Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • CamScanner 01-07-2022 16.13.31

    Uploaded by

    cdg
    6 views12 pages

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    6 views12 pages

    CamScanner 01-07-2022 16.13.31

    Uploaded by

    cdg

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 12
    jgnment (Ba 2007) mode and mans i the formal ner of Avmaignment 6 the OTT of an accused {0 be seen ttl ms ere ae 28 ad oho accused hY be is being him Is purpose i6 £0 OPP Syeh, it is am indispensable rosecuted by the SUN Sind thus, cannot be regarded eae ey ty © Do, eres an et at 22,2012. enable in tinge the 2 carralgnnet .im of the nature and cs othe 1 sions against him. The importance of arraignment fea al gt ofthe cu oe Se nt ie tt then sera Poa fred othe es rh Saran tha tudo fe, dh indi be ably eed aging cored el heel he ie, a are te ee charge te A eet he hu ma Site ull of felon, een a tive sea at are a ried eine hummer ‘Rots Son S850 Seber 1,201) and importance of a8 aunque Effect of the absence of arraignment ‘The absence af arraignment results in the nullity of the proceedings before the tril enue (Taglayv. Daray, 678 SCRA 1300, 650, August 22, 3012). Note, too, that ifthe accused as fot been arraigned, he cannot be tried in absentia (Se. 142]. (Art IHL, 1987 Constitution ofthe Philippines) awake tet cms oreo) ia putyof the court before arraignment. ‘i 1 Before arraignment, the cour sah ia the cust of hv rgh counsel) shim if he desires to $Seeone: and mus asignacunsl doi to deen im, ‘ava he ceed () is allowed to dete himself in person weg nas employed ours! of his cote (See @ ule 176 ules of Cour). ‘This duty is mandatory and the only instance when. the court can arraign without the benefit of counsel is if the ‘accused waives such right and the cour, finding the accused capable, allows him to represent himself in person. If the ‘accused informs the court that he cannot afford a lawyer, and the court has not allowed the accused to represent himself or the accused is incapable of representing himself, the judge thas the duty to appoint counsel de ofcio to give meaning and substance to the constitutional right of the accused to counsel (Gamas v. Oco, 425 SCRA 588, 600-601). The insistence ofthe accused to be arraigned without representation is no reason for the judge to accode readily to his wishes. A judge has the duty to protect the rights of the accused, even against their ‘wishes, when itis clear that he isnot in a position to validly exercise or waive thse rights (Gamas v. Oco, 425 SCRA 588, 603) 2, ‘Thecourt shall appoint as counsel de ofcfo members of the bar in good standing who, by reason of their experience and ability, can competently defend the accused. In localities ‘where members of the bar are not available, the court may appoint any person, resident of the province and of good repute for probity and ability, todefend the accused (Sec. 7, Rule 116, Rales of Court) gotta 7 tated ae Shan the arraignment toe agent 2 es cnc ct ng fans nl ee se-— The acute AY, bln wey il ea en pare ra The eg ft pony ne eet ofthe compan Ba he yee deed ee iat and O17 (agr 100% 3018) 1 cy Se 116, Rules of Cer normation defective a sce rina seared comping Sasa rll ert heshou wrers his plea. Failure to do ap under le 6b otal desired in th Se Sct 5 a it piles Wich dn te: A i Rule 116 is deemed a prohibited contr 0 Sci 9 Guidelines of Continuous Tal a i TAM. No. 1506-10SC(M}2 Sete on Sopteber 1, 207. ment — Upon mi, (Suspension of arraignment . 10 eee ak for the suspension of the cee Bimen inthe following eases: (Bar 2012) { Thesrwsed appears tobe suffering roman encod metal condition whieh elcivly render ‘unio fly understand the charge epint Mi nln thea, nuh threo sal rer is ental examination tects. his confement far such purpose: Aside fom suspension ofthe arraignment he traleaut inate tnd theconfinement an sessed, who's mentally nsnund atthe ime he Annalee ha ‘mute ie trial, in one ofthe hospitals or asylums established for persons thus afflicted (People. Mala, 411 SCRA 327, 238), (i) "There exists prejudicial question; and (ii) There is @ petition for review of the resolution of the prosecutor which is pending at either the Department of Justice, or the Office ofthe President. The period of suspension shall not exceed sixty (60) days counted from the fling of the petition th the reviewing office (See. 11, Rule 116, Rules of Court, ‘Jurisprudence is clear that, with the arraignment of the accused, the DOJ Secretary can no longer entertain the appeal or petition for review because petitioner had already waived or abandoned the same (Gandarosa v. Flores, 527 SCRA 776, 794). ‘Note: A motion to suspend the arraignment based ‘on grounds not stated under Section 11 of Rule 116 shall be deemed a prohibited motion under the Revised Guidelines of Continuous Trial of Criminal Cases (A.M. ‘No, 16:06:10-SC/III[2ovi) effective on September 1, 2017. Under the same Revised Guidelines, a petition to suspend the criminal action on the ground of prejudicial ‘question shall be prohibited when no civil ease has yet been fled (A.M. No, 15-06-10-SC/I} [fui Hence, ‘where a civil case was fled prior to the criminal case, ‘© motion to suspend proceedings on the ground of prejudicial question is considered a meritorious mation. ‘Also isa motion to suspend arraignment on the ground ‘of an unsound mental condition, is an example of a ‘meritorious motion since both grounds are specifically provided for under the Rules of Court, (© Motion toquash—At any time before entering his plea, the accused may move to quash the complaint or information on any ofthe grounds provided for under ‘See, 3 of Rule 117, in relation to Sec. 1 of Rule 117, maa ai a py art o7 AY sit or tn the gation of the charge Se inven objection against ay quisition by the how or assal de ‘therwise, the objection sce ead, 08 SCRA 45, is deomod waived Tripent of the accused constitutes 503). The area iminary investigation ¢¢ Sree a he ee neamount toa Eng A Javestgation, SUCH Wi jos, 516 SCRA 261, 257. of probable cae SCRA 776, 794-795). Gandarone he Supseme Court rejected petitioner’, 2, Im a case nd motion for reconsideration before 7 pended his arraignmens, Ske ale eg According to the SUPFENE fling of an information in court atin me rater egret men ret i the can i en tc rl ate af criminal procedure, logically follows the filing of the than eran Ete reir ey eer mean Sees ee aan (8493 (Ramiscal, Jr. v. Sandiganbayan, 630 SCRA 505, 515). substituted Arraignment under an amended information; Information 1, Where the accused has been already arraigned and sstscquenty, the iformation vay substantially amended ceurren vin co AIAESSIENE AND PLEA ‘mua tn arraignment on the amended information is mandatory ‘ecause the accused has the constitutional right tobe informed ofthe accusttion against him and, more so, beeause the accused hnad repeatedly called the attention ofthe court to the absence farraignment. If he is not arraigned and is convicted under the second information, the conviction constitutes reversible ‘error (Cabangangan v. Concepcion, 95 Phil. 87, 90) 2, Where the amendment is only a to form, there is no need for another preliminary investigation and the retaking Gf the plea of the accused; in substitution of information, another preliminary investigation is entailed and the accused has to plead anew to the new information (Teehankee, Ju ‘Madayag, 207 SCRA 134, 143; Kummer v, People, 705 SCRA 490, 509, September 11, 2013). Kummer v. People further emphasizes that an amend: ment done after the plea and during the trial, does not call for ‘a second plea where the amendment is only as to form such fas the change in the date of the commission ofthe erime of hhomicide. Such amendment does not change the nature of the crime, does not affect the essence of the offense nor deprive the accused of an opportunity to meet the new averment, and isnot prejudicial tothe accused (Kummer. People, 705 SCRA 490, 509, September 11, 2013) 'B, HOW ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA ARE MADE ‘Where arraignment is to be made ‘The accused must be arraigned before the court where the complaint or information was fled or assigned for trial (See. fal, Rule 116, Rules of Court) How arraignment is made ‘The arraignment is made in open court by the judge oF clerk by furnishing the accused with a copy ofthe complaint or information, reading the same in the language or dialect ‘known to him, and asking him whether he pleads guilty or not guilty (Sec. Ifa), Rule 116, Rules of Court eee “epURE 100 pace 7 Ger fon he nto ont waiver of Readiog A, gins for Continuous Ny spine Revise! court upon Deena Pursuant toe iver of there in Criminal Cases, mF gow a w ating in cermin of te se), understanding 2nd expregy th pe counsel, Which concen np accused #28 he mines! Certicate gp ces rl "he on See egret Sa Persgnment The COU sh sol tad te eee pe language or date, tothe (full understan arian the waver 10 DE SESS cused’ full understanding sureth ; rnown thine, 0. na or before approving the same? a Sg SCHIST 2012) tis tobe mace We ey cideles for Continous Tag 1, The Revie Oe llowing schedule rina Bro ratte ving eh se eect Peta — One ) Se ston oer the Peon of ty ec a ante Pe secu th ar alent a8 fom date of shal be st within ac far detained accused, yer a om the ate nd ain on ether by ares or volutary url acai pom detained accused, unless a shorter sae ea oy spel aw oF Supreme. Cou Se “The cout mus st the aragnment ofthe acused inthcromattment ocr inthe cast detained accuse, ein horde t approval bln any ther case. For {Ei purse where the Brcutive Judge and Pairing Sign eto al eplications in cases assigned eo other our they hal crdnate withthe courts to which the Caves te cally esse fo ochedulng purpose, “©) Noten of raiqment and Pre-Trial, — Notice et agent nd prea shall be sent to the accused, hfe ons private complinant or complaining law faforemet agent pblie prosecutor, and witeses ‘ose names apr fn he information fr purposes of +> 7.111 uteie sleatborainng arraignment and pretrial 15-06-10-SC{IN (8). : sic Leal 2. The above rule requires the setting of aragnment and peril onthe same date This means thatthe current rules require the balding ofthe prea ight alter the fraignment. This rules obviously designed to addres delays {phe proceedings, 3, When the case is subject to the Rule on Summary Procedure, the arraignment and preliminary conference shal be held simultaneously. Thus, ifthe accused does not enter & plea of guilty toa lesser offense or to the offense charged in the information, the court shall immediately prooeed with the arraignment and the preliminary conference, and thereafter refer the case to mediation, ifthe case is one subject to mediation (A.M. No. 1.06-10-SC(II[[4fefi). Not allcase ‘subject to the Rule on Summary Procedure are mediatiable (AM. No, 15-06.10-SC(I [iff ‘Arraignment after submission of the case for decision ‘May arraignmentbe madeatter acasehasbeen submitted for decision? The question was answered by the Supreme Court in the affirmative. In a case, accused-appellant assailed his conviction because he claimed that he was not properly arraigned. Since it appeared that he was arraigned only after the case was submitted for decision, he contended that this procedural error was tantamount toa denial of his constitutional right to be informed of the accusation against him. He further argued that his subsequent arraignment did not cure the defect in the trial proceedings because, at the time the petition for bail was heard, the trial court had not yet acquired jurisdiction over his person, Brushing aside the contentions, the Court emphatically stated: “Appellant is mistaken. When the hearings for his petition for bail were conducted, the trial court had pox ceo ca Laure ‘cuarren vut a o | AUIAIGRAENT AND PLEA ‘over his Person. Settleg i a tion is ine juries the perzon OF ENC ecg s | against him was not violated” (People v: Pangilinan, 518 ir Fo “ is i unin Oe unary APPEAEANE. ye ‘SCRA 358, 371-272 citing People v. Cabale, 185 SCRA aes ge HON vee | 140, 145.146; and People v. Atienza, 86 Phil, $76, 579 helen amare I 580; Underscoring supplied). fhe a | Record of arraignment ripe fal mode and manner ‘The areaignment and plea shall be made of record, but pagan te ight of an Acused ty failure to do shallot afet the waliiy ofthe prec consti used the acesation agai, (Gee. Ifo}, Rule 116, Rules of Court). Bred i hs, C0 apprise te pose oar tccdom, eve of his ie presence of he accused essed of he po fhe rime imputed thin, dof esau crime opted hin, ‘The accused must be present atthe arraignment and epentingon te nat him of Why the prosecuting must personally enter his plea (Se. 1], Rule 116, Rules of ath nie gine Bi | | | | 5 Gaur a, agtant_ we, aesened Ar hy | Tor decision. The question is: Were co i gdm ney the the Presence of the offended party price ts 1. The private offended party shall be required to eras arraigned only at this stage ofthe Proceedings ‘appear at the arraignment for the following purposes: (a) plea ‘edo nt think so. Appellants belated arraigomen, thargaining, @) determination of civil liability, and (€ other et im, Thi procedural defect was cred matters requiring his presence (Sec. If, Rule 116, Rules of i a pce pariated in the trial without raising Cour). his ent ad yet to be arraigned. In 7 ‘any objection th 2 pea even cross-examined the prosecution In ease the offended party fails to appear despite fact, his counsel even due notice, the court may allow the accused to enter a plea tins His cuss active particpation inthe of uty to leser offense which fe necesaiyintuded in engine tunel would ne ‘the offense charged withthe conformity ofthe trial prosecutor ‘hjeted and informed thecourtofthisblunder. Moreover, lone (Sec il, Rule 116, Rules of Cowes) no potest was made when appellant was subsequently ‘ , oa a wale i SPE tan pian of ot uy hab eared (ar 08, 163 ‘ndertaken bythe trial court. Ie is only now, after being convicted and sentenced to two death sentences, that | 1. Aside from an actual plea of not guilty, @ plea of appellant cries that his constitutional right has been | ‘not guilty shall be entered for the accused if he (a) refuses to violated. I is elready too late to raise this procedural plead; (6) makes a conditional plea (See. tf), Rule 116, Rules defo. This Court ill not alow it xxx Since appellants of Court; (©) pleads guilty but presents exculpatory evidence Fights and interests were not prejudiced by ths lapse in in which ease the guilty plea shall be deemed withdrawn and ‘rosedure it only fll that his constitutional right t© plea of not guilty shall be entered (Sec. 1d), Rule 116, Rules ‘informed ofthe nature and cause of the accusation of Court. octane aan of not ult, ering a Plc Sti bye ‘rial court, are curing © pe waiver of the rg Bore doe ot meses ye uation the din? fe ah gon of 0 incidental x carte a nag me ee People. Pug be factsin the informa, eq admits the facts in thenformayg Waentbeatcuse oy ee acts a8 charged Because pura tnt i er ener © Pes oF nt guy feared for BE. py 120- it (People v. Bat! fo be considered conditional jp i; pin the imposition of @ pengly 100 SCRA 155, 16.16, 7 with homicide bt aye ile penal tbe than dea thc npn Pe eve tha eked appa rmenalty, such does not make his pleg of requested for ese pent be an admission ofthe fey ale remeparging robbery with homicide ay formation

    You might also like