Subject: Criminal Procedure

Name: Chelsea Princess O. Cabalquinto

Year: JD-1A
Date of Branch Visit: November 18, 2022

It felt surreal to be back in a courtroom. The last time I was in one, I was a witness
in a criminal case that turned my life around 360 degrees. I was present from start to
finish, and, thank God, the case was dismissed. It was an exhausting and traumatic
experience one can ever have in his life, but I got over it. A life-changing event in my
whole life and that is one of the reasons why I wanted to be a lawyer and seeing in reality
innocent people put on trial and the burden to prove it and how it consumes the time of
your life proving your innocence. Somehow, I am familiar with some parts of the rules of
court as I was hands-on with the criminal case I was involved in. But now, I am back in
the courtroom, no longer a witness, but a student, to observe, and learn the courtroom's
tortuous proceedings, especially in criminal cases where I am currently enrolled.

It was a mixed feeling for me to hear the sound of the gavel again. I was excited
to see what we were about to hear in the 8 cases scheduled for hearing, but at the same
time felt weird as I reminisced about the time when I was a witness. But nevertheless, I
am more focused on seeing in action the procedures we discussed during class.

There were 4 types of procedures that involved civil and criminal cases namely:
(1) Motion to declare defendants in default and to render judgment based on the pleading;
(2) Promulgation; (3) Arraignment; (4) and lastly, Pre-Trial conference.

The first case was a civil case, First Standard Finance Corporation vs. SPS.
Josephine Balbastro and Eddy Dan Villaruel, and it was my first time to see where the
plaintiff moved to declare the defendants in default due to failure to respond. I have really
no idea yet how civil cases proceed but this case was definitely one to take note of. Before
Judge Trespeces banged the gavel, it was also mentioned that defendants should be
notified, then lawyers asked permission to leave the court. Although in this type of case,
plaintiffs were not present as they did not necessarily need to appear as the lawyer was
representing them and in fact that it was a Motion to declare defendants in Default,
however, their presence will be required during Pre-trial proceedings according to the
Rules of Civil Procedure

The next case was one of the cases that stood out for me. It was an arraignment
for 2 criminal cases filed against the same person, People v. Samuel Tiongco. During the
arraignment, the complainant was not present, only the Public Prosecutor. In the open
court, lawyers of both parties introduced themselves, Prosecutor Dequila representing
the State and Atty. Robledo appeared on behalf of Atty. Cataluna, the main counsel for
the accused. The accused was then called and asked to confirm his name in the complaint
filed. The purpose is to make sure the specific identification of the person to whom the
commission of an offense is being imputed so that the court may acquire jurisdiction over
his person and inform him of the facts. This is in accordance with Section 7, Rule 110 of
the Rules of Court. When the accused confirmed, he was then asked what language he
preferred in accordance with Section 1, Rule 116 of the Rules of Court which states, “The
arraignment shall be made in open court by the judge or clerk by furnishing the accused
with a copy of the complaint or information, reading the same in the language or dialect
known to him, and asking him whether he pleads guilty or not guilty”. It is one of the most
important parts of arraignment, which is to provide the accused with a reading of the crime
with which he has been charged. Thus, without the translation of the information in a
language understood by the accused, Sec 1 of Rule 116 of the Rules of Court would not
be carried out.

The accused was then asked one of the most important questions of all, “How do
you plead?”. It pertains to the matter which the accused on his arraignment, alleges in
answer to the charges against him. After the accused pleaded not guilty, Judge
Trespeces then informed everyone in open court that the pre-trial conference shall be
held on December 2, 2022, 10 days after the arraignment. Since one of the cases is a
violation of municipal or city ordinance, it falls under the Revised Rules on Summary
Procedure which does not require preliminary investigation in accordance with Section 8,
Rule 112 of the Rules of Court.
Subject: Criminal Procedure
Name: Chelsea Princess O. Cabalquinto
Year: JD-1A
Date of Branch Visit: November 18, 2022

I have also noted that Judge Trespeces said the cases were non-mediatable.
Additionally, the 2 cases were consolidated in accordance with Section 22, Rule 119 of
the Rules of Court, consolidation of trials of related offenses. This contemplates a
situation where separate information is filed: (1) For offenses founded on the same facts;
(2) For offenses which form part of a series of offenses of similar nature character. In
these cases, the charges may be tried jointly at the court’s discretion. The object of
consolidation of trials of related offenses is to avoid multiplicity of suits, guard against
oppression or abuse, prevent delay, clear congested dockets, simplify the work of the trial
court, and save unnecessary costs and expenses. However, one of the most exciting
parts was the defense lawyer said there is, yet a counter-affidavit filed. Due to this
circumstance, Judge Trespeces allowed the defendant’s party to submit the counter-
affidavit within 10 days and furnish copies to the prosecutor’s office and the court.

The next cases were for Pre-trial conferences. The pre-trial conference is
conducted for the expeditious disposition of the case. What happens at the conference is
more than what meets the eye. The pre-trial conference considers the following: (1) Plea
bargaining; (2) Stipulation of facts; (3) Marking for identification of evidence; (4) Waiver
of objections to the admissibility of evidence; (5) Modification of the order of trial if the
accused admits the charge but interposes a lawful defense (reverse trial); lastly, (6) other
matter that will promote a fair and expeditious trial of the civil and criminal aspects of the
case.

I have observed in the case of People v. Abitang, public and private prosecutors
were present as well as the counsel for the accused. Judge Trespeces also mentioned
looking for a date for marking of evidence and making sure to bring all original documents.
The Original Document Rule provides: “When the subject of inquiry is the contents of a
document, writing, recording, photograph or other record, no evidence is admissible other
than the original document itself xx x.” The accused’s lawyer, Atty. Tañeza, said that they
have more than 60 documents to be presented, then Judge Trespeces said in open court
to have all these documents brought in court for comparison of evidence to be the basis
of exhibits during pre-trial proceedings. It was a means of making more effective use of
hearing time and to otherwise aid in the disposition of the proceeding or the settlement
thereof. I have correlated this in accordance with Sections 1 and 2, Rule 118 of the Rules
of Court. After the pre-trial conference, a pre-trial order shall be issued. This will serve as
the bible for the rest of the proceedings.

The other cases for the pre-trial conferences did not go through the same events
as People v. Abitang. In the case of People v. Hulleza, a motion for postponement and
resetting was offered and the complainant was not present. In the case of People v.
Bejasa, the accused is imprisoned, and the counsel of the accused appeared in court and
notified her withdrawal of representation, and that the accused has sought new counsel.
Due to this circumstance, Judge Trespeces sets a new date for the pre-trial conference
so the new counsel can review the case and prepare for trial as it is the right of the
accused to be present and defended by counsel at every stage of the proceeding. In
accordance with Rule 115 of the Rules of Court, it is the accused who must assert his
right to counsel.

During the court observation, the promulgation is the highlight of all proceedings
for me. It’s the official proclamation or announcement of judgment. It consists of reading
the judgment or sentence in the presence of the accused and any judge of the court
rendering the judgment in accordance with Rule 120 of the Rules of Court. In the case of
People v. Minguez, the Clerk of the court read the decision in open court and the accused
was standing accompanied by his counsel. While the clerk of court was reading the
judgment, a few clerical errors were noted, and Judge Trespeces said an amendment of
the decision will be made and is a nunc pro tunc. As a general rule, final and executory
judgments are immutable and unalterable, except under these recognized exceptions, to
wit: (a) clerical errors; (b) nunc pro tunc entries which cause no prejudice to any party;
and (c) void judgments. The accused was then informed that within 15 days from the
Subject: Criminal Procedure
Name: Chelsea Princess O. Cabalquinto
Year: JD-1A
Date of Branch Visit: November 18, 2022

promulgation of judgment he may avail of the remedies within 15 days from notice which
is in accordance with Section 6, Rule 120 of the Rules of Court.

The rules dictate you must be precise, as the law is a precise endeavor. It is
astonishing to witness and see in action the rules and procedure right before your eyes.
In addition, criminal procedure protects the rights of the defendant. I have learned a lot
and made sense of all the discussions we had during class. Indeed, an accused must be
presumed innocent until his guilt is established by proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Hence, it is very important that procedural rules should be applied and followed at all
times, ensuring the fairness of proceedings and enabling a person the equality of arms.