NOTES:

What is the reason why an accused is presumed to be innocent? Life and liberty is so precious that it
can only be deprived of such if there is compliance with fair play and requirements that will satisfy
fair play.
What is required here is not absolute certainty that he committed the crime, but moral certainty that
there should be no reasonable doubt.
This presumption of innocence is a disputable presumption, not a conclusive one thus, it can be
overcome by contrary evidence that will prove that such presumption is wrong because he is guilty
and that finding of guilt can only be on the basis of evidence that is relevant and admissible.
There can be evidence but because of a person’s Constitutional rights, such evidence is inadmissible.
If such evidence is inadmissible and there is no other strong evidence that he is indeed guilty beyond
a reasonable doubt, he will be acquitted.
But there are contrary presumptions that will overcome presumption of innocence:
Basis: human experience that will shift the burden of the person being charged as presumed to be
guilty instead of being presumed as innocent
a.) unexplained flight

*Presumption in the regularity in the performance of official duties or functions

When the prosecutor finds probable cause, there is presumption in the regularity in the performance
of his duties. Would this prevail over presumption of innocence? No. The presumption of innocence
will still prevail UNLESS the presumption in the regularity carries with it with strong evidence that
the accused is guilty of the crime charged.

*Silence
Would the exercise of a person’s right to remain silence, can an inference be made that he is guilty or
not guilty? No. There can be no inference that can be drawn from such silence of the accused because
he has such right to remain silent.
However if there is overwhelming evidence to prove guilt of the accused and he chooses to remain
silent, he waives his right to present evidence to contradict his guilt. it cannot be taken against you
but it will not favor your cause.

The prosecution will have the first opportunity to present his case that the accused is
guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

Right to be heard by himself or through counsel

 In a criminal proceeding, the right to counsel cannot be waived. But supposed the accused
simply says that he does not want to be represented by a counsel, it is the duty of the court to assign
him a counsel de officio, even in cases where the accused cannot afford one, so that trial can proceed.
Right to counsel is an absolute right during trial however, the right to choose a counsel is not
absolute.
If the right to choose one’s counsel is included in the right to a counsel, it could be abused so
that it can be used as a dilatory tactic to frustrate the ends of justice by the accused simply invoking
his right to have his counsel of choice to represent him and that counsel is not available.
What is the remedy since the right to counsel is absolute? The remedy is for the court to
provide him with one.
The counsel de officio is expected to exert his utmost … and duty to represent the cause of
the accused.
The right to a counsel can only be waived but with conditions during custodial investigation
BUT during trial, you need a counsel.
Appeal is not an essential part of due process except when it is provided for by the
Constitution and by law. Such right to due process can be waived.

Right to be Informed of the Nature and Cause of the Accusation Against Him
When would the accused know of the nature of the cause of accusation against him? During
arraignment. During arraignment, it would be considered formally notifying him of the exact crime
for which he is being charged and tried in Court.
In the information, what must be contained? The designation of the crime (title or name), the
name of the accused, the acts or omissions constituting the crime, the name of the victim, the date
and time of the commission, and where the crime took place or happened.
An act is considered as a crime only if it is defined by law. In the definition of the law, there
are the elements of the crime.
Can the information be amended? Yes, the form and substance of the information can be
amended even without leaf of court BEFORE the arraignment (before the formal reading).
Trial absentia can only be done: (requisites)
When the accused must have been arraigned, informed of the date of trial, absent without justifiable
reason
When accused knows exact accusation against him, he can prepare his defense, he can avail himself
of conviction or acquittal in order that he cannot be prosecuted for the same offense in the future
(right against double jeopardy), so Court would be able to know if the facts under the allegations
would be sufficient to render judgement or to constitute a crime.
When there is an amendment as to the form and substance of the information against him,when will
the right of the accused be prejudiced? There will be prejudice when the defense he prepared in the
original information will no longer be applicable after the information has been amended thus, such
shall not be allowed.
The counsel should explain to the accused the information.
After reading the information, judge will ask the accused’s plea.
*Who will invoke the right to remain silent? it is not the duty of the Court of the accused to inform
accused of this right but the defense counsel’s.
When accused pleads guilty, it is the duty of the Court:
To ask searching questions as to the voluntariness of the accused to plead guilty;
To ask the prosecution to present evidence to establish the exact degree of culpability of the accused
(notwithstanding that he pleaded guilty to the crime); and
To allow the accused to present his evidence if he so desires.

Right to a Speedy, Impartial, and Public Trial

Impartial Trial
Court must be neutral (not favoring or discriminating anyone; dispenses justice without fear or favor)
Public Trial
In order that the public be able to witness how the court dispenses justice
While public trial is guaranteed by Consti, are there instances when the public will be
disallowed/barred from witnessing trial? Yes, there are some instances (cases of rape). It won’t be a
violation of the accused’s right to public trial.
Speedy trial
There should be no inordinate, capricious, or oppressive delay
Delay is capricious or oppressive when… 4 factors established by SC:
a.) The length of the delay
b.) The reason for the delay
c.) Whether the accused invoked his right against the delay
d.) What would be the prejudice caused to the accused by such delay
 Importance: If it will be found that there is violation of the accused's right to speedy trial, the
case can be dismissed or even to the point that he will be acquitted because it will be considered that
there is no sufficient evidence on the part of the prosecution.

*Motion to Set Trial - for the Court to resolve pending motions

The right to speedy trial is not the same with the right of persons to speedy disposition of their cases.
Speedy disposition refers to criminal, civil, and administrative proceedings.

Trial in absentia
Requisites:
The accused has already been arraigned
He has been duly notified of the date of the trial
His absence is unjustified
Can trial proceed? Yes. Those who escaped would no longer benefit.

TRIAL IN ABSENCIA
1. The accused should have been duly arraigned
2. The accused have been duly notified about the trial
3. The accused was absent -no valid reason-
+Trial will still proceed

+warrant of arrest be issued

The branch man’s duty to bring the accused in court

= supposed the accused would go abroad- the accused need permission (Jurisdiction purposes)- not
a violation of his constitutional right to travel

 Accused meeting the witnesses

1. Test the testimony of the witnesses
2. The court would be able to see the demeanor of the witness once they take a stand to
witness- the witness most likely cannot lie in front of the accused
=the cross examination will be done by the lawyers of the accused
*exparte affidavit
  Actions of the counsel is the act of the accused, the accused is bound to the action of the
accused unless the error committed is in denial of due process

Exception of meeting the accused face to face

Compulsory process :

1.suobpeona – attendance i8n court to testify

-the person might be in possession of certain documents which are to be presented in court

- It is the duty of the court to compel a person to testify in court

-if the person refuse to come to court and testify w/o justifying reason not withstanding the subpoena-
held in contempt- warrant of arrest

Sec 21, Art III

Double jeopardy (=Jeopardy- a person put in danger)

“No person shall be put in jeopardy for the same offense”

1.identity of offense

2.Identity of acts

Art III, sec 21

1. A person committed an act that can give rise to more than one offenses which are different from
one another
-he can be charge for committing 2 different offenses even if offenses arise from 1 act

2. A person committed an act- gambling against penal code and ordinance

-he cannot be charge for violating an ordinance and another for violating the penal code- cannot be
prosecuted by both