RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED
• MIRANDA RIGHTS:
✓ RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT
✓ RIGHT TO COUNSEL
✓RIGHT TO BE INFORMED OF THOSE RIGHT
WHEN IS MIRANDA RIGHTS AVAILABLE?
ONLY WHEN THE ACCUSED IS IN CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION.
- ANY QUESTIONING INITIATED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS AFTER
A PERSON HAS BEEN TAKEN INTO CUSTODY OF LAW OR OTHERWISE
DEPRIVED OF HIS FREEDOM OF ACTION IN SOME SIGNIFICANT WAY.
EFFECTS OF VIOLATION OF MIRANDA RIGHTS?
ANY ADMISSION/CONFESSION IS INADMISSIBLE (EXCLUSIONARY RULE)
A IS A POLICE OFFICER, SOMEBODY REPORTED TO HIM THAT B STABS VICTIM C AND DIED.
A NOW ASK SERIES OF QUESTIONS TO B, IF HE THE ONE WHO STABS C AND B SAID YES.
QUESTION 1: IS B UNDER CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION?
NO. B IS NOT UNDER CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION. HE IS NOT TAKEN INTO CUSTODY OF
THE LAW NEITHER DEPRIVED OF HIS FREEDOM.
QUESTION 2: CAN B INVOKED HIS MIRANDA RIGHTS?
QUESTION 3: IS THE ADMISSION OF B ADMISSIBLE AS
EVIDENCE?
• MIRANDA RIGHTS:
✓ RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT
✓ RIGHT TO COUNSEL
✓RIGHT TO BE INFORMED OF THOSE RIGHT
EFFECTS OF VIOLATION OF MIRANDA RIGHTS?
ANY ADMISSION/CONFESSION IS INADMISSIBLE (EXCLUSIONARY RULE)
CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION STARTS
WHEN THE POLICE INVESTIGATIONS NO
LONGER A GENERAL INQUIRY INTO AN
UNSOLVED CRIME BUT HAS BEGAN TO
FOCUS ON A PARTICULAR SUSPECT
TAKEN INTO CUSTODY BY THE POLICE
WHO STARTS THE INTERROGATION AND
PROPOUND QUESTIONS TO THE
PERSON TO SOLICIT INCRIMINATING
STATEMENTS.
1. TO BE PRESUMED INNOCENT UNTIL CONTRARY IS PROVED BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT.
THE PROSECUTION MUST OVERTHROW THE PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE OF THE
ACCUSED LEAVING NO OUNCE OF DOUBTS AND MUST EXCLUDE EVERY HYPOTHESIS.
WHEN THE ACCUSED ADMITS THE KILLING BUT PLEADS SELF-DEFENSE, THE BURDEN OF PROOF SHIFTS
TO THE ACCUSED TO PROVE HIS INNOCENCE BY CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE (PEOPLE VS. DELOS SANTOS)
EQUIPOSE RULE
WHEN THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED BETWEEN THE PROSECUTION AND THE DEFENSE ARE EQUAL, OR WHEN THERE ARE
CONFLICTING VERSION BETWEEN THE PROSECUTION AND THE DEFENSE, THE COURT HAS TO ACQUIT IN FAVOR OF THE
ACCUSED PURSUANT TO THE PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE UNDER THE CONSTITUTION (PEOPLE VS. ERQUIZA)
2. TO BE INFORMED OF THE NATURE AND CAUSE OF ACCUSATION.
o THE ACCUSED CANNOT BE CONVICTED OF AN OFFENSE UNLESS IT IS CLEARLY CHARGE IN
THE COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION, SO THAT HE CAN PREPARE FOR HIS DEFENSE
PURSUANT TO DUE PROCESS OF LAW CLAUSE IN THE CONSTITUTION.
3. TO BE PRESENT AND DEFEND IN PERSON AND BY COUNSEL AT EVERY STAGE OF THE
PROCEEDINGS FROM ARRAIGNMENT TO JUDGEMENT.
WHERE PRESENCE CANNOT BE WAIVED:
o ARRAIGNMENT
o IDENTIFICATION
o PROMULGATION OF JUDGEMENT
WHEN THE ACCUSED UNDER CUSTODY ESCAPES, HE IS PRESUMED TO HAVE WAIVED HIS RIGHTS TO BE PRESENT ON ALL SUBSEQUENT
TRIALS UNTIL CUSTODY OVER HIM IS REGAINED.
4. RIGHT TO TESTIFY IN HIS OWN BEHALF.
o THE ACCUSED IS ENTITLED TO THE RIGHT TO TESTIFY AS A WITNESS IN HIS OWN BEHALF
BUT SUBJECT TO CROSS-EXAMINATION ON MATTERS COVERED BY DIRECT EXAMINATION
o HIS SILENCE SHALL NOT IN ANY MANNER PREJUDICE HIM.
5. RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION. TO BE EXEMPT FROM BEING COMPELLED TO BE
WITNESS AGAINST HIMSELF.
6. TO HAVE COMPULSORY PROCESS ISSUED TO SECURE THE ATTENDANCE
OF WITNESS AND PRODUCTION OF OTHER EVIDENCE IN HIS BEHALF.
o THE ACCUSED HAS THE RIGHT TO SUBPOENA HIS WITNESS OR WITNESSES AND ARREST
IF HE FAILED TO DO SO.
7. TO HAVE SPEEDY, IMPARTIAL AND PUBLIC TRIAL.
o BASIS: ART 3. SEC 14(B) OF PHIL. CONSTITUTION
EFFECT OF VIOLATION: A DISMISSAL OF THE CASE AND WOULD BAR FURTHER
PROSECUTION OF THE ACCUSED.
8. TO CONFRONT AND CROSS-EXAMINE THE WITNESS AGAINST HIM AT THE TRIAL.
9. TO APPEAL IN ALL CASES ALLOWED AND THE MANNER PRESCRIBED BY LAW.
ARRAIGNMENT
Preliminary Filling of Issuance of
Arrest Arraignment
Investigation information warrant of arrest
ARRAIGNMENT
IS A PROCEDURE WHEREBY THE ACCUSED IS BROUGHT BEFORE THE COURT
TO PLEAD TO THE CRIMINAL CHARGE AGAINST HIM IN THE INFORMATION.
DUTY OF THE COURT BEFORE ARRAIGNMENT
THE COURT SHALL INFORM THE ACCUSED HIS RIGHTS TO
COUNSEL AND ASK HIM IF HE DESIRES TO HAVE ONE.
PREFERABLY OF HIS OWN CHOICE.
WHAT IF THE ACCUSED CAN’T AFFORD TO HAVE A COUNSEL?
THE COURT MUST PROVIDE HIM ONE. (PUBLIC ATTORNEY'S OFFICE)
THE COURT WILL APPOINT A COUNSEL DE OFICIO.
HOW IS ARRAIGNMENT MADE
IT SHALL BE MADE IN OPEN COURT IN A LANGUAGE OR DIALECT KNOWN TO
HIM AND ASKING HIM WHETHER HE PLEADS GUILTY OR NOT GUILTY
DUTY OF THE COURT BEFORE ARRAIGNMENT
THE COURT SHALL INFORM THE ACCUSED HIS RIGHTS TO COUNSEL AND ASK HIM IF HE
DESIRES TO HAVE ONE. PREFERABLY OF HIS OWN CHOICE.
WHAT IF THE ACCUSED CAN’T AFFORD TO HAVE A
COUNSEL?
THE COURT MUST PROVIDE HIM ONE. (PUBLIC ATTORNEY'S OFFICE)
THE COURT WILL APPOINT A COUNSEL DE OFICIO.
DATE OF ARRAIGNMENT
A. DETAINED
WHEN THE ACCUSED IS UNDER PREVENTIVE DETENTION, HIS CASE
SHALL BE RAFFLED AND TRANSMITTED TO THE JUDGE WHOM THE
CASE WAS RAFFLED WITHIN 3 DAYS FROM THE FILING OF THE
INFORMATION OR COMPLAINT.
THE ACCUSED SHALL BE ARRAIGNED WITHIN 10 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF RAFFLE.
B. NOT DETAINED
THE ARRAIGNMENT SHALL BE HELD WITHIN 30 DAYS FROM THE DATE ACQUIRES JURISDICTION OVER THE
PERSON OF THE ACCUSED.
PLEA BARGAINING
A PROCESS WHEREBY THE ACCUSED AND THE PROSECUTION WORK OUT
A MUTUALLY SATISFACTORY DISPOSITION OF THE CASE SUBJECT TO THE
COURT APPROVAL. IT INVOLVES THE DEFENDANT’S PLEADING GUILTY TO
A LESSER OFFENSE THAN THAT OF A GRAVER OFFENSE.
ENTER PLEA ON ✓ THE LESSER OFFENSE IS NECESSARILY INCLUDED IN OFFENSE CHARGED.
ARRAIGNMENT
✓ THE PLEA MUST BE WITH THE CONSENT OF BOTH OFFENDED PARTY AND PROSECUTOR.
PROPER
✓ WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE PROSECUTOR, THE PLEA BARGAINING IS VOID.
AFTER
✓ THE ACCUSED MAY STILL BE ALLOWED TO PLEAD GUILTY TO A LESSER OFFENSE AFTER WITHDRAWING HIS
ARRAIGNMENT
PREVIOUS PLEA OF NOT GUILTY.
BUT BEFORE
TRIAL
AFTER ✓ PLEA TO A LESSER OFFENSE MAY STILL BE CONSIDERED DURING THE TRIAL PROPER OR EVEN THE PROSECUTION
PROSECUTION HAS FINISHED PRESENTING ITS EVIDENCE AND RESTED ITS CASE.
RESTED HIS CASE
PLEA BARGAINING IN DRUG CASES
RA 9165 – SEC. 23. PLEA BARGAINING PROVISION. – ANY
PERSON CHARGED UNDER ANY PROVISION OF THIS ACT
REGARDLESS OF THE IMPOSABLE PENALTY SHALL NOT BE
ALLOWED TO AVAIL OF THE PROVISION ON PLEA BARGAINING.
PP VS ESTIPONA CASE: SEC. 23 OF RA 9165 DECLARED AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL FOR BEING CONTRARY TO THE
RULE MAKING BODY OF THE SUPREME COURT UNDER SECTION 5 OF ARTICLE III OF THE 1978 CONSTITUTION.
VIOL. OF RA 9165 PLEA TO WEIGHT PENALTY
Sec. 5 (PUSHER) Sec. 12 (USER) 0.01-.99 grms 2 yrs 1day 4yrs
Sec. 11 (POSSESSION) Sec. 12 (USER) 0.01-4.99 grms 2 yrs 1day 4yrs
Above 10 grms (NPB)
MOTION TO QUASH
GROUNDS
1. THE FACTS CHARGED DO NOT CONSTITUTE AN OFFENSE.
2. THE COURT TRYING THE CASE HAS NO JURISDICTION OVER THE OFFENSE CHARGED.
3. THE COURT TRYING THE CASE HAS NO JURISDICTION OVER THE PERSON OF THE ACCUSED.
4. THE OFFICER WHO FILED THE INFORMATION HAD NO AUTHORITY TO DO SO.
5. IT DOES NOT CONFORM SUBSTANTIALLY TO THE PRESCRIBED FORM.
6. THAT MORE THAN ONE OFFENSE IS CHARGED EXCEPT WHEN A SINGLE PUNISHMENT FOR VARIOUS OFFENSES
IS PRESCRIBED BY LAW.
7. THE CRIMINAL LIABILITY OR ACTION HAS BEEN EXTINGUISHED.
8. THE CRIMINAL LIABILITY OR ACTION HAS BEEN EXTINGUISHED.
PRE-TRIAL
Issuance of
Preliminary Filling of
warrant of Arrest Arraignment Pre-Trial
Investigation information
arrest
PRE-TRIAL IN CRIMINAL CASE: MANDATORY
A. DETAINED
WHEN THE ACCUSED IS UNDER
PREVENTIVE DETENTION, WITHIN 10
CALENDAR DAYS FROM RECEIPT OF THE
CASE.
B. NOT DETAINED
THE PRE-TRIAL SHALL BE HELD WITHIN 30 DAYS
CALENDAR FROM THE DATE
ACQUIRES JURISDICTION OVER THE PERSON OF THE ACCUSED.
MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED DURING PRE-TRIAL
A. PLEA BARGAINING.
B. STIPULATION OF FACTS.
C. MARKINGS FOR IDENTIFICATION OF EVIDENCE
OF THE PARTIES.
D. WAIVER OR OBJECTION TO ADMISSIBILITY OF
EVIDENCE.
E. MODIFICATION OF THE ORDERS OF TRIAL.
TRIAL
Issuance of
Preliminary Filling of
warrant of Arrest Arraignment Pre-Trial Trial
Investigation information
arrest
TIME TO PREPARE FOR TRIAL
AFTER A PLEA OF NOT GUILTY IS ENTERED, THE
ACCUSED SHALL HAVE AT LEAST 15 DAYS TO
PREPARE FOR TRIAL AND SHALL COMMENCE
WITHIN 30 DAYS FROM RECEIPT OF THE PRE-
TRIAL ORDER.
IN NO CASE SHALL THE ENTIRE TRIAL PERIOD
EXCEED 180 DAYS FROM THE FIRST DAY OF TRIAL.
LAW ON SPEEDY TRIAL
REMEDY: MOTION TO DISMISSED THE INFORMATION.
ORDER OF TRIAL
A. PROSECUTION SHALL PRESENT EVIDENCE TO
PROVE THE CHARGE.
B. ACCUSED MAY PRESENT EVIDENCE TO PROV
HIS DEFENSE AND DAMAGES.
C. BOTH PARTIES MAY PRESENT REBUTTAL.
D. WHEN THE ACCUSED ADMITS THE ACT OR
OMISSION CHARGED IN THE COMPLAINT OR
INFORMATION, THE ORDER OF TRIAL MAY BE
MODIFIED.
JUDGMENT
Issuance of
Preliminary Filling of
warrant of Arrest Arraignment Pre-Trial Trial Judgement
Investigation information
arrest
JUDGMENT
IS THE ADJUDICATION BY THE COURT THAT THE ACCUSED IS
GUILTY OR NOT GUILTY OF THE OFFENSE CHARGED AND THE
IMPOSITION ON HIM THE PROPER PENALTY AND LIABILITY.
LAW ON SPEEDY TRIAL
REMEDY: MOTION TO DISMISSED THE INFORMATION.
JUDGMENT
IS THE ADJUDICATION BY THE COURT THAT THE ACCUSED IS
GUILTY OR NOT GUILTY OF THE OFFENSE CHARGED AND THE
IMPOSITION ON HIM THE PROPER PENALTY AND LIABILITY.
FORM:
(1) Written in official language. If given verbally, it is incomplete [People v. Catolico, G.R. No. L-31260 (1972)];
(2) Personally and directly prepared by the judge;
(3) Signed by the judge. The judge who presided over the entire trial would be in a better position to
ascertain the truth or falsity of the testimonies. But the judge who only took over can render a valid
decision by relying on the transcript. It does not violate due process [People v. Badon, G.R. No. 126143
(1999)];
(4) Contains clearly and distinctly a statement of facts proved and the law upon which judgment is based
[Sec. 1, Rule 120].
JUDGMENT
IS THE ADJUDICATION BY THE COURT THAT THE ACCUSED IS
GUILTY OR NOT GUILTY OF THE OFFENSE CHARGED AND THE
IMPOSITION ON HIM THE PROPER PENALTY AND LIABILITY.
FORM:
(1) Written in official language. If given verbally, it is incomplete [People v. Catolico, G.R. No. L-31260 (1972)];
(2) Personally and directly prepared by the judge;
(3) Signed by the judge. The judge who presided over the entire trial would be in a better position to
ascertain the truth or falsity of the testimonies. But the judge who only took over can render a valid
decision by relying on the transcript. It does not violate due process [People v. Badon, G.R. No. 126143
(1999)];
(4) Contains clearly and distinctly a statement of facts proved and the law upon which judgment is based
[Sec. 1, Rule 120].
CONTENTS OF JUDGMENT CONVICTION
The judgment of conviction shall state:
(1)The legal qualification of the offense constituted by the acts committed by
the accused and the aggravating/mitigating circumstances which
attended its commission;
(2)The participation of the accused in the offense, whether as principal,
accomplice or accessory after the fact;
(3) The penalty imposed upon the accused;
(4) The penalty should not be imposed in the alternative. There should be no
doubt as to the offense committed and the penalty for it;
(5) The civil liability or damages caused by his wrongful act/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/waived [Sec. 2, Rule 120].
ACQUITTAL
The judgment of conviction shall state whether:
(1)The evidence of the prosecution absolutely failed to prove the guilt of the
accused; or
(2)Merely failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
STATE LIABILITY FOR UNJUST CONVICTION
The DOJ Board of Claims is authorized to receive/evaluate/process/investigate claims of
victims of unjust imprisonment/detention and victims of violent crimes [RA 7309].
The following may file claims for compensation before the Board:
(1)Any person who was unjustly accused, convicted and imprisoned but subsequently
released by virtue of a judgment of acquittal;
(2)Any person who was unjustly detained and released without being charged;
(3)Any victim of arbitrary or illegal detention by the authorities as defined in the RPC under a
final judgment of the court; and
(4)Any person who is a victim of violent crimes, including rape and shall likewise refer to
offenses committed with malice which resulted in death or serious physical and/or
psychological injuries, permanent incapacity or disability, insanity, abortion, serious trauma,
or committed with torture, cruelly or barbarity [Sec. 3, RA 7309].
FINALITY
When does judgment become final (1) After the lapse of the period for
perfecting an appeal; (2) When the sentence has been partially/totally
satisfied or served; (3) The accused has expressly waived in writing his right
to appeal; (4) When the accused applies for probation, and thereby
waives right to appeal. [Sec. 7, Rule 120]
Judgment also becomes final when judgment is an acquittal [People v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 164577 (2010)].
APPEAL
An appeal in a criminal proceeding is a proceeding undertaken to have
a decision reconsidered by bringing it to a higher court authority.
WHERE TO APPEAL
MTC/MeTC/MCTC - RTC
RTC (if it involves questions of fact and of law) - CA
RTC - SC
- a. Involves only questions of law
- b Involves constitutionality or validity of any treaty, law, ordinance, EO, regulation or
jurisdiction of the inferior court
- c In criminal cases involving offenses for which the penalty imposed is death or life
imprisonment
CA/CTA or Sandiganbayan - SC
