Page 1 of 63

5th Recording (Criminal Procedure Remaining

Rules)

Rule 114 Bail

Petition for Bail; Matter of Right

Purpose of Bail
● Bail is a means for someone who has been placed in
detention to secure their temporary release. Bail is
only a temporary remedy; only temporary relief. It is
not permanent. Just because it has been availed of or
is granted does not mean you are free to go abroad
and not return to the Philippines. It is tentative and
temporary.

Two Kinds of Bail

1. Bail as a matter of right
2. Bail as a matter of discretion

1. Bail as a matter of right

● Meaning, the court will not exercise discretion, it
cannot simply say, “denied.” It is called a matter of
right because at any time, it can be availed of by the
accused and the accused can choose the kind of bail
he will post: cash bond, surety bond, property bond,
recognizance. Later on we will return the different
types of bail.
When will the court’s discretion come into play?
● Court’s discretion will come into the picture
concerning cash bail. Will it reduce the amount? In the
criminal information, there is a corresponding bail
recommended by the prosecutor for a particular
offense.
o At the time of Justice Singh, usually, when the
offense is murder, the usual recommended bail
is P60,000 to P120,000. There are bail bond
guidelines.
o E.g., The recommended bail is P80,000. What
the defense counsel (usually PAO) would do is
file a motion to reduce bail because they want
to post it in cash but they want to reduce the
amount since the accused who is poor cannot
afford P80,000. Usually, the court will grant it,
as long as indigency has been invoked. But it
cannot be a mere allegation. Must submit a
certificate concerning the income of the
accused or proof that the accused is a part of
impoverished families in the barangay. When
there is proof, the motion is usually granted.
That is where court’s discretion comes into
play.
 Page 2 of 63

● When bail is a matter of right, the discretion of the

court will never be exercised on whether to grant or
deny the bail. Because it is a matter of right.
● Discretion comes into play when the accused files a
motion to reduce the amount of the bail, or whether
the court will approve of the surety bond posted,
considering that the surety company, for example, has
an issue and is blacklisted, or whether the court will
approve of the property bond being offered where
there is a title to the property, but there is prior
encumbrance. That is where court’s discretion enters
the picture. But as to whether to grant a particular
accused the right to bail, if it is a matter of right, the
court cannot exercise its discretion.

When is Bail a Matter of Right?

● When the offense is not punishable by death,
reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment. This is what
we call capital offenses.
● Death penalty; as you already know we cannot
impose the death penalty nowadays beacuse we have
a law suspending the imposition of death penalty.
Although Congress has been attempting to bring back
the death penalty. Internationally, there are only
around two countries which impose the death
penalty. That is one of the reasons why during the
time of President Arroyo she agreed with the law
suspending the imposition of the death penalty.
Although she did not completely abolish its
imposition, until now the imposition of the death
penalty is suspended.
● That is the dividing line when bail is a matter of right
and when it is not a matter of right, meaning,
discretionary.
● When it is not a matter of right, it is discretionary
upon the court.
● The dividing line will be based on the nature of the
offense. Is it a capital offense, meaning it is
punishable by death, reclusion perpetua, or life
imprisonment?
● Are reclusion perpetua and life imprisonment the
same?
o They are different. Reclusion perpetua is a
penalty imposed under the Revised Penal
Code. It has a maximum duration of 30 years.
o Life imprisonment on the other hand is a
penalty imposed under special laws, and, in
some special laws, life imprisonment is only
equivalent to 20 years. So they have differences
and they are not used interchangeably.

2. Bail is a matter of discretion

 Page 3 of 63

● It is a matter of judicial discretion when the offense

is a capital offense. But in relation thereto, there is
another criterion.
Elements; When will bail not be granted if it is a capital
offense?
1. When the accused is charged with a capital offense;
2. When the evidence of guilt is strong
● These two elements must be satisfied in order to deny
the bail when it is a matter of discretion, meaning, the
accused is charged with a capital offense.
● To reiterate: first, the penalty imposable is death,
reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment; and second,
the evidence of guilt is strong.
● For example, an information has been filed charging
the accused with murder. Murder is punishable by
reclusion perpetua; before it was punishable by death.
Now, it is punishable by reclusion, making it a capital
offense. In the information for murder, “no bail” is
stated therein, as written by the fiscal since it is a
capital offense. When it reaches the court, the court
will issue a warrant of arrest if the accused has not yet
been detained. If the accused has been detained, the
judge will issue a commitment order.
o If the judge issues a warrant since the accused
is at-large, “no bail” will be written therein
since it is a capital offense.
o At-large means the accused has not been
arrested or detained.
o Accused along with his counsel will now go to
court and file a petition for bail, which should
actually not be entitled petition since it is not
an initiatory pleading. For Justice Singh, the
proper term is motion for bail, since there is
already an ongoing proceeding that is not
really an independent action. But the same has
been done in practice and has not been
corrected by the SC, so we follow it, calling it
“petition for bail.”
● The first question the court will ask is: Is it a matter
of right or is it not a matter of right? You can
determine that by looking at the offense charged.
o For example, the crime charged is murder. The
first element then is satisfied.
● How are we not going to satisfy the second element:
when the evidence of guilt is strong?
 Page 4 of 63

o The only way to do that is if we conduct a

summary hearing.

Petition for Bail; Summary Hearing

● To determine if the evidence of guilt is strong, we are

required to conduct a summary hearing where the
prosecution must present its evidence. The
prosecution will be the only one to present evidence
during the bail hearing. The accused will not present
his evidence because the burden is on the prosecution
to prove that its evidence is strong so that, in the
meantime, bail will not be granted to the accused who
is charged with a capital offense.
● But can the accused participate during the bail
hearing even if it is just the prosecution presenting
its evidence?
o Yes. The accused has the right to be present at
every stage of the proceeding, and this is just
one stage of the proceeding.
● Can the accused or defense counsel cross-examine?
o Yes. Can cross-examine because the accused
has the right to confront or to be confronted
confront and to be confronted with all the
evidence against him.
 Page 5 of 63

● Why is the accused not allowed to present evidence?

o Because the defense of the accused is not the
issue in a bail hearing. The issue in a bail
hearing is: is the evidence of the prosecution
against the accused strong? The defense of the
accused is not an issue, even the lack of
thereof. That is why the accused does not need
to present its evidence.
● After the prosecution has presented its evidence, the
court must resolve the petition for bail – whether to
grant the bail or not to grant the bail if the evidence of
guilt is strong. But it does not mean just because the
court has resolved to deny the petition for bail
because the evidence of guilt is strong that it is the
end of the proceeding. The prosecution can still
present evidence. If there is none, it will now be the
turn of the accused to present his evidence to counter
the evidence of the prosecution.

● The case of Senator Enrile vs. Sandiganbayan, Justice

Singh is sorry to say, is an indirect contravention of
the Constitution and the Rules of Court.
o The provisions of the Constitution are clear on
the grant of bail in capital offenses or in cases
where capital offenses are charged. Justice
Singh believes that the procedure was not
followed. It is clear that summary hearing
must be conducted. But the Sandiganbayan did
not conduct a summary hearing. Certiorari was
filed against them for denying the petition for
bail and bill of particulars of Enrile.
o It went up to the SC, and the SC then granted
the petition for bail. The considerations of SC
were the age, the medical condition, the social
stature of Enrile that he is not most likely to
run away, etc.
o Justice Singh had no problems with those
findings, grounds to grant bail to Enrile.
However, for Justice Singh, procedure has been
laid out to be followed. The case for her is an
aberration.
● This is what Justice Singh tells her Criminal
Procedure classes, and the students are free to follow
her or not: as much as possible do not rely on the
aforementioned case as your authority, if you want to
invoke it, as far as the procedure that was used in that
case is concerned.

Factors to be Considered in Fixing the Reasonable Amount

of Bail
 Page 6 of 63

● What are the factors to be considered in fixing the

reasonable amount of bail?
o Although the fiscal always has a recommended
amount of bail, the same is only a
recommendation. The court will still be the one
to fix it. And the accused can go to court to file
a motion to reduce the bail. So what must the
court consider in these instances? These are
some of the factors.
1. Financial ability of the accused to give bail;
2. Nature and circumstances of the offense;
o Is it a grave offense? Is it just a light offense?
Or less serious?
0. Penalty of the offense charged;
0. Character and reputation of the accused;
0. Age and health of the accused;
o 4. and 5. were the factors considered in Enrile’s
case;
0. Weight of evidence against the accused;
o That was lacking in Enrile’s case; no summary
hearing was conducted there;
0. Probability of the accused appearing at the trial;
o Because that is the underlying purpose of the
bail; it is a guarantee, an undertaking, that
accused will appear whenever summoned by
the court;
o That is the undertaking in all forms of bail
whether it is cash or property or surety or
recognizance; there is always an undertaking
that the accused will appear when called by the
court during trial;
0. Forfeiture of other bail;
o If the accused had other cases, and, in those
cases, after posting bail, the accused jumped
bail and was not seen by the court anymore;
bad record; most likely, the accused will do the
same thing here;
0. The fact that the accused was a fugitive from
justice when arrested; and
o What is a fugitive from justice? A fugitive from
justice has a technical meaning. In court
decisions, the same has been defined as one
who has evaded the court processes.
o For example, there is an outstanding warrant
of arrest against the accused, and the accused
has been evading the warrant of arrest against
him, or the accused has posted bail and has
 Page 7 of 63

jumped bail; in those cases, he has become a

fugitive from justice; or the accused has been
convicted, and has gone in hiding to avoid
serving his sentence;
0. Pendency of other cases where the accused is on
bail
o That is also a factor.

Forms of Bail

Forms
1. Corporate Surety;
2. Property Bond;
3. Cash Deposit;
4. Recognizance;

(1) Corporate Surety;

● Bonding company; surety bond which we always
hear; here, what is only paid is the premium;
● For example, if the bail is fixed at P80,000, a
percentage only of P80,000 will be paid, which the
accused will pay to the bonding company; for that
premium, the bonding company will guarantee the
appearance of the accused in court throughout the
proceedings until judgment; if the accused fails to
appear, the guarantee of the bonding company is it
will be liable for the full amount, not just the
premium paid for by the accused;
● For example, the bail is fixed at P80,000, and the
accused paid for 10% of the amount; if the accused
failed to appear, the bonding company will pay the
full amount of P80,000; That is how bonding
companies earn money, and that is also how they lose
money; because they accept anyone, who would then
jump bail; bonding company ends up paying a lot in
court;
● What is the lifetime of a surety bond?
o For example, the accused posted a surety bond
as bail, what is its lifetime?
o Usually, people think it is only one year,
because the premium payment only covers one
year; but that is wrong; as far as the court is
concerned, the lifetime of the surety bond is
until judgment because that is what is
indicated in their undertaking, that they will
produce the accused before the court at any
time the court summons the appearance of the
 Page 8 of 63

accused during trial until judgment; that is

what appears in their undertaking;
● But why do bonding companies say it is only for
one year?
o The premium payment is only for one year;
that is why there is renewal of premium
payment every year;
o However, many accused are unable to pay the
subsequent premium payments; the bonding
companies then would claims that they are at a
disadvantage since many accused are unable to
pay premium payments;
o The SC would then say that the same is none of
their concern since that is a private transaction
between the bonding company and the
accused; as far as the court is concerned the
surety company guaranteed the appearance of
the accused until judgment; as far as the court
is concerned the guarantee is valid and binding
until judgment, even if the accused did not pay
the premium, that is between the bonding
company and the accused;

(2) Property Bond

● a lien on real property given as a security for the
amount of bail;
● For example, the accused does not have any cash, and
is unable to pay any premium, but he has a sibling
who takes pity on him and is willing to lend the title
over his property to serve as the accused’s bond; that
is what we call a property bond;
● In which case, the authority given by the title owner,
like the sibling for example or whoever, is submitted
to the court plus the title;
● The lien, which is the undertaking to bring the
accused to court whenever he is summoned by the
court, must be annotated on the title. It is only upon
the annotation on the title that the court will
approve of the property bond. If it is not annotated
on the title, the court will not approve the property
bond, and a warrant of arrest will be issued against
the accused.

(3) Cash Deposit

● This is the easiest;
● Whatever bond amount is fixed, for example, P80,000,
then the accused will have to post it in cash;
● This actually is preferred; if what is posted as bond is
cash, then it can later be withdrawn once the case is
finished; it does not matter even if the accused is
convicted, he can withdraw the amount later in full,
except if the court orders that the cash deposit be
applied;
o For example, to the fine or the whatever; the
court can do that at the end;
o But if the same is intact, or whatever is left of
it, the same will be refunded by the court to the
accused at the end;
 Page 9 of 63

● Most of the time, the accused uses the cash bond as

payment for civil damages;
o For example, the case is theft; the value of the
thing lost, for example, a cellphone, is valued
at P35,000; the accused uses the cash bond as
payment; they will execute an agreement in
court where the accused assigns it to the
private complainant, and a settlement exists
between them;

(4) Recognizance
● an obligation of record, entered before some court or
officer authorized to take it with a condition to do
some particular act, the most usual condition in
criminal cases being the appearance of the accused for
trial;
● Here, the accused will be released to a private
individual or to a public official, and that person now
will be the one to execute an undertaking, taking the
accused into his custody and guaranteeing the court
that he will bring the accused to court whenever the
court summons the appearance of the accused during
the trial and until judgment;
● That is his undertaking; if he is unable to fulfill it, the
court can then hold him liable; he will be subjected to
show cause;
o why did you fail to bring the accused to court;
explain the reason behind his non-appearance;
if he is unable to satisfactorily explain the
reason behind the accused’s non-appearance,
then the court can even cite him in contempt,
or impose a fine or even imprisonment;

Conditions of Bail

1. The undertaking shall be effective upon approval and

shall remain in force at all stages of the case until
promulgation of the judgment.
2. The accused shall appear before the proper courts
whenever so required.
o As discussed last time, the accused has the
right to be present at any stage of the
proceedings. It is a right. It is not an obligation.
As such, if the court wants the accused to be
present in court at every stage, the court has to
require the accused expressly to be present.
o When Justice Singh was still in the trial court,
if, for example, she would ask the accused to
 Page 10 of 63

attend, there will always be a notice directed to

the accused; other courts will issue a subpoena
directed to the accused; but Justice Singh
would simply direct the accused to appear
personally in her court on a certain date and
time, and then she would state whatever stage
of proceeding it were; If the accused does not
appear, she would then issue a warrant of
arrest against him or she can forfeit his bond;
those are the sanctions which will be discussed
later on;
0. The failure of the accused to appear at trial without
justification despite due notice shall be deemed as waiver of
his right to be present thereat. Trial may proceed in absentia.
o All proceedings can proceed in absentia if the
accused has already been arraigned. If the
accused has not been arraigned, then the court
has no jurisdiction and cannot proceed with
anything (if the accused has not been
arraigned).
o After arraignment, if the accused does not
appear, then the court can proceed; as long as
the accused has been notified, then that means
he has waived his presence;
0. The bondsman shall surrender the accused to court
for execution of the final judgment.
o That is included in the undertaking of the
bondsman, whether it is a surety bond, a
property bond, or recognizance;

Where to File Petition for Bail

1. The application for bail may be filed with the court

where the case is pending. If the judge thereof is
absent or unavailable, then the application may be
filed with any RTC judge or MTC judge. (Rule
114.17[a])
o The court to which the case has been raffled
already; Technically, it should not be called a
petition for bail since there is already a
pending case;
o General Rule: our first rule is, bail is filed the
court where the case is raffled;
 Page 11 of 63

o But, for example, let’s say the judge of Branch 1

where the case was raffled was not present.
Should the accused who has been detained
overnight wait for the judge of Branch 1 to
return? No. Supposedly, its pairing court
Branch 2 should act on it if the judge thereof is
present. If both judges are not present, then
their Executive Judge supposedly should act
on it. But if all these RTC judges are not
present, then any MTC judge or first-level
court judge in the same sala can act on it;
o If Branch 1 RTC is not present, Branch 2 RTC is
not present, and the Executive Judge is not
present, and the only judge present in the
building is an MTC judge, can the MTC judge
act on it? Yes. That is what is provided for in
Rule 114, Sec. 17[a].
0. If the accused is arrested in a province, city, or
municipality other than where the case is pending, bail may
also be filed with any regional trial court of said place, or if
no judge thereof is available, with any metropolitan trial
judge, municipal trial judge, or municipal circuit trial judge
therein.
o For example, the accused is from Makati and
his case is in Quezon City RTC. The accused
was arrested at his residence in Makati. Is it
necessary for the accused to go to Quezon City
to post bail? As a general rule, yes, he needs to
go to Quezon City because that is where his
case is pending. However, if the accused does
not want to travel considering the distance,
and since his residence is near the Makati
courts, the accused can post bail in the place
where he was arrested. But what is important
here is he must have been arrested. The same
does not apply where the accused learned that
there was an outstanding arrest against him,
and wanting to avoid the humiliation and
embarrassment of being arrested, the accused
would post bail already.
o For example, the Quezon City court issued a
warrant against the accused since it is the
Quezon City court which will handle his case.
The accused is from Cebu. Someone called the
accused to inform him that a warrant of arrest
has been issued against him in Quezon City.
The accused now wants to post bail. He goes to
Lapu-Lapu City RTC to post bail, even if he has
not been arrested. That is not allowed. Why?
Because Lapu-Lapu City court has no
jurisdiction over him. But if he were arrested in
that jurisdiction, then the court of the place
where he was arrested and detained acquires
authority.
o What is required here: the certificate of
detention must be shown, meaning, the
accused has been arrested. He can now post
bail therein.
 Page 12 of 63

0. Where the grant of bail is a matter of discretion, or the

accused seeks to be released on recognizance, the application
may only be filed in the court where the case is pending,
whether on preliminary investigation, trial, or on appeal.
o For example, the charge is murder, a capital
offense; the bail here is not a matter of right; it
is a matter of discretion to the court; even if the
accused was arrested in Makati, but his case is
pending before the Quezon City court, the
accused cannot post bail in Makati; since bail
is not a matter of right, and a summary
hearing must be conducted; bail is
discretionary; the only court which can act on
it is the court which is handling the case; the
accused charged with murder has to go to the
Quezon City court and file a petition for bail
first; bail is not matter of right;
o Same applies in recognizance;
0. Any person in custody who is not yet charged in
court may apply for bail with any court in the province, city,
or municipality where he is held.
o For example, you are still undergoing
preliminary investigation or inquest, for
example, you were arrested in flagrante
delicto; it looks like the proceeding will take a
long time, you would still have to wait for the
inquest prosecutor, and the police is asking for
more time; in the meantime, you are detained
in the jail cell of the police station; you want to
post bail because you do not want to stay
detained much longer; can you post bail even
if no case has been filed against you?
o Yes. Rule 114, Sec. 17, par. (c);
● Rule 114, Sec. 17, par. (c) Any person in custody who is
not yet charged in court may apply for bail with any court
in the province, city, or municipality where he is held.
o Not yet charged; no case has been filed in
court;
o Even if no charge has been filed in court, but
the accused has been subjected to preliminary
investigation or to inquest, the accused can
post bail in the court of the province, city, or
municipality where your client is being held
for preliminary investigation or inquest.

Flowchart of Summary Hearing for Bail in Regular Cases

 Page 13 of 63

Petition for Bail During the Time of Pandemic

● Special rules concerning bail application during the

pandemic;
● Many instances where the courts were closed; we
have been in lockdown and the courts were
physically closed;

00:30:01-00:56:00
Reduced Bail and Recognizance During the Pandemic,
Pending the Resolution of their Cases

Forfeiture of Bail
 Page 14 of 63

Cancellation of the Bail

No Bail After Final Judgment

Rule 116 Arraignment

Rule 118 Pre-Trial
Arraignment; Importance

Duty of the Court Before Arraignment

 Page 15 of 63

Options of the Accused Before Arraignment

Arraignment and Pre-Trial

54:12
Arraignment; Plea Bargaining

● Very important; The reading of the information is in a

language known to the accused.
 Page 16 of 63

● Should the whole information be read to the accused?

o That is our way of informing the accused of the
nature and cause of the accusation against him.
Why should it not be read in full? But
sometimes we have what we call a waiver of
the reading of the information. Before, that
was not allowed. But now it is allowed with
the consent of the accused. The accused will be
the one who waives, signing the waiver. In
some instances, for example, 50 counts of BP
22. Will you read each one? Reading each
information will take too much time. When
that is the case, we do not have to read each
one. But that would depend on the accused
waiving the reading of the information because
that is his right.
● Plea Bargaining; first of all you have to remember that
plea bargaining is a part of arraignment and also of
pre-trial, but more of arraignment. Before the accused
pleads guilty or pleads innocence, the court should
ask the parties, both the prosecution and the defense,
is there a possibility of plea bargain? If the parties
say, “Yes,” the court should ask them, “What is the
proposal? What do you say to that proposal?”
o Plea bargain is supposed to be an agreement.
For there to be a binding agreement, both
parties should consent. There is no binding
agreement if the prosecution just proposed
something but the same was not accepted by
the defense, or the defense would propose
something but the prosecution did not accept
the same. There is no agreement there.
● Bargaining is negotiating. The ultimate goal is an
agreement. But if there is none, even if you went
through bargaining, even if you negotiated, then you
proceed with the original charge.

Arraignment; Plea Bargaining in Drug Cases

 Page 17 of 63

● Here is where it got confusing; Estipona, Jr. vs.

Lobrigo;
● In this case, the SC categorically declared as
unconstitutional Sec. 23 of RA 9165. What is RA 9165?
That is the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of
2002 as amended. Under Sec. 23 of RA 9165, the law
states that no plea bargaining in drugs cases. Plea
bargain was disallowed because the rationale one the
law or the state of its purpose was to curb drug trade,
to reduce the incidences of drug offenses, etc.
o The same was laudable, but the SC said that
plea bargaining should be discussed;

Nature of Plea Bargaining

● What is plea bargaining? What is the nature of plea
bargaining? Is it a substantive right such that if a
hearing was conducted, and plea bargaining was not
discussed, can the accused file a motion, invoking his
right to plea bargain? Is that the case? No. Plea
bargaining is not a substantive right.
● Plea bargaining is not anybody’s right. It is not a
right of the accused. It is not a right of the
prosecution. It is a method, a means, a tool that the
parties can use to expedite the proceedings.
o Defense pleading guilty to a lesser offense so
that the client can avail of probation later on;
● It is a tool to speed up the disposition of the case. It is
not a substantive right. It is a procedural tool which
the SC held in Estipona, Jr. vs. Lobrigo.
● It is a matter of procedure. If it is a matter of
procedure, who has the authority here? The Supreme
Court. Under Article VIII, Sec. 5, the Supreme Court
has the exclusive authority to promulgate rules on
pleadings, practice, and procedure.
o Not the legislature. Congress has the exclusive
power to pass laws, but they do not have
power of procedure, because promulgation of
procedure is within the power of the Supreme
Court.
● As such, when Congress passed RA 9165 and
included therein Sec. 23, proscribing plea bargaining
in drugs cases, Congress overstepped its authority
because it encroached on the rule-making power of
the Supreme Court under Art. VIII of the
Constitution. There is a violation of the most
 Page 18 of 63

cherished separation of powers. That is why Sec. 23

was declared unconstitutional.

Estipona, Jr. v. Lobrigo, G.R. No. 226679, 15 August 2017

● A defendant has no constitutional right to plea
bargain. No basic rights are infringed by trying him
rather than accepting a plea of guilty; the prosecutor
need not do so if he prefers to go to trial. Under the
present Rules, the acceptance of an offer to plead
guilty is not a demandable right but depends on the
consent of the offended party and the prosecutor,
which is a condition precedent to a valid plea of
guilty to a lesser offense that is necessarily included in
the offense charged. The reason for this is that the
prosecutor has full control of the prosecution of
criminal actions; his duty is to always prosecute the
proper offense, not any lesser or graver one, based on
what the evidence on hand can sustain.
● Section 23 of Republic Act No. 9165 is declared
unconstitutional for being contrary to the
rule-making authority of the Supreme Court under
Section 5 (5), Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution.

Plea Bargaining in Drugs Cases

● Because of Estipona, Jr. vs. Lobrigo, the issue of plea
bargaining in drugs cases was opened. When the
same was opened, the SC foresaw the influx of plea
bargaining in drugs cases.
● According to Justice Singh, 60% of the appeal cases
before her had been drugs cases. The SC wanted to
adopt guidelines that would serve judges when it
came to plea bargaining submitted before them for
approval.
● The SC then created the guidelines. Under the
guidelines of the SC, it allows plea bargaining with
respect to sale or distribution of illegal drugs to a
lesser offense of possession of drug paraphernalia.
The original charge is sale or distribution of illegal
drugs. The penalty therefor is life imprisonment; the
fine therefor is millions. That is the original charge
and the original penalty. Under its guidelines, the SC
allows the same to be downgraded to a lesser offense
of possession of drug paraphernalia, the penalty
therefore being prison correccional or four years, or
something like that, or even lower. Definitely, the
accused can avail of probation because it is less than 6
years.
o In probation, the cut-off is 6 years. Where the
penalty is over 6 years, you can no longer avail
of probation.
● But the Secretary of Justice issued its own guidelines
for prosecutors. In the guidelines of the DOJ, it says
there that where the offense charged is illegal
possession of drugs, the accused can plea bargain to
a lesser offense of illegal possession of drug
paraphernalia.
o What is drug paraphernalia? For example,
tooter, foil, lighter, burner; meaning, tools or
 Page 19 of 63

implements that you used to imbibe or to

smoke or whatever the illegal drugs;
● But under the DOJ guidelines, where the offense
charged was illegal sale or distribution of drugs, the
accused can only plea bargain to a lesser offense of
illegal possession of drugs. Illegal possession of drugs
has a high penalty. Can you see the conflict between
the SC guidelines and the DOJ guidelines?
● There is then a conflict between the SC guidelines
which allows, when the charge is illegal sale of drugs,
the accused to plea bargain to a lesser offense of
illegal possession of drug paraphernalia, and the DOJ
guidelines, where, when the charge is illegal sale or
drugs, the accused can only plea bargain to a lesser
offense of illegal possession of drugs.
● There is a conflict between the guidelines; there are
several cases where the accused would propose to
plea bargain to a lesser offense of illegal possession of
drug paraphernalia; but when the same reaches the
court, the fiscal would opposed the same, arguing
that it objects because under the DOJ guidelines, the
prosecution cannot agree to that; they can only agree
to a lesser offense of illegal possession of drugs, not
drug paraphernalia; the judge would then recite the
SC guidelines where the SC also said that if the
prosecution disagreed with the accused’s proposal
but the latter was in accordance with the SC
guidelines, the court can approve of the plea bargain
even if the prosecution does not agree thereto;
o Actually, it is not SC guidelines; it is Office of
the Court Administrator (OCA) guidelines;
● The conflicting guidelines then resulted to cases with
contrary rulings; one of those cases reached the SC;
Sayre v. Honorable Xenos;
● In Sayre v. Honorable Xenos, the SC categorically
said that plea bargaining is a procedural device; it is a
process; but in this process both parties must agree; if
they do not both agreed, there is no agreement to
speak of; if they do not both agree thereto, then there
is no plea bargaining to speak of;
● The Court declared that it is a give-and-take
negotiation, which is for the approval of the court.
The refusal of the prosecution to accept the plea
bargain of the accused is considered as a continuing
objection. There is no agreement if there is a
continuing objection.
● In plea bargain, both the prosecution and the defense
must agree. No objection. If there is an objection, there
is no plea bargain to speak of.

Sayre v. Honorable Xenos, G.R. Nos. 244413 & 244415-16,

February 18, 2020
● Plea bargaining has been defined as “a process
whereby the accused and the prosecution work out a
mutually satisfactory disposition of the case subject
to court approval.” There is give-and-take negotiation
common in plea bargaining. The essence of the
agreement is that both the prosecution and the
defense make concessions to avoid potential losses.
 Page 20 of 63

Properly administered, plea bargaining is to be

encouraged because the chief virtues of the system —
speed, economy, and finality — can benefit the
accused, the offended party, the prosecution, and the
court.
● A plea bargain still requires mutual agreement of
the parties and remains subject to the approval of
the court.The acceptance of an offer to plead guilty to
a lesser offense is not demandable by the accused as a
matter of right but is a matter addressed entirely to
the sound discretion of the trial court.
● The use of the word "may" signifies that the trial court
has discretion whether to allow the accused to make a
plea of guilty to a lesser offense. Moreover, plea
bargaining requires the consent of the accused,
offended party, and the prosecutor. It is also essential
that the lesser offense is necessarily included in the
offense charged.
● Taking into consideration the requirements in
pleading guilty to a lesser offense, We find it proper to
treat the refusal of the prosecution to adopt the
acceptable plea bargain for the charge of Illegal Sale
of Dangerous Drugs provided in A.M. No.
18-03-16-SC as a continuing objection that should be
resolved by the RTC.

Arraignment

Arraignment; Plea of Guilty to Capital Offense

 Page 21 of 63

What are the requirements to a plea of guilty to a capital

offense?
● People v. Pagal;

People v. Pagal, G.R. No. 241257, September 29, 2020

Pagal pleaded Guilty to a capital offense, then he was

sentenced. However, Pagal questioned the plea bargain
improvidently (not voluntarily or not understood).
The SC has triple (3) duty if the accused wants to plead
guilty to a capital offense. The three (3) fold duties are:
1. Court must conduct a search inquiry.
- First, it must be voluntary, and
- Second, the court must ask if the accused
understood.
2. Require the prosecution to prove the accused guilt
and precise degree of culpability
- It is imperative that the trial court require the
presentation of evidence from the prosecution
to enable itself to determine the precise
participation and degree of culpability of the
accused in the perpetration of the capital
offense
- Plea of guilt alone can never be sufficient to
produce guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
In the Pagal case, even if the accused plead guilty to the
offense, it is not proof beyond reasonable doubt, the
prosecution must present evidence of the degree of
participation of the accused who has already pleaded guilty.
Ex. Murder - There are 3 accused and A pleaded guilty; We
do not know what he is guilty of. He may be a look out, or
the one holding the murder weapon. We are still at
arraignment. How did it become proof beyond reasonable
doubt? You do not know what the accused did. It is based
only on the bare information. What can you prove or
establish with the acts or omission of A.
 Page 22 of 63

Based on the facts, the penalty can be imposed. He may be

an accessory or accomplice. But if he is a principal, there
may be mitigating circumstances. We will not know any of
those things if we do not ask the prosecution to present
evidence of the accused.
Pagal is a close vote, 8-6.
3. Allow the accused to present evidence on his behalf
(Culpatory or Mitigating Evidence)
- Will not stop with the prosecution evidence,
the accused may still present evidence. This is
for the correct imposition of the penalty.
However, the court cannot compel the accused
to present evidence.
- While it is true that the conviction based on an
improvident plea may be set aside if it is the
sole basis of the judgment, it will not
automatically result in the acquittal of the
accused. Usually, it will be remanded to the
lower court.

Ex. The case reached the Supreme Court and it was proven
that the plea of guilt is improvident, it was not explained or
it was explained but there was pressure.
In the Pagal case, the lower court gave the prosecution a
chance to prove the guilt of the accused and present
evidence but they did not present any evidence. Why would
you still remand the case, the accused must be acquitted
because there was no evidence against him.
Look here, the prosecution was given a chance to present
evidence but they were negligent. It was the fault of the
prosecution, why would you give him a chance? Because of
due process of the state? The accused also has a right to due
process and speedy trial.
** If the prosecution was given an opportunity already but
it wasted its opportunity, there will be no remand anymore.
The accused must be acquitted because it flows from its
constitutional guarantees to due process and presumption of
innocence. **
Courts Where Pre-Trial is Mandatory

Pre-Trial Agreement
 Page 23 of 63

What is Pre-Trial Agreement?

o One of the purposes of pre-trial is to obtain
stipulations and admissions. (Rule 118 - crimpro, Rule
18 - Civpro)
o Scenario: The court asked, “Will the accused admit
that the place and time in the information, that he was
present and he was carrying a gun?” The accused said
“I admit”. There is admission.
Can the court use the admission against the
accused?
o YES ONLY If, that admission is part of the
pre-trial order and is signed by both the
accused and his counsel.
o Any admission/stipulation during pre-trial or
during the course of trial; In Trial there is a
witness to be presented, a forensic chemist. The
accused said that they will stipulate that the
forensic chemist received the specimen and
conducted a test on the specimen and yielded a
positive result for the presence of shabu.
o If it was written in the transcript, is it
allowed? YES. It will not fall under this but
will fall under Judicial Admissions. (Rule 129,
Sec. 4)

Pre-Trial Conference; Non-Appearance of Parties

Consequences of Non-appearance of Parties

Civil Procedure

- If the plaintiff does not appear in pre-trial, the case

will be dismissed.
- If it was the defendant who failed to appear, the
plaintiff may be allowed to present evidence ex parte.

Criminal Procedure
 Page 24 of 63

- If the accused did not appear, if the accused was

notified and the court requires his presence but failed
to appear, a warrant will be issued for his arrest and
the bail will be forfeited.
- If the offended party failed to appear, the case will
NOT be dismissed. The offended party is NOT the
real party in interest, it is THE STATE. The offended
party is ONLY a WITNESS of the state. The
non-appearance of an offended party is equivalent to
the non-appearance of the witness.
- If the offended party is absent, the court will issue a
show cause order and if the explanation is not
satisfactory, he can be arrested or fined for
non-appearance.
- If the witnesses did not appear, the accused may
move for the violation of his right to speedy trial. The
trial cannot proceed because the witnesses are not
appearing in court, it will result in undue delay; there
is a violation of speedy trial and this can result in the
dismissal of the case.

One (1) non-appearance will not result in dismissal but

based on jurisprudence, at least two (2) non-appearances
that are unjustified - there is notice but there is no just cause,
then he did not attend the hearing, it caused a delay, a
ground for dismissal. Sometimes the ground used is failure
to prosecute but the proper terminology for the ground is,
Violation of the Right of the Accused to Speedy Trial.

- If the dismissal of the case is on the ground of

violation of the right of the accused to speedy trial, it
is a dismissal on the merits and double jeopardy is
attached. If it is dismissed on the merits, it is
equivalent to acquittal and cannot be charged with
the same offense (double jeopardy).

What if Fiscal was the one who was absent?

- The case will not move. The fiscal must be present in

a criminal case because the prosecution must always
be in the control and supervision of the public
prosecutor. There is ONLY one (1) exception: if the
private prosecutor has a written authority from the
city prosecutor or provincial prosecutor.

What are the consequences?

- “Pagalitan si Fiscal”
- If justified, there is a notice, the absence is excused.
An alternative is that the court will not reset the
hearing but there must be a substitute fiscal,
especially if there is no notice.
- As to consequences, the court may direct the fiscal to
show cause and impose penalty. The fiscal must be
given an extra leeway because they are overworked.

Pre-Trial Conference
 Page 25 of 63

Pre-Trial Order

Mediation

01:52:01
Rule 117 Motion To Quash

Motion to Quash; Nature and Time of Filing

 Page 26 of 63

Form and Contents of a Motion to Quash

Motion to Quash; Grounds

The four other non-waivable grounds are:

1. Lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter;
2. Prescription;
3. Double Jeopardy; and
4. Facts alleged do not constitute an offense.
● This is important because the ground you will see
under Sec. 3, par. (d) “That the officer who filed the
information had no authority to do so;” is not included in
the enumeration of non-waivable grounds;
 Page 27 of 63

● The aforesaid non-waivable grounds do not include

Sec. 3 (d);
● But in the case of Ongkingco, the SC held that that
ground par. (d), “That the officer who filed the
information had no authority to do so,” pertains to lack of
jurisdiction over the offense.
o Effectively, it is included in the list of
non-waivable grounds.

Ongkingco v. Sugiyama, G.R. No. 217787, [September 18,

2019]
● It is significant to note that under the substantive law,
a public prosecutor has the authority to file an
Information, but before he or she can do so, a prior
written authority or approval of the provincial or city
prosecutor or chief state prosecutor or the
Ombudsman, or his or her deputy, is required by a
procedural rule, i.e., Section 4, Rule 112 of the Revised
Rules of Criminal Procedure. It also bears emphasis
that under Section 9, Rule 117 of the same Rule, the
ground that the officer who filed the information
had no authority to do so, which prevents the court
from acquiring jurisdiction over the case — referred
to in Garfin and Cudia — pertains to lack of
jurisdiction over the offense, which is a
non-waivable ground. The three other non-waivable
grounds for a motion to quash the information are:
(1) the facts charged do not constitute an offense; (2)
the criminal action or liability has been extinguished;
and (3) the accused has been previously convicted or
acquitted of the offense charged, or the case against
him was dismissed or otherwise terminated without
his express consent.

Motion to Quash; Grounds; Amendment of Complaint or

Information

Amendment of a Complaint or Information

 Page 28 of 63

Double Jeopardy; Requisites

Double Jeopardy; Basis

Provisional Dismissal
 Page 29 of 63

Provisional Dismissal; Time-Bar Rule

Rule 119 Trial (Under the Continuous Trial System)

Order of Continuous Trial

The Continuous Trial System

The Continuous Trial Rule; Basis

 Page 30 of 63

Previous Issuances Relating to the Conduct of Continuous

Trial
Issuances Subject matter Notes
Circular No. 1-89 Guidelines to be Through
(19 January Observed By Administrative
1989) Designated Order No. 135
Branches of the dated 21
Trial Courts in theDecember 1988,
Conduct of the Supreme
Mandatory Court designated
Continuous Trial the branches of
trial courts which
were to
participate in the
pilot project for
mandatory
continuous trial.
Administrative Mandatory Noting that there
Circular No. 3- Continuous Trial was a Significant
90 (31 January in All Courts decongestion in
1990) court dockets
arising from the
mandated
continuous trial
laid down in AC
No. 4, all trial
courts in the
Philippines were
mandated to
adopt the
continuous trial
system.
Republic Act No. Enacted to ensure Prescribed
8493 or “the a speedy trial of guidelines
Speedy trial Act all criminal cases regarding time
of 1998” (12 before the frames for the
February 1998) Sandiganbayan, conduct of trial,
filing of
 Page 31 of 63

RTC, MetC, MTC information, and

and MCTC. commencement
of trial following
the issuance of an
order for new
trial, among other,
and also imposed
sanctions against
counsels who
shall be
responsible for
causing delay.
Circular No. Pursuant to
38-98 (11 August Section 15 of R.A.
1998) No. 8493, the
Supreme Court
promulgated this
circular for
the purpose of
implementing
the provisions of
the said law.
Administrative Expeditious Certain branches
Circular No. 4 Disposition of of trial courts
(22 September Cases in the RTC, were designated
1998) MetC, MTCC, as
Municipal Trial participants in the
Courts and pilot project
MCTCs for mandatory
continuous trial.
Administrative Addressed to Prescribed the
Circular No. 3-99 Trial Court Judges hours during
(15 January 1999) and Personnel, as which courts
well must be in
as the IBP, session, and
mandating strict reiterated that the
observance of continuous trial
session hours of prescribed
trial Courts and under AC No. 4
effective and Circular
management of No. 1-89 be
cases to ensure effectively
their speedy implemented.
disposition
Applicability of the Rule on Continuous Trial

Hearing Days
 Page 32 of 63

Motions

Consolidation of Cases
 Page 33 of 63

● This is just a procedural device for an orderly

administration of justice.
● For example, two counts of violation of BP 22; same
accused; same offended party; same transaction.
There was a loan, and payment made for that debt
were two checks; when the two checks bounced there
were two counts of BP 22, but there was only one
transaction involving the same parties;
o But when the information was filed, the two
counts of BP 22 were separated and were
raffled to two different courts; if that is the
case, it is possible that the accused will be
convicted in one court, and acquitted in the
other; to avoid that, the cases will be
consolidated;
o When cases like this are filed, there is
coordination with the fiscal’s office and the
same are covered by a motion to consolidate;
● For example, there are three accused; an information
was filed against the two accused who had
undergone inquest since they were caught in
flagrante; the third accused was able to escape when
they were being caught by the police; as such, the
third accused was not included in the information;
o The third accused was later arrested after two
days; that is why the information against him
was separately filed and was not included in
the first information charging A and B;
o now there is a second information charging C
which is not covered by the motion to
consolidate since it was filed at a different time;
o The fiscal can now file a motion to consolidate
when he files the information against C. The
fiscal can now ask the court to consolidate the
case against C with the first case against A and
B. Or, if the fiscal does not file the motion, the
accused can ask that his case be consolidated
with the case against A and B. C can say, “Your
honor, there is a previous case which arose
from the same act or omission, or from the
same incident. Your honor, please
consolidate.”
o Or, it can be the court can consolidate the cases
motu proprio.
● In consolidation, the objectives are the convenience of
the parties, the facility of trying the case, and the
prevention of conflicting decisions.
 Page 34 of 63

Summary Procedure
● Year in and year out there is always a question about
summary procedure; sometimes in Civil Procedure,
sometimes in Criminal Procedure;

Criminal Cases under RA 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous

Drugs Act of 2022)

Drugs; Reduced Timeline;

● Judgment is within 75 days, unlike the usual 90 days;
● In summary procedure, whether civil or criminal,
decision-making is within 30 days;

Criminal Cases under the Rules of Procedure on

Environmental Cases
 Page 35 of 63

Criminal Cases under the Rules of Procedure on

Intellectual Property Rights Cases

Order of Trial

● In general; may it be a case involving drugs or

intellectual property or summary or regular;

Reverse Order of Trial

● When is there reverse order of trial?

● There is reverse order of trial when, for instance,
during arraignment, the accused plead guilty for
homicide, claiming it was self-defense. In a case like
that, there can be a reverse trial. Because the burden
of the prosecution to prove the killing has been
discharged, because the accused admitted the killing.
There can now be a reverse trial, starting with the
evidence of the accused.
● Remember, even in civil cases, reverse trial is
discretionary on the court. If the court wants to
follow the regular procedure, regular procedure may
still be followed. It does not have to be reverse. That is
discretionary on the court.
● Considering what the Court held in People vs. Pagal,
the prosecution must still present its evidence to show
the degree of culpability of the accused. The wiser
choice is still to do the regular order of trial,
 Page 36 of 63

prosecution first, to be able to see the degree of

culpability of the accused, and to see if there are any
mitigating or aggravating circumstances; and then
accused, whatever defense he may have.
● People v. Pagal, G.R. No. 241257, September 29, 2020
o The present Revised Rules of Court, however,
decrees that where the accused pleads guilty to
a capital offense, it is now mandatory for the
court to require the prosecution to prove the
guilt of the accused and his precise degree of
culpability, with the accused being likewise
entitled to present evidence to prove, inter alia,
mitigating circumstances.

Strict Observance of Trial Schedule

Phase Period Reckoning Point
Presentation of 90 days Not later than 30
prosecution days from
evidence termination of
arraignment and
pre-trial
Presentation of 90 days Not later than 30
defense evidence days from the
court’s ruling on
the prosecution’s
offer of evidence
Rebuttal Within the Determined by
evidence 180-day period the court

● Once there has been an agreement as to the trial

schedule, the parties will be asked to sign the
Pre-Trial Order where the trial schedule has been
included. It is like a binding agreement between the
parties; they must respect the trial dates. If you want
to postpone one of the dates assigned to you, you will
not be given an extra date in replacement. That means
effectively you have to complete the presentation of
your evidence within your remaining dates. Will not
be given additional dates.
● One-day examination of witness rule;
o Before, examination of witness was piecemeal;
meaning, the witness comes one day for direct
examination, and then he will have to return
for his cross-examination, and then another
day for redirect examination, and then another
for re-cross examination. It takes a long time
before the testimony of one witness finishes;
sometimes even years. Since the examination is
cut up into pieces, you will have a hard time
remembering the witness and his testimony,
 Page 37 of 63

which is not conducive for an effective

examination of witness.
o Imposing the one-day examination of witness
rule; meaning, if you present the witness today,
you finish everything (direct, cross, redirect,
recross).
● Most Important Witness Rule under A.M.
03-1-09-SC Rules on Enhanced Pre-Trial and
Preliminary Conference
o When it comes to evidence, it is not about
quantity, but the quality of evidence. “Hindi ito
paramihan.” In fact, sometimes the testimony
of one witness is enough to convict. For
example, in rape cases. The testimony of the
victim is enough to convict the accused in a
rape case; because the victim is the most
important.
o During pre-trial, while we are listing our
witnesses, only present the most important
witnesses. Meaning, there will be no need for
corroborative, or if there is need for
corroborative, only one will suffice, more than
one will not be allowed.

Postponements: Generally, Prohibited

Generally, postponements are prohibited. Except for:

1. Acts of God;
2. Force majeure; or
3. Physical inability of the witness to appear and testify;
● As to physical inability, stomachaches and headaches
are not included. It really has to be physical inability,
cannot stand up, cannot go to court; and there must
be proof.
● You will be compelled to finish your evidence
presentation on the dates remaining. You will not be
given additional dates.

Postponement Fee and Receipt

Postponement; Discretion of the Court

 Page 38 of 63

● Again, discretionary on the court. Even if you file a

motion for postponement, never presume that the
court will grant your motion, as always held by the
SC.
● For example, you filed a motion for postponement
one week ahead of the scheduled date, and you did
not attend the scheduled hearing since you assumed
that the court would grant your motion. Again, never
assume the court will grant your motion. The lawyer
claimed that he had a conflict in his schedule. Even
so, at least, have your client attend the hearing date,
to show the court good faith. Or at least, send
somebody to represent you.

Form of Testimony
● What is the form of testimony in criminal cases?
● Under the Judicial Affidavit Rule; all direct
testimonies of witnesses;
● But there is an important distinction when it comes to
criminal cases; In criminal cases, the accused has the
right to confront the witnesses and all the evidence
presented against him.

● In first level courts, meaning the penalty imposed is

less than 6 years, Judicial Affidavits are used, even if
the accused opposed the same.

● In criminal cases tried by the second level courts,

meaning, the offenses are punishable by
imprisonment of 6 years and up, it is the accused’s
choice or discretion if a Judicial Affidavit would be
used.
 Page 39 of 63

o There is only a choice in criminal cases. In all

other cases, civil cases, special proceedings,
Judicial Affidavit is used.
● Also, in tertiary courts; for example, Sandiganbayan
(which is also a trial court); the accused can choose if
Judicial Affidavits would be used.
● Read the Judicial Affidavit Rule; still applicable;
● Note that as far as the civil aspect is concerned,
whether in the first level or second level courts, it has
to be Judicial Affidavits.
o Even in the Sandiganbayan; however, usually,
there is no civil aspect in the Sandiganbayan
since it is just the State which is the offended
party.
● Where the demeanor is not essential in determining
the credibility of the witness; for example, the forensic
chemist, medico-legal, and they will testify merely on
the due execution and contents of documents and
reports; Judicial Affidavits may be used, no need to
have them go to court since they are so busy.
● But under the Continuous Trial Guidelines, they
(medico-legal, forensic chemist) are exempt from
executing Judicial Affidavits. Since it will take more
time to have them go to the office and execute Judicial
Affidavits. They have no time. These jwitnesses
coming from government officers are allowed to go to
court and testify orally, instead of by Judicial
Affidavit.

The Judicial Affidavit Rule (A.M. No. 12-8-8-SC)

Judicial Affidavit is Testimonial Evidence

 Page 40 of 63

● The Judicial Affidavit takes the place of the witness’

direct testimony. Question, is the Judicial Affidavit a
documentary evidence or a testimonial evidence?
o It is testimonial evidence because it takes the
place of the direct examination of the witness.
So it is the direct examination of the witness.
● It is testimonial evidence; need not be marked;
● You are supposed to submit the Judicial Affidavit five
(5) days before the pre-trial. Considering the changes;
in Civil Procedure, the Judicial Affidavits are attached
to the initiatory pleading;
o In civil cases, no need to wait for pre-trial
before executing the Judicial Affidavits;
o In criminal cases, the rule remains the same: 5
days before pre-trial.
● No affidavit, no testimony.
o But there is one chance to submit a late
affidavit; But you have to provide a just cause
for the lateness or the delay, plus pay a fee of
P1,000.

Format of Judicial Affidavits

● There is a specific format in Judicial Affidavits; it has
to be in question and answer form;
● Plus there are two jurats: jurat of the affiant, then the
jurat of the person who took the answers of the
affiant.
o Two notarizations are required;

Hearing Through Videoconferencing

 Page 41 of 63

● Remote hearings because of the pandemic; but of

course, Justice Singh advocates that the hearing
through videoconferencing continues even after the
pandemic to solve the problems of expenses and
distance, such as in the case of witnesses coming from
the province who are made to attend hearings
conducted in Manila to testify, and vice versa.

Discovery Procedures in Criminal Cases

Discovery Procedures in Criminal Cases

● Production or inspection of material evidence in
possession of the prosecution
o Could also be subpoena; subpoena is often
used, asking for the issuance of subpoena ad
testificandum for testimony and subpoena duces
tecum for objects and documents;
● Suspension of Arraignment if the accused appears to
be suffering from unsound medical condition
o Examination of the mental condition of the
accused;
● Depositions
● Conditional examination of witnesses of both the
defense and the prosecution

Justification to Allow the Conditional Examination of the

Witnesses for the Accused

● Very common, sensical; for example, the distance, or

is sick (bedridden, can no longer stand), or other
similar circumstances; the court will allow;
● If the persons being examined are witnesses of the
accused, examination can be done before a different
 Page 42 of 63

judge or a different court, does not have to be the

court trying the case; can also be before any other
officer like a notary public;
● If the persons being examined are witnesses of the
prosecution, will not be allowed. If they will be the
ones conditionally examined, it can be done only in
court and before the court actually trying the case.
● What is the difference? The difference is the witnesses
of the prosecution should be available for
confrontation by the accused since the accused has the
right to confront all the witnesses and evidence
against him. Unlike in the case of witnesses of the
accused, the State does not have the same right.

Examination of Prosecution Witness

● Basically the same grounds; distance, infirmity or

illness, or not in the Philippines, cannot go home or is
about to leave the Philippines, etc.; it is allowed but
has to be before the same court.

Where the Accused Not Brought to Trial

● The information may be dismissed on motion of the

accused on the ground of denial of his right to speedy
trial.
o This is subject to proof; and the burden is on
the accused;
o The presumption is there is regularity; there
was regularity in the performance of the duties
of the prosecutor; there was regularity in the
performance of the duties of the court.
● If the accused claims there was delay, violating his
right to speedy trial, and the case should be
dismissed, the burden is on him. He has to overcome
those presumptions.

Trial of Several Accused

 Page 43 of 63

● For example, the are two or more accused, jointly

charged, they shall be tried jointly, unless the court
orders separate trial.
● This is what usually happens; there are two accused;
one of them is arrested immediately, while the other
remains at large; the trial proceeds with the first
accused; the first accused is then sentenced and
convicted; only then is the second accused arrested;
what will happen? Start from scratch; this is another
accused who is entitled to his own trial; he is entitled
to confront the witnesses and all the evidence against
him. It is going to be a separate trial, but it does not
mean that all the evidence presented with respect to
the first accused is useless; if the prosecution is
presenting the same evidence, they can just adopt
what was used against the first accused. But the
second accused would have the right to confront,
meaning he can cross-examine the witnesses that have
been previously presented, although these witnesses
do not have to go through another direct examination.

Grounds for Discharge of Accused to be a State Witness

● State witness in controversial cases; B

● But these are the elements or requisites that have to
be satisfied for an accused to be discharged as a state
witness;

Elements to be Discharged as State Witness

1. There is absolute necessity for the testimony of the
accused whose discharge is requested;
o Connected to the second element;
0. There is no other direct evidence available for the
proper prosecution of the offense committed, except the
testimony of said accused;
o This means without the testimony of the
accused sought to be discharged as state
witness, the case of the prosecution will not
prosper; that is the absolute necessity under
the first requisite, and the direct evidence
under the second requisite;
 Page 44 of 63

0. The testimony of said accused can be substantially

corroborated in its material points;
o This means it is not self-serving which the
accused invented to become a state witness
when actually there is no corroborating
evidence in support thereof;
o Can be substantially corroborated;
“kapanipaniwala”
0. Said accused does not appear to be the most guilty;
and
o The accused does not appear to be the most
guilty; no evidence presentation yet; all this is
based on prima facie, on its face the evidence
seems to indicate that the accused is not the
most guilty;
0. Said accused has not at any time been convicted of
any offense involving moral turpitude.
o If the accused has been convicted of an offense
involving moral turpitude, the honesty,
morality, and integrity of the accused is in
question; his trustworthiness;

Effect of Discharge of an Accused to be a State Witness

● If you are discharged as state witness, that would

amount as an acquittal; remember, there is no hearing
yet since the accused is still being discharged as the
witness of the prosecution;
● Once the court issues an order discharging you as a
state witness, that amounts to an acquittal as far as
you are concerned; the accused is acquitted; double
jeopardy will attach; later on, the accused cannot be
charged for the same offense;
● However, if the accused did not proceed with his
testimony, or if the accused testified differently in
contrast to his previous testimony, then his discharge
as state witness can be set aside, and his acquittal
will be invalid. Meaning, he can be prosecuted for
the same offense.

Oral Offer of Evidence

 Page 45 of 63

● After presentation of evidence, we proceed with oral

offer of evidence.
● The rule now is all over of evidence must be oral,
whether civil action, criminal action, special
proceeding.
● Comment must be oral. Ruling of the court must be
oral.
● But remember, that when what is offered is a
testimony of a witness, you have to offer the
testimony of your witness first before he starts
testifying. This happens during the time you are
presenting your witness. It does not happen at the
end of your presentation of evidence.

Oral Offer of Evidence; Rationale

● Rationale: The rule is very clear. Under Rule 132,

evidence not offered shall not be considered by the
court. That is why a formal offer is required.

Objections to the Offer of Evidence

When Formal Offer of Evidence is Not Necessary

 Page 46 of 63

When is formal offer of evidence excused?

1. When the evidence was duly identified by testimony
duly recorded;
o As evidenced by the transcript;
2. When the evidence is incorporated in the records of
the case;
o 1. and 2. coincide; as to the first, meaning, in
the course of the proceeding, one witness
identified the evidence; as to the second, that
evidence is incorporated in the records of the
case;
o For example, a contract of sale; offended party
testified on the contract of sale; included in his
TSN; and then the contract of sale itself is
attached in the record of the case; even if that
contract of sale was not formally offered in
evidence, the same may be considered by the
court;
3. Where the court takes judicial notice of adjudicative
facts pursuant to Rule 192.2;
o Will get to that in Evidence;
4. Where the court relies on judicial admissions within
the context of Rule 129.4; or
o Will also get to that in evidence;
5. Where the court, in judging the demeanor of
witnesses, determines their credibility even without
the offer of the demeanor in evidence;

Objections to Testimonial Evidence Under the Judicial

Affidavit Rule

● Under the JAR, when the testimony is offered; “Your

Honor, I am calling A and he has executed a Judicial
Affidavit. Your Honor, I am offering the testimony of
A for the following purposes (and then you state your
purposes).” After you state the purposes, the court
should give the other party a chance to object or say
his comment as to the offer of testimony. As to
purposes;
 Page 47 of 63

● Secondly, the court should give the adverse party a

chance to object to any of the questions or answers in
the Judicial Affidavit;
● In an oral testimony, when there are questions, we are
allowed to object: “Objection, Your Honor.
Irrelevant;” “Objection, Your Honor. The witness is
incompentent;” “Objection, Your Honor. It is covered
by attorney-client privilege.”
o We can raise so many objections;
o But, since the testimony has become written in
the form of a Judicial Affidavit, what will
happen to those objections? The court cannot
allow those objectionable parts to go into the
record without comment.
● Have to give the party a chance to object; if there is an
objection the court has to rule on it. If the court finds
that the objection is justified, the court can make a
ruling to expunge that part of the Judicial Affidavit. It
will not be physically expunged; but the court will
bracket it and mark it, “expunged.” So that if there
would be an appeal, the same can still be read by the
appellate court. If the same is physically expunged,
will not be read by the appellate court, in cases where
the trial court erred in its ruling.

Demurrer to Evidence

● Procedure; after the prosecution has rested its case;

what is the procedure in a demurrer? The court will
inquire from the accused if he wants to file a motion
to file leave for a demurrer?
● There are two steps in demurrer;
 Page 48 of 63

1. Motion for leave to file a demurrer to evidence;

2. Actual demurrer to evidence.
● In a motion for leave to file a demurrer, you have to
state clearly your grounds for filing a demurrer to
evidence.
● In demurrer to evidence, essentially what you are
saying is, the evidence of the prosecution is
insufficient to prove the guilt of the accused beyond
reasonable doubt.
● But in a motion for leave, you have to state how you
can say the evidence is insufficient to prove the guilt
of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
● If the court has granted the motion for leave to file a
demurrer, that is when you can file a demurrer to
evidence.
● If the court denied the motion for leave to file a
demurrer, and still you filed a demurrer to evidence
which was then denied, then you can no longer
present evidence.
● However, if you filed a motion for leave to file a
demurrer which the court granted, and then you
filed a demurrer which was subsequently denied,
you still have the right to present evidence.

Demurrer to Evidence; Effect

● If the demurrer is granted, that is an acquittal.

● The demurrer is an objection to the insufficiency of
the evidence. If the court grants the demurrer, that
means the court agrees that the prosecution failed to
prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable
doubt. That is why it amounts to an acquittal.
● If the demurrer is denied, it is like the court is stating
the evidence of the prosecution is sufficient to
establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable
doubt. But the accused is still given the chance to
present evidence.

Demurrer to Evidence; Standard of Proof

 Page 49 of 63

Review of an Order Granting a Demurrer

Review of an Order Denying a Demurrer

If the Demurrer is Granted, What is Your Remedy

● For example, the demurrer is granted. That amounts
to an acquittal. Can you appeal? No.
o You cannot appeal because that will be double
jeopardy.
o Even MR is prohibited. That will be double
jeopardy.
o What then is the remedy? Rule 65 petition.
● If you were the OSG, you can file a Rule 65 petition
before the CA, questioning the criminal aspect and
the civil aspect.
● If you were the offended party, the only thing you
can do is file a Rule 65 petition questioning the civil
aspect. You cannot question the criminal aspect.

If the Demurrer is Denied, What is Your Remedy

● If your demurrer to evidence is denied; you cannot
appeal or certiorari; that is the rule under Rule 119
and the Continuous Trial Guidelines;
● The cited provision in 2017; where there is grave
abuse of discretion but that is still not the Continuous
Trial Guidelines;
● Under the Continuous Trial Guidelines, was not
included; but under the Rules on Civil Procedure,
with respect to demurrer, that is prohibited;
● It would seem under Rule 119, Sec. 23: The order
denying the motion for leave of court to file demurrer to
evidence or the demurrer itself shall not be reviewable by
appeal or by certiorari before judgment.
o For Justice Singh, when 2017 was released the
Guidelines for Continuous Trial was not yet
complete. Rule 119, Sec. 23, last paragraph
was not amended. Shall not be reviewable by
appeal or by certiorari before judgment.
 Page 50 of 63

Rebuttal/Sur-Rebuttal Evidence

● Rebuttal evidence is included in the 180-day period;

Rebuttal; The prosecution has the right to present
rebuttal evidence. The right of the prosecution to
present rebuttal evidence cannot be denied;
● As to sur-rebuttal, that is discretionary on the part of
the court. That is not mandatory.

Memoranda

● Discretionary on the part of the court.

● If the court wants the parties to submit memoranda,
that is allowed. If the court does not want the parties
to submit memoranda, the case can be submitted for
decision, even without memoranda.

Rule 120 Judgment

Judgment; General Principles

● Lack of stenographic notes is not a ground to defer

the submission of the case for decision. Because as
soon as both parties are complete with their
presentation of evidence and the evidence have been
admitted by the court, the case should be submitted
for decision.
● The period to decide varying; 90 days in regular
cases; 30 days in summary; 15 days in drug cases;
varies;
● Form and Contents; basic; as prepared and signed by
the judge in the official language stating clearly and
distinctly the facts and the law upon which it is based;

Judgment; Contents
 Page 51 of 63

Judgment; Acquittal

● In case the judgment is an acquittal, the court shall

state that the accused acquitted for lack of evidence or
insufficiency of evidence, or acquitted because the
prosecution absolutely failed to prove the guilt of the
accused, or the offense was proven but the identity of
the assailant was not proven. The court should state
the same because it has an effect on the civil aspect;

Judgment; Conviction

It shall state:
1. The legal qualification of the offense constituted by
the acts committed by the accused and the
aggravating or mitigating circumstances which
attended its commission;
o Meaning, e.g., considering the mitigating, the
aggravating, is the offense qualified rape or
simple rape; cannot just say that the accused is
convicted of rape; there are different penalties
therefor; the same goes in the case of robbery;
what kind of robbery; and also estafa; must be
qualified;
0. The participation of the accused in the offense,
whether as principal, accomplice, or accessory after the fact;
o What is the participation of the accused; is he
a principal, accomplice, accessory;
o Justice Singh did not make it habit that in
every decision she would state that “I am
convicting him as a principal;” for Justice
 Page 52 of 63

Singh, it is understood that the accused is

convicted as a principal if nothing else was
said; but if the accused will be convicted as an
accessory or as an accessory, she would specify
the same;
o Justice Singh shared that the whole time she
was in the Judiciary she has only convicted an
accused as an accomplice or accessory twice;
usually, they are principals; if the principal was
not a principal by direct participation, Justice
Singh would specify such as if the accused was
a principal by inducement or principal by
indispensable cooperation; but if she does not,
it should be understood that the accused is
convicted as principal by direct participation; it
is only logical;
0. The penalty imposed upon the accused; and
o When it comes to penalty, would have to
consider the Indeterminate Sentence Law;
0. The civil liability or damages caused by his wrongful
act or omission to be recovered from the accused by the
offended party, if there is any, unless the enforcement of the
civil liability by a separate civil action has been reserved or
waived.
o Civil liability ex delicto; includes moral
damages, exemplary damages, nominal or
temperate;
● People v. Jugueta
o Outline the civil damages awardable; you do
not need to memorize since you are not yet
judges; but just so you have an understanding
that there are differences as to the award of
civil damages depending on the penalty;

People v. Jugueta, G.R. No. 202124, 5 April 2016

● Anent the award of damages, the Court deems it
proper to address the matter in detail as regards
criminal cases where the imposable penalty is
reclusion perpetua to death. Generally, in these types
of criminal cases, there are three kinds of damages
awarded by the Court; namely: civil indemnity,
moral, and exemplary damages. Likewise, actual
damages may be awarded or temperate damages in
some instances.
● First, civil indemnity ex delicto is the indemnity
authorized in our criminal law for the offended party,
in the amount authorized by the prevailing judicial
policy and apart from other proven actual damages,
which itself is equivalent to actual or compensatory
damages in civil law. It is to be noted that civil
indemnity is, technically, not a penalty or a fine;
hence, it can be increased by the Court when
appropriate.
● Also, it is apparent from Article 2206 that the law only
imposes a minimum amount for awards of civil
indemnity, which is P3,000.00. The law did not
provide for a ceiling. Thus, although the minimum
amount for the award cannot be changed, increasing
the amount awarded as civil indemnity can be validly
 Page 53 of 63

modified and increased when the present

circumstance warrants it.
● The second type of damages the Court awards are
moral damages, which are also compensatory in
nature.Similarly, in American jurisprudence, moral
damages are treated as "compensatory damages
awarded for mental pain and suffering or mental
anguish resulting from a wrong."
● Corollarily, moral damages under Article 2220 of the
Civil Code also does not fix the amount of damages
that can be awarded. It is discretionary upon the
court, depending on the mental anguish or the
suffering of the private offended party. The amount of
moral damages can, in relation to civil indemnity, be
adjusted so long as it does not exceed the award of
civil indemnity.
● Also known as "punitive" or "vindictive" damages,
exemplary or corrective damages are intended to
serve as a deterrent to serious wrong doings, and as a
vindication of undue sufferings and wanton invasion
of the rights of an injured or a punishment for those
guilty of outrageous conduct.
● Existing jurisprudence pegs the award of exemplary
damages at P30,000.00, despite the lack of any
aggravating circumstance. The Court finds it proper
to increase the amount to P50,000.00 in order to deter
similar conduct.

Judgment in Case of Variance Between Allegation and

Proof

● If there is a variance between the allegation and then

what is established by evidence, then you can be
convicted of the crime which is established by the
evidence, as long as the offense is necessarily
included or necessarily includes the offense charged.
● Why is the rule the way it is? Because you are deemed
to have been informed of the nature and cause of the
 Page 54 of 63

accusation against you. There is no violation of your

constitutional right.
● But if the offense proven is not necessarily included or
does not necessarily include the offense charged, then
you cannot be convicted of that offense; because they
would be a violation of your right to be informed of
the nature and cause of the accusation against you.
What will happen to the case then? Will it not be
unfair when it is in fact true that the accused
committed the crime?
● Then you would have to file a new information. If
after trial, it becomes apparent that there is a mistake
in the offense that was charged, a new information
will be filed charging the proper offense.

Promulgation of Judgment

● That is done in open court, meaning, in public, the

judgment would be read against the accused. There is
no need to read the whole decision. Justice Singh
would just read the dispositive portion: “Wherefore,
the accused is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt
of whatever, and then the penalty.”
● In some cases like light offenses, reading is not
necessary. The same can just be recorded in the
criminal docket. Especially when the accused and
counsel are absent, despite notice. But if the accused
was present, you go through with the promulgation,
the public reading, because he is entitled thereto.

Promulgation of Judgment; Effect When the Accused is

Absent
 Page 55 of 63

● When the accused does not attend the promulgation

of judgment, despite notice, he loses all his remedies.
● What are his remedies?
o To file a motion for reconsideration;
o To file a notice of appeal;
o To file for probation;
● All these remedies are lost; plus warrant is issued
immediately, his bail is forfeited;
● If at the promulgation of judgment the accused fails
to appear, despite notice, and his non-appearance is
without just cause, he loses all his remedies under
the Rules. The court will order his arrest; the court
will forfeit his bail if he has his bail, and he can no
longer file an MR, he can no longer file a notice of
appeal, he can no longer file for probation.
● Of course, the accused can file an MR to explain why
he failed to appear. If he has a justifiable cause, the
court can grant his motion and reinstate his remedies.
Meaning, he can file for probation, he can file a notice
of appeal.

Modification of Judgment

● Not allowed once the decision has become final.

Doctrine of Immutability of Judgment.
● But Sec. 7 of Rule 120 bars the modification of a
criminal judgment only if the appeal brought before
the court is in the nature of a regular appeal under
Rule 41 (meaning, a notice of appeal), or an appeal by
certiorari under Rule 45, and if that appeal would put
the accused in double jeopardy.
● Generally, there is no double jeopardy. If it is a regular
appeal, then that is a continuation of the same case.
You are not being tried for the same offense in a
different litigation. It is still the same case. Appeal is a
continuation of the case.
 Page 56 of 63

● If it is an appeal under Rule 41 or appeal by certiorari

under Rule 45, that is just a continuation. No double
jeopardy. Judgment may still be modified.
● But if it is not, and it is a different case already like a
Rule 65, because Rule 65 is not a continuation. Rule 65
is not an appeal. An appeal is a continuation of the
main case. But a Rule 65 is an independent case. You
can still plea double jeopardy.

Entry of Judgment

● Once a judgment is entered into the Book of

Judgments, that means there are no remaining
remedies or appeals to the accused or to the other
party. That is what we call judgment that is final and
executory, immutable, can no longer be modified,
changed even if there is a mistake. Even the SC cannot
change it.

Rule 121 Motion for New Trial or Motion for

Reconsideration
Motion for New Trial; Grounds

● In Civil Procedure, there is FAME (fraud, accident,

mistake, excusable negligence) and newly-discovered
evidence. In Criminal Procedure, no more FAME, but
there is newly-discovered evidence, the second
ground.
Grounds
1. The errors of law or irregularities prejudicial to the
substantial rights of the accused have been committed
during the trial;
o There are many errors of law or irregularities;
but any denial of due process is a ground for
new trial;
0. The new and material evidence has been discovered
which the accused could not with reasonable diligence have
discovered and produced at the trial and which if introduced
and admitted would probably change the judgment.
o Newly-discovered evidence; it is not just about
being available at the time of the trial, but it is
about discovery; that is why it is called
newly-discovered evidence;
o At the time of the trial, the same has not been
discovered; you have no idea that it actually
exists; you could not have foreseen its
 Page 57 of 63

existence, could not have predicted its

existence;
o If at the time of trial, you already knew that
had you gone to the NSO or the PSA you
would be able to get the certificate of marriage
but you did not go; you could have predicted
that, you could have foreseen that; as such, the
same is not newly discovered evidence;

The first guideline to restrict the concept of

newly-discovered evidence to only such evidence that can
satisfy the following requisites:
1. The evidence was discovered after trial ;
2. Such evidence could not have been discovered and
produced at the trial even with the exercise of
reasonable diligence;
3. The evidence is material, not merely cumulative,
corroborative, or impeaching; and
4. The evidence is of such weight that it would probably
change the judgment if admitted
● All four requisites must be satisfied. Rarely are the
cases granted on the ground of newly-discovered
evidence.

Motion for Reconsideration; Grounds

Grounds
1. Errors of law in the judgment which requires no
further proceedings; and
2. Errors of fact in the judgment which also requires no
further proceedings.
● MR is easier, errors in fact and law;

Rules 122, 123 and 124 Appeals

Appeal Not a Natural Right

 Page 58 of 63

● Appeal is not a natural right. What does that mean?

Meaning, it is not inherent. That is because we are
human beings, does not mean we are entitled to
appeal. It is not a natural right. It is not granted by the
Constitution. It is granted by statute or the Rules of
Court. That is why it is called a statutory right or a
statutory privilege.
● Since it is not a natural or inherent right, we must
avail of it strictly in accordance with the dictates of
the statute or the rules that granted it. It is more of a
privilege than a right.
● Since you are given that opportunity, must follow the
requirements to avail of it. Strictly, of the time, the
mode of availing of it. If you fail to avail of it in the
manner dictated by the rules or by the law, then you
lose it. It is more of a privilege. It is a statutory
privilege.

Where to Appeal

How to Appeal
 Page 59 of 63

● MTC to RTC; Ordinary notice of appeal; When you

come from a first level court, or Metropolitan Trial
Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Municipal Trial
Court, or Municipal Circuit Trial Court, you will
appeal before the Regional Trial Court.
o What mode of appeal? Notice of appeal, which
we call an original appeal. Ordinary appeal by
notice of appeal. One paragraph notice of
appeal, “The undersigned respectfully gives
notice that the decision dated so and so of this
is being appealed to the Regional Trial Court
on both questions of fact and law. A copy of
the decision of this court was received on blank
date. The appeal fee is paid for. Attached is the
receipt.” Notice of appeal is that simple. To be
filed within 15 days.
o Together with your notice of appeal, pay your
docket fees within the same period of appeal. If
you fail to pay the docket fees within the same
period, you will lose your appeal.
● RTC to CA; from RTC decision, before the CA; But
you have to distinguish with respect to the decision of
the RTC. Is it a decision of the RTC in the exercise of
its original jurisdiction or in the exercise of its
appellate jurisdiction?
o If it is in the exercise of its original
jurisdiction, meaning, the case is filed with the
RTC (e.g., the charge is murder); original
jurisdiction; the RTC convicted the accused; the
accused would appeal; what is the mode of the
appeal before the CA? Ordinary appeal by
notice of appeal; The decision of the RTC in
the exercise of its original jurisdiction; ordinary
appeal by notice of appeal under Rule 122; File
the notice of appeal with the RTC; pay case
with the RTC; then the RTC with elevate the
case to the CA;
o If it is in the exercise of its appellate
jurisdiction, meaning, MTC decision
conviction (e.g., BP 22) appealed before the
RTC; after reviewing the MTC decision, the
RTC affirmed the MTC decision, the accused is
still convicted for BP 22; what is the mode of
review of the accused? The CA; What is the
mode of review? Cannot be ordinary appeal
by notice of appeal because the appeal from
MTC to RTC is already an ordinary appeal,
cannot availed of twice; Petition for review
under Rule 42;
 Page 60 of 63

o This is an aberration; Petition for review under

Rule 42; Why will we go back to Civil
Procedure for an appeal of a criminal case? No
counterpart provision was created in the rules
on Criminal Procedure. As such, all appeals of
decisions of the RTC in criminal cases in the
exercise of its appellate jurisdiction, Rule 42
will apply. As such, when docketed before the
CA, they appear as civil cases because the
mode of review used is Rule 42 which is under
Civil Procedure. That is why they are classified
as civil cases, although what is being appealed
is a criminal decision.
● Let’s say the decision of the RTC in the exercise of its
appellate jurisdiction affirmed the MTC decision,
convicting the accused for BP 22. Can the accused go
straight to the SC? For example, the issue of the
accused is the court has no jurisdiction. Even before
the MTC, the accused has already filed a motion to
quash for lack of jurisdiction. Before the RTC, the
accused also argued that the MTC has no jurisdiction
but the RTC affirmed the MTC decision. The accused
thinks going to the CA will just worsen his problem,
thinking that the CA will simply affirm the RTC
decision. Can the accused go straight to the SC,
alleging questions of law? Jurisdiction is a question of
law.
o Yes. The accused can file Rule 45. Questions of
law.
o Art. VIII, Sec. 5; questions of law; that is one of
the original jurisdictions of the SC; Rule 45
Petition for Review on Certiorari raises
purely questions of law;
o Technically, from the MTC; for example, the
accused filed a motion to quash for lack of
jurisdiction, alleging that RTC has jurisdiction;
MTC denied accused’s motion to quash; MTC
proceeded with the trial and later convicted the
accused; can the accused go straight to the SC?
o Yes. Questions of law. Although after the
denial of motion to quash, accused could file
certiorari. Rule 65. But he cannot go straight to
the SC because we have hierarchy of courts.
The SC, CA, and RTC have concurrent
jurisdiction with respect to Rule 65.
o Because of the hierarchy of courts, the accused
would have to file his Rule 65 petition before
the RTC.
o If Justice Singh were the lawyer, they should
proceed with the trial and if they lost, they
should go straight to the SC via Rule 45.
Question of law.
● Let’s say the case went to the CA. The decision of the
CA, any final order, decision, or resolution of the CA
of appeal is appealable to the SC by Rule 45. Petition
for review on certiorari. Question of law only. No
question of fact.
 Page 61 of 63

o Can Rule 65 be availed of? Rule 65 is only

available for questions of jurisdiction and
grave abuse of discretion.
o If you are asking that a decision of the CA be
reviewed, Rule 65 is not proper. Interlocutory
incidents only.
o Rule 45 may be availed of with respect to
questions of law after the CA.

Period to Appeal

● Within 15 days from promulgation of judgment or

from notice of the final order appealed from.
● Yu vs. Tatad
o The Court declared that the case of Neypes as
to the fresh period rule where when you file a
motion for reconsideration of the decision
when you receive the denial of your MR, you
have a fresh period of 15 days to file your
notice of appeal, is extended to criminal cases;
o The fresh period rule is extended to criminal
cases;

Yu v. Samson-Tatad, G.R. No. 170979, February 9, 2011

● In Neypes, the Court modified the rule in civil cases
on the counting of the 15-day period within which to
appeal. The Court categorically set a fresh period of
15 days from a denial of a motion for reconsideration
within which to appeal.
● While Neypes involved the period to appeal in civil
cases, the Court's pronouncement of a "fresh period"
to appeal should equally apply to the period for
appeal in criminal cases under Section 6 of Rule 122 of
the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure.

Procedure in the MTC

● If you appeal from the MTC to the RTC, no brief is

filed with the RTC. Memorandum of appeal is filed
with the RTC.
o Brief is filed before the CA.
 Page 62 of 63

Procedure in the Court of Appeals

Appeal of Several Accused

● Under Rule 122, Sec. 11 (a) An appeal taken by one or

more of several accused shall not affect those who did not
appeal, except insofar as the judgment of the appellate court
is favorable and applicable to the latter.
● If there are several accused, and only one accused
appealed, the appeal of the accused who chose to
appeal will not affect the others, except if the appeal is
beneficial.
● For example, there are two accused. One appealed,
the other did not. Upon appeal, the decision was
reversed, acquitting the accused. That acquittal
should benefit the other accused who did not appeal.
● Another example, there are two accused. Both of them
appealed. One of the accused did not file his brief, as
such his appeal was dismissed. The other accused
filed his brief, and his appeal was granted, the
decision was reversed and he was acquitted. Even if
the accused who did not file his brief and whose
appeal was dismissed will benefit from that. Even if
he was negligent and did not file his brief, he will
benefit from the acquittal.
● As long as one of the accused appealed, and the result
of the appeal is beneficial, all the other accused will
benefit from it.

Rule 127 Provisional Remedies

Provisional Remedies

● Provisional remedies are also available since there is a

civil aspect;
● Most common is the writ of preliminary attachment;
 Page 63 of 63

When Preliminary Attachment is Available

● Here are the instances where writ of preliminary

attachment is available; also same as the grounds
under Rule 57;
o About to abscond from the Philippines;
o Embezzlement, misappropriation;
o Concealing, removing, or disposing of
property;
o Mostly similar to the Rule 57 grounds also.

-end of Crimpro-