1. What are the rights of the accused in a criminal proceeding?

Ans:
(a) To be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved beyond reasonable
doubt.
(b) To be informed of the nature and cause of accusation against him.
(c) To be present and defend in person and by counsel at every stage of the
proceedings, from arraignment to promulgation of the judgment.
(d) To testify as a witness in his own behalf but subject to cross-examination on
matters covered by direct examination. His silence shall not in any manner
prejudice him.
(e) To be exempt from being compelled to be a witness against himself.
(f) To confront and cross-examine the witnesses against him at the trial.
(g) To have compulsory process issued to secure the attendance of witnesses
and production of other evidence in his behalf.
(h) To have speedy, impartial and public trial.
(i) To appeal in all cases allowed and in the manner prescribed by law.

2. Does presumption of innocence admit exemptions?

Ans:
Yes. This constitutional guarantee cannot be overthrown unless the prosecution has
established by such quantum of evidence sufficient to overcome this presumption of
innocence and prove that a crime was committed and that the accused is guilty
thereof. The presumption of innocence is not meant to be forever. It ends when it is
overcome in a final conviction. There is only one type of quantum of evidence which
overcomes the presumption — proof beyond reasonable doubt. Without such quantum
of evidence, the accused is entitled to an acquittal. Proof beyond reasonable doubt is
indispensable to overcome the constitutional presumption of innocence

3. When does right to counsel arise?

The Bill of Rights guarantees the right of counsel to an accused (Sec. 14[2]), Article
III, 1987 Constitution of the Philippines). Under Sec. 1(c) of Rule 115, the accused
has the right to defend in person and by counsel at every stage of the proceedings,
from arraignment to promulgation of judgment".

In criminal cases, the right of an accused person to be assisted by a member of the bar
is immutable. Otherwise, there would be a grave denial of due process. Thus, even if
the judgment had become final and executory, it may still be recalled, and the accused
afforded the opportunity to be heard by himself and counsel.

4. Is the client bound by his lawyer’s mistake?

5.What is the difference between waiver or right to counsel during

custodial investigation and during trial?
Ans:

6. Is the right to counsel absolute?

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.
7. Is right to counsel applicable in administrative investigation?

There is no law, jurisprudence or rule which mandates that an employee should

be assisted by counsel in an administrative case. On the contrary, jurisprudence
is in unison in saying that assistance of counsel is not indispensable in
administrative proceedings.

While investigations conducted by an administrative body may at times be akin

to a criminal proceeding, the fact remains that under existing laws, a party in an
administrative inquiry may or may not be assisted by counsel, irrespective of the
nature of the charges and of respondent's capacity to represent himself, and no
duty rests on such body to furnish the person being investigated with counsel.

Thus, the right to counsel is not imperative in administrative investigations

because such inquiries are conducted merely to determine whether there are
facts that merit disciplinary measures against erring public officers and
employees, with the purpose of maintaining the dignity of government service

8. What is meant by Silence in Rules of Evidence?

9.What is the extent 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.

10.Exceptions to right against self-incrimination?

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

11.What is the purpose of right to confrontation

1. To allow the court to observe the demeanour 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.

12. In people vs Berdaje (99 SCRA 388), how was the compulsory
process to secure attendance of defense witness stressed?
13. What is the purpose of public trial?

14. Is there an exception to the requirement of public trial?

15. In determining whether or not the right to the speedy disposition of

cases has been violated what are the guidelines set under MGen Carlos
Garcia vs. Executive Secretary (G.R. No. 198554, July 30, 2012)?

16. When is the right of the accused to speedy trial deemed violated?
factors to consider (Braza vs Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 195032, February
20, 2013)?

17. What is meant to the notion that right to appeal is not a natural right
but a statutory right?

Cases

1. MGen Garcia vs Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 198554. July 30, 2012
2. Cadet Cudia vs. PMA
3. US vs Katigbak et al. 35 Phil 367
4. Herrera v. Alba and Hon. Cuesta-Vilches, G.R. No.148220
5. JAIME D. DELA CRUZ vs.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, G.R. No. 200748, July 23, 2014
6. Gutang vs People, 390 Phil. 805 (2000).

7. Garcia vs Domingo, 52 SCRA, 143)

8. Braza vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 195032, February 20, 2013

9. Anita Ramirez vs people, G.R. 197832, October 2, 2013