Rule 119 a.
a. Whether or not the failure to grant a continuance would likely *the decision to employ the accused as a state witness must necessarily
TRIAL
Sec. 1 Time to prepare for trial - after a plea of not guilty is entered; the
accused shall have at least 15 days to prepare for trial. The trial shall commence
within 30 days from receipt of the pre – trial order.
Effect of not bringing the accused to trial within the prescribe period – if
the accused is not brought to trial in accordance within the time limit set by
Sec. 6 of Rule 119, the information may be dismissed upon the motion of the
accused. The ground for dismissal is the denial of his right to speedy trial.
For the 1st 12 calendar month -180 days
For the 2nd 12 month period – 120 days
For the 3rd 12 month period 80 days
(Rule 119, Sec. 6)
Delays to be excluded in computing the period for commencement of the
trial
a. Delay resulting from an examination of the physical and
mental condition of the accused.
b. Delay resulting from proceedings with respect to other
criminal charges against the accused.
c. Delay resulting from extraordinary remedies against
interlocutory orders.
d. Delay resulting from pre – trial proceedings; provided that
the delay foes not exceed 30 days.
e. Delay resulting from orders of inhibition or proceedings
relation to change of venue of cases or transfer from other
courts.
f. Delays resulting from a finding of the existence of a
prejudicial questions
g. Delay resulting from the mental incompetence or physical
inability of the accused to stand trial
When delay or suspension of trial is justified by reason of the absence of a
witness – it refers to the period of delay resulting from the absence or
unavailability of an essential witness as described in Sec. 3 (b) of Rule 119
meaning his whereabouts are unknown or his whereabouts cannot be
determined by due diligence.
Continuous Trial – as a rule, once commenced, the trial shall continue from
day to day as far as practicable until terminated but it may be postponed for a
reasonable period of time for good cause. To ensure speedy trial, the court shall
set the case for continuous trial on a weekly or other short – term trial calendar
at the earliest possible time.
Trial Period – In no case shall the entire trial period exceed 180 days from the
1st day of trial, except as otherwise authorized by the SC (Sec. 2, Rule 119,
Rule of Court)
Postponement or continuance – a continuance may, among others, be granted
if continuing the proceeding is impossible or would result in a miscarriage of
justice (Sec. 4 (a), Rule 119, Rules of Court)
Factors to be considered for granting continuances or postponements -
postponements are subject to judicial discretion. There are certain factors in
granting continuance.
make a continuation of such proceeding impossible or result in a
miscarriage of justice.
b. Whether or not the case, taken as a whole is so novel, unusual
and complex, due to the number of accused or the nature of the
prosecution, or that it is unreasonable to expect adequate
preparation within the period of time established therein.
(Sec. 4, Rule 119, Rules of Court)
Prohibited grounds for continuance – the rule prohibits a continuance on the
ff grounds
a. Congestion of the courts calendar
b. Lock of diligent preparation
c. Failure to obtain available witnesses on the part of the
prosecutor.
(Sec. 4, Rule 119, in relation to Sec. 3 (f), Rule 119)
How to secure appearance of material witness
a. either party may, upon motion, secure an order from the court
for a material witness to post bail for such sum as may be
deemed proper, if the court is satisfied upon either a proof or
oath that a material witness will not testify when required. (Sec.
14, Rule 119, Rules of Court)
b. if the witness refuses to post bail, the court shall commit him to
prison until he complies or is legally discharged after his
testimony has been taken (Sec. 14, Rule 199, Rules of Court)
Sec. 16 Trial of Several Accused - when two or more accused are jointly
charged with an offense, they shall be tried jointly unless the court in its
discretion and upon motion of the prosecutor or any accused, order separate
trial for one or more accused.
Discharge of Accused to be a state witness; requisites
a. Two or more accused are jointly charged with the commission of
an offense
b. The motion for discharge is filed by the prosecutor before it rests
its case
c. The prosecution is required to present evidence and the sworn
statement of each proposed state witness at a hearing in support
of the discharge
d. The accused gives his consent to be a state witness
e. The trial court is satisfied that:
a. There is absolute necessity for the testimony of
the accused whose discharge is requested
b. There is no other direct evidence available for the
proper prosecution of the offense
committed,except the testimony of said accused;
c. The testimony of said accused can be
substantially corroborated in its material points
d. Said accused does not appear to be the most
guilty.
e. Said accused has not at any time been convicted
of any offense involving moral turpitude.
Note:
*attention id drawn to the requirement that a state witness does not need to be
found to be the least guilty; instead he or she should not “not appear to be the
most guilty” (Jimenez, Jr. Vs. People)
originate from the public prosecutors whose mission is to obtain a successful
prosecution of the several accused before the courts.
Evidence adduced during the discharge hearing - the evidence in support of
the discharge shall automatically form part of the trial (Sec. 17, rule 119, Rules
of Court)
If the court denies the motion for discharge of the accused as a state witness,
his sworn statement shall be inadmissible in evidence (Sec. 17, Rule 119, Rules
of Court)
Effect of discharge of an accused to be a state witness; acquittal – it shall
amount to acquittal and shall be a bar to another prosecution for the same
offense, except if the accused fails or refuses to testify against his co-
accused in accordance with his sworn statement constituting the basis for his
discharge (Sec. 18, Rule 119, Rules of Court)
Of course, if the motion for the discharge of an accused is rightfully
denied, the proposed state witness shall be prosecuted like his co – accused.
Mistake in charging the proper offense - where the has been a mistake in
charging the proper offense and this mistake has become manifest at any time
before judgement and the accused cannot be convicted of the offense charged,
or any other offense necessarily included therein. The court shall order the
filing of new information. The court shall dismiss the original case and
shall commit the accused to answer for the proper offense. The accused
shall not be discharged if there appears good cause to detain him. (Sec. 19,
Rules 119, Rules of Court)
ORDER OF TRIAL
1. The prosecution shall present its evidence; first to prove the
charge and second to prove the civil liability in the proper case.
2. The accused may then present his evidence to prove his defense
and the damages he sustained, if any, arising from the issuance
of a provisional remedy in the case.
3. The prosecution may present its sur-rebuttal evidence, unless the
court allows it to present additional evidence bearing on the
main issue.
4. The accused may present sur-rebuttal evidence, unless the court
allows him to present addional evidence bearning on the main
issue;
5. Upon submission of the evidence of the parties, the case shall be
deemed submitted for decision, unless the court directs them to
aruge orally or to submit written memoranda
(Sec. 11, Rule 119, Rules of Court)
Modification of the order of trial; reverse trial – the order of the trial may be
time modified when the accused admits the act or omission charged in the
complaint or information, but interpose a lawful defense (Sec. 11 (e), rule 119,
Rules of Court; Sec. 1(e), Rule 118, Rules of Court.
Reopening of the proceedings - at any time before the finality of the
judgement of conviction, the judge may, motu proprio or upon motion, with
hearing in either case, re – open the proceedings to avoid miscarriage of justice
(Sec. 24, Rule 119)
A motion to reopen the case to receive further proofs is a recognized procedural
recourse; existing jurisprudence stress the following requirements for re –
opening a case
 1. The re-opening must be before the finality of a judgement of
conviction
2. The order is issued by the judge on his own initiative or upon
motion
3. The order is issued only after a hearing is conducted;
4. The order intends to prevent a miscarriage of justice
5. The presentation of additional and further evidence should be
terminated within 30 days from the issuance of the order
(Cabarles vs Maceda)
Trial in absentia – an accused need not always be present in every hearing
although it is his right to be present, if he so desires from arraignment to the
rendition of the judgement.
While this right to be present may be waived, the rule should not be taken to
mean that the accused may be tried in his absence
Thus, the accused can only be tried in absentia when the following requisites
concur.
a. The accused has already been arrainged.
b. The accused has been duly notified of the trial or hearings
c. The absence of the accused or his failure to appear is unjustified.
(Bernardo VS People)
Instances when the presence of the accused is required
1. At arraignment and plea, whether of innocence or of guilt
2. During trial, whenever necessary for identification purposes
3. At the promulgation of sentence UNLESS it is for a light
offense, in which case, the accused may appear by counsel or
representative
(People Vs. De Grano)
*Sec. 1(b) of Rule 116 requires that the “accused must be present at the
arraignment and must personally enter his plea”
Lack of Formal Offer of evidence during the trial
*Documents which may have been identified and marked as exhibits during
pre-trial or trial but which were not formally offered in evidence cannot, in any
manner, be treated as evidence. Consequently, any evidence that has not been
offered shall be excluded and rejected (Pursuant to Sec. 24, Rule 132 of the
Rules of Court)
When formal offer of evidence is not necessary
*The rule that only evidence formally offered before the trial court can be
considered is relaxed where 2 requisites concur
a. the evidence was incorporated in the records of the case
b. the evidence was duly identified by testimony duly recorded
*furthermore formal offer of evidence is not necessary when
1. the court takes on judicial admissions or draws inferences from such judicial
admissions
2. where the trial court, in judging the demeanor of witnesses, determines their
credibility even without the offer of the demeanor as evidence.
DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE
What is demurrer to evidence? – It is a motion to dismiss that is filed by the
accused after the prosecution has rested its case. It may also be filed in civil
cases.
It may be an objection by one of the parties in an action, to the effect that the
evidence which his adversary produced is insufficient in point law, whether true
or not, to make out a case or sustain the issue.
Demurrer to evidence by the court – the court may, on its own initiative,
dismiss the action without waiting for a demurrer from the accused on the
ground of insufficiency of evidence. However, before it may avail, the court is
required that it must give the prosecution an opportunity to be heard. (Sec. 23,
Rule 119, Rules of Court)
Demurrer to evidence by the accused with leave of court
1. The demurrer to evidence filed by the accused may be
a. With leave of court or
b. Without leave of court
(Sec. 23, Rule 119, Rules of Court)
*The proper remedy of the accused, in case his demurrer to evidence is
denied, is to present his evidence, then to appeal in case he is convicted.
This is because the order denying the motion for leave of court to file the
demurrer to evidence or demurrer itself shall not reviewable by appeal or
certiorari before judgement. (Sec. 23, Rule 119, Rules of Court)
NOT EVERY MOTION TO DISMISS IS A DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE
– a demurrer to evidence must contain what is so fundamental in every
demurrer. It must make reference to the insufficiency of the evidence of the
prosecution and to the evidence on record. Hence, a motion to dismiss is not a
demurrer under Sec. 23 of Rule 19
The court in the case of Cabador vs. People held that in order to determine
whether the motion filed is a demurrer to evidence or just a motion to dismiss,
the following must be considered
1. The allegations in it must be made in good faith
2. The stage of the proceeding at which it is filed
3. The primary objective of the party of filing it.
Thus, it was held that it is a motion to dismiss on the ground of violation of his
right to speedy trial and not a demurrer to evidence.
GRANTING OF DEMURRER IS AN ACQUITTAL – dismissal of a
criminal case by the grant of demurrer to evidence may not be appealed, for to
do so would be to place the accused in double jeopardy. The verdict being one
of acquittal, the case ends there because the ruling granting the demurrer to
evidence is an acquittal and may no long be appealed (Magleo vs De Juan –
Quinagoran
But, although the grant of a demurrer to evidence amounts to an acquittal
and that the order of dismissal is not subject to appeal, it may be reviewed
through certiorari under Rule 65, however, it will not apply to correct errors of
judgement.