of liberty should prevail therefore bail is applicable Waiver?  Yes – People vs Judge Donato  Personal right therefore can be waive . Capital offense such as life imprisonment. criminal and Exceptions: 1.exempting and mitigating  If tried in civil court – a matter of circumstances discretion  Military court –cannot avail Comendor Tatad vs. Savellano  No cold impartiality or neutrality  The judge is ordered to inhibit himself matter of discretion  Capital punishment were evidence of guilt is not strong from the case Bacolon BAIL  Security given for the release of a person in the custody of the law  Purpose: to secure provisional liberty of the accused pending trial  Type: case. Sandiganbayan  Unreasonable delay  Violated his right to criminal due process Matter of right – all cases in MTC – for tried cases involving punishment of 6 years and Galman vs. US Government vs.

The apprehending officer/team having before a person can be convicted to a confiscation. in the presence of the accused or the can be convicted  Evidence proof of guilt beyond reasonable person/s from whom such items were confiscated and/or seized. immediately after seizure and crime – evidence  There must be evidence before a person photograph the same 2. and any Burden of proof Can counsel. Umipang  Burden of proved is not a part of the be public inventory and be given a copy thereof People vs. or his/her doubt o Absolute certainty? – no – moral representative elected required  Job of the state  Prosecutors establish all the elements of sign the who copies shall be of the  chain of custody is not established – drugs confiscated through buy bust – not accused but for the prosecutor properly inventoried a law chain of custody absolute? immediately establishing/assuming the guilt of an accused? Dumlao vs. Dramayo there a Department of Justice (DOJ). Right to bail is not impaired by the  Natural person for it is applicable only to suspension of the privilege of writ of habeas corpus criminal case Feeder vs CA  Can be invoke only by living individual PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE and not an artificial person – corporation partnership etc are not entitled  To assume a fact as real Why a right?  Mere suspicion is not synonymous with Chain of Custody Rule – RA 9165 guilt  Suspicion is not an evidence  There must be a factual or legal basis 1. Aguilar     illegal drugs are seized failure to comply sec 21 of RA 9165 not photograph? Is not fatal as long as the integrity of the evidence is preserved o Actual drugs actually exist and can be presented in court Equipoise Rule/ Equiponderance  WHERE THE EVIDENCE OF THE PARTIES IS EVENLY BALANCED. who can invoke it? What kind of person? to official People vs. representative from the media and the certainty on the part of the judge the crime  Defense counsel find a weak point or People vs. THE CASE WILL BE RESOLVED AGAINST . COMELEC  A criminal information was filed in court and there is no conviction yet  However the law immediately disqualified a person from running a person who have a pending case in court  Not allowed it violates the presumption of innocence If it is really a right. physically inventory and initial custody and control of the drugs shall.

Quintal  Rape case  Victim visited the accused six times in jail  Entitles the accused of acquittal based on the presumption of innocence People vs.THE PLAINTIFF. the scale of justice should favor in the presumption of THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD BY HIMSELF AND COUNSEL  The accused can defend himself provided that it is under the jurisdiction of the MTC and not RTC  “a man who had himself as his lawyer is a fool”  Objective presenter of facts is a lawyer’s job innocence for it was not overcome People vs. and when evidence is equally balance.  If the evidence presented is susceptible to two interpretation. THUS IN CRIMINAL CASES THE ACCUSED MUST BE ACQUITTED AND IN CIVIL CASES. Agbayani  There can be no negative inference against the judge during the course of the trail  The court is presumed to have followed the procedure in criminal trial Accused represented by counsel de officio – is not synonymous to denial of proper counsel because the lawyer is free – no negative inference RIGHT TO BEINFORMED OF THE NATURE AND CAUSE OF ACCUSATION  Part of due process  Consider the act of the accused as well Criminal Information – best document or as the acts of the complainant  In case of doubt uphold the presumption Elements: of innocence instrument to informed the accused . THE COMPLAINT MUST BE DISMISSED. Fulgado People vs. Maraorao How to treat inconsistent statements in a criminal trail  Minor inconsistencies are considered as budgets of truth  Inconsistent statement in prosecution witnesses on material points entitled the accused an acquittal based on his right to presumption of innocence  SC – even the most intelligent man may have no skill in the science of law particularly in the rules of procedure  And without a counsel he may be convicted not because he is guilty but because he does not know how to established his innocence  Absolute right and cannot be waived  Also part of due process People vs Tumambing  Rape case  Days lapsed when she was sure that the person presented to her was really the accused  The accused entitled to an acquittal based on presumption of innocence – when the rape victim fail to immediately identify the alleged attacker when presented to her – contrary to human experience People vs. one in consistent with the innocence of the accused and one favor to the prosecutor.

1. 3. Any aggravating circumstances should stated in the criminal information. IMPARTIAL AND PUBLIC TRIAL Speedy – not the same with speedy disposition of cases – former applies only to criminal trial. The name of the accused should be  Upon filing of an information the accused stated in the criminal information – should be arraign within 30 days  15 days from arraignment accused john/jane Doe – valid 2. WRIT WRIT WRIT WRIT OF OF OF OF HABEAS CORPUS AMPARO HABEAS DATA KALIKASA Section 15. 4. The name or designation of the offense by any statute should be stated in the criminal information 3. Time. The acts or omission complaint constituting the elements of a crime should be information 4. Nazareno) it does not violate the constitution – time is not an integral part of rape – it the act of rape itself or the sexual intercourse secure the attendance of witnesses and production of witnesses  Subpoena witness – subpoena ad TRIAL IN ABSENTIA  To hold unnecessary delays  How to acquire jurisdiction – warrant of arrest or voluntary surrender  When presense of the accused  Criminal statute is unclear – entitled to acquittal RIGHT TO SPEEDY. conspiracy also – mitigating etc – not The information state that the rape was within the span  Right of the accused  Public trial is different from publicized trial RIGHT OF COMPULSARY PROCESSES  Right of 9 years - complainant cannot recall the time and date (people vs. date and place of the offense  If the criminal information also should be tried  180 days from arraignment the case FOUR WRITS THAT THE SUPREME COURT CAN ISSUE 1. latter applies to all kinds of proceedings is mandatory: o Arraignement o Identification o Promulgation of judgment Void for vagueness rule: RA 8493 – Speedy Trial Act to testificandum  Documents – subpoena duces tecum Original charge is murder committed trial direct and cross examination should be done in one day defective be should have been decided  One witness rule per day  If a witness is presented in the course of criminal Jane/John Doe – invalid 5. The name stated in the of the offended part – it violate Who can invoke the right? is the constitutional right to be informed 6. 2. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended except in cases .

all citizens may AGAINST SELF INCRIMINATION  Apply to all types of proceedings  There is a compulsion but what kind? – you compel a person to do something  Police lineup and provide sample eg saliva is not violative of the right  Apply to testimonial compulsion be required. Neither shall death something oral verbal written or parol  Also connected with the right to remain penalty be imposed. No person should be detained solely by reason of his political beliefs and Against whom?  Against charge  Other crimes not in the information is the government and private aspiration persons No voluntary servitude in any form shall exist Writ of Amparo – there is immediate danger to life. signature sampling is or handwriting violative of such act – intellectual act not a mechanical act – mechanical sample act are those biological reasons involving heinous crimes. Excessive fines shall not be imposed.of invasion or rebellion when the public safety When available requires it  Anytime but when the accused is already Writ of Habeas Corpus – A writ (court order) at the witness stand – considered waiver  Only question pertinent to the crime that commands an individual or a government official who has restrained another to produce the prisoner at a designated time and place so that the court can determine the legality of custody and decide whether to order the prisoner's release. under conditions provided by law. nor cruel. the Congress already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion The employment of physical. Any death penalty that  Asking perpetua. or degrading punishment against any prisoner or detainee or the use of substandard or inadequate penal facilities under subhuman conditions shall be dealt with by law. to render personal military or civil service Section 19. . psychological. liberty and property committed by the government or private person except as a punishment for a crime whereof the party shall not been duly convicted INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE  Court issue it to stop such act Exception: 1 2 SPEEDY DISPOSITION OF CASE  Justice delay is justice denied  Apply to all types of proceedings When convicted to a crime Section 4 Article II – the government may call upon the people to defend the state and. unless. for compelling silent  No negative inference can be drawn from hereafter provides for it. degrading or inhuman – punishment inflicted. still covered of the right against selfincrimination  Also applies to ordinary witnesses Section 18. in the fulfillment thereof.

Accused was previously acquitted/convicted/ or the case was otherwise dismissed or terminated without his expressed consent. cannot be re-filed after arraignment. This amounts to double jeopardy. Requisites: Demurrer to Evidence .within 2 yrs.  -proscribes re-filing of the same case against the same accused. 4. the full power of the state is raged against the accused. the accused can file such saying that the prosecution Failed to discharge its burden of proving the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. 3. .  -there is only one criminal trial involving the same accused regardless of the result. Webb) Private prosecutor: to prove civil liability only.but the case may be re-filed without violating the prosecution of the same act  the accused was already tried in a criminal case which either results to acquittal or conviction. Punishable by 6 yrs and below: within 1 yr. and above. . If there is no limit to attempts to prosecute the accused for the same offense after he has been acquitted.1. Punishable 6 yrs.has jurisdiction  No imprisonment for non-payment of Poll Tax  BP 22 does not violate this constitutional provision.already filed in People vs. Rationale: Jessica Alfaro is not a credible witness. Valid complaint/information. Complaint must be filed before a competent Permanent dismissal. *from the date of provisional of dismissal Not re-filed: Permanent dismissal.g. Charge does not define a crime. E. so another trial involving the same case against the same accused is prohibited. MR was filed by Lauro Vizconde. Instances when the accused does not want to enter a plea: The court presumes that it will enter a plea of “not guilty”  Motion to Quash. Provisional dismissal- with the expressed consent and permission of the accused. Accused should have entered a plea. … rule on double jeopardy.after the prosecution already rested its case. -can be re-filed subject to certain periods prescribed by law. (PP v. Echagaray court Preliminary investigation not included  Cruel or inhuman? – no  It is beyond our power to determine  Political question 2. –In criminal cases.remedy to an accused DOUBLE JEOPARDY     before entering a plea  -asking for the dismissal of the case on Right and process Part of remedial law – criminal procedure Act punish by law and ordinance Conviction shall be a bar to the certain grounds allowed by law. -double jeopardy will apply.

1. -PROSPECTIVE dapat! 2. e. (Bautista v. Sandiganbayan and Tita Meldy) BILL OF ATTAINDER Being a State Witness tantamounts to -proscribes dismissal of the case. Tita Shawy) in one criminal information.punishes an act through legislation penalty without the . People) automatic benefit of trial. informations which should have been embodied Hence. double jeopardy will accrue. 2. Rape  (PP v. entering a plea of guilt without the consent of the offended party.g. not being able to fully present evidence. Separate crimes filed in different criminal Court?  -a grant to this amounts to an acquittal.  Exceptions: against . -imposes a higher penalty e. Denial of due process particularly on the part -aggravates the crime of the prosecution. Wrong appreciation of the crime. double jeopardy will not apply. (Villareal v. (Jason Ivler case) 4. In a supervening event. non-compliance with obligation to testify fellow accused and failed to tell EVERYTHING. Absolute? NO. EX POST FACTO LAW 2 exceptions: 1. Grave abuse of discretion- error on -punishes an act which was not punishable at jurisdiction. the court. whimsical exercise on the part of the time it was committed. with an expressed Motion of Leave of 3.g.