BAIL

INTRODUCTION

Constitutional basis

I. Definition and purpose

II. Kinds
III. Rules for when bail may be availed of

A. When Allowed
(1) Matter of Right
(2) Matter of Discretion
B. When not allowed
C. When not required

IV. Conditions
V. Entitlement
VI. Application (includes who may grant)
VII. Posting
VIII. Forfeiture

Definition and purpose

The right to bail flows from the presumption of innocence in favor of the accused. (De la Camara v. Enage, 41 SCRA 1)

When right may be invoked

Rules for when bail may be availed of

When bail is a matter of right

Bail is a matter of right in the following instances:

In criminal cases before the MTC: Before or after conviction

In criminal cases before the RTC: Before conviction, where the penalty is
less than reclusion perpetua, death or life imprisonment

When bail is a matter of discretion

(1) Matter of Discretion

Bail is a matter of discretion in the following instances:

In criminal cases before the RTC: After conviction, where the penalty is
less than reclusion perpetua, death or life imprisonment

When bail is not allowed

Bail is not allowed when the crime involved is a capital offense where evidence of guilt is strong. (Note that it is the prosecution
which has the burden of showing that evidence of guilt is strong.)

Bail is likewise not allowed after final judgment. The exception to this is when the accused applies for probation before the
judgement becomes final. (Note that the Probation Law must be applicable to both the penalty and the offense.)
When bail is not required

Kinds

A. Surety Bond
B. Property Bond
C. Cash Bond
D. Recognizance - Personal underwriting by accused or good citizen of community.

Conditions

At what stages of the criminal action is the accused required to be present?

1. arraignment
2. for identification
3. promulgation of judgment, except if the case is one involving a light offense

Right to bail and the right to travel abroad

Standards for fixing bail

Entitlement

Application (includes who may grant)

Where does one apply for bail? (Rule 114, Sec. 17)

As a general rule, bail is applied for / filed with the court where the case is pending.

Exceptions:

1. judge where case is pending is not available

2. Accused arrested in a place other than where case is pending
3. Accused has not yet been charged

Until when is bail good?

Unless cancelled, bail remains in force at all stages of the case until promulgation of judgment by RTC. (Rule 114, Sec. 2)

Posting

Forfeiture

What is the effect of failure of the accused out on bail to attend a hearing despite due notice?
(1) Bond -- If the hearing is one wherein the accuseds presence is mandatory, the
bond is forfeited. (However, if his presence is not required, there will be no effect on the bond.) Moreover, the Court will give
the sureties 30 days within which to produce their principal (or to give the reason for his non-production), and to show cause why
no judgment should be rendered against them for the amount of their bail (i.e., explain why the accused did not appear before the
court when first required to do so).

(2) Trial -- Trial in absentia, provided that accused has already been arraigned.

Question: Is the accuseds presence waived for that date only or for all other
dates thereafter?

Waiver of the right to bail

Who are NOT entitled to bail as of right?

1. reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment, death when evidence of guilt is strong

2. after conviction by the RTC imposing penalty of imprisonment exceeding 6 years but not more than 20 years and any of
the grounds enumerated

3. conviction reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment, death

Sirs view If you are convicted and penalty is more than 6 years, not as a matter of right but discretionary if any of the 5
conditions

Matter of right
a. before or after conviction by MTC
Bail MTC RTC; still good upon appeal

b. before conviction by RTC of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment
6 years and above 20 + 5 grounds = no discretion
SEC 24. If there is final judgment no bail because convicted, but can apply for probation before finality

What are the stages of bail?

(1) applying
(2) fixing
(3) posting

Where to apply not the same as where to post

look at type of bond see sec 11 and sec 14

Court where you apply fixes amount of bail

but this is NOT necessarily the court which will release you but where you post bail
e.g. charged in RTC Manila. Fix bail at P30,000. Can you post bail in RTC QC? Yes, 2nd paragraph sec 19

If post with treasurer get receipt and go to court you want the warrant to be recalled by the court

Applying v. Fixing v. Posting

just because court approves bail does not equate to posting
after approval of bail get ? then post

posting= where? any where case is pending or arrested?

theres no provision where to post bail
can post bail anywhere
Must forward what?
e.g. issue warrant Manila
release Q.C. ( cant approve application but once Manila approves, QC can release)

Bail = confusing = as to applying, fixing and posting

When is the liability of surety extinguished?

1. acquitted
2. dismissal
3. death
4. convicted and surrenders

Sec 21 = appeared as required

There used to be a letter of instruction waiving presence of accused

Bail fixed at P100,000 if surety or P10,000 if cash. Is this valid? Yes.

Bail if in cash can it be applied to fine and civil damages

fine Yes
Civil liability No, might not be his money

What if explain why cant produce

produce body OR give reason for his non-production
possibility that liability of bondsman will be reduced

If out on bail, can he travel abroad? No, unless with court permission may lose jurisdiction impairs contract of bondsman
Is this not impairment of liberty? Still in jail although out on bail bondsman is his jailer = bondman can arrest (no need for
warrant) sec 23

practice notice to the bondsman is notice to the accused

Sir: Who is not entitled to bail? Is there anyone not entitled to bail?
A: No.
Sir: Everybody is entitled to bail. There is no one not entitled to bail. Everybody is entitled even those charged with
reclusion perpetua and where evidence of guilt is strong. (?)

Sir: Even after conviction but pending appeal, they are entitled to bail?
A: Yes.

Sir: What is the difference of (1) those accused with offenses punishable by lesser penalties or RP where evidence of guilt is
not strong; and (2) those accused with RP evidence is strong?
A: (1) Bail is a matter of right. (2) Bail is discretionary upon court

Sir: If you are charged with an offense in the RTC, may you apply for bail in the MTC of the same province?
A: R 114, S 14, 2nd sentence, ....bail may be filed also in MTC.
Sir: I said applied. Here are the concepts. The court which fixes the bail. The court that accepts the bail, and therefore
releases the accused on bail.

Sir: May the MTC of QC fix and release on bail a person not charged before it? I did not say accept the bail.
A: S 16, 2nd par. ...file xxx.
Sir: But that provision presupposes that the bail was fixed. I am talking of QC-MTC fixing and accepting bail of one not
charged before it. In S 16, 2nd paragraph, why should he file bail when it has not yet been fixed?

Sir: Read provision where accused is arrested and not yet charged, and he can put up bail?
A: R 114, S 14 (c) xxx apply

Sir: Apply. That means is has not yet been fixed.

A: But S 6 The judge who granted the application shall fix the bail. So in S 14 (c), if the person applies for bail in court,
necessarily the court who approves application must also fix the bail. Thus, whoever approves application may fix the bail.

Sir: But a bail already fixed may be filed in another court other than that which fixed it.
A: Rules for fixing of baill and acceptance of bail is under S 14. Once bail is fixed, the court authorized t accept bail
should only be pending unless branch is unavailable, or arrested somewhere else.

Sir: How about if he is arrested without being charged?

A: He can file it in any court where he is held.

Sir: What amount if bail? Who will fix the bail?

A: Where he applied.

Sir: So that is different now. The court will fix the bail. Who will fix the bail of person arrested but not charged? Any court
in the province where he is held.

Sir: What are the kinds of bail? Can the court require of accused to fix bail at P 20,000 surety, but if case P 10,000 lang?
How about: the court required that if the bail be real property bond that if be real estate in the province and must have
been owned by surety for at least 5 years. Is that reasonable bail requirement? The requirement that is must have been owned for
at least 5 years has been held to be unreasonable if the property is Torrens titled. The implication was that it was reasonable if
property was not titled.

Sir: P 500,000 bail for homicide charge where the accused is a government clerk?

Sir: Regarding problem on P 20,000 surety bond or P 10,000 cash bond. Usually, to attain a bail bond of P 20,000, you might
be asked to put up collateral, even cash, sometimes for P 10,000. But there are time like right now where there are very few
bonding companies that have clearance to issue bail bonds about 5. If the accused is a government clerk only and he is charged
with homicide, half a million bail excessive? What is the test? What is the impact of his financial capacity? Whether bail is
excessive or not depends on the circumstances of the accused and the crimes charged like where some crimes are very rampant,
the Court may be justified in fixing very stiff bail.

ARRAIGNMENT & PLEA

I. Nature and purpose of arraignment

II. Procedure
III. Plea

A. Purpose
B. Types

(1) Guilty
(2) Not Guilty
(3) Refusal to enter plea
(4) Qualified or Conditional admission
(5) Plea Bargain

IV. Pre-Arraignment Remedies

V. Effects of Arraignment and Entry of Plea
VI. Availability of Provisional Remedies

Nature and purpose of arraignment

What is arraignment? (Rule 116, Sec. 1)

Pagbabasa in Filipino. The information is read to the accused in a language which he understands and is given a copy thereof.
He is then asked to enter his plea. If he doesnt have a lawyer, he is given a counsel de oficio.

Procedure
Plea

Purpose of plea

Types of plea

(1) Guilty
(2) Not Guilty
(3) Refusal to enter plea
(4) Qualified or Conditional admission
(5) Plea Bargain

What are the possible pleas?

(1) Guilty
(2) Not guilty
(3) Conditional plea of guilty (This is considered as not guilty.)
(4) Pleads guilty but presents exculpatory evidence (Considered as not guilty)
(5) Plea of guilty to a lesser offense
(6) Mute (This is considered as not guilty.)
(7) Evasive (considered as not guilty)

Plea of guilty: when is reception of evidence mandatory? discretionary?

If the accused pleads guilty to a capital offense, reception of evidence as to the voluntariness and full comprehension of the
consequences of his plea, proof of guilt, and precise degree of culpability is mandatory. This is so that the Supreme Court will
have something to review once the case goes up on automatic review.

However, if the accused pleads guilty to a non-capital offense, reception of evidence is merely discretionary.

Is a negotiated plea or a plea to a lesser offense allowed?

Yes. Under the Rules, a lesser offense is one that is necessarily included in the offense charged. (Rule 116, Sec. 2) It is
allowed to be made either during arraignment, or after arraignment but before trial provided that the earlier plea of not guilty is
withdrawn. It can also be made by the trial prosecutor in the event that the accused fails to appear during the arraignment despite
due notice. (Rule 116, Sec. 1(f))

Note: An offense charged is deemed to be necessarily included in the offense

proved when the essential ingredients of the former constitute or form part of those constituting the latter. (Rule 120, Sec. 5)

It must be stressed, however, that a plea to a lesser offense or to one that is necessarily included in the offense charged
does NOT apply to crimes covered by special laws (e.g. possession of drugs under the Dangerous Drugs Act)

When is a plea deemed improvident? What are its effects?

A plea is deemed improvident when the accused finds out that there was a mistake in the admission. The Court may permit an
improvident plea of guilty to be withdrawn and be substituted by a plea of not guilty. (Rule 116, Sec. 5)

Note: If the accused pleaded guilty because he misappreciated the penalty to be

Imposed, this is not deemed an improvident plea.

Can a withdrawn plea of guilty be used as an admission?

No, doesnt make sense if used against him

Plea Bargaining

Pre-Arraignment Remedies
Availability of Provisional Remedies

Is it possible for the accused to waive reading of information?

Generally, no.

Even if pleads guilty if later on there is evidence to show incomplete self -defense change to not guilty

mute not guilty

evasive not guilty

Who are required to be present during arraignment? (Rule 116, Sec. 1 (f))

1. accused - Must be present.

2. offended party for plea bargaining and civil liability. If the offended party fails to appear despite due notice, a plea
of guilty to a lesser offense which is necessarily included in the offense charged may be entered with the conformity of the trial
prosecutor alone.

Effects of Arraignment and Entry of Plea

What are the consequences of an entry of plea?

The moment you plea, you can no longer:

1. move to quash (except on those 4 exceptional grounds);

2. question validity of the arrest;
3. question lack of preliminary investigation;
4. amend the information without leave of court;
5. move for a bill of particulars (Rule 116, Sec. 9)

Moreover,

Sec 7, Rule 117 (b) The conviction of the accused shall not be a bar to another
prosecution for an offense which necessarily includes the offense charged in the former complaint or information if the facts
constituting the graver charge became known or were discovered only after a plea was entered in the former complaint or
information.

Jeopardy attaches, since one of the requirements is that the accused has been arraigned.

Trial can be conducted in absentia thereafter.

Do we allow for reconsidered plea?

Yes. If prosecution and offended party consents provided further that it is necessarily included in the information.

variance can be convicted if elements of lesser offense are included

plea of guilt can be withdrawn = before conviction

plea of guilty can be withdrawn before reception

Time Frame : 30 days from date court acquires jurisdiction over person
What are the exceptions? Motion to quash, etc.

reserve action = reserve before prosecution starts presenting evidence (R111, sec 1 par2)

Answer as long as deny allegations in information, its up to prosecution to prove

at pre-trail there can be some admission (ex. reserve trial)

Plea signifies that accused understands charge

a denial (like answer)
jeopardy attaches

New Rules aggravating circumstances = must be alleged in the complaint (even generic)

Plea of guilt can be withdrawn before judgment improvident plea

What if pending appeal? Yes like a withdrawal of appeal (sec 12, R122)
What about withdrawal of appeal if already in appellate court?
see sec 18 R 124 = Civil cases
can withdraw sec 3 R50 before filing of appellees brief as a matter of right

Can decisions of the RTC be reviewed by Sandiganbayan? Yes, if salary grade is below 27

Negotiated Plea Bargainin like blackjack favorable to both accused and prosecution State conviction saves
time/resources

Can the accused be arraigned in absentia?

No. Not even if he is going to plead guilty.

May a plea of guilty be withdrawn? up to when?

May a plea of not guilty be withdrawn? When is the last time you can change it?

Sir: The accused plead guilty to information which does not allege any aggravating circumstance nor any civil liability and
yet the court convicted him and sentence him taking into consideration account of aggravating circumstance and imposed civil
liability, is it correct?
Sir: Even generic aggravating cannot be taken into account in imposing penalty to the accused who enters plea of guilty? Can
the court take into account generic aggravating in sentencing accused who pleads guilty to an information that does not allege any
such circumstance?
Sir: No, nor any civil liability which is not allege. Reason: where he pleads guilty, a plea of guilt means an admission of all
the material allegations of the information. Only those that are alleged.

Accused charged with rebellion can he plead guilty to unjust vexation?

Yes.

He cannot plead guilty to rape because it more serious offense than rebellion.
A: Yes.

Sir: Even if the lesser offense is not within the jurisdiction of the Court?
A: Yes.

Sir: Even if the lesser offense is not necessarily included in the offense charged?
A: Yes.

Sir: Under what conditions can such plea to unjust vexation be accepted?
A: If the offended party consents and the fiscal.

Sir: Regarding aggravating circumstance and plea of guilt. In that case of plea of guilt, I was assuming that no evidence was
received. Remember: generic aggravating although not alleged may be proved because it is not an essential element of the
offense. So, if not alleged nor proved, cannot be taken into account. However, if not alleged nor proved, cannot be taken into
account because what is the basis.
Sir: So if not alleged, pleaded guilty, but proved, it can be taken into consideration
Sir: R 116, S 2. Conviction under plea is equivalent to conviction for double jeopardy. Is it not absurd that ex. charge of
murder, pleads guilty to unjust vexation, he cannot be prosecuted for murder anymore?
Sir: Only absurd if you do not understand the philosophy behind plea bargaining. State encourages plea bargaining. Quid pro
quo? The trade off? Saves time and resources of state.

Sir: What is the status of Trono doctrine promulgated by RP SC under US period and affirmed by US SC, but in recent
decision of US SC now that we are no longer under US rule, was reversed implicitly? The facts are like this supposed: supposed
you are charged with murder but convicted of homicide, and then you appeal, can the appellate court convict you of murder?
Same facts, charged with murder. Convicted of homicide. You appeal. On appeal, new trial was ordered, New trial
held. Convicted of murder. Pwede ba? Under Trono case, yes.

QUASHAL

QUASHAL PROPER

Comparison of old and new rules

OLD RULES 2000 RULES COMMENTARY

No counterpart provision.
Rule 117, Sec. 8. Provisional
dismissal. - A case shall not be
provisionally dismissed except with
the express consent of the accused
and with notice to the offended party.
The 2000 Rules finally codify the
practice of the courts of granting
provisional dismissals.

The provisional dismissal of

offenses punishable by imprisonment
not exceeding 6 years or a fine of any
amount, or both, shall become
permanent 1 year after issuance of
the order without the case having
been revived. With respect to
offenses punishable by imprisonment
of more than 6 years, their
provisional dismissal shall become
permanent 2 years after issuance of
the order without the case having
been revived.

I. Concept of quashal
II. Grounds for Motion to Quash
III. Concept of Double Jeopardy
IV. Effect of Failure to Move to Quash
V. Remedies for Denial of Motion to Quash

CONCEPT OF QUASHAL

Is it possible to move to quash and plead at the same time?

The rule says that a motion to quash must be made before the accused enters his plea. (Rule 117, Sec. 1. Previously, in the pre-
85 Rules, you were allowed to plead AND file a motion to quash. This is no longer true.)

What is the consequence of resorting to a motion to quash?

Jeopardy will not attach since the accused will not be entering a plea.

GROUNDS FOR MOTION TO QUASH

The accused may move to quash the complaint or information on any of the following grounds:

(a) That the facts charged do not constitute an offense;

In this case, the prosecution shall be given an opportunity to correct the defect by amendment. The motion shall be granted if the
prosecution fails to make the amendment, or the complaint or information still suffers from the same defect despite the
amendment. (Rule 117, Sec. 4, 2nd paragraph)

(b) That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the offense charged;

The court can consider this ground even if it has not been alleged in the complaint or information. (Rule 117, Sec. 2)

(c) That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the person of the accused;

(d) That the officer who filed the information had no authority to do so;

(e) That it does not conform substantially to the prescribed form;

If the motion to quash is based on an alleged defect of the complaint or information which can be cured by amendment, the court
shall order that an amendment be made. (Rule 117, Sec. 4, 1st paragraph)

(f) That more than one offense is charged except when a single punishment for various offenses is prescribed by law;

(g) That the criminal action or liability has been extinguished;

(h) That it contains averments which, if true, would constitute a legal excuse or justification; and

Is the insanity of the accused a ground to motion to quash?

It is. The basis is in letter G Sec. 3 of Rule 117 i.e.. That it contains averments which if found true would constitute a legal
excuse or justification.

(i) That 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

What are the grounds for a motion to quash (MTQ) which are not barred even though not raised before the accused pleads, in
other words, grounds, which may be raised even after plea?

(1) Lack of jurisdiction over the offence charged or the person of the accused;

(2) Extinction of the criminal action or liability;

Note: Prescription, pardon, and amnesty fall under extinction of criminal liability.

(3) Double jeopardy; and

(4) The facts charged do not constitute an offense (Rule 117, Sec. 8)

Is there evidentiary hearing in a motion to quash?

There is, (Note: In P. v. Qadabis the SC held that matters of defense can be produced when the grounds for a motion to quash are
extinction of criminal liability; prescription and double jeopardy. In P. v. De La Rosa, the SC held that when the prosecution asks
the court to present evidence; as did the other party, the accused; the court cannot close its eyes on such evidence presented.

Sir: The problematical ground is where the ground for the MTQ is that the information does not allege facts sufficient to
constitute the offense. In civil procedure, the oft-repeated rule that motion for dismissal based on the ground that the complaint
does not allege a sufficient cause of action shall be resolved only on the basis of the complaint is no longer absolutely true. The
court may consider all evidence already on record as that in the case of Tan v. Bureau of Forestry. The case involved a boundary
dispute over timber concession. During the hearing on preliminary injunction, a Map was presented wherein the boundaries were
marked so that it was clear that the allegations of the complaint has no basis.

The courts may consider evidence already on record, second matters of judicial notice, and 3 rd, admissions. This is also the case
where the grounds for MTQ is failure to allege facts sufficient to constitute an offense. In P. v. de la Rosa, the famous gold bar
case, a German lady was apprehended at the then Manila International Airport for bringing several gold bars. She was charged
on violation of Tariff and Customs Code for bringing in dutiable items without declaring them for customs purposes. She moved
to quash on the ground that the information did not charge an offense. Surprisingly, it was even the fiscal who moved for hearing
where evidence was adduced to the effect that she was just a transit passenger and was really bound for Taipei. Thats why she
was book overnight long at the Hilton. There was no connecting flight to Taipei then she had to stay overnight. These were
considered. The court said that based on the evidence on record, together with the admissions of the fiscal, it was clear that she
had no intent: to import the gold bar to the Philippines and dismissed/ Quashed the information for failure to charge an offense.
Suspension of arraignment sec 11 R116
new = petition for review pending with DOJ or Office of the President shall not exceed 60 days ---- taken from the case of
Roberts 349 Pepsi case

If inadequate or lack of PI not move to quash

remedy = ask for PI and move to suspend
Deadline; before entering his pleas
Qualification: if arrested without warrant, RPC 125 ---ask for PI (sec 7 R 112) 5 days

Can move for production of evidence even after arraignment

Insanity legal excuse or justification- ground for quashal if it contains averments which if true

Is there evidentiary hearing on a motion to quash?

General Rule NO
In evaluating motion to quash on grounds court NOT limited to allegations but may consider all evidence already on record,
matters of judicial notice

CONCEPT OF DOUBLE JEOPARDY

OLD RULES 2000 RULES COMMENTARY

Rule 117, Sec. 3. Grounds. - The Rule 117, Sec. 3. Grounds. - The
accused may move to quash the accused may move to quash the
complaint or information on any of complaint or information on any of
the following grounds: the following grounds:

(h) That the accused has been
previously convicted or in jeopardy
of being convicted, or acquitted of
the offense charged.
(i) That 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.
The 2000 Rules now expressly
enumerate the 4 instances by which
an accused is protected by law from
being placed under jeopardy a second
time.

Rule 117, Sec. 7, second paragraph.
Former conviction or acquittal;
double jeopardy. -
However, the conviction of the
accused shall not be a bar to another
prosecution for an offense which
necessarily includes the offense
charged in the former complaint or
information under any of the
following instances:
Rule 117, Sec. 7, second paragraph.
Former conviction or acquittal;
double jeopardy. -
However, the conviction of the
accused shall not be a bar to another
prosecution for an offense which
necessarily includes the offense
charged in the former complaint or
information under any of the
following instances:

(a) the graver offense developed (a) the graver offense developed
due to supervening facts arising from due to supervening facts arising from No change.
the same act or omission constituting the same act or omission constituting
the former charge; the former charge;

(b) the facts constituting the
graver charge became known or were
discovered only after the filing of the
former complaint or information; or
(b) the facts constituting the
graver charge became known or were
discovered only after a plea was
entered in the former complaint or
information; or
The reckoning point is now date
of entry of plea and no longer the
date of filing of the complaint or
information.

(c) the plea of guilty to the lesser
offense was made without the
consent of the fiscal and of the
offended party.
(c) the plea of guilty to the lesser
offense was made without the
consent of the prosecutor and of the
offended party, except as provided in
Sec. 1 (f) of Rule 116.
Sec. 1 (f) of Rule 116 provides
that in case of failure of the offended
party to appear despite due notice, the
court may allow the accused to enter
a plea of guilty to a lesser offense

In any of the foregoing cases, where
the accused satisfies or serves in
whole or in part the judgment, he
shall be credited with the same in the
event of conviction for the graver
offense.
In any of the foregoing cases, where which is necessarily included in the
the accused satisfies or serves in offense charged with the conformity
whole or in part the judgment, he of the trial prosecutor alone.
shall be credited with the same in the
event of conviction for the graver
offense.

DOUBLE JEOPARDY DEFINED

Double Jeopardy cornerstone of criminal procedure

Purpose of double jeopardy

What is the purpose for the principle of double jeopardy?

Because of vast resources of the State, should give it only one chance; otherwise, harassment

Sir: Jeopardy is the pillar of our criminal justice system. How important it is need not be stressed. You can imagine what kind
of system we will have if we do not have that rule. Perhaps the best way to understand the provision if to quote it. Is it a long
provision? Its only a sentence isnt it except for that qualification about the ordinance. What are the critical words or phrases
in the provision? Actually, Jeopardy lang and same offense. So the questions to ask are: When are you put in jeopardy of
punishment first, when are you put in jeopardy at all, so that you would know that the next time you are put twice. The next
question is, is it for the same offense? The rules of court in Rule 117; Sec. 7 refines and expands the constitutional provision.
First it expands the meaning of same offense to include if frustrated and attempted; necessarily included and includes in the
offense charged. The rules also define when you are put in jeopardy for the first time. What are the instances that create
jeopardy? In other words, what acts or events in a criminal litigation will put a person in jeopardy without which he is not in
jeopardy at all? The Rules define that very clearly and enumerates several instances, which constitutes jeopardy. What are they?

A. Conviction or Acquittal of the accused, dismissal or termination of the case without his express consent and after he has
pleaded. (Sec. 7 R. 117)

Elements of double jeopardy

What are the elements of double jeopardy?

(1) Court of competent jurisdiction;

(2) Complaint or information sufficient in form and substance to sustain a conviction;
(3) Arraignment and plea by the accused;
(4) Conviction, acquittal, dismissal or termination of the case without the express consent of the accused

Crimes covered under double jeopardy

Subsequent prosecution is barred for the following:

(1) Same offense

(2) Attempt of the same offense
(3) Frustration of the same offense
(4) Offense necessarily included in the 1st offense
(5) Offense that necessarily includes the 1st offense

Order of dismissal is bar to subsequent prosecution if:

1. prescription
2. extinguished
3. double jeopardy
4. without consent of accused

What are the exceptions to the double jeopardy rule?

(1) Doctrine of supervening facts: If the graver offense developed due to supervening facts arising from the same act or
omission constituting the former charge;

(2) Doctrine of subsequent discovery (Prof. Barlongays term): If the facts constituting the graver charge became known or
were discovered only after the filing of the former complaint or information

(3) The plea of guilty to the lesser offense was made without the consent of the fiscal and the offended party

What are the principles of double jeopardy?

1. No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for the SAME OFFENSE

2. If an ACT is punished by a law and an ordinance, conviction or acquittal under either shall constitute a bar to another
prosecution for the SAME ACT.

ATTACHMENT OF JEOPARDY

When is a person first put in jeopardy?

1. charged with the same offense in 2 separate cases

2. accused is prosecuted after the same had been convicted or acquitted
3. prosecution appeals from a judgment in the same case

CONCEPT OF "SAME OFFENSE"

same OFFENSE not equal to same ACT

Except that where an act is punished by both a law and by ordinance

Basic rule act offense

act may be several offenses

Problem A charged with direct bribery

RA 3019
Code of Ethics

Important amendment to 3 and 4

Old Rules = R117 sec 3 previously convicted OR IN JEOPARDY
this was omitted. Why? it implies litis pendentia. Now under New Rules no more litis jeopardy

X charged with BP22. X moves to quash due to prescription.

ISSUE: Do you count period from issuance of check or date of dishonor?

If motion to quash is granted and prosecution appeals is this jeopardy?

Motion to quash= consent of accused

1st case for estafa for selling property which is mortgaged without disclosing to buyer
RPC 316 (2) NO
Chattel mortgage law Jeopardy

Mr. Casis shoots clock (no intent to kill)

2 crimes: illegal discharge and alarms and scandal. Can they be prosecuted for 2 crimes?

People v del Carmen

charged with malicious mischief acquitted
for doing the same thing prosecuted for grave coercion
Is second prosecution barred by jeopardy? R120 sec 5

If accused is charged with rape and grave coercion, is this allowed?

Relova case electric meter and qualified theft under #2 same act
Rule on provisional dismissal accused must consent (no jeopardy since with consent)

If prosecution is not ready with the evidence and keeps on postponing remedy = move for trial and if not ready then ask for
dismissal for failure to prosecute

Accused cant say to court that jeopardy, must invoke that at the 2 nd court with prejudice

If a criminal charge is dismissed by accused on ground of prescription, can the dismissal be appealed? Yes, State can appeal.

If you are charged with murder and convicted of homicide and you appeal, can you be convicted of murder?
Trono Case: accused charged with murder convicted of homicide. CA convicted him for murder ---no double jeopardy

reasoning of Green Case: when the conviction for 2nd degree murder (lesser offense), he is acquitted of the higher offense

Our theory- appeal vacates the judgment

sec 11, R124 (applies to SC by virtue of R125, sec1) ---can INCREASE
cant = must make a finding if there is civil liability or not

Double Jeopardy Res Judicata

3 men barge into a house, robbed 4 poker players. One of the masked men, charged for robbery of a poker player. Acquitted.
Can the same robber be charged against other player?
Theory: one chance only by State

Sir: By the way, when we took up civil procedure, I dont think we discussed the Sibonghanoy case (Tijam v. Sibonghanoy).
Thats a civil case where plaintiff lost after trial. Later on, he challenged the jurisdiction of the court.
When a party himself invokes the jurisdiction of the court and goes as far as judgment, then later when he loses, turns around and
wants to invalidate the judgment on the ground that there was no jurisdiction applying equitable principle, the SC said in the
particular situation, the party is estopped from challenging jurisdiction. Whether they will apply in criminal cases, I dont know.

Now, with respect to the qualification in the constitutional provision, which is the subject of the Relova case In the Relova
case, the accused was charged with tampering with the electric meter of his ice plant so that the registration of the electric
consumption was less. He was charged with violating a municipal ordinance, but was acquitted on the ground of prescription.
Based on the same facts, he was charged again for theft under the Revised Penal Code. The second charge was dismissed on the
ground of jeopardy. applying the second clause of the constitutional provision. The SC in the opinion written by Justice
Feliciano claims that if an act is punished by 2 different statutes, he can be charged of as many offenses as there are statutes or
sections of statutes violated. The test would be the identity of offenses test. But if the same act constitutes a violation of the
statute and also an ordinance, the test is identity of the acts, why so? Whats the reason for the exception? Did I not tell you
before that you could be convicted of estafa and BP 22 at the same time after issuing a bouncing check same way you could be
convicted of theft of motor vehicle which is qualified theft of a motor vehicle and violation of the anti-carnapping law(?) Why
did these things happen, but not the one in Relova? What is the reason for the proviso in the constitution?

The reason is because an ordinance and a statute are made by two different law-making bodies.

Problem: Casino barges into his classroom He pulls his .38 calibre gun and fires at him (Jose Rizals portrait), doing it while
we are having a class. He was charged and convicted of alarms and scandals. Then he is charged again for the same act of illegal
discharge without intention to kill. Is the second charge barred by jeopardy?

A. No, Since the 2 charges fall under the same law, the penal code; Casino is not being prosecuted for the same offense.

Now about that famous Del Carmen case involving the media agua and banguera ? First, accused was charged in the information
in the inferior court with malicious mischief for removing and destroying with resentment, hate, revenge the banguera of
complainant. He was acquitted for lack of proof. Based on the same act, he was charged with grave coercion for allegedly having
prevented complainant from keeping his agua and banguera. Is there Double Jeopardy?

A. SC: There is jeopardy, - single act giving rise to malicious mischief and grave coercion. (Handwritten)
No. There is no identity of offenses (Typewritten)

See Rule 117 how it defines identity of offenses. In that case, it was held that there is jeopardy because you cannot segment an
offense into integral parts and make out several, as many offenses a part of each may make. Thats what the rules of court say.
Otherwise, according to Justice Paras, in prosecution for rape, you can again prosecute the same act for preventing the girl from
keeping her virginity intact. Puede mo rin gawin grave coercion yung rape. You think about that.

Accused is first charge with violation of the chattel mortgage law for allegedly having sold a property, which is mortgaged, to the
complainant without the written consent of the mortgagee. Convicted. Thereafter, he is charged again based on the same act, for
estafa for selling the same property without telling the buyer that the property is encumbered. Will the second prosecution survive
an attack on the ground of jeopardy? One is under the chattel mortgage law, the other is estafa under the Revised Penal Code.

A. No.
To understand jeopardy, obviously you have to know the elements of the offense. (Draws on the board)- The violation of the
chattel mortgage law is the act of selling the property. Also, yung violation on estafa is the act of selling. There is a common
element the act of selling. (shaded area in the drawing) But they have non-common elements. In violation of the mortgage law,
there is an additional element of not obtaining the consent of the mortgagee. Estafa is for the protection of the buyer, the
additional element is not telling the buyer of prior encumbrances and selling the property and unencumbered . While there is a
common element, they are not the same offense in order to constitute necessarily includes. What is the definition of necessarily
includes?

A. Rule 120 Sec. 5

So it does not mean situations like this. It means those situation like Casinos.

You remember the Melo doctrine (P.v. Melo)? Accused hurled a stone at complainant, wounding the latter. On the basis of that
act, information for slight physical injuries was filed, stating that the wound took 5 to 9 days to heal. Tried, convicted. Later,
found out there was going to be a deformity or a scar. The accused was charged with serious physical injuries. Is there jeopardy?
This is now covered by specific codal provision.

No. Basis is Rule 117, Sec. 7 (b)

PRE-TRIAL

INTRODUCTION

Definition and attributes of a corporation

PRE-TRIAL

Purpose and when proper

Subject matter of pre-trial conference

Requisite of pre-trial agreements

Pre-Trial Order

Mandatory
must be conducted with a certain period
but no time period as to when court acquires jurisdiction --- up to law enforcement agencies

TRIAL

INTRODUCTION

I. Order of Trial
II. Rights of the Accused at Trial

A. Against self-incrimination
B. Compulsory process
C. Discovery
D. Right to Counsel
E. Presumption of Innocence
F. Speedy Trial

III. Discharge of Accused

IV. Provisional Dismissals

ORDER OF TRIAL

I. Order of trial (Rule 119, Sec. 11)

Note however that when the accused admits the crime but interposes a lawful defense, the order of trial may be modified. (Rule
119, Sec. 11 (e))

RIGHTS OF ACCUSED AT TRIAL

a. against self-incrimination (i.e. handwriting)

i. If he takes stand, can he be examined like any other witness?

No, only covered by direct. See sec 132, sec 6 (all matters)

Note that when the accused takes witness stand, the prosecution can only impeach his character as to truth telling. Failure to
take stand wont prejudice him.

b. compulsory process

c. discovery

d. right to counsel

e. presumption of innocence

demurrer to evidence insufficient evidence

If granted, it amounts to an acquittal.

When filed? After prosecution rests

Is it a matter of right?

with leave or without leave if without and denied= waives opportunity to present evidence
deadline 10 days
If motion for leave is denied, what is his remedy? present evidence, no more certiorari or appeal

Sir doubts constitutionality that no remedy if denied motion for leave of court
It emasculates your right to test sufficiency of the prosecutions evidence

If you allow state to cross-examine accused, gives state a chance to improve on its case

If court denies demurrer to evidence means evidence of guilt is strong (with regard to bail)

If non-bailable offense dont ask for demurrer to evidence

Right to speedy trial

See Rule 119, Sec. 9-10.

Burden on prosecution to prove dates excluded

Webb v. De Leon: What was sought to be discovered? Affidavit of Alfaro, lab reports

Webb claimed witnesses in California wanted to depose. Trial court denied. CA allowed. SC said no need since evidence is
merely corroborative
Davide concurring said the issue must be resolved (citing several rules) If allowed in civil cases, all the more allowed in
criminal cases
Puno - alluded to Webb v De Leon, even at PI stage allowed; suppression = denial of due process

Prosecution witnesses allowed since doesnt get info from the accused

DISCHARGE OF ACCUSED

R119 affidavit state it in the affidavit

What if unable to testify?
o conditions under the law and the Rules of court (see sec 3 and sec 10)

What if most guilty but discharged nonetheless or other evidence is available, will this amount to an acquittal? If not
hearing = void not acquitted (Flores v Sandiganbayan)

Can the prosecution withdraw the information during the pendency of the case?

It depends:

(1) If accused has already been arraigned and it appears at any time before judgment that a mistake has been made in charging
the proper offense, the court shall dismiss the original complaint or information upon the filing of a new one charging the proper
offense in accordance with Sec. 19, Rule 119, provided the accused shall not be placed in double jeopardy. (Rule 110, Sec. 14,
last paragraph)

(2) If the accused has not yet been arraigned, the complaint or information can be amended or withdrawn without leave of
court. (Rule 110, Sec. 14)

Note however that double jeopardy attaches if the new information includes the original information. (?)

What are the 2 instances when the Court can dismiss on motion of the prosecution?

(1) Rule 110, Sec. 14, par. 2 -- An accused may be excluded from the complaint or
information at any time before entry of plea
(2) Rule 119, Sec. 19 -- ?

In the case of Chua v. CA, it was held that an accused can be discharged at any time before the defendants have
entered upon their defense, i.e. before the prosecution rests. There is no need to complete the presentation of evidence since it is
the prosecution which knows who is most guilty.

As a general rule, the discharge or exclusion of a co-accused from the Information, in order that he may be utilized as
a prosecution witness rests upon the sound discretion of the trial court, this discretion should be exercised by it strictly on the
basis of the conditions set forth in Rule 119, Sec. 17.

When can an accused be discharged as a state witness?

See Rule 119, Sec. 17.

Compare discharge of an accused under Rule 119, Sec. 17 and under the Witness Protection Program (RA 6981).

Discharge under Rules of Court Witness Protection Program

Rule 119, Sec. 17 RA 6981, Sec. 10

Immunity granted Transactional immunity Transactional immunity

Who may avail Only an accused Anyone, even the accused

Effect of discharge Operates as an acquittal, which Witness will no longer be charged

means that the accused is charged at all.
 first then discharged or excluded
from the information.

Is threat to life necessary? No. Yes.

Note that under the Rules of Court, to be discharged, there must still be a hearing.

Which is better: to be discharged under the Rules of Court or under the Witness Protection Program?

The Witness Protection Program. For one, you do not need to be charged. The advantage there is that the prescriptive period
runs, and you have no criminal record.

Provisional Dismissals
(though placed under Motion to Quash, I think its more properly
placed here)

Requirements for a provisional dismissal (Rule 117, Sec. 8)

(1) Express consent of the accused

(2) Notice to the offended party

What are the periods?

If penalty of imprisonment of not more than 6 years or fine: becomes permanent after 1 year without case being revived

If penalty of more than 6 years: becomes permanent after 2 years

JUDGMENT & POST-CONVICTION REMEDIES

INTRODUCTION

Definition and attributes of a corporation

I. Judgment defined
II. General rules on Judgments
III. Form and Content
IV. Rules in case of variance between allegation and proof
V. Promulgation of judgment
VI. Modification of judgment

A. Motion for Reconsideration

B. Motion for New Trial
C. Appeal

VII.

Form = writing, signed by judge, degree of participation, finding of civil liability, circumstances mitigating or aggravating

promulgation what is read? Entire

presence of accused = required to be there unless light offense

If doesnt appear and convicted no remedies available: probation/appeal

Probation law If availed of, cant appeal conviction

Judgment defined

General rules on Judgments

When judgment becomes final

When does judgment in a criminal case become final?

(1) Acquittal

(2) Lapse of period to appeal

Note the qualifications.

(3) Written waiver of right to appeal

(4) Probation

(5) Service of sentence

Form and Content

Rules in case of variance between allegation and proof

Promulgation of judgment

Effect of failure of the accused to appear during promulgation

If accused is acquitted, no problem.

If accused is convicted, and his failure to appear was without justifiable cause, he loses the remedies available in the
Rules against the judgment. Also, the Court will order his arrest.

However, should the accused surrender within 15 days from promulgation of judgment, he may file a motion for leave
of court to avail of these remedies. (Rule 120, Sec. 6)

Modification of judgment

Motion for Reconsideration

Motion for New Trial

Appeal

Appeal v. Certiorari

Appeal is resorted to when the judgment is erroneous. Certiorari when the judgment is void.

NEW TRIAL OR RECONSIDERATION

grounds/ effect different

When is judgment Final?

acquittal final immediately
 applies for probation
waiver
satisfies the sentence
escapes
15 days with qualification

new evidence
see R121 sec 3, R 124 sec 14

effect of Death criminal liability extinguished, civil liability arising from crime also extinguished

certiorari from order of dismissal on legal grounds, double jeopardy, prescription, jurisdiction prosecution can appeal

Acquittal can use R 65, Why? theory judgment VOID, grave abuse of discretion or no jurisdiction

Galman case: no jurisdiction because Not impartial

If certiorari is available, is habeas corpus available?

Yes, 2 cases: Cruz v Dir of Prisons; People v Labriaga