CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

NOVEMBER 24, 2020 prosecution and he actively defended himself then any defect in the
FISCAL CARRILLO SLIDE + TRANSCRIPT arraignment is deemed waive.

The usual defect here that is mentioned by the SC here is the belated
arraignment. Because under normal procedures ofcourse, that should be the
first that occurs. You are arraigned. But if it is a belated arraignment, the SC in
several cases say that is a defect that may be waived.

Arraignment must be made in open court. It is done by the court where the
information or complaint is filed. He is furnished a copy of the information. He
is informed of the charges which is through the reading supposedly in a
language or dialect that he choses or that he understands, that is why we will
always have a problem if it is a foreigner who is an accused because sometimes
interpreters are not readily available so in those cases arraignment would
usually be reset until an interpreter is obtained.

Naa pud uban even tho they have been already in the PH for several years altho
they are foreigners kalit lang ug ingon I do not know how to speak english just
to delay the proceedings.

In 2 cases both for violation of the bouncing checks law. The cases was properly
arraigned in one. But in the 2nd case his lawyer manifested orally in an open
court, the counsel said can the reading of the information be waived and a plea
of not guilty be entered for my client? The court did not make a ruling because
technically that was a motion. The lawyer there of the accused made a motion
that can the reading be waived and a plea of not guilty be entered in favor of
my client – we mentioned this before and it is not allowed. But anyway, the
court did not make a ruling and after that hearing, the court made an order
stating that the accused had pleaded not guilty to the 2 cases. SC upon review
of the cases said there was no valid arraignment in the second case. The trial
court did not make a ruling on the motion of the accused, waiving his right to
The purpose of arraignment we have already mentioned this before is primarily information and entering a plea of not guilty for him. There was no ruling. The
to inform the accused. court only said in his ruling not guilty. The SC said not a valid arraignment. It is
not only a defect it is a total absence of a defect in this particular case.
Why does he have to be informed? Because it is presumed that he does not
know what he is being charged with. For as far as the second case, where no valid arraignment was conducted, the
court said there has to be an arraignment, accused must be entitled to a
Why? Because he is presumed to be innocent. So, he has to be informed of the hearing. He must be entitled to present evidence. Another issue raised in this
nature of the crime and the cause of the accusation against him so he can particular case, although it is not related to arraignment but it is more related
prepare his defense. Secondly, he can also determine whether double jeopardy to bail between an accused who is in detention and an accused who is not in
is available right there or may be available during a future charge for the detention in relation to them not appearing for a scheduled hearing despite
purpose of future accusations against him. due notice.

So – information and double jeopardy. For an accused who is in custody of the law, how doe he not appear despite
due notice, he escapes! What if he escapes from detention? His absence during
a particular date is a waiver of his right to be present in that hearing and all
other subsequent hearings until he is re-arrested. But for an accused who is out
on bail or at the very least is not in detention like for example, bouncing check,
no warrant or bail is required. But for an accused who is not in the custody of
the law and does not appear despite due notice for a particular hearing, he
waives his appearance only for that hearing, he does no waive his appearance
for the subsequent hearings.

Just something that the court distinguished in this case.

We also mentioned before that a defect. DEFECT NOT ABSENCE. If there is an

absence then that is violative of the accused constitutional rights and that is a
reversible error. But if it is merely a defect – a defect that is a fact corrected
during the proceedings, then:
- He is deemed to have waived the objections especially if he actively
participate in his defense or he participated in the evidence of the

1 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

PEOPLE VS. COMENDADOR

Sandiganbayan apparently came to some kind of unauthorized practice of It was not actually a conditional plea. It was not part of the arraignment. He
conditional arraignment. Im not sure what the purpose of the conditional pleaded guilty but it seemed that it was more an appeal to the emotion which
arraignment was because it seems that it was an arraignment just for the actually did not qualify his plea. Well he requested for a lesser penalty it was
purpose of the case moving. But it was not the actual arraignment that not actually considered by the court as far as the records are concerned as a
supposed to be done under the Rules of Criminal Procedure. The SC here said condition. Hangyo lang ba. Kung pwede judge iubos lang ako penalty. It remains
Sandiganbayan stop that practice because that is not the practice authorized to be an admission of guilt. Robbery with homicide. An appeal to the emotion
by the rules. which does not qualify the plea.

Conditional arraignment, what is conditional? The plea, the fact that an

arraignment was conducted? Diba? Unsa may conditional? And then why do When you plead guilty es
you have to make it conditional? Apparently that was the practice of the
sandiganbayan. Ambot giunsa to nila. (LOL)

When you plead guilty especially if it is not plea bargaining or even though if it
is plea bargaining because it stated during the process as to what you are
actually pleading guilty to. So, you plead guilty then you have to face the
There is no qualified. What happens if you make a qualified plea of guilt. Yes I consequences. If there are any aggravating circumstances mentioned in the
killed the man but it was not self-defense. It is not actually guilty because you information that would be taken into consideration in the imposition of the
are invoking a justifying circumstance. I am not guilty. Im not guilty. I penalty. But ofcourse you remember a voluntary plea of guilt is a mitigating
committed the act but im not guilty. That is qualified. Not guilty that is not circumstance. So that should also be taken into consideration.
allowed. Just guilty. PERIOD. Not guilty PERIOD.
CONTD. PEOPLE V. COMENDADOR
Plea bargaining is different because it is still guilty not guilty its just that youre Although the court in people vs. comendador said yes if you are going to plead
in some kind of negotiation as to the exact penalty as to the offense that he will guilty you plead guilty to the crime charged as well as to all the other
eventually plead guilty to and the penalty that is to be imposed because you aggravating circumstances. But the court said, however, circumstances not
can either plead guilty to a lesser offense or plead guilty to the present offense supported by the evidence cannot be considered in the imposition of the
at a lesser penalty pwede man plead guilty to murder but at the minimum penalty.
allowed penalty that is pleading guilty to the offense charged at a lesser offense
but you can also plead guilty to a lesser offense so instead of murder you plead I don’t know if that also extends to qualifying circumstnaces. What if you plead
guilty to homicide. Diba? guilty to murder? What if the qualifying circumstances is not borne out by the
evidence? Although that would not be much of a problem because remember
when you plead guilty to murder which is a capital offense, the moment you
plead guilty the prosecution is still obligated its not a privilege or discretionary.
It is mandatory to present evidence. I guess in that particular case, since the
prosecution is mandated to present evidence and the prosecution failed to
establish treachery, then homicide rra jud. Even if you plead guilty, you will only
plead guilty to homicide. Diba?

In fact there was one very exceptional case where even though there was a
accused pleaded guilty upon presentation of evidence one of the accused was
actually not a participant. In that exceptional case even if he plead guilty he
should be acquitted. Ahh ni plead guilty nana but acquitted. In those
exceptional cases, as I have said is very rare because what would happen there
is that the moment you plead guilty, the prosectuion there will always present
evidence, and evidence there coupled with plea of guilt. Sayon ra kay
convictohon. Very easy of the court to be convinced. Morally certain of the guilt
A conditional plea should be entered by the court as a not guilty plea. So you of the accused.
cannot say plead guilty provided this is the penalty. You cannot make it as a
condition. You just expect is a result if you are going to plead guilty.

Kanang plea bargaining its not actually a condition to plead guilty, well I guess
probably the ultimate effect is the same but the terminologies that are used
are actually different because it is not like a negotiation, there is an agreement
but when you plead guilty then these are the consequences. So when the
accused will sayI will plead guilty only if a fine is imposed – that is conditional.
PERIOD nalang ka. I plead guilty. And then the fact that is a fine that is going to
imposed that was reached before. And then another thing, is that you can only
negotiate with the other party.

Example: the accused negotiates with the prosecution insofar as the civil
liability is concerned or the fine is concerned. But he cannot negotiate with the
court. Whatever agreements that are reached by the parties that is not subject
by the approval of the court. That is why we don’t say that you can plead guilty
only if this is the penalty- you plead guilty and then accept the consequences.

During arraignment the private offended party, the victim is supposedly

required to attend. Ofcourse he can waive his presence but for purposes there
of plea bargaining especially with the civil liability involved or even with the

2 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

downgrading because usually in plea bargaining the charge is down graded. You the information is amended? If it is amended, if it is a substantial amendment
need the conwsent of the victim. according to CABANGANNGAN

And also for purposes of civil liability, that is why when the private offended
party is not around or does not appear despite due notice, the rules authorize
the court to allow the parties to enter into a plea bargaining and that is just
between now the private prosecutor and the accused. Basically he waives his
right to appear during the plea bargainging.

If after arraignment...nag arraign nah unya not guilty. If the information is

amended, if it is a substantial amendment, according to
Cabangangan...actually, how can you have a substantial amendment after
arraignment? Di ba di na puyde? Di bah after arraignment you can only have
formal amendments with leave of court? anyway , basaha lng nah. Tan-awa if
mo fit bah ang ruling. Re-arraignment under the amended charge, basin wla mo
object. If it’s a mere formal amendment, no retaking of a plea.
*Read the Cabangangan Case

Plea of guilt ot a lesser offense so from murder to homicide, from attempted

homicide maybe to serious physical injuries. As we asaid iff it is to a lesser
offense you need the:
1. Consent of the victim – the private offended party and the
prosecutor
2. The lesser offense must be necessarily included in the offfense
charged – so it is no longer allowed that like for example, you are
charged with lets say serious physical injuries but lets say mu plead
guilty lang ka ug unjust vexation that is not necessaruly included.
Necessarily included – means allt he elements are part of the elements of the
offense that necessarily includes. So, murdeer necessarily includes homicide.
Rape necessarily includes acts of lasciviousness. BUT rape under the the You plead guilty to murder, you plead guilty to robbery with homicide, robbery
paragraph does not necessarily include rape under the second paragraph. with rape- capital offenses. We still say it is a capital offense because under the
Remember the case of People v. Kawili – rape in the first par does not provisions of the RPC, they are still punishable by death. Technically, they can
necesssarily inclues rape in the 2nd par although rape under the 1st par still be called capital offenses. Unlike a non-capital offense, where after
necessarily includes acts and rape under the 1st par necessarily includes sec 5(d) pleading guilty the judge can immediately pronounce judgement, in a capital
of 7610. So the accused was charged under rape par. 1 but during the hearing offense, there has to be a hearing. The court shall conduct an inquiry and
it was established that he only used his finger. Court said he has been charged require the prosecution to present evidence to prove the guilt of the accused
in par1 of rape, we cannot convict him of par. 2 because it is not necessarily or the precise degree of culpability. It’s discretionary upon the court if the
included. BUT SC Sec 5(b) of 7610 lascivious conduct mura ra daw na ug acts of accused still has to present evidence. Usually, the accused may be allowed to
acts of lasciviousness that is necessarily included in par. 1 of rape. So convicted present evidence to prove mitigating circumstances but definitely, the accused
ghapon wala lusot. is not allowed to present evidence to prove his innocence. Ni plead guilty na
baya cya, so why should he still be given the opportunity to prove that he is not
BTW if you plead guilty under this particular proceeding plea guiity to a lesser guilty? He has pleaded guilty, then present evidence for mitigating
offense, there is no need to amend the information. Even if you are charged circumstances. As I said, there was that exceptional case after the presentation
with murder and then you plead guilty to homicide. You don’t need to amend of evidence by the prosecution, then the court said not guilty.
because that is expressly stated in the order or in the judgement.

Duty of the court whenever an accused pleads guilty to a capital offense.

Conduct a searching inquiry. Before that mandatory hearing, where the
prosecution must present evidence, the court first and foremost must make
sure that pleading guilty to the capital offense was voluntarily and intelligently
PEOPLE V. MAMARION made- full comprehension. Naa bayay uban nah they would plead guilty
In this case, after the prosecution had arrested, the SC said the trial cour t because they want to but the moment that this is the penalty mausab ang huna
actually has the discretion to allow the accused to plead guilty to a lesser huna, mo hilak. “Di diay ko guilty judge oie”. Di pa gani toh capital offense
offense, although supposedly we should consider this as a separate concept of kanang VAWC, gi sagpa niya iyang asawa and then later on said “sayop to nako
a plea of guilt as a mitigating circumstances, remember it is only mitigating judge, I was wrong. I admit” then the judge pronounced the penalty is this and
before the prosecution has presented evidence. In this particular case, it is no this, naa man imprisonment, ning hilak and said “di diay ko guilty judge”.
longer mitigating but it can still be considered for purposes of plea bargaining.
And then gipun-an pud sa SC that since the prosecution does not have sufficient After that searching inquiry, as to the voluntariness of the plea, Require (no.2
evidence to establish the guilt the accuse under the present charges, allowing sa slide). Not discretionary, require the prosecution to present evidence to
him to plead guilty to a lesser offense does not really do him any prejudicial prove the guilt of the accused and the precise degree of culpability. If proper,
injury to the accused. ask the accused if he wants to present evidence.

Guidelines as to what searching inquiry is. How he was brought into the custody
of the law. There have been several decisions on the manner in which they were
If you plead guilty to a lesser offense, as we have said before information need brought into the custody of the law. Police officers, it was done in such an
not be amended. BUT if after arraignment, nag arraign na – not guilty – what if intimidating manner. Sometimes an accused would be intimidated in pleading
guilty. Hadlok naman. Assistance of counsel- remember, competent and
3 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

independent counsel during custodial investigation. What were the conditions

during the investigation or interrogation?

How about presumption of evidence after pleading guilty to a non-capital

offense? Reception of evidence, unlike in a capital offense, it is discretionary.
The defense counsel would also come under the inquiry of the court. The That's why the courts may immediately pronounce judgement after the
defense counsel would be asked by the judge if he actually did his job. Did he accused pleads guilty if it is a non-capital offense. As we’ve said, it is
ask questions? Did he ask the accused the consequences of pleading guilty? discretionary. If the judge believes that a hearing is required, it’s also not
Personality profile. Mura na ug psychologist atong judge. Age, socio-economic prohibited.
status, and educational background as an index of his capacity to give a free
and informed plea.

Pleaded guilty but after the presentation of evidence, there was no evidence.
After Murag gi kasab-an ang PAO ani. The Public Attorney wa ma tingali kasab-i di
everything is laid out, you are charged with this, you have pleaded guilty, it is man tingali na mangasaba ang SC. The Public Attorney was singled out in the
voluntary and intelligently done with the assistance of counsel. One more thing, last part of the decision. He should’ve done more especially since the records
what are the consequences of pleading guilty? Imprisonment. How long? Exact clearly show that there is no evidence against the accused. We cannot allow
length of imprisonment or the nature of the penalty that is going to be imposed. such an error to prevail over the constitutional right to be presumed innocent.
Of course, if it cannot be imposed, most likely, perpetua. Perpetua, unsa mana Ni plead guilty man cya unya wla diay silay evidence against him. Paita. You get
ka tas-a judge? Perpetua gani, 40 years. For 1 count of perpetua 40 years. How a lawyer who is less than truthful to his obligation.
about if you have multiple counts of perpetua? You have that 30 year limit. 30
bah toh or 40? Unsa gani toh limit natoh? We have that three-fold limit.
Hidumdumi kuno nah inyong Crim1.
We just had somebody who got convicted with 10 counts of rape. Napu ka
perpetua ang gi impose ni judge.

Katong wla kasabot. Nagtuo cya if mo plead guilty mas dali mahuman, I can go
home early. An improvident plea of guilt, as long as there is no judgement yet,
if the court believes that the accused has entered a plea of guilt without fully
understanding the nature of his plea and the consequences of his plea, the
court may stop the proceedings. “Oops, not so fast, let us enter a plea of not
Knowing the actual crime is- it’s not just rape, it’s qualified rape. It’s not just guilty kay wla kasabot ang accused”. The plea of guilt should be withdrawn, a
homicide, it’s murder. It’s the qualified type of the crime. plea of not guilty entered and then let’s go to trial.

There have been cases also where even though it may have been an
In a language known and understood by the latter. Lastly, the trial judge himself improvident plea of guilt but since the court conducted hearings and allow the
must be satisfied that after all these inquiries he has done the accused is parties to present evidence, even though there was a finding of guilt despite an
actually guilty. improvident plea of guilt, if that is not the only basis for the finding of guilt
because evidence was presented, then both parties were given that
opportunity , there’s nothing wrong with that. What would be wrong is if an
improvident plea of guilt was entered as the SOLE basis for the judgement and
the eventual sentence which is (35:47?) evidence.

It forecloses the right to defend oneself. That’s why when you plead guilty, after
the prosecution has presented its evidence, the judge may allow the accused
to present evidence but not for the purpose of exonerating himself. The best
he can do, mitigating circumstances or at least mitigate criminal or civil liability.
But, not to contest the fact whether he is guilty or not guilty. Problema na sa Let’s say an extrajudicial confession, sayop. Lack of irregularities. What is aside
judge. from that there was actual evidence presented in court to sustain that plea of
guilt even though it was improvident? Okay ra, not reversible according to Pp
v. Documento. Always emphasizing, what is the duty of the judge during

4 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

arraignment? Inform the accused of his right katong counsel btaw. It isn't If you are not so sure that you can defend your client properly because the
enough to say you have the right to counsel. He has to be asked if he desires information is not as accurate as you want it to be, you can ask for a bill of
one. “Do you have a lawyer of your own?” ” Do you desire that lawyer of your particulars. File a motion. Especially if you believe that maybe the time or date
own to defend you?” Because if he is not here, and that is what he wants, you is too vague for you to, but what if you can properly document your
be given sufficient time. You want your own lawyer pero wla paka kaila. You will whereabouts if only the date is more accurately depicted in the information.
be given sufficient time. You do not know anyone and you do not know how to What if you were out of the country and you can properly document that imong
contact anyone. You will be assigned a counsel de oficio. Naay uban nga what passport, whatever documentation you can come up with to prove that you
happens usually in court is that if the resident public attorney is not present, were in another country at that time. That would be a good ground to file a
the judge, for purposes of arraignment, will choose any of the lawyers waiting motion for bill of particulars.
their turn. After arraignment, the counsel de oficio will ask the court that they
be relieved from their duties kay for purposes of arraignment raman ang Because remember if you are not going to question that, the jurisprudence is
counsel de oficio. Supposedly, the accused during the subsequent hearings that if the date is NOT an element, pwede, the information can only state as an
would either gets his own lawyer or gets the resident public attorney assigned approximate – as close as possible to the actual date if they do not know the
to them in court. Usually , judges would say yes. “ Atty. so and so is hereby actual date. File a motion for a bill of particulars. If you fail to do that, you waive
relieved”. “Accused should get his own lawyer or contact the resident PAO of your right. You can no longer say later on that you are not properly informed.
this court before the next scheduled hearing.”

Naay usa ka judge, he would not relieve the lawyers. He would say “no, you will
not be relieved until the accused gets his own lawyer and that lawyer enters his
appearance.” Nakalitan nuon. Most lawyers ma kalitan ato nga court. He was
different from all the others. That was a family court.

This usually occurs on white collar crimes (estafa, falsification) and then
corporations were involved and then you have voluminous documents.
It is a mode of discovery if the information merely alludes to documents that
are too many to attach to the information itself then you can ask for its
production so that you can inspect it. If it’s not that many then probably you
can ask for a copy – di kaayo gasto. But if it’s too many to photocopy, well you
can do that at your own expense. If you can’t do that, just have it produced so
It is not enough for the court to apprise an accused of his right to have an you can inspect. Maybe the court can schedule a hearing wherein the parties
attorney. It is not enough. You have the right to an attorney. Di pa na mao. You can meet and the prosecution can bring along the evidence and the accused
still have to ask him “ do you want a lawyer?” remember, a person could can inspect it.
actually defend himself if the court is convinced that he is intelligent enough,
capable enough, then he is allowed to defend himself. Does he desire one? You
have that right, do you want to avail of that right? If he wants a lawyer but
doesn’t have a lawyer, doesn’t know a lawyer- counsel de oficio.

You can have a suspension of the arraignment, kahinomdom mo, insanity

eiether at the time of the commission of the crime – exempted, insanity at the
time of the trial – suspend proceedings. Let us get this person cured of insanity
and get him fit to stand trial before we proceed.
There’s a prejudicial question.
In practice, most of the counsels de oficio (cdf) are usually for the purposes of There’s a petition for review filed with the DOJ but this only lasts for 60 days.
arraignment. Mao rman urgent kaayo. Usually, if it were for the purposes of Unsound mental condition - kini indefinite ni, as long as the mental condition
trial, either you get your own lawyer or you get a public attorney to defend you does not change, he is still unfit to stand trial – pwede jud na masuspended
because all the court,all the branches, the RTC, MTC, they have their resident indefinitely. Can you ask for speedy disposition – NO! Because that is as speedy
public attorneys. Usually, this is not so much a problem. It might become a as you can get. It’s not unreasonable. That is the procedure, if di siya ma-ayo
problem if you are disqualified. You might be disqualified from a public attorney didto, ambot naa ba oud maayo? Naa pa cguro pud.
because naa man gud na silay qualifications:
1) the income- I’m not so sure how much but public school teachers are
disqualified from availing. Ambot pilay sweldo ron sa teacher. Before the Du30
administration, public school teachers were disqualified from availing a public
attorney. Why? Their salary was too high. But, there are certain businessmen
who don’t keep proper records sa ilang mga BIR, mga whatever, mo qualify
nuon makakuha ug PAO. Pastilan, mga dagko kaayo ug income nga
businessman but because they don’t keep proper records especially their ITR.
ila siguro e declare nga gamay kaayo ug income, ka qualify na nuon.

If you cannot avail of PAO or cdf, maybe IBP free legal aid. You get a young
lawyer if the issues are not so difficult, the consequences are not so harsh, di
kaayo dako ug penalties. May be MTCC nga cases. It’s okay if you get a young Actually, there are only very few there that are actual defenses that can
lawyer but according to the issues, the novel issues, the degree of work, cdf terminate a proceeding. Because majority of the grounds of the motion to
could also be the more experienced lawyers. Panagsa ra kaayo ni mahitabo quash are curable by amendment.
because you have the PAO. usually if you are in the PAO, or bag-paka dira, They can be cured by amendment, well probably except double jeopardy, lack
usually, you are qualified to defend anyone. It’s just the amount of work you of jurisdiction. Even the…they fail to execute an offense, eh di mag-file bag-o.
have to do when you are in the PAO because you do everything. Unlike for As impressive as this may sound, only a few of these are really helpful for an
example prosecutors, we only look at criminal cases primarily, panagsa siguro actual defense.
mga admin but that’s very few and far and in between. If you are in the PAO- The concept of the motion to quash is that granting that this is the information,
criminal, civil, administrative, labor, daghan kaayo. Everything under the sun. I have complaints. You admit that this is the information and granting that this
usually, that’s a very good training ground. Dagko padyu ug sweldo. is the information going to be filed by the prosecution in court, you’re saying “I
have objections.” Then you cite the grounds under the question. So you
hypothetically admit that granting that that is true, I have a defense that will
shoe the defects of the information.

5 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

Your objection to a motion to quash is one that can be seen on the information said that it must be apparent in the information but there are some factual
readily – patently observable in the information. You so not look at external grounds that would take form of outside evidence.
evidence. Kanang defense of alibi, defense of denial, self defense – dili na sila When you say lack of damage, no one was damaged, that is not a proper ground
motion to quash because they go into the merits of the case. Here, while we for a motion to quash. That is a defense that you raise during trail. That is stated
can say that it may go into the merits of the case, usually it is limited to what is in the information nga nay na damage and if you are going to say that there is
in the information. That is why a lot of these are curable by amendment no damage, so basically you are saying “di mana tinuod ang information” then
because most of these are just typographical errors. Nasayop lang pag-prepare you go to trial.
in the making of the information. If the information itself does not state that anyone was damaged – kana siya.
Ideally, you should file your motion to quash before arraignment. Because Your ground there would be the allegations does not constitute an offense
there are some grounds that are waived after arraignment. Although in this because the element of damage is not alleged in the information. Kana siguro,
case of Bulaong, the Court said, you can file it either, you can go to arraignment that is a proper ground for a motion to quash.
or you file it before arraignment, ambot unsaon ni. Either move to quash the But if the information says “to the damage of Mr. so and so, your defense is
complaint or information or plead thereto or do both. Kani, do both – ambot, “wa mana siya na-damage sa tinuoray” –a matter of evidence, you go to trial.
how do you do that? You plead guilty but you are actually objecting to the That is not a ground for a motion to quash.
information – ayaw! Although SC na dila, mas kamao jud siguro na sila nato.
Although I just fail to see a situation where you have gorund to file the motion
to quash but you still proceed with the arraignment. Mura kag nag-ingon na,
there’s something wrong with the information but not guilty. Have that
corrected first. If there is something wrong, either point that out because it can
be a complete defense – double jeopardy, does not constitute an offense. Or
prescription – ibutang baya na nimo diha na approximate time, but what if it is
several years than the date menti0oned there, prescription ka. But anyway, di
man nato na malalis kay naa man sa decision diha.
So you either file a motion a motion to quash or you plead or you do both. If
you file your motion to quash without pleading -the motion is withdrawn or
overruled –arraignment na pud. If your motion is denied, because remember,
a denial of the motion to quash is interlocutory – you cannot appeal that. It
doesn’t terminate to the proceedings. Di ka ka-appeal. What if it’s granted? As You are merely looking at the information itself – defects in the information.
I said, if the court grants a motion to quash, majority of the grounds, the court Mao nay primary na imong tan-awon, if there is a defect in the information.
would not dismiss the case, it will just give the prosecution the opportunity to
amend the information.

Lack of jurisdiction of the offense charged

Extinction – prescription, death
Extinction of the offense – what if the crime has been de-
criminalized?
Extinction of the penalty – prescription
Double jeopardy
These doesn’t change. So whether you entered a plea and you are going to trial,
if jeopardy can later on be established – you can even raise jeopardy, for the
first time on appeal, you can even raise lack of jurisdiction for the first time on
appeal because you cannot waive that, it is conferred by law. If there was no
jurisdiction then there is no valid judgment, no valid proceeding that can come
forth in the case of absence of jurisdiction over the offense charged.
These are proper even after arraignment. Most of the other grounds – you do
not file a timely motion to quash –they are deemed waived.

Remember the terms in the provisions cited need not be the exact terms used
in the information.
Naglalis sila between lumber and timber. This is the case that involves the
Forestry Act. Illegally cut wood and they said lumber mani, timber mani. Pareha
rana sila duha oyy.

What’s the form? Of course it must be in writing.

Distinctly specify the factual and legal grounds – remember the grounds of the
motion to quash are exclusive aside from those mentioned in Section 15, wala
na, there are NO other grounds for a motion to quash.
Except lack of jurisdiction, extinction, prescription, double jeopardy. Even if you
do not cite them in the motion to quash, they can be raised at any time.

You can actually go to facts outside the information.

General rule: We only look at the information. We hypothetically admit the
allegations in the information and then the allegations themselves there is
something wrong with them.
Exception: Grounds that necessitates going to facts outside the information.
Outside evidence – evidence outside the information.
Ex. Prescription, double jeopardy
Where the allegation in the information do not constitute the offense charged
– you don’t have to go outside the information because the elements are
lacking but there are also cases where the elements as alleged in the
information do not constitute an offense. Libel. What if the information states
Most of the grounds are apparent in the face of the complaint/information - of that the libelous remarks are contained in a pleading that is submitted in court?
course if you are going to mention prescription, it won’t be readily apparent. What if the libelous remarks are in a newspaper, through report, or let us say a
Although you can probably make something – ibutang didto sometime in 1986, letter? Gipublish ang newspaper and let us say he wrote a letter to a public
karon pa na file, syaro wa pa na ni prescribe. official. That is just a news report, there is nothing wrong with that. And the
We have said, you do not need external evidence – most of the grounds are letter itself is sent to an appropriate public official. By itself, it can readily be
apparent on the face of the information itself but also requires some form of seen as privileged. But there are also cases that requires you going to
external. Kana diayng double jeopardy, how can you raise double jeopardy if information or evidence outside of the information. Remember the rules say –
you are not allowed to resort to the first jeopardy? Di mana ibutang sa you must state the legal and factual grounds. So establish any of the grounds in
information ang first jeopardy. So if you have been charged with homicide but a motion to quash, if you need outside information in evidence rather, that is
if you can present a judgment that you have been charged for that particular allowed.
homicide before then you have to refer to outside evidence. That is why the SC

6 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

Lack of jurisdiction over the offense, di na malalis, that is clear under the rules.
Katong gi-kiha bitaw sa Rappler “Cebu City became the center of the
pandemic”. Filed it with the MTC, libel man kaha against the Cebu City
Lack of authority of the prosecutor to file the case. It is either a prosecutor from
government. Even though the penalty is less than 6 years, jurisdiction for libel
another city was the one who filed a case in another city. Or, a prosecutor in
as expressly provided under the law kay RTC man jud na – wlay jurisdiction, lack
the same City but he was not authorized or he is not the head of office. If you’re
of jurisdiction. Di mana nimo malalis, you can readily see it in the information
not the head of office and the head of office is not around, usually somebody
itself. Dako kaayo nakabutang – Municipal trial court in cities – pero libel so RTC
is designated. Somebody is authorized, i-delegate ba ang authority, he is going
dapat. Sayon ra kaayo i-motion to quash.
to sign the information. But, if you have no such authority, signing an
In fact in this case, wa niy motion to qash gi file, pagkakita sa judge, dismiss
information, filing it in court. Motion to quash; other party can file a motion to
dretso.
quash.
Jurisdiction may also refer to the jurisdiction of the territory.
Kani sila provincial prosecutors’ assistant—under the assumption that they are
filing the information within their territorial jurisdiction.

Quisay v. People
There was no showing that it was approved by the City Prosecutor of Makati.
The person who signed it was an assistant. And, there is no showing that he was
authorized by the City to act in behalf of the City prosecutor.
Officers filing the same lack the authority to do so or fail to show that they have
What if the victim in online libel is a resident of Lapu-lapu, nya diri Cebu City gi-
the written authority from the authorized officer.
file? Walay jurisdiction. In online libel there’s only one venue—residence of the
So, if the motion to quash would be successful information would be quashed.
private offended party. Then, jurisdiction is conferred by law, you cannot argue
What is the end effect? No double jeopardy set in.
who has or who has no jurisdiction over the case. Remember it is always the
law at the time of the institution of the action. For purposes of liability look at
the law at the time of the commission of the crime. But, for purposes of
instituting the action, the law at the time the action is instituted.

Kanang lack of substantial conformity. There’s a form that’s supposed to be

followed by those who are going to file the case. One of those grounds where
There’s no estopeel against the State diba? if the Court would grant the motion to quash, the order would not be to dismiss
People vs. Casiano the case but would be to give the prosecution time to amend the information.
But, in one case, what the SC is saying here is if you convince a court that it did And only when after the expiration of the period and the prosecutor and only
not have jurisdiction when in fact it had, probably you’re better to convince kay when after the expiration of the period and the prosecutor still does not amend
you have the better argument, and maybe the court made an error of the information, pwede na na’ ma-dissmiss.
judgment, you cannot later on change your tune. If that case is elevated… you
cannot change your theory on appeal. You are estopped from saying nga, naa
diay na siyay jurisdiction oyy, when your stand at the trial court level was it has
no jurisdiction.

Galzote y Soriaga vs. Briones

SC said, an information substantially conforms to the one that is required by
law: 1) the name of the accused; 2) the offense—kani siya optional ni siya—as
designated in the law. What is most important is the manner how it was
committed. And then, 3) date and time which need not be very specific.

Lack of jurisdiction over the accused. Jurisdiction over the accused by the court
is obtained through voluntary appearance or his/her arrest. Custody of the law
obtained through arrest or voluntary submission.
Courts may already have jurisdiction over the person of the accused but he is
not necessarily under the custody of the law. Or, it can be the other way
around, he is already under the custody of the law but no jurisdiction pa ang
korte. Wa’ pa ma-notify ang court nga nadakpan na diay ang accused.

Multiple Offenses; the rule is information, one offense. Now, kani silang mga
complex crime, technically these are not multiple offenses. Pero, ingon ra ang
Court nga’ they have an appearance. If you remember complex crimes, one
offense is a means to commit the other, but one penalty. The law sees one
crime being committed by this particular person. Same thing with compound

7 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

crime, one act even though it results to several injuries, one crime. So, a the evidence to be presented kay wa’ man mu object ang
complex crime is only one offense. Continuing Crime, same thing. prosecution. Ingon ang SC, wa’ may mabuhat, wa’ man objeki.
Kaning single criminal impulse(read the case of PP vs. Nelneda discussion on
the single criminal impulse, gi-Klaro sa SC). It all started with this several
accused, several victims, and they didn’t know who kill who. They said, way
conspiracy but, usaha sila. Then, remember your Ivler case, reckless
imprudence that is the crime. So, even if there are several injuries. Let’s say
homicide--- naay namatay, another person incurred injuries, and then another
person’s property is damaged. That’s only one crime. It’s reckless imprudence.
The homicide, the injuries, the damage are only consequences. That’s one
offense. There’s no multiplicity of offenses if you file reckless imprudence
resulting in homicide, physical injuries and damage to properties, which is the
proper thing to do.
However, if there’s more than one charge in an information and you don’t
object ahhhh waived. You waived that and, you can be convicted of as many
charges that are stated in that single information. And it’s only possible that If its privileged communication, if the prosecution has only objected, then you
you’re charged with several offense, several information, then you’ll say mao had to have a trial. Mag-matter of evidence siya ang iyang pagka-privileged, if
mao ra man ni. Take note, the crime of estafa can also result in violating special it is not apparent in the information itself. (Read the cases of Pano and Balao;
penal laws. Hinumdom mug illegal recruitment can also be estafa under false distinguish the two)
pretenses. It might be the same act but estafa, falsely pretending the
qualification that you can deploy this person for employment abroad. In the
same manner, that same act also results in the crime of illegal recruitment
under your Overseas Worker’ Act, illegal recruitment.
Same here, estafa and another special penal law—estafa, falsification and
investment law.
A reading of both information may seem to appear that you’re being charged
with the same offense twice. But, because there’s a repeatition of most of the
facts. But, usually they are repeated because it’s the same act just resulting in
two offenses. And then, if it is punished by two laws, we look at same offense
for it to be double jeopardy. So, even if it’s the same act but if it is being
punished by two different laws, resulting in two different offenses, that’s not
double jeopardy. We look at the same act if it is a law and not an ordinance.

Double Jeopardy—(reading the what’s in the ppt) :

1) Valid information
2) Court of competent Jurisdiction
3) You must have entered a plea. Before, you have entered your plea issues
have not been enjoined you cannot said that you are in jeopardy yet. Di man
dyud ka ma-convicto if there is no arraignment. Remember the
4) You are Convicted or acquitted or case is without your consent. That’s why a
provisional dismissal or an appeal by the accused does not result in double
jeopardy. Because in this two cases there was that consent of the accused. The
proceedings continued with the consent of the accused.

Extinction, that is also a ground to file a motion to quash. Remember the

extinction under the RTC: Death, service of sentence, amnesty, pardon,
prescription and marriage.
RAPE: MARRIAGE BETWEEN THE OFFENDER AND THE OFFENDED PARTY
extinguishes either the action pending or penalty imposed. So, it says penalty
imposed, meaning to say, final judgment, convicted na—nya’ gi-pakaslan ang
rapist. Extinguished.
Remember your private offenses, seduction, abduction and acts of
lasciviousness, pardon there must be before the institution of proceedings. Imo
pakaslan after the institution di’ na na’ pardon diba?

The general rule is, if the motion to quash is a valid motion, the grounds are
valid, the first thing that the court will do, if possible amend the information.
Wa’ pa man nay double jeopardy, before arraignment pa man.
Court will order the prosecution to amend or to cure the defect in the
information. Then, if pros fails to amend the pros w/in the given period, issue
ug order.
Motion to quash is granted, information is considered quash. Case is dismissed.

This is now the example where evidence outside of the information is allowed. —EXCEPT—extinction and double jeopardy, you cannot cure these by
You can receive evidence outside of the information to establish amendment. If these can be properly established, motion to quash will have to
justifying. Insane at the time of the commission. Ohh, kinahanglan man ka anag be granted, case has to be dismissed.
evidence.

When we say effect of sustaining motion, we merely say GRANTED. Motion is

granted. Amendment. So, either order a new complaint/information.
If he(accused) is in custody, he shall not be released kay hatagan pa man ang
prosecution an opportunity to amend the information.
Then after the expiration of period, but prosecution does not make the
Kaning, privileged communication. There are two cases here: necessary amendment, grant the motion. Quash the information. Dismiss the
1) The privileged communication is very apparent in the information case. And if the accused is in custody, release the accused.
itself.
2) The privileged was only made clear after evidence was presented
during the hearing of the motion to quash. And, the court still allow

8 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

You are going to meet that judge basin iya gipersonal, nga gikiha nimo syag
administrative. Usually, you reserve that for the most serious cases if you’re
ever going to file an administrative case against a judge.
If motion is denied, can you file a notice of appeal? No. Because the result of
denial of motion to quash, lets proceed to arraignment and go to trial. So, it’s
not a final order that you can appeal. What you do is you go to trial. And, if your
client is convicted, you file an appeal. Sign the denial of your motion as one of
your errors in your appeal. Unless of course, this denial, you have a valid
grounds to file a petition for review for certiorari—special civil action, grave
abuse of discretion. There’s no other remedy. That’s difficult to establish.
Because there’s no other remedy, you go to trial.
Grave abuse of discretion—usually when a court denies motion to quash—if
there’s error at all, usually there’s error of judgment not error of jurisdiction.
AND, error of jurisdiction is the only ground that is proper under Rule 65. That
is a special mode because you can raise to a higher court an order that has not
terminated the case–mura kag you’re jumping. Wa pa nahuman ang kaso,
nisaka na ka. That is only reserved for extra-ordinary situations. Huwat lang When it is the accused himself who consents to the termination of the
mahuman, then, file an appeal. proceedings, way double jeopardy.

E.g.
Provisional dismissal - that is always with the consent of the accused. There can
be no double jeopardy there.

However, as I said, once the dismissal becomes final because there has been
no motion to revive it within the 1 or 2 yr periods, becomes final by operation
of law.

If a motion to quash is given due course, granted, walay double jeopardy.

Because usually motion to quash, unless its double jeopardy itself or extinction,
you file that before arraignment. When there’s no arraignment, there’s no
double jeopar

You have here an exceptional case. Even though the motion to dismiss was filed
by the accused, Court said, double jeopardy gihapon. Remember,
speedy trial. If you are going to file that motion - file a motion for dismissal of
the case for violation of the speedy trial act. The Rule is, the dismissal under
that particular violation is EQUIVALENT TO AN APPEAL. Even if it was with the
consent of the accused, that the case was dismissed, she may nagfile motion.
Equivalent to an acquittal man - so EXCEPTION TO THE RULE that double
jeopardy doesn’t set in if the dismissal is with the consent.

Same thing with demurer. Granting of a demurer - equivalent to an acquittal.

In both these cases, even if it is with the consent of the accused, DOUBLE
JEOPARDY WILL ATTACH.
Ninggawas kuno ug karaan nga Bar Exam. What do you mean by re judicata
imprison grey? That’s double jeopardy. Because if you say res judicata lang, that
may apply to civil cases. This is actually a phrase from US jurisprudence and just
adapted here. Nya’ grey siguro na didto sa ila. Hinumdumi ni kay mugawas nig
Bar Exam, pero dugay na man tuh.

Take note of the difference if it’s an error of judgment, usually the only remedy
there is appeal. Nasayop ang judge, the, interpretation of the evidence, etc.
Error of jurisdiction--- that is usually either mag-Rule 65 ka----grave abuse of
discretion. And, only grave abuse of discretion resulting in error of jurisdiction
which may result in lack of jurisdiction or excess of jurisdiction. Maoy reversible.
If it’s just abuse of discretion, not grave, SC said sorry sayop sa Judge. Kihaa ang If the court acted with grave abuse of discretion, “amount to lack or excess
judge, administrative. jurisdiction... prosecution was not given the opportunity to go to trial...” Case
Usually you reserved that to most serious cases if you’re going to file an was railroaded, gidali-dali, dismissed, the supposedly it’s dismissed without the
administrative case sa judge. consent of the accused, let’s say speedy trial, whatever equivalent to an
acquittal. But if it’s done with grave abuse of discretion, either no jurisdiction
at all, or excess of jurisdiction, judgment is NOT VALID, no double jeopardy will
attach.

9 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

are so wide that anything under the sun, because it says “anything that unjustly
annoys or vexes.”

What if a person has a peculiar disposition to a particular thing? Maglagot sya

ana. Maglagot sya sa nawng bug.os na katao. Anytime he sees that, maglagot
sya. He becomes unjustly annoyed or vexed upon seeing the face of a particular
person. What if this persons knows that his face annoys that other person and
he intentionally looks for that person, tries to strike a conversation with him
just to annoy him. Unjust vexation? Under the Rules, YES.

Unjust vexation it is under the felony light coercions. Acts of Lasciviousness,

crimes against chastity but SC in this case (Maghilum case) said, masuod kuno.
Unjust vexation is necessarily included in Acts of Lasciviousness.
Remember your Rules on identity of offense.
Ambot. Looking at it purely from the elements listed in the RPC. Although in
If it’s the same offense, the same elements, or it’s an attempt of frustration practice, YES. If you take away the lewd intent. Murag manggud unjust vexation
thereof, or katong necessarily includes or is necessarily included. All these is necessarily included in ALL CRIMES. Because most crimes would result in you
(enumeration above) included sila sa double jeopardy. vexing or annoying someone else. The moment you know that a person is trying
to commit a crime against you, diba ang saato ani no, unjust vexation is
However, if it is a supervening fact; attempted murder charged. But if during necessarily included in ALL felonies under the RPC. But anyway sige lang. Let’s
the trial namatay? You can actually withdraw the original charge. That doesn’t limit ourselves to this jurisprudence.
actually happen a lot.

What if you’ve already been convicted? Judgment has become final adto pa
matay - ah kaya pud. Although, we has one case where the original charge was
I’m not even sure now attempted or frustrated murder, after 2 years namatay.
Doctor said, related to the injury, secondary the incident. We were able to
amend it or substitute a new charge from attempted murder to murder, wa pa
man mahuman trial, nagsige pa man mi. Probably as the length of time why
dance between the commission and the eventual supervening event. Basig sira
ug it becomes more difficult to prove that was the result of the injury inflicted.
I haven’t of it becoming a problem so I don’t think it should be a problem.

Kani - relatively a new ruling, giusab ni J.Leonen ang stand sa SC. Before, the
usual was you choose 1: Rape under 266 of RPC or 5 (b) sexual intercourse with
a minor under the Child Abuse Law. Choose 1 not both, double jeopardy kuno.
2018 ning usab ang SC sa ilahang stand. They said, they have different
elements. These are 2 different offenses.

As things stand now, you can actually charge a person with Rape under the RPC
AND 5(b) Sexual intercourse with a minor under the Child Abuse Law as long as
you can establish. Basically the elements are the same. Ang 5 (b) lang doesn’t
require force, intimidation, unconscious etc, all that is required is that
influence, coercion, sexual intercourse with a minor. Even if it’s consensual.
Estafa and illegal recruitment. Estafa under false pretenses, pretending to Because 266 usually is without consent - sexual intercourse without consent.
posses - whatever qualifications and then illegal recruitment.
Sec. 5(b) of RA 7610 actually, unsa ba to, Amployo or Olaya(?) na kaso? SC said
Estafa also under false pretenses by post-dating a check. Remember that? It theoretically this includes consensual sexual intercourse with a minor because
can also be violation of the Bouncing Checks Law. supposedly minors cannot give their consent to such a act. Even if there seemed
to be a consent or at least was not forced, mao ra ghapon na, no consent. Under
Kani - consented abduction and qualified seduction. Same act but not the same the law, no consent can be given.
offense. Technically you can be charged consented abduction. Remember
qualified seduction - seduction of a virgin, seduction of a sister, abuse of
authority, abuse of relationship. Consented abduction - might be the same act
but not the same offense because it has different elements. Puydi kuno na. You
can be charged with 2 offenses for the same act.

Again, in this case, even though the elements are present, but because of the
grave abuse of discretion of the judge resulting in lack or excess of jurisdiction,
the element of a valid judgment = nawagtang so no double jeopardy. Even
though, let’s say accused was acquitted, there was trial but there was grave
abuse of discretion on the part of the judge, Court said the dismissal there, you
Murder necessarily include homicide. Robbery necessarily includes theft. If you cannot raise the issue of double jeopardy.
take away the force upon things or violence, intimidation of persons, that
becomes the crime of THEFT. Because you’re left with unlawful taking of
personal property of another.

But robbery in a band does not include theft as an accessory. Layo nasad oi.

GR: Accused cannot be convicted of a graver offense than that which is charged
in the information so gikiha ug homicide. What if during the trial murder was
the one established. You can only be found guilty of homicide even if the
evidence established murder.

Unjust vexation is embraced in in the crime of Acts of Lasciviousness. A lot of Serious physical injuries - what if you were able to establish intent to kill? Most
people, lot of sectors complain about unjust vexation. They want is stricken off likely attempted homicide, serious physical injuries *inaudible* kutob. You
the RPC because they say “It’s too capricious!” The parameters of the elements cannot convict of a graver offense than that which is stated in the information.

10 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

Except, di man jud ni siguro exception. Because if it’s a supervening fact, you
have to amend the information. Kung gikan ka attempted murder then you
want it to become murder then file a new information for murder. When you
get convicted, you are not being convicted other than the information for
attempted murder. You’re being convicted under the information FOR murder.

Newly discovered evidence - well, as I said again, you have to either make an
amendment or a substitution of a new information.

Kani pud - (plea to lesser offense was made without the consent of the
prosecutor and the offended party) again, this is in violation of the rules, you
plead guilty and without the consent of the prosecutor and the offended party.
If there is any kind of judgment there, that judgment was done with grave abuse
of discretion, that is reversible error, no double jeopardy kana ta. How about motion to quash and demurer?

In these 2 (first 2), there’s actually no double jeopardy because this would result Motion to quash again, before arraignment or during arraignment if you read
in a new charge being filed against the accused. the cases. Demurer to evidence, after the prosecution has presented his
evidence (that’s when filed).
Prior leave of court - remember, prior leave of court is important in a demurrer.
You can either file a demurer without leave or with leave of court. The effects
are different.

Grounds are also different. In a motion to quash, you have those exclusive
grounds. Demurer of evidence, there’s only 1 ground - evidence of the
prosecution is insufficient to convict the accused by itself.

GR: Evidence aliunde - evidence outside of the information is NOT allowed in a

motion to quash, of course there are exceptions.

In a demurer to evidence, the nature of the motion itself, actually requires

evidence outside of the information.
Sometimes called the TIME-BAR kaning provisional dismissal. If you look at the
jurisprudence, the SC sometimes refers to this as the TIME BAR RULE. Effect of granting. Just remember the difference between effect of a denial, of
a demurer - if the demurer was filed with or without leave of court.
Meaning to say, after the expiration of 1 or 2 yrs without the case being revived,
DISMISSAL BECOMES FINAL. That’s why there’s some discussion as to whether
this has changed the rules on prescription. SC said NO, prescription has its own
function. So prescription of a crime from the discovery of the crime up to the
filing of the complaint or information. You go beyond that, the crime prescribes.

Prescription of the felony - from the time you evade service of sentence to the
time you are recaptured. Penalty prescribes.

Here, (becomes permanent if not revived after...) in some cases yes, it may
result in the prescription being shortened. What if let’s say you are charged
with Rape? Supposedly Rape prescribes in 20 yrs. What if you get charged on
the same year you committed the crime? What if during the trial there was a
provisional dismissal? As a rule, if you go through arraignment and and trial without raising the
grounds in a motion to quash, they are deemed waived. You don’t file a motion
Instead of 20 yrs for the crime to prescribe, there is only 2 or 3 yrs now because to quash before arraignment. All objections under this rule are deemed waived,
after the provisional dismissal you only have 2 years to revive the same and except these 4 (slide above) - failure to charge an offense, because that can be
then the dismissal becomes final. It would seem that the crime has prescribed. raised at ANY TIME BEFORE TRIAL. The information itself is defective, it doesn’t
You cannot really look that way that the crime has prescribed, it’s just that it’s charge an offense. Jurisdiction, extinction, and double jeopardy.
now prohibited under the time-bar rule. Although as I said, there are some
sectors who say that violates the rule on prescription because instead of 20 yrs, NOVEMBER 25, 2020
you now just have 2 yrs within which to revive it. But the thing is, it’s because
there’s that procedure that has been presented.

A motion to quash - you file that before arraignment.

Provisional dismissal - you file that at ANY TIME before judgment. It can be done
before arraignment.

Who files motion to quash?

- by the accused

Provisional dismissal - it’s usually filed by the prosecution with the consent of
the accused or it can be a joint motion of the prosecution and the accused.

Grounds are different. Motion to quash it’s exclusive under this particular rule.

Grounds for provisional dismissal - the rules doesn’t seem to state what are the
grounds for provisional dismissal. It merely says, “OK you can file a motion for
the provisional dismissal of a case and then you have that 1 or 2 yrs within which
to revive it.”

The effect of granting a motion to quash - they also can be differentiated.

11 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

When you say marking of evidence it does not include proffer of exhibits.
Proffer of exhibits is a very peculiar move that a lawyer or a party will result to
during the trial. You usually use that whenever your evidence has been rolled
by the court as inadmissible. The court will say irrelevant or excluded because
those are the 2 grounds upon which evidence can be denied admission. It is
either irrelevant or excluded by the rule. I am not talking about the credibility
of the evidence I am talking about the admissibility, those are two different
things.

ADMISSIBILITY V. CREDIBILITY
Admissibility is whether the court can even consider it as evidence. Credibility
is once the evidence has been admitted, can the court or will the court give it
weight?
Example: Testimony of an eye witness. This is generally admissible especially if
the testimony of the witness relates to the very facts and issues. What if the
testimony it will claim that he is an eyewitness to the crime – he saw the crime
being committed? If he is going to testigy on the fact that he saw the crime
being committed, then ofcourse that type of testimony is admissible. It is not
irrelevant nor is it excluded by the rules. So, admissible sya. But is it credible?
That is a different thing. It depends on how he testifies the nature of his
testimony, how he performs during cross, so the totality of how the testimonial
evidence was given will now be the measure if it is credible or not – the
admissibility or credibility. Here we are only talking about admissibility.

Once your evidence has been deemed inadmissible di dawaton sa korte

because the court says its irrelevant, you still have an option, you still proffer
your exhibits. Basically you are saying okay the court has not admitted my
evidence, but if admitted this is the purpose this is what it will prove. Basically
what you are doing there is that you are preparing the groundwork if ever you
go to appeal. BECAUSE wala mana dawata sa trial court, it maybe on appeal if
PRE-TRIAL AND TRIAL the case eveer goes to appeal, the exhibits you proffered will be admitted and
considered by the court.
Pre-trial as the term suggest is a preliminary procedure right before the trial.
The primary purpose of a pre-trial is to facilitate the proceedings during the That is proffer of exhibits. Usually it is not that common because courts gives a
trial. It helps simplify the issues so that not all issues have to be litigated. Maybe lot of leeway to the parties as to what is admissible or not.
there will be issues that would be admitted by both parties so no need to
litigate on that. No need to prove that even if it is admitted.

PLEA BARGAINING
Aside from that, you can also have plea bargaining. Because. I mean better ang
plea bargaining because it finishes everything. Usually plea-bargaining ends
with the proceedings because most likely the parties and the court will come
to an understanding how to terminate the proceedings.

STIPULATION OF FACTS – Maybe there are some facts that might be admitted
by both parties so need to litigate on that.

MARKING OF EVIDENCE – there are some cases as I have said katong mga
voluptuous na documents, you would rather have that marked before rather
than during the trial. Its going to help you. Because it actually takes up time, the
actual marking takes up time. There will be manifestations made by the parties
As part of the rules of court, when you talk about plea bargaining supposedly
and theres the actual marking so you would rather have that done before the that is not allowed. Ideally speaking we do not negotiate the criminal liability of
actual trial. a person. More and more the SC has recognized the fact that there are times
WAIVER OF OBJECTIONS TO ADMISSIBILITY that plea bargaining is useful and it is not contrary to law. Rules of court allow
Maybe waiver of objections to admissibility, this is pretty much like stipulation plea bargaining.
of facts, so that maybe you don’t have to object on that. The one that I always
find interesting is admission as to the identity of the accused. I short cut sa ESTIPONA V. LOBRIGO
lawyer the lawyers would make a manifestation that would say Admitted SC said congress cannot even deny the parties to plea bargaining. There is a
identity of the accuse – I always wonder what does that mean? Does it mean provision iiin the law that congress place not subject to plea bargaining. The sc
the accused is admitting that he has been identified? Well of ocurse noh if you said unconstitutional. They have already recognized that that is the trend, plea
are at the side of the defense that you are actually really admitting there is that bargain ta.
this person who is my client is the same person who is the accused in the instant
case. That should be the limit of your admission. Because otherwise, anything
more than that would be detrimental to the case of your client. So, mao ra
siguro na ang pasabot ana. Admitted as to the identity. What if somebody might
misconstrue that? What if the judge might misconstrue that? The accuse is
admitting that he has been identified by the prosecution as the offender. Ah
WALA NA DERETSO NA CONVICT.

ORDER OF TRIAL
Regular order – prosecution first. Defense second.
Reverse order – especially if you have exemptifying circumstances – defense
first – prosecution next. And any other matter that might help facilitate the
proceedings.

PRE-TRIAL AGREEMENT NOT THE PRE-TRIAL ORDER

The pre-trial agreement. This is not the pre-trial order. This was the agreement
that was reached during the pre-trial. Like for example there they were able to
agree on the civil liability. Sabot sila – OK civil liability 50K. But in installments

12 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

maybe in 5 months or 10 months or whatever. That is a pre-trial agreement.

Not the pre-trial order.

PRE-TRIAL AGREEMENT DEFINITION

A pre-trial agreement must be in writing signed by the accused and counsel and
requires the approval of the court. Usually you don’t need the signature of the
(?), usually in pre-trial agreement it is usually on the part of the accused.
Normally you would see an obligation on the part of the accused, well there
could be a an obligation that would manifest that he is no longer interested in
the civil liability etc. or maybe make a manifestation or proceeding, that might
be the extent of his obligation under the agreement. Most likely all the
obligations there would be on the part of the accused. That is why it is
important that is the ACCUSED AND COUNSEL sign the agreement otherwise it
is not binding.
So you have here periods but I don’t know if this has been or this can be
followed by the courts. Like for example, there was this hearing that I attended
October – this is even dates agreed during the pre-trial these are already dates
that were agreed upon long before. Dba sunod february na. that is how clogged
our courts. Lisod makiha ron. Especially if you are charged for a non-bailable
offense and you cannot afford to post bail. Youll be staying in the city jail. So
diba imo holloween-xmas-newyear-sinulog city jail.

CONTINUOUS TRIAL AS FAR AS PRACTICABLE because you cannot just have

that. Probably there are special cases. Because there are cases that have been
publicized so much. So much pressure on the courts to finish it. They can
probably have time to have it continuoous. That is ideal. But not really practical.
Nowadays.

When I started early on as a lawyer, pre-trial was looked at by most courts as Postponements allowed are now those which are reasonable and for a good
something that is pensive, you dismiss it. Noh if there is no plea bargaining, cause.
usually the court will only say ok lets go to trial – pre-trial is terminated. The
judge would usually ask the parties has there been any kind of agreement
between the parties maybe plead guilty to a lesser offense, etc whatever and if
the parties say no – ok pre-trial is terminated lets go to trial. Nowadays, you
cannot do that.

The rules requires that it is mandatory that the judge, the court, must conduct
a pre-trial in accordance with the rules. They cannot dismiss it perpangtorily (di
ko sure if the word is correct). Di na pwede I dismiss lang na nmo diha diha. You
have to go through the steps.

NON-APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES MAY RESULT IN SANCTIONS.

Usually, the most common sanctions might be either a warning or di man gani
guro na sanction ang warning. Reprimand. Possible guro reprimand. Fine.
Maglagot – I guess it would be more common for a fine to be imposed rather
than a reprimand. And then, worst comes to worse. Imprisonment. Declared in These are factors to be considered as to whether a motion for postponement.
contempt of court. Ipapriso ka for not attending. But ofcourse noh this would
be you do it failute to appear is unjustified. Unless there is an acceptable MISCARRIAGE OF THE ACCUSED VS. MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE
excuse. Miscarriage of the accused – it can also mean miscarriage of justice on the part
1. Warning of the prosecution. Meaning to say, there might be a miscarraige of justice if
2. Reprimand you don’t give the prosecution reasonable time to prove its case in the same
manner that there is a miscarriage of justice if you unreasonably delay the
3. Fine
4. Imprisonment proceedings of the accused.

If the issues are too complexed the parties need to study. Sige pagtuon sa atty
kay lisod na. And then courts calendar. You look at that also.

PRE-TRIAL ORDER – this is an order issued by the judge after the pre-trial.
Basically its just playing down what occurred in the pre-trial. What where the
actions taken, nay stipulations. Evidenced marked. Especially it has been signed We already discuss this to some degree. Right to speedy trial. Ok remember
by the parties, binds the parties, they cannot later n say we would like to stage right to speedy trial and right to speedy disposition of cases those are 2
our strategy. Di na pwede becausae you are bound to the order. different things. Basically, the effect is the same if you invoke that. And the case
is dismiss which is equivalent to an acquittal.
It limits the issues to be disposed -meaning to say if that is a stipulated issue or
that issue has been agreed upon and no longer be taken up and any kind of Upon motion of the accused, the accuse has the burden of proving that his right
evidence to be presented witness or whatever would be denied by the court has been violated and the prosecution there are some exclusions mentioned in
sec 3 but those exclusions they fall under whether it is reasonable or excusable
upon objection.
or whether objections to any kind of postponement have been made.
Control how the trial proceeds – you use it as a basis for your trial. Katong una
uso kay na. Ok how many witnesses Mr. prosecutor – I have 2 witnesses your
honor I would also like to make 2 reservations. Before that was allowed. NOW
NO. HAHA Today – I have 2 witnesses – who are this witnesses to identify them,
what would they be testifying what is the gist of their testimony? Reservation
di pwede unless for a very good cause. Maybe a very good cause would be that
you have information that there is a witness who is yet to be identified.
Otherwise, you are not allowed to reserve an unnamed witness.

This is generally the order of trial.

13 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

First. The prosecution and then you have the accused. Especially if the accused
brings up new matter that has to be rebutted by the prosecution then you can
give the prosecution chance of rebuttal. And then to make matters fair, after
the rebuttal of the prosecution – surrebuttal. The accused would be given the
opportunity to submit surrebuttal. After that one. Wala na. Syaro naa pa mo
issues to be raised after 2 opportunities and evidence in chief. And then after
the party has submitted her evidence in chief, his supposed to formally offer
his exhibits. Formal offer we usually call that usually kaning prosecution we
usually call that evidence in chief formal offers of exhibits – issued there
admissibility and not credibility. So the judge there would say ok after the
prosecutions exhibits have been admitted what will you say mr prosecutor, the
prosecutor will say we rest our case. Ok because you don’t know whether youll Remember this, if you are not in the custody of the law and you do not appear
submit a rebuttal yet. Wala pa man ka kahibaw. But you have presented all your for one hearing, you waive your appearance for that hearing. You do not waive
evidence here (refer to 1st prosecution sa slide) which is evidence in chief nimo. your appearance for subsequent hearings, but if you are in the custody of the
After the prosecution has rested accused napud. law and you evade such service, you escape from the custody of the law, you
waive all your appearances until you are recaptured.
Accused now presents his evidence in chief. Same thing formal offer. After that,
after his formal offer of his exhibits has been admitted by the court and the
accused rest its case, the prosecution will ask – hmm Mr prosecution rebuttal
ka? YES..NO..DEPENDS. And if you say yes, its just like the first prosecution
rebuttal. Accuse surrebuttal.

After everything has been submitted. After both parties has rested. No more
rebuttal. No more surrebuttal. Case is submitted for decision. Courts may allow
oral arguments. Ganahan sila mag grandstand mga lawyer. Ok oral arguments
mo. Or written memoranda. Now there is nothing wrong but there are some
judges who would say ok make a memorandum decision that is in your favor
and then I will chose. Its not as simple as that wherein the ennie Minnie mini
emo. Ah kini daog. He can use that as a guide in preparing his own decision.
This is perpetuation. We’ve mentioned this in passing before. You perpetuate
the testimony of a witness for the accused because you foresee that during the
actual trial when it’s your turn as the defense to present witnesses, this witness
will no longer be available or is not available. Basin naa cyay scheduled nga
travel. If he is a witness, you cannot restrict his liberty of travel. You can
perpetuate that by getting his testimony beforehand. It’s just a matter of
preserving it and later on during the actual trial you open up the envelope that
was sealed so that will form part of the testimony or part of the evidence of the
defense.
Take note, the rules are different when you perpetuate the testimony of a
defense witness, it’s different from witnesses from the prosecution. If it’s for
the defense, file a motion with notice to the other party, you state who and
why you have to perpetuate the testimony. name , residence, substance of
testimony. Sickness and infirmity are the most common reasons. Puyde pud ni
cya residing more than 100km from the trial with no means to attend. Kanang
It’s not as simple as that where the judge will say eenie meenie minie mo kani mga mountain barangay sa South ug North. Tua man sila sa pinakatumoy. Or,
daog. He can use that as a guide in preparing his own decision, okay na cya. any similar circumstance.
What is not okay is that without studying he just signs one or the other decision
just to finish the proceedings. If self-defense, remember, bali. Mag una ang
accused because the act as described in the information is admitted, what if it’s
homicide, so the accused admits I killed a man. There’s no need to prove
anymore. Mao may naa sa information. The accused now has to prove the
elements of self defense. Reverse order.

Once the motion is granted the court will issue the order, the date, time, and
place, where the testimony of the defense witness is to be taken, notice to the
prosecution, and the testimony is taken either before a judge (some other
judge nga mas accessible to the witness), or in the absence of a judge, any
member of the BAR. What if there is a lawyer who lives in the vicinity? Adto
mo didto. What actually happens there is that the witness, the judge or
The court may ask clarificatory questions but the SC has repeatedly said “Mr. member and the lawyer will be there so he can propound questions,
Judge use it sparingly and judiciously, otherwise, it might give the impression prosecution is notified so that if they want, they attend.
that you have lost your impartiality. You are now siding with one of the parties
because of the nature of your questions.” What if you have more questions
than the cross-examining counsel? Mawala imong pagka cold neutrality of an
impartial judge, especially if there are side comments. If mahimo, no side
comments from the court. Clarificatory questions, as the term suggests, is that
you want to be clarified as to certain issues so that it helps you in your decision-
making. It’s not there to favor one party or the other. It’s for your consumption
as the judge.

To secure the appearance of a material witness, there are grounds ay di mo

tunga, bail may be required. Meaning to say, if you don’t post bail, there is a
different rule for civil procedure, rule 23 is civil procedure, but there is a specific
procedure for criminal cases. Rule 23 is exclusively for civil cases and for a court
not to grant the prosecution’s motion for the arrest of the witness because he
relies on Rule 23 the judge, the SC said in Montejo, that amounted to grave
abuse of discretion. Criminal ka, anhi ka diri sa criminal procedure.
We have already this that you have the right to be present in the same manner
you have the right not to be present in your hearing as long as you have been
arraigned where your presence is mandatory, you have been duly notified of
the trial and your failure is unjustified, then the court can authorize a trial in
absentia.

14 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

Salvanera, the court said two accused may corroborate their testimonies. It
does not have to be from another person who is not an accused.

Rule for defense witness: any judge or member of the bar accessible to the
witness. But, look at the examination of a prosecution witness before trial. He
is too sick or infirmed, he has to leave the Philippines. Examination before the During the trial, what if it becomes evident that a wrong charge has been filed
court where the case is pending, this is the most compelling difference between before the court? It is very general. After the prosecution has presented its
examination of a witness for the defense before trial and where the case, then it’s the turn of the accused. What if the accused can’t be convicted
examination can be conducted. It’s more restrictive in the case of prosecution under the present charge? Because it is either included or it necessarily includes
witnesses. That’s why in one case the complainant was in Manina because she what’s charged and what is being proven, di dyud ma sud. You do not release
was in the hospital, so didto gi kuha ang iyang testimony. The court said we the accused. What happens is that there is a dismissal of the present charge.
cannot allow that. This is one of those cases where the SC said the rules must What actually happens here is that the motion to dismiss is actually filed but
be strictly interpreted as compared to other instances where the courts would attached to the motion is the new information. So, there is no gap in the
say rules can be liberally interpreted. Di mo sugot ang court. Awa sick gud naa proceedings where the accused would still be or would not be discharged from
sa hospital unsaon mana nimom? I guess since you are the complainant, you the accusation and there is no information against him. Along with this motion,
have to find ways for your testimony to be conducted where the case is if you’re the prosecution, you’re going to file a motion to dismiss. Attached to
pending. that motion to dismiss is the new charge. That’s why the court need not
discharge the accused upon the filing of the motion to dismiss, dismiss the
present charge and then have the accused arraigned under the new
information.

If there are several accused, even if they have different defenses, they should
be, as a rule, they should be tried jointly because more often than not the
evidence will be the same. There might be slight changes especially if they have
inconsistent defenses among themselves the several accused. The rule should Public morals or decency is the standard that the courts will use regarding
be they should be tried jointly. Upon motion of any party, for any reason, the public trial. Usually, it’s a minor involved especially if it’s going to be the minor
court may order a separate trial. who will testify whether he is an accused, the victim, just a witness, if he feels
that excluding the public is for the best interest of the child then it can do so.
It’s not even just limited to minors. What if it’s a private offense? Seduction,
abduction, that has to do with decency and public morals so usually, those are
the more common instances where a public trial or you can exclude the public
from the trial.

Remember, this is an accused who is applying to be a state witness so he can

be discharged as an accused. This happens during the trial. This does not
happen before trial. Remember that case where there was evidence that this
accused, that this person was also liable for the crime but the prosecution
decided we are not gonna charge him because we are going to use him as a You can have several cases but if the evidence in these several cases are more
witness. You’re not allowed to do that, only the Ombudsman under their rules or less the same, you can consolidate them. This is very common in drug cases.
can do that. They can exclude an accused before trial for purposes of using that You get arrested or somebody gets charged Sec. 11- possession of drugs, Sec.
accused (di gani cya accused...or charged *choppy si fiscal), you only see that 12-paraphernalia, Sec. 7- visiting a drug den, puyde ra mag dungan ang tulo.
in the Ombudsman. You don’t see that in criminal procedure. Prosecutors do You visit a drug den and then your possession of actual drugs and
not have that choice. Remember, the rule is you charge all those who appear paraphernalia. File-lan ka anang tulo. These are three different cases but
responsible. If you’re going to use him as a state witness, during the trial, you because these actually occurred at the same time and it’s going to involve the
apply. You have to make an application that this particular accused will be used same witnesses(?40:50). When you say consolidated, you mean to say that
as a state witness so that he will be discharged later on because what happens during that one trial all three cases that we mentioned, they are all being heard
there when the court grants the motion that the witness is made to testify, di at the same time. It’s not just on that day the 3 cases will be heard, no. One trial
ba nah cya e discharge nga ipa testify man cya? Then if has all the requirements for all three cases. That is what we mean by consolidation.
(refer to pic above), that’s when the court will say since he complies with all the
requirements of a state witness, discharged as an accused. Anha pa. It is the
court who will decide. Ang imong kuyaw ana gamble on the part of the accused,
he applies, hearing is conducted, and the court says no you cannot be
discharged. Balik accused ka, laban naka sa prosecution kay wa man ka ma
discharge.

After the prosecution has presented its evidence, after the prosecution has
rested its case, if the defense believes that on its own, the evidence of the
prosecution is insufficient- di pami mo tubag mo ingon ang defense. On its own-
the evidence of the prosecution cannot convict the accused, so demurrer ka.
Meaning to say, Mr. judge look at the evidence of the prosecution

In one case, there were two accused who were applying as state witnesses. We’re not going to present evidence nalang. Look at the evidence, by itself
They were the one who were corroborating each other’s testimony. The rest of that’s not sufficient to sustain a conviction. That is basically what you’re saying
the accused, the defense, objected. NO, there should be someone else other when you demure. As I have said, there are two ways to file a demurrer to
than the accused themselves who should corroborate their testimonies. In evidence:
15 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

1. With leave of court – you ask permission from the court So if the demurrer is granted, well good if you’re the defense because that puts
2. Without leave of court – here what you file first is a motion for leave an end to the proceedings. An order granting a demurrer is equivalent to an
of court to file a demurrer to evidence and only when your motion acquittal. Double jeopardy will set in if imo nang file-an usaba ng accused ana/
for leave is granted will you file your actual demurrer to evidence. Granting a demurrer effectively dismisses the case. What if the demurrer is
In this second option, without asking for leave of court, you denied? Meaning to say, if you file your demurrer with leave of court, you go
immediately file your demurrer to evidence. The difference here is to trial or your present evidence if you are the accused. You cannot appeal.
when the demurrer is denied. If it’s granted, then it becomes moot Stated otherwise, the accused cannot appeal an order denying a demurrer to
and academic whether it’s with leave or without leave. If it is denied, evidence. Why? Because an order denying a demurrer does not dispose of the
when you file your demurrer with leave of court, you can still main issue. Even if the demurrer was filed without leave, after denying, the
present evidence. If it is without leave of court, and the demurrer is court still has to decide on the case. So you can only appeal an order if it is a
denied, you can no longer present evidence and you have your case final order. An order denying a demurrer is not final. Either you go to the
submitted for decision. extraordinary remedy of Rule 65, wherein you have to prove grave abuse of
discretion or you wait until your client is convicted. When you file your appeal,
you cite the denial of the demurrer as one of your errors if you believe that the
denial is not in accordance with law and jurisprudence. Just like a motion to
quash. A denial of a motion to quash – you cannot appeal that. Go to trial if
convicted, file an appeal and cite that as one of your errors.

Even if it is just a motion for leave, you must state specifically the ground
because that is the basis of the court to grant the motion for leave of court. In
fact, some lawyers, even their motion it’s practically their demurrer to
evidence. They spell out the grounds and when it is granted, they come out
with the actual demurrer and basically it is the carbon copy of their motion. On the part of the prosecution, if their demurrer is granted? If it is barred by
They want to be sure, they play it safe, their motion basically is a demurrer double jeopardy, it puts an end to the proceeding. If the granting of the
already. Technically it is just a motion because you’re required to specifically demurrer is tainted with grave abuse of discretion, Rule 65 ka. Otherwise, most
state your grounds. You cannot just say evidence of the prosecution is likely it puts an end to the proceedings because it is as good as acquittal. Then
insufficient. Dili na pwede, That is just a general conclusion that you are double jeopardy would set in.
resorting to.
Just remember the aftereffects of the denial between filed with leave and filed
without leave.

There’s this rule, specifically here that the case can be reopened for reception
of evidence but granting that motion to reopen requires hearing. So meaning
to say, you have to conduct a hearing for purposes of deciding whether there
In Tolentino, court said, if you file it without leave of court, that is an unqualified should be a reopening of the case.
waiver of the right to present evidence. You are no longer allowed to present Question:
evidence if you filed your demurrer without leave.

A motion to dismiss might be for any ground. Speedy trial – motion to dismiss
ka. For demurrer, that is only one sufficient ground – insufficiency of evidence. .
If it is a motion to dismiss then it is denied, it does not have the same effect of Fiscal: Let us say there are 5 of you who were caught in a pot session, so kamo
a demurrer to evidence that has been denied without leave of court. You can tantna gi-filean ug Section 11 and since there is no conspiracy in the particular
still present evidence. situation, there would be 5 separate charges of Section 11 for possession of
shabu. But since you have one arresting officer, he probably has all the evidence
against all you 5. He is going to testify in the same manner against all you 5. A
motion for consolidation would be proper. Once a motion for consolidation of
all these 5 charges is granted, the 5 information will be consolidated in one
proceeding with a particular court. A court has its own method on how it is
consolidated. Sometimes, they refer to the case number – lowest case number
maybe. Or who has the first court raffled with the case – adto na niya tanan.
Let us say, it is consolidated with a particular branch. So you have 5 information.
The 5 information will remain separate. There will still be 5 information, it is
just the proceeding that will be consolidated. You actually have 5 cases but one
hearing for all 5 cases. Of course, during the cross-examination of the defense,
Whether to grant the demurrer within the discretion of the court – it is just like what if the 5 accused have different lawyers, each lawyer will take turns in
denial or granting of demurrer whether it’s correct or not, that is basically an cross-examining the witnesses of the prosecution. On the same manner, each
error of judgement which is not reversible. That is discretionary on the part of accused will have the same turn in presenting their evidence.
the judge. If di siya kamao, sorry nalang. Especially when you do not agree with That’s it for trial and pre-trial.
his findings, sorry nalang because that is the purpose of the judge to decide on
the issues.

16 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

We mentioned before that the judge can require the parties to submit
Now when we talk of judgement, if you want to be very specific, very technical, memoranda. Or they can even submit a decision. A memorandum in decision
judgment is that part of the decision which disposes of the case. So usually form. Even if the judge will adopt everything in your memorandum, it is not
either that dispositive part – “wherefore”. If you want to be strict about it, that necessarily improper if it is still reasonable, on why you conducted wholesale,
is the judgment. The entire decision is composed of several parts. Judgment is the argument so of one party.
actually the finding of guilty/not guilty or whether the case shall be dismissed. It would be improper if the adaption of the whole sale arguments. One of the
Because you can actually have a case that is dismissed before reaching that parties is not supported by present law and jurisprudence. As long as it clearly
point whether to decide ether the accused is guilty or not guilty – motion to states the fact and law on which the ruling is based. While it does not
quash, demurrer to evidence – there is no finding of guilt, all you do is to grant specifically address each and every assigned error. Only those relevant issues
these so the case is effectively dismissed. Judgment there is a finding of that would be sufficient for a judge for proper reading need not be cited and
guilty/not guilty and also an adjudication of whatever liability is imposed – stated in the decision and judgment,
criminal liability, fine. You have to sate these in the judgment. Civil liability, You do not have to go through all the issues.
damages – whatever damages is allowed, it is part of judgment.

Ration decidendi – Basically that is the explanation of the court. You’ll find this
in the decision itself. An explanation on why they arrived at that judgment. What if, the judge made the decision is not the judge who heard the trial –
Opinion may be either an opinion of the court – whether it is concurring, retirement, termination, resignation etc. Another judge takes over his court
dissenting and not necessarily the majority. But that is different from judgment and then one of the cases ripe for decision.
because judgment is the adjudication – guilty or not guilty,
No trial to be held, all the hearing have already been conducted, all that is
required is the making of the judgment or promulgation of the decision.
Court said it’s not necessarily improper as long as that judge studied the record.
Just because he was not the one who heard the proceedings, doesn’t mean that
he is not qualified to render a decision.
It would be improper if a judge who did not participate in that proceedings
would make pronouncements in a decision as to the credibility----because his
demeanor was this during the trial. Clearly, he was not there that would be
improper. But if the judge would say, by looking at the transcript and the
affidavits, the testimony of these witnesses are credible or full of
inconsistencies than the testimony of these other witnesses. Pwede ra na’ siya
It must be written because in one case, the judge merely verbalized his decision
kay that could be discovered just by looking at records. Kato sigurong mag-
(ambot unsay nasud sa iyang ulo) and let us put it in writing later but never put
demeanor during the trial. The judge there can no longer rule on the demeanor
in writing at all. So the court said that there was never any judgment. The
of the witnesses during the trial. If he does so, nga di’ diay siya mao ang nag-
moment that verbal order of the judge was put into writing, that could have
hear, then, that would be improper.
been the judgment required under the rules. Since it was never out into writing,
Basically, all this decisions, even if you are not the judge who heard the trial as
dili jud pwede.
long as your decision is based on law and facts as established during the trial.
Personally and directly prepared by the judge – the actual preparation may be
Then, there’s nothing wrong.
delegated to some other person, he must see to it that he knows, he studied
and it is with his approval – the entire decision. He signs it.
The good part of the decision would be statement of the relevant facts. You do
not have to state all the facts because there might be facts during the trial that
are not relevant. Relevant evidence presented by the parties. What are the
issues involved?
If it is a criminal case, it is simpler – guilty or not guilty.
Statements of the laws and jurisprudence that are relevant upon which the
judgment will ultimately be based upon. Mura ra gud ni inyong case digest, if
you make a good one, you are summarizing a decision and you get to have the
most important things out of this decision. As long as it clearly and distinctly
contains a statement of facts and the law, kanang law, apil ana ang
jurisprudence upon which your judgment is based.
If given verbally, that is incomplete. Even if muingon ang judge – acquitted, case
dismissed, that does not amount to an actual acquittal.
The order of dismissal was never reduced into writing and signed by him, it did
not yet attain the effect of an acquittal. So it can still be set aside.
If you remember, the initiatory pleading, it’s not really that important what you
name the crime. The designation is not that important. What is important is the
narration of the acts in the information. But, when it comes to
decision/judgment of conviction there you must now properly designate the
legal qualification of the offense. In fact if you look at the cases that are
available for reading, you will see the Court takes time in their ruling to properly
give us the name of this particular crime.
Convicted at the RTC and CA of Robbery with homicide with physical injuries.
Upon reaching the SC will always say, THERE IS NO SUCH CRIME. Proper term is
Robbery with homicide. And that homicide, since use in its generic sense, will
include all the physical injuries, homicide and even the rapes. So, if there’s rape
committed somewhere there, it can no longer be considered an aggravating
circumstance nga equivalent to cruelty. Ingon tuh sa PP vs. Regala---WALA NA’,
WE DON’T USE THAT ANYMORE. Before Regala there were decisions that said,
Robbery with homicide. What if there were a rape committed? Ahhhh let’s
consider them as generic aggravating circumstance---di na kunoh ni pwede
karon.
SC merely said, there is no provision of the law that provides that a rape is an
aggravating circumstance.
Aside from the:
1) legal qualification of the offense;
2) participation of the accused: principal, accomplice and accessory; and

17 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

3) the penalty. If it’s in the RPC there are two things that you must state: what was actually established was consummated theft? Obviously, you cannot
a. the penalty—its prision correccional, mayor, minimum, convict him of consummated theft because that is the most serious offense and
indeterminate sentence law; and which was not alleged in the information. Can you convict him of frustrated?
b. duration. No. Because SC has already said there is no such crime. What remains now is
So, it’s not enough to say, prision mayor medium to reclusion temporal. You attempted theft. In that particular case, no other option but attempted theft.
must also state the duration. You must state there, okay 8 yrs. and 1 day of Original charge: frustrated theft. What was proven during the trial:
prison mayor medium to 14 yrs. of reclusion temporal. The penalty, which are consummated. Judgment: attempted.
the terms used in the RPC. The period, if the Indeterminate Sentence Law is
applicable. And, the duration.
The civil liability; if it has been instituted w/ the criminal action. Civil action is
instituted together w/ the criminal action then.

Offense necessarily includes if some of its elements are the elements of the
crime necessarily included. An offense is necessarily included if all its elements
are some of the elements of the crime that necessarily includes it.

If Acquittal, then the judge must specify—did the prosecution absolutely fail to
prove the guilt or was it just----there’s a reasonable doubt that was interjected
by the accused. The reason for the acquittal must be stated clearly by the judge.
“ACT OR OMMISSION FROM WHICH CIVIL LIABILITY MIGHT ARISE DID NOT
EXIST”→→ This is determinative of whether there is civil liability despite
acquittal. If the judge will say the act or omission from which civil liability might
arise did not exist, wa’ dyuy civil liability. Otherwise, there might be other
grounds for civil liability-----culpa acquiliana/culpa contractual.

Acts of lasciviousness is included in the crime of rape under Par. A or rape by

sexual intercourse. But, rape by sexual intercourse does not include rape under
Par. B. How about rape under par. b, does that include acts of lasciviousness?
Yes. Same principles as rape with under Par. A where rape necessarily includes
acts of lasciviousness. In fact, if you look at history of sexual assault par. 2 of
266-A—that is actually acts of lasciviousness but more serious than other types
of acts of lasciviousness. Cause diba, whenever an object is inserted. Before
sexual assault was made a crime by the legislators, that is actually acts of
lasciviousness.
If there is more than one offense charged in a single information. What if the
information sites multiple cases of rape? What if accused did not object? He
went to trail. and defended himself. Lets say in one information there were
three counts of rape? Naay sexual intercourse, inserting of a finger or Sexual
assault. Diba each act of sexual inter course is one count? What if there are
several counts described in the information? You did not object but defended
yourself during the proceedings? Then, you can be convicted of as many
offenses as they are stated in the information. Of course, if that’s the finding of
the court, then, the court must specifically alleged the reason for each
conviction. The Court must state why the accused is being convicted of several
crime when there is only one information filed against him.

In PEOPLE vs. CAOILI Court said Par. A, does not necessarily include par. b 226-
A. What was charged was rape under first paragraph of 266-A. What was
proven was that he did not have sexual intercourse. He inserted his finger into
the genitals of the victim. Victim turned out to be a minor. SC said Under the
Variance doctrine, we cannot convict him of the second paragraph of 266-A,
but we can convict him still using the variance doctrine under Sec. 5 B of RA
7610 convict him for lascivious conduct w/ the minor.

If you remember in the previous folder if the accused cannot be convicted?

Here, if he can be convicted of some other offense, what we have here is a
variance between what has been alleged and what has been proven. In this
particular case, there need not be any kind of substitution of the information.
What is only required here is that one offense is included in the other. You can
still be convicted. Acts of lasciviousness included in rape. Theft included in
Robbery. So while the allegation is for robbery but what if the proof is for theft?
You can still be properly convicted of theft.
But, the other way around if you’re charged with theft, but what was actually
proven was robbery, then you cannot be convicted of that.
Several cases were the information was for simple rape. What was proven
during the trial was qualified rape. Since, the qualifying circumstances were not
alleged in the information, then, he can only be liable for simple rape.
In the same manner, the person who was charged with frustrated theft. We all
know that frustrated theft is not a crime. There’s no such thing as that; its only
attempted or consummated. But what if nasipyat, wa makit’i---- g-file? Wa’ gi-
dismiss diresto? So, frustrated theft as it stands in court. What if during the trial

18 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

Promulgation is that particular proceeding where the decision is made known

to the accused. Ideally, it should be the reading of the entire decision including:
the findings of facts, the ruling, interpretation of the law, relevant
jurisprudence and eventually the judgment. But, there are some courts that just
go to the dispositive/the judgment. It is not really that unfair because Court
actually gives copies to both of the parties after the proceeding to help them
decide whether to file an appeal or whatever remedy they might feel is
available to them.
Promulgation is read in the presence of the accused. If it is a light offense,
pwedeng in the presence of the counsel. As long as his representative or lawyer
is there.
If the judge of the Court that supposed to promulgate--nagleave/nagbakasyon,
Clerk of Court may do so.
If the accused is confined in another place. Pending ang kaso diri sa Cebu. What
if he is in jail for some other crime in Manila? Executive judge of the RTC Manila
He failed to surrender within 15 days of promulgation – lost the right to appeal.
where the promulgation is to be conducted. Because, it would be easier to bring
the decision to Manila, than for the accused to be brought here in Cebu. Send
the decision to Manila for the Executive Judge there to conduct the
promulgation.

When does a decision become final? – 15 days from promulgation.

Before it becomes final or before an appeal is perfected, if at anytime these two
things happen, the court can modify its judgment. The one that I said, it was a
It would be easier to bring the decision to Manila than for the accused to be case for Acts of Lasciviousness, but you could readily determine while the
brought here when he is detained. Send the decision to Manila for the decision was being read that probably the judge here was thinking that this is
Executive Judge there to conduct the promulgation. rape that he was deciding. You would see here all these citings of decisions
GR: promulgation must be conducted in the court where the case is pending regarding rape instead of acts of lasciviousness. Mao day jud. Pag dispositive
portion, finding the accused guilty of rape, gikiha man ba ra sya Acts of
Lasciviousness. During the actual promulgation, the judge there noticed the
discrepancy so he stopped promulgation right then and there and gidali dali ug
modify ang judgment. The judgment has not yet become final because that’s
the day of promulgation yet; no appeal has been perfected because we were
still listening to the decision being read.
Rape is perpetua, Acts of Lasciviousness is prision correctional so daghan jud sa
penalty if you are not going to modify your judgment – you are being charged
of Acts of Lasciviousness but you are convicted of Rape.
Once a judgment becomes final because no appeal has been perfected within
15 days from promulgation. What if the sentence had already been served?
Case is for robbery with physical injuries, bail was set at P100k. Accused could
not afford to post bail so while the case was pending, he was in the detention
for 3 yrs that the case went on. On promulgation, judge convicts him not
robbery with physical injuries but only of physical injuries. Wa man kuno
What if the accused doesn’t appear during promulgation? What if he’s out on maprove sa prosecution a robbery. They were able to prove serious physical
bail or he’s facing charges where bail is not required? injuries but not robbery. Court said, convicted – less serious physical injuries,
If the accused fails to appear without good reason, wa kit sin basahan so di na penalty 3 months. Accused spent 3 yrs in detention because he couldn’t post
ta magreading. bail. Court there immediately made the finding that since the records would
Record the judgment in the criminal docket – courts have their own record show that the accused has already served their sentence, more than the
books for the civil, criminal cases, etc. I-record didto what was the finding of sentence that is imposed upon them, then order their release.
the court. Kato, final dayon ang decision. Ikaw di naka muappeal. Bahala maconvicted ka
You furnish notice – a written copy of the decision is served on the – of course basta satisfied na ang sentence because you’ve been there for more than 3
wa man sya magtungha so at his given address. If he’s no longer there, the last months of the conviction.
address of record. You waive in writing – ambot wa ko kadungog wa man mahitabo na you waive
But this is the more important one – if he is convicted and his failure to appear in writing. Why would you waive? What do you get out of that? Di ka kahuwat,
during conviction is not justified, (if it’s justified, courts are allowed to reset the you want to serve your sentence na. “I waive my right to appeal. I want the
promulgation. Nasakit, he’s supposed to be here but nasakit man so puydi judgment to become final immediately”
ireset ang promulgation) and he is convicted, accused loses the remedies OR
available. The court shall order his arrest. Remember this, you apply for probation. An application for probation is
What are available remedies? basically an admission that you were properly convicted. The conviction is
- Appeal proper, you just don’t want to serve your sentence in jail. You want to be given
opportunity to reform outside of the jail system.
Meaning, you can no longer appeal a conviction if you fail to appear during In all these instances, judgment becomes final.
promulgation and your failure is unjustified. Of course there are still remedies
there. The court will still issue the order here.
Conviction -> failure to appear seems unjustified -> loses remedies available
You can always file a motion for recon. Explain your absence, and if it’s justified,
the remedies will be available again. Mao ning nahitabong Ecleo(?). He was able
to post bail and after wa na jud sya makit.i, iya nalang abogado magsiling ngadto
sa court. During promulgation he was convicted, he never appeared. He lost all
the remedies available to him. That’s why wa na muabot ug SC an iyahang
conviction, he was charged with parricide. Dili ra diay sya sa Pilipinas, dugay
lang jud nakit.an.
If the accused surrenders after having lost his remedies because he failed to
appear, unjustified during promulgation, proves that his absence is justified
within 15 days from promulgation – he can still avail of the remedies. It will
return to him.
There are certain times when in acquittal you can actually file for a motion for
reconsideration. But as the jurisprudence tell us, this is usually limited to the
civil liability, right? Motion for recon ka?
New trial – it’s not actually reserved for the accused, but in most instances,
these two only available to the accused because you might raise issues of
double jeopardy the moment it’s the prosecution who files these two
proceedings. Still, it’s possible. Remember you have jurisprudence.
Grave abuse of discretion, where there’s no jeopardy because judgment was
not valid. At any time before judgment of conviction becomes final, you can file

19 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

a new trial or reconsideration. Actually, you can file these within the same
period where you can file your notice of appeal which is 15 days from
promulgation. Upon motion of the accused, although this is very rare – motu
proprio. Meaning to say, the court on its own will decide that there should be a
new trial pero kanus.a pud na.
Or he would reconsider – this would probably be more possible –
reconsideration, because the court upon reconsidering his decision found, ui
sayop man diay. Puydi, but as I said, it’s very rare.
Usually, a new trial or recon – upon motion. If it’s the court on its own, there
must be consent of the accused. Curiously, the prosecution is no longer – wa
nay appeal.

Newly discovered evidence, you have to conduct new proceedings that’s why
you call it new trial.
But if it’s only a review of errors of fact or law in the judgment, what you file is
a motion for reconsideration. No new proceedings will be conducted yet, it’s
just a review of the findings of the court.

If it’s
new trial – because there is new and material evidence. Meaning, you have to
conduct a new trial. Because in reconsideration, usually it’s just a review of the
findings. No new proceedings are conducted.
If you requested for a new trial, that’s because you want to introduce new and
material evidence. The important term there is NEW. Meaning to say, this
evidence basically was not available during the trial. If it was available and you
just did not take advantage of that, you did not try and present it in court, then
your motion for new trial will be denied. “Could not be discovered and
produced despite reasonable diligence” Motion must be in writing. You state the grounds. If it’s newly discovered
More important if introduced will probably change the judgment. You have evidence, there must be affidavits and documents. Remember the
cases like, “Oh we have witness who’s going to testify that. He was actually the requirements – (1) newly discovered (2) could not be produced with the
one who committed the crime. He’s going to sign a confession.” exercise of reasonable diligence. That might be: affidavit of the complainant
himself. He’s probably in charge of trying to obtain all the evidence in his favor.
Your motion should also state that the introduction of this new evidence will
probably change the findings. Because the motions here are filed with the
accused, notice to the prosecutor.

If that witness was available, you cannot explain why he was not presented
during the trial, the motion should be properly denied. Because the test is
reasonable diligence.
If the motion for new trial is granted, what happens?
The proceedings that were affected by the errors of law or irregularities will be
set aside.
A motion for new trial is granted if there errors of law or irregularities of the
proceedings or there were newly discovered evidence. If this is your grant for a
new trial, then all those affected by the irregularities is set aside, deemed void.
Wala na na. You have to take it anew.
If it’s newly discovered evidence, the proceedings already taken will remain and
you just add new proceedings for the newly discovered evidence.
Where motion for new trial or reconsideration is granted:
The original judgment, whether it’s new trial or MR, vacated ang original
judgment. And a new judgment whether, it could be that you reverse nausab,
gikan sa guilty or not guilty; it could be guilty but with modification – crime,
penalty, liabilities, whatever. You render a new judgment.
*Fiscal reads a question from the chat box
In one case, it was the weapon. Accused said, “Move for a new trial because we Yes, we had a case where the accused merely verbalized at the start of the
have found the weapon that was used in the killing of the victim.” Court said, proceedings, “MINOR KO!” Under the rules, the judge there has to presume
that will not change the findings and the weapon was available to you during that the accused is a minor. Of course after he verbalized na minor ko, several
the trial. hearings after he verbalized that, he produced a dubious birth certificate. As I
However, if you look at this case (Estino vs Pp), the Court said strictly speaking said, nahimo syang minor. The effect is yes.
these are not newly discovered. Meaning to say, these documents were Q: is it a ground for a new trial as well?
available but the thing was, the accused was operating under the impression Technically no, because the fact that you are a minor, can never be considered
that the documents for a particular year, 1998, was not the records required. as new evidence. Karon di ka kahibao na minor ka? But the effect is the same.
That was there, but they were operating under the wrong impression so the The case was nearing completion with the drug courts, and he came out with
Court said, puydi ra na. They were not allowed to present the 1998 because the manifestation “minor ko” and he had this dubious birth certificate to
they were under the impression that it was only the 1999 documents that were present.
material to the case at hand. You have here a liberal interpretation of the rule. All the proceedings that were had at the drugs court set aside ky way
jurisdiction ang drugs court. Why? Because the accused was a minor. It had to
be reraffled to one of the family courts here in Cebu City. All the proceedings
had to be taken anew. Technically, while it was not a motion for new trial, the
effect was the same because all the proceedings were affected by the
irregularity.
What was the irregularity here? A minor accused was having his case heard NOT
in a family court.
The accused just filed a motion that his case be reraffled to family court.
Granted because wa man pud jurisdiction ang drugs court. I guess the
prosecution in that drugs court just did not have the facility to try and counter
his claim na in fact he was a minor.

20 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

NOVEMBER 28, 2020

While it is a statutory right just like any statutory right the moment a party is
deprived of such right, then that can be a violation which violation is more or
less protected by our law on due process which is based on our constitution.
We can make the connections there.

Who can appeal? – The rules say any party. He must be a party to the case for
you to be able to appeal.

Basic limitation especially in criminal procedure is double joepardy. That is why

99% of the appealed cases would be done by the accused. There are very
limited situations where the plaintiff whether the state or the private offended
party can appeal a decision.

You have the state the accused and the private offended party. Other than that
it seems hard to imagine a situation where you are neither of these three
personalities then you can file an appeal. Wa nakay labot. Even if the
Appeal is basically the mode of raising to a higher court a final order or consequences might affect you if you are not a party, you do not have that right.
judgement of a trial court or a lower court and in that one party, the appellant Well you have other remedies. Maybe you can initiate a separate proceeding
or the one who makes the appeal, as he is not satisfied with the final order or to protect your rights.
judgement. The party adverse to the appeal we call the appellee. It is not a
constitutional right it is a mere statutory privilege. Therefore, to exercise such
privilege it must be done in the mode provided for by the law.

Fortunately, appeal is done by merely the ordinary appeal is quite simple. You
merely file a notice of appeal. Probably just one-page document where you say
here you are hereby filing an appeal to the judgement. You just state there the
material date so it can be established you can file it with the time allowed.

Like for example in a case of reckless imprudence. The accused here reckless
imprudence involving a passenger bus so the accused here most likely an
employee of the bus company. The employer is not a party. But remember in
your criminal law, while the employer maybe subsidiary liable, the insolvency
of the accused if he is an employee and while the crime was committed in the
discharge of his duties as an employee, it was established during the trial upon
his conviction and upon a finding of his insolvency to satisfy the civil liability,
the employer is automatically subsidiarily civilly liable. While that may be so,
the employer is not a party, therefore he cannot appeal. He has no right to
appeal.
We do not find the right to appeal in the constitution. It is merely in our rules That is why in jurisprudence of this nature, the SC always repeats – the
of court and in some laws where appeal is mentioned as a remedy. And
employer even though you are not a party you are not the accuse but you
although there are some types of appeal if you resort to a petition for review. should help and give legal assistance to your employee because eventually the
It becomes a bit more complicated than just a notice. We will discuss the four benefits of that legal assistance will redound to your benefit. If you do not
modes of appeal in this particular folder. assists him and he gets convicted he is insolvent, you will be subsidiarily liable
but you cannot appeal because you are not a party.

21 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

• RTC again. EOJ. Good government cases. ECJJ cases where the
accused is not a high ranking officer. RTC man ka. Di man ka mu
deretso sa Sandiganbayan. So the accused gets convicted here, then
the appeal is with the Sandiganbayan and not to the CA.
• RTC well it would imply or it necessarily implies that these are cases
wherein the RTC exercises EOJ because the penalty is Perpetua or
life, diba if you remember penalty with the RTC starts with 6 years
and 1 day, so necessarily if its perp or life then that is exclusive
original jurisdiction in the same thing with the 3rd bullet so ordinary
appeal here with the CA. Ok. So. Ordinary appeal.

As I have said before, only judgements and final orders are the subject of
appeal. A final judgement or order is one that finally disposes of a case.
Meaning to say, it leaves nothing else. Probably, except execution mga auxillary
ba na aspects, execution, satisfaction of judgements, etc. Well the judgement
before that, the decision of the court awarding those instances. That is the final
judgement or order that can be raised on appeal.

PETITION FOR REVIEW

This is what I said noh if the MTC exercises EOJ – its decision is appealed to the
RTC. So MTC to RTC Ordinary mode. But from the RTC in the exercise of its AJ
and yet the accuse is still not satisfied with the decision of the RTC. He can still
go to the CA. Now, the appeal is from the RTC in the exercise of its AJ to the CA.
Not a normal mode of appeal anymore. From MTC to the RTC – ordinary mode
of appeal. RTC to CA – petition for review na ka. Anytime you appeal a decision
which jurisdiction was exercise by that court is in its appellate jurisdiction and
you want to raise it to a higher court. Petition for review. No longer ordinary
We have a hiearchical format. It is very simple. From the first level courts,
appeal. So petition for review.
appeal the case to the RTC which is the normal mode of appeal. In the same
manner, if your case is originally tried by the RTC you can go to the CA or
Now unlike the ordinary appeal where you open everything for review, and
Sandiganbayan by normal mode of appeal.
raised as many errors as you want. You are more or less limited in a petition for
review.
It becomes a petition for review if like for example, from MTC you appeal to the
RTC by ordinary mode but still you are not satisfied so now you go to the CA for
Basically you have already lost at the first level. You went to the RTC, again you
a petition for review naka. In the same manner, if the case is heard by the RTC,
lost. So, chances are sayop ka. You are wrong. Now your grounds are limited.
pildi ka, you go to the CA, pildi gihapon ka, if you go to the CA that is by normal
Probably just a matter of screening raised up to the CA then SC. That is why if
mode of appeal, and if you are not satisfied from CA to SC that is by petition for
you are able to prove, your grounds are limited to:
review.
1. Prima facie evidence against the decision

Although you can raise errors both of fact or law. Meaning to say, findings of
the court on the interpretation of evidence and the law. Jurisprudence. You can
always raised errors of law. Meaning to say, there were errors of law committed
to the court in the application or interpretation of the law. What is important
here is that you must have prima facie evidence of errors of fact or law that
would warrant a reversal or modification. WARRANT A REVERSAL OR THE VERY
LEAST A MODIFICATION OF THE DECISION. That is petition for review.

MODES OF REVIEW
Right now, appeals that are practice are these 3. This does not include the
special civil action of certiorari under Rule 65. Di to sya appeal. It is a type of
review but it is not an appeal. These are the types of appeal.

RULE 65 - Reserve for orders that are not final. For interlocutory orders.
PETITION FOR REVIEW ON CERTIORARI V. PETITION FOR REVIEW
AUTOMATIC APPEAL – More or less wala nani sya because automatic appeal is
for death penalty. And since death penalty cannot be imposed by judges. This
What is the difference? Petition for review errors of fact or law. Petition for
is jus for purposes of academic appeal.
certiorari – errors or questions of law. Normally errors of facts will no longer be
entertained. Although inig basa nimo sa decision sa SC, well to prevent a
miscarriage of justice especially if the errors of fact would result in substantial
prejudice to the rights of the accused. The SC can review errors of facts. DBA
Supposedly it is not. Well they have exceptions. Anyway there are always
exceptions. The SC will always have exceptions.

Topics for a petition for review on certiorari are the constitutionality of a treaty.
BTW technically you can do this in the RTC. You can go to the RTC and question
a treaty, law or ordinance, e.o or regulation or the jurisdiction of an inferior
court.

So, if this is a normal criminal case the ground is only errors or questions of law
or jurisdiction. Here, this can be done at the first instance (referring to
constitutionality, etc.)
ORDINARY APPEAL
• It must refer to a final decision or order. Judgement or final order or
whatever.
• From the MTC exercising its exclusive original jurisdiction to the RTC.
• Same thing with the RTC exercising Exclusive original jurisdiction to
the CA by ordinary appeal.

22 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

Especially if well, as I have said while it is a petition for review, the appellate
court limits itself to errors of law, they are no longer going to review the findings
of facts of the trial court – petition for review ka on certiorari.

However, as we have said, there are grounds that will allow the court to review
both findings of facts and errors of law. And basically, it allows them to open
the entire case for review. Actually, when you file an appeal whether it is an
ordinary appeal or a petition for review or petition for review on certiorari, you
are actually making a gamble especially if you have not been imposed the
maximum penalty. WHY? Because on review the court opens the entire case,
and it can impose a higher penalty, ofcourse noh it wont go beyond the original
charges filed. Lets say for example, you are charged of murder but got
convicted of homicide, and then you appeal. the appellate court can actually go
back to murder as charged. That is one thing.
As we have said before, automatic review. Although this is reserve whenever Another thing what about the penalty? Just today I was reading a case where
the penalty of death is imposed. Its not death penalty is the imposable penalty. the court imposed the penalty of 6 years to 15 years. Kuan to sexual assault of
NO. Automatic review is when the penalty of death is imposed by the trial court. a child below 10 years old. 6 -15 years ang penalty sa RTC. SC after reviewing
Even if lets say the crime is qualified rape imposable by the death penalty, and the case raised the penalty – they affirmed the conviction and said yes this is
lets say the court during the trial court said perpetua. Minimum ako iimposed. sexual assault of a minor below 12 but they raised the penalty to reclusion
That is not automatic review. Automatic review is when the death penalty is
temporal medium – it was 12 years to 15 years. The conviction was affirmed.
imposed. Not allowed to do that as long as RA 9346. So effectively as long as The penalty was increased. Because the SC said ah sayop ang computation sa
RA 9346 is effective there is no automatic review. RTC and CA. They were not able to compute the proper penalty they were not
able to give the crime the proper (???). They can do that. They can appreciate
aggravating circumstances that were not appreciated in the trial court level.
AGAIN the penalty might be raised to its maximum.

Of course noh if you are the accused, what you are trying to get is a total
reversal, so acquitted jud ka. That would be the best case scenario for you. That
is the best possibility for you but as I have said, there are also other possibilities
that are not as beneficial to the accused. OK.
So, they can even review matters that were not raised on appeal. Diba the
moment you appeal you are going to raise error of law or fact that were
committed at the RTC level. PUYDI.

How do you appeal? If it is an ordinary appeal, meaning to say, the RTC in the
exercise of its original jurisdiction came up with the decision you are not
satisfied, you want to go with the CA. Mere notice of appeal ka. Ordinary appeal
mani (points to RTC).

RTC to CA. RTC in its exercise of its EOJ = ORDINARY APPEAL

RTC in the exercise of its AJ. Meaning to say the case was from the MTC raised
to the RTC now you want to appeal the decision of the RTC exercising its AJ =
PETITION FOR REVIEW.

Whenever the RTC imposes the perpetua or life or the decision arose out of the
same occurrence, what do we mean by that? ACCOMPLICE. Somebody got
imposed the penalty of perpetua or life. = NOTICE OF APPEAL We have mentioned this before. A party cannot change his theory on appeal.
So like for example, denial or alibi. On appeal, SELF DEFENSE! Ahhh di pwede.
Technically if you are an accomplice you wont be having a penalty of perpetua So in that particular case you cannot say – AW OPEN MAN KA HA THE ENTIRE
or life you demand something lesser. So, notice of appeal. CASE FOR REVIEW. SO PWEDE SELF DEFENSE – NO HA. The court by itself can
look at that but you as a party cannot raise a new defense. You cannot change
Penalty is death, then automatic. your defense.

HAHAHAHAHA TAWA SA SYA

There are exceptional cases where they allow it especially if to attaint the ends
All appeals by the SC shall be by petition for review on certiorari – rule 45. No of justice. Ohhh dibaa mao ng maglibog ta aning crimpro.
exceptions. If you want to go to the SC. Petition for review on certiorari.

There are exceptional cases where they will allow it especially if kanang to
attain the ends of justice. Maglibog ta aning crim pro.

23 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

You have this fresh period rule. This term first came about in a civil case- Neypes
v. CA. This is a civil case but the SC said you can apply this in civil and criminal
cases. Before, there was a lot of discussion as to how you actually compute the
15 days. The court eventually said let’s have a standard procedure. Mura ra ni
sa DOJ when they came out with its uniform rules on appeal. 15 days from any
kind of resolution or decision you receive from the offices. Same thing here.
The court said let’s say 5 days from promulgation the accused files a motion for
reconsideration. After the motion for reconsideration was resolved, there were
some decisions that said okay he used up 5 days before filing the motion for
reconsideration. The motion for reconsideration(MR) effectively interrupted
the period. After the motion for reconsideration was denied, he only has a
balance of 10 days. Diba 15 days man cya tanan? He already used up 5, MR
We were discussing last month with Atty. Galeon on this predilection of the SC denied, from the denial of the MR, he only has 10 days. There were also cases
to come up with a general rule and then come up with an exception on this very that said di oie 15 days, so they said let’s get rid of all that confusion, let’s
general expedient ground to attain the ends of justice. Mao to wa tay mabuhat. standardized everything-15 days. Promulgation- 5 days from promulgation you
Let’s just give the students the general rule and always tell them to be careful filed a MR. From the denial of your MR, you have a FRESH PERIOD of 15 days.
because these general rules are filled with holes of exceptions. Daghan kaayo Wala natong balance2. They took that out.
ug buslot, exceptions. Btw, the moment that parole is not interconnected with Any party who wishes to file an appeal, you either count the 15 days from
appeal, there’s no connection between the two whether you are released from promulgation, notice of order, whether it is a final order that you are trying to
parole doesn’t matter. The appeal process is not affected. Meaning to say, even raise an appeal, or notice of an order of MR. Counted from the receipt of the
if you have been released from parole, the only time that your right to appeal order dismissing a motion for a new trial or motion for reconsideration.
is affected, you unjustifiably fail to appear for promulgation and you don’t give Everything starts afresh, that’s why they call it the fresh period rule.
any kind of explanation especially within the 15 day period. You lose all the
remedies, that includes the appeal. Being released on parole is not one of
them. It does not become moot and academic. The appeal is not affected. The
appeal must go on even if you have been released from parole. Remember,
parole is a conditional release. It doesn’t mean that you are discharged from
service from the penalty. That’s just a conditional release. There are conditions
and the moment you violate them, you can be reintroduced to the penal
system.

They said in Yu v. Samson, okay Neypes was civil but there’s totally nothing
wrong, in fact, it would be better for the ends of justice to apply to both civil
and criminal cases.

As we’ve mentioned before, the moment a criminal case reaches beyond the
RTC, the moment it reaches the CA, the SC, the public prosecutor/pp (city and
provincial prosecutors), they lose any personality to appear therein. Their
function now is taken over by the OSG. In this particular case, the CA will require
the SolGen to file its comment and since the pp (city and province) are not
authorized to appear therein or any kind of pleading they might have submitted
cannot be considered. The effect is the prosecution is deprived of its
opportunity to further prosecute the case in its appellate stages. Therefore, any TSN- Transcript of Stenographic Notes. If you become a lawyer or you are
kind of judgement reached thereto was a nullity. Here, it is no longer an error working in a law office and you go to court, you always hear that term- TSN.
of judgement, this is now an error of jurisdiction by depriving the prosecution Basically, it’s a written record of everything that was said during the trial. That’s
of that opportunity which is now CA exercising lack or excess of jurisdiction a very common problem in courts because of the volume of work that
because they committed grave abuse of discretion. stenographers have to do. I think each branch has a spot for 4 stenographers.
Take note, courts have hearings everyday. You have this stenographer, he is
there in court let’s say in the morning, taking down notes. Supposedly, in the
afternoon, he/she is going to transcribe that para mabasa nato because when
they are taking down notes, it is in stenographic whatever unya di mana
mabasa. Even then, during that time, they could not catch up because there are
some cases tag-as kaayo ug manifestations sa mga lawyers.
There was a time especially last year, the courts were mandated to have
hearings the whole day. Morning to afternoon nag hearing, kanus-a paman mag
transcribe ang mga stenographers sa ilang notes. That’s one big problem from
the punctuality or the prompt preparation of the TSN. Sometimes it delays the
processing of the records back to the appellate court. These are just some of
the rules (refer to pic above) required of stenographers.
Appeal must be taken within 15 days from promulgation. If you are not present The moment notice of appeal is filed by the accused, the stenographers are
during promulgation because it’s a case where the accused does not have to be notified that a notice of appeal has been filed so they have to finish all their
there in the promulgation like for light offenses, then 15 days from the notice stenographic notes because the records will eventually be passed off to the
of the final order. If it’s an order for example and order granting demurrer, appellate court. Supposedly, no extension allowed.
order granting a motion to quash based on double jeopardy of course, lisod na
cya ma appeal because that puts an end to everything. Anyway, if it’s a notice
of the final order, then from that day-15 days. Promulgation of judgement-15
days. Let's say you file your notice on the first day after promulgation, katong
14 days na balance wla na nah. Meaning to say, the moment the appeal has
been perfected that ends the filing of a notice of appeal process. You don’t get
to change your mind. You file your notice of appeal, your appeal is perfected.
15 days- This is also the same period which you can apply for probation. It’s
either you appeal because you are not guilty or you apply for probation because
you agree, you admit that you're guilty but you want some kind of allowance
from the courts as far as execution of sentence is concerned.

Appeal to the RTC, that means it’s from the MTC. The moment the clerk from
the RTC receives everything. He receives all the records. W/in 15 days of the
receipt of the complete records, that includes the stenographic notes, he
notifies the parties. The clerk of court notifies both the appellee and the
appellant that the entire records have been received by the RTC. Within 15 days
from notice of the records being submitted, the parties can choose whether to
submit their memoranda. Or, the RTC itself may issue an order to submit
memoranda.

24 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

For purposes of discussion, anytime the death penalty is imposed again,

automatic review to the CA. Under the Constitution, it was SC but SC changed
the rules. Before you go to the SC, you go to the CA first. That includes death
penalty, perpetua and life, although, perpetua and life, it’s not automatic. You
still go through the CA.

You have several accused but only one files an appeal. If his appeal is successful,
the effects of that successful appeal...let’s say he gets acquitted on appeal. The
effect of that is that it also benefits the other accused even if they did not
appeal, if applicable to them. If the decision is ‘we acquit this accused because
the evidence was not enough to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt’,
meaning to say, no evidence against all the accused. Apil tong wala mo appeal.
Those who did not appeal will be benefitted by the acquittal of the one who
appealed the case, that is, if applicable to them. What if the one who appealed As much as possible, the procedure is uniformed whether it’s the MTC, MCTC,
was able to raise an issue personal to him? Insanity oh. Siya ray naka raise ug MTCC, RTC. There are certain procedures that are exclusive to certain courts.
insanity and then only he was found insane, so it cannot affect the others who For example, in the MTC, only the MTC can conduct summary proceedings. In
did not file a notice of appeal. the same manner, only the RTC or the Family Court can conduct diversion
proceedings for minors. As a general rule, procedure is the same.

Rule is: it does not affect those who did not appeal except if favorable and
applicable to the latter. In an appeal, you have an appellant and an appellee.

You can actually withdraw an appeal. You can withdraw an appeal not for Counsel de oficio for the accused. There was an appeal and he was appointed
purposes of applying for probation because the rule is quite clear there. No as counsel de oficio and then he filed a motion to dismiss the appeal (hahaha).
application for probation shall be granted once a notice of appeal or an appeal The SC said, NO, you cannot do that. It seems like you are trying to wash your
has been perfected. What this contemplates is that you withdraw the appeal hands off your obligation by having the appeal dismissed by motion of counsel
because you changed your mind. You’re saying ‘I’m no longer going to contest de officio. That is not allowed. You are also not allowed to admit findings of fact
my conviction, I’d like to serve my sentence’. The moment you withdraw your which are detrimental. Tinapulan bah. Not the counsel de oficio who is
appeal, the decision becomes final and executory. competent and independent. You are lacking the competent part there if you
The terms will always be there in your jurisprudence whether criminal or civil. are not going to fight tooth and nail for your client.
If you’ve noticed, if you’ve read the jurisprudence, the SC always takes time out
to rule on the propriety of the mode taken by the parties whether it should
have been 45, 65, should’ve been an ordinary appeal, petition for review. Even
if a party has taken the wrong remedy, they will always say to attain the ends
of justice they will dispense with the technical requirements and we will
consider this petition for review or whatever.

This is not procedure but we call it a brief because supposedly, it’s a summary
of the entire case you are raising to the appellate court. It now contains all the
material facts and all the relevant arguments that you are raising. This is
appellant’s because you are the one who filed it. Supposedly a brief, but there
was one case…(cont. on brief, brevis, ...slide)

25 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

Your appeal can be dismissed outright. You don’t have to submit your brief, it
can be dismissed outright.
Of course no, failure to file a brief…Although as I said, maybe he never asked
for an extension. Remember you have only so many days to file your brief;
accused escaped from confinement if he is detained; jumps bail; flees to a
foreign country – may result for an OUTRIGHT dismissal of an appeal.

This is the appellee.

Although extensions can be unlimited but if it’s not for a sufficient ground, you
can properly be denied a Motion for Extension and as we’ve said, failure to file
a brief may result to the dismissal of your appeal.
Inadvertence – basically you are saying “nakalimtan”
Equally urgent professional work – do not put work of other cases before this
particular case. Suko SC ana.

Kani nga case. Suko ang SC. This was a time when, I’m not sure if it was the
ponente or the Chief of Justice pero Amerikano pa. We have reviewed the brief
but we have not done so in a gracious mode. Nasuko, why? Look at what the
parties did. They assigned a total of 116 errors between the two of them. 256
pages and tawgon nimo brief? Brief diay na? 685 pages of stenographic notes.
The justice of the SC mura sad ni ug law student, di gnahan mo basa ug tag-as.
A brief is supposed to present to the court in a concise form. Concise- short and
complete.

Escaping from prison - dismissal of your appeal.

Extension of time to file a brief. There doesn’t seem to be a limit. You can file
as many extensions you want. Of course, whether to grant each motion for
extension totally discretionary on the court. But, the court said as long as the
ground is good, sufficient, reasonable, we can grant as many extensions Flight –let’s say you’re on vacation but you don’t actually have the intention to
because there is no limit as far as extensions are concerned. As long as, it is a come back. That means you’re going and you’re not returning.
good reason with a view to substantial justice. That’s for extensions to file your
brief.

A reversal of a judgment raised on appeal will only be justified, meaning to say

you don’t affirm the findings of the trail court, you only reverse it if you find
Naa man moy Legal Forms noh. What are the contents of a brief? Index, that substantial rights, of course in criminal cases, especially if he is convicted
Assignment...I saw one once ay lisora oie , I don’t think I would know how to and then he is entitled to an acquittal – ah kadako anang substantial rights have
make a brief nowadays. been injured – injuriously affected.
If it’s just a small matter of evidentiary consideration which will not change the
findings of the trial court, you are not entitled to a reversal.

Kani siguro kamao ta anah. Mga arguments2. But other than that, ay na.

As I’ve said before, as a general rule – findings of fact of the trail court are
usually given full faith and credence. Will give highest degree of respect to
findings of the trial court – especially regarding issues of fact. Because they
were the ones in the hearing, although as I’ve said there are exceptions.

26 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

It’s very general but anyway, it allows the appellate court specially the SC to
review errors of fact when supposedly they were only there for errors of law –
wala tay mabuhat ana. Especially when it affects the result of the case – form
conviction to acquittal. Unless there are special rules for certain proceedings.

Fiscal (chika): Aside from whatever text you have, you should have also the
codal provisions. Specially in procedure, it’s good to read the rules as a process
than read all through them with all those annotations. Sometime, the
annotations are too long and you forget that this is just a step by step process.
Ig magtuon ka nga codal ra, that would serve your purpose better.

If you look at most of the decisions of the SC, probably, mga 70-80% of the cases
raised to the SC, criminal cases involving drug case and usually the reversals are
big due to compliance with certain provisions of 9165 – like Sec 21. –
photographic recording the marking, etc. They would review issues of fact
rather than just issues of law.
What do they do, the SC in an appeal case? They can do anything. As we said,
it opens the whole case so Limitation (Constitution)
• they can reverse – from conviction to acquittal. • A search can only be done through a search warrant.
• They can affirm or they can modify – so instead of murder to • Arrest can only be done through a warrant of arrest.
homicide. Acts of lasciviousness to lascivious conduct under 5810.
• They can increase or decrease the penalty – the findings of the As a general rule – signed by a judge. But as you remember, there are certain
offense of conviction is affirmed, it’s just the penalty. Because times wherein certain offices (esp. Executive dept) can issue their own searches
sometimes the court would say that there was an improper but this is very limited.
application of the indeterminate sentence law. SC in a way would
tell judges that they do not know how to apply the ISL, you must not
have graduated from USC—oooh diba.
• They can remand the entire proceedings back to the trial court –
remember that case where the accused moved that they be
allowed, they waived the right to the reading of the info and a plea
of not guilty be entered and then the trial court did not rule on that
motion. Then upon conviction, the SC said, well for this case, there
was no proper arraignment, this judgement is void. As far as this
case is concerned, we remand this back to RTC for further
proceedings because upon entering a plea of not guilty – trial ka,
pero they were not able to do that because technically there was no
arraignment. It doesn’t matter if you have a mansion or the simplest of huts. What if your
• Or they can dismiss the case. Dismiss the appeal. residence is your car? A car is exempted from warrants. I do not know, I never
heard of that issue being raised here.

Basically this is the same as new trial at the RTC level. The issue here is basically What is the place to be searched? It doesn’t have to be a dwelling which is
where do you hold the new trial or the newly discovered evidence. It can be at exclusively used for rest and comfort. You can actually apply for a search even
the CA itself if all the records have been forwarded. Or the CA on its own could if it’s not a dwelling. Kanang mga NBI, mangraid ug offices/commercial
remand all the records back to the origin court for the trial of the newly establishments selling items in violation of the Intellectual property code – di
discovered evidence to be conducted. The only limit here is the judgment; the mana dwelling. I guess it’s not that hard, let’s say the vehicle is more or less
moment the evidence becomes final – unsa pamay gamit sa new trial hahaha stationary – it does not transfer from one place to another, it can fall under the
parameters for applying a search warrant. Ordinarily in our jurisdiction, a search
warrant can be applied for more or less stationary places/structures.

Take note! The application for a warrant is not a criminal proceeding.

Remember that the moment that you are asking for a new trial is that you have The normal rules of due process do not apply there. Matod pa sa SC, a police
newly discovered evidence. If it’s merely irregularities in the findings of fact or weapon used for police power. When it is applied for ex parte – meaning you
law, then reconsideration can. do not give the other party the opportunity to answer the application for search
15 days from notice – just like the same period to file your appeal, you have the warrant. The moment the party knows that his place is about to be searched, if
same period to file the motion for recon. he has contraband items, he would probably get rid of that before his place is
During the pendency of your motion -the mittimus (that order which basically searched.
authorizes the execution of whatever sentence has been imposed) shall be
stayed during the pendency of the motion.

27 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

I think this was a case about the Davao Death Squad and then somebody said
the victims remains are buried in this cave. So they applied for a warrant. Is that
a proper subject of a warrant? Human remains? Court said YES because it
relates to the offense of murder.
I do not know why they needed a warrant to search a cave, basig private
property tong cave.

You apply search warrant in the court which has territorial jurisdiction. We are
not talking about jurisdiction over the offense but jurisdiction over the place.
File your application with the MTC court even if the offense that you are
applying for to get evidence is cognizable with the RTC as long as that MTC court
has jurisdiction over the place where the warrant is to be executed. – AS A
GENERAL RULE.
Our police here in Cebu City, whenever they apply for a warrant for example:
We emphasize that again because there are a lot of exceptions:
drugs are being sold/kept in a particular house, what you see in the affidavit –
1. You can apply a search warrant in NCR for certain heinous crimes
we conducted a surveillance activity in that house for 2 weeks and we were
and it can be executed anywhere in the Phils.
able to confirm that drugs are being sold. Or another –we made a test buy for
2. The application for a warrant in a court in a different jurisdiction for
a small amount and we brought it back to our chemist/crime lab and it tested
purposes of security and integrity. So that it won’t be compromised
positive for dangerous drugs. Now we are applying so we can go inside that
through informants, publicity that they are applying for a warrant.
house and search it for dangerous drugs. That is how they try to establish the
As long as you can justify that. There is a time that most of the
probable cause.
search warrant in Cebu City is issued in the province. They say for
It is to one specific offense.
security reasons and are totally justified ignon ang SC.
It is examined personally by the judge under oath. - It should be the team leader
3. Letter c (slide) is very rare. A warrant is applied for but the case has
of the team of police officers will be called the applicant and then attached to
already been filed in court. Normally, you apply for a warrant, get
his application would be the affidavits of his other police officers who
your evidene and oyu file your case so that a criminal case is filed in
conducted the actual surveillance. All of them should go before the judge for
court. Here, a case is pending in court and probably to get additional
the judge to examine them. Ask them searching questions.
evidence, the prosecution applies for a search warrant. In that
Particular – NO general warrants. What are you looking for?
particular case, you have to apply in the court where the action is
pending.

It would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that the offense
As long as it is within the territorial jurisdiction of the court. has been committed and objects in connection thereto are in the place to be
So this is not a criminal case. As I have said, the rules on prosecution of offenses, searched.
of civil action – they don’t apply here. Because this is merely a process. So issues The concept as probable cause for the purpose of filing of a case in court.
of jurisdiction of the court as to the offense, over the person – they don’t apply.
Because this is merely the court exercising one of its ancillary powers. The
issuance of a warrant.

It doesn’t have to be proved beyond reasonable ground because that’s what

trials are made for. This is just a summary examination as to whether more
likely than not a crime has been committed and it has been committed by this
Application for search warrant involving heinous crimes, illegal gambling, pero
accused.
I would think the illegal gambling here is kadtong mga dinagko. Even dangerous
drugs and firearms – you file it here, dako ang gasto pero technically it is
allowed to be filed in RTC of Manila and Quezon City.

We do not need a scatter-shot warrant.

Di ka pwede muingon ug illegal contraband – that is like a shot gun search
warrant. It has to be specific. But it doesn’t mean, one count.

What types of property?

You do not apply for search warrant to see surreal property because warrant
should be subject of the offense. Like for example unlicensed firearms,
dangerous drugs – that is subject of the offense. Proceeds of the offense –
stolen money/ personal property or anything that may be used or intended to
be used in the commission of the crime. Probably a supply of cache of weapons
to be used in rebellion, coup-de-etat, whatever, you can apply for a search
warrant.

Same species – ingon ang SC, so a single warrant can be used for drugs and drug
paraphernalia. Remember that possession of drugs and drug paraphernalia are
distinct offenses but are the same species. Ingon si SC na okay ran a drugs and
drug paraphernalia – one warrant.
This warrant (firearms and explosives)– I am not so sure now. Kaning Pastrana
mentioned PD 1866. This is no longer the SPL for loose firearms. Explosives is
punished by RA 9516 amending PD 1866. Firearms is punished by 10591. So I
am not so sure now if you can lump both. Can you still consider both as the
same species when they are treated by two different laws nowadays?

28 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

Drugs and firearms, not allowed. Meaning, you cannot apply for a search
warrant then have a single warrant issued for both. Two separate warrants if
its drugs and firearms.
People v. Court of Appeals
What was being site? The warrant said Abegail Variety Store. What the
applicants were actually referring to in their application, the apartment behind.
Problem was, what was issued was Abegail Variety Store. But, what they want
to search is Apartment 1 behind said store. SC said no, you cannot even say it
is a typographical error. They distinguished this from that other case where the
police applied for two search warrants. They wanted to search house A
and house B. It is clear from the records. The court issued two warrants both
for House A. The SC said, “Clearly, the court is not stupid enough to issue two
warrants for the same place.” This must have been a typographical error. There
should have been house A and B. Here, it is only Abegail Variety Store. Even
though we can say that the police officers were applying for the apartment
behind said store, sayop man ang warrant. There’s no going around that. It is
If it’s murder, it can be for six counts of murder. You’re looking for 6 human not even typographical error. Hence, any search conducted at the Apartment
remains, you do not have to have six separate search warrants. Single offense behind Abegail Variety Store is not valid and any evidence recovered is not
in murder, there may be 6 bodies there, only single warrant. admissible for any proceeding.

The records would show that there was no personal examination or

determination of the records of the judge because he merely listen to Iya ra gibasa
Stenographer reading her notes. It was actually the Clerk of court who
examined complainant and her witnesses. She(Clerk Of Court) made notes, and
then, read her note to the judge. Ingon, SC that is an invalidly issued warrant.
Another case, where the Court said “the judge there must probably have been
sleeping during the hearing because while the complainant and his witnesses
applied for the violation of the custom and tariff codes the judge issued a
warrant for non-payment of the purchase price of the cars. The warrant issued
was totally different from the warrant applied for. So, the issue of personal
determination, personal examination by the judge became irregular.

We do not know what the judge was thinking. Maybe he was sleeping. Warrant
issued was different from the warrant applied for. There was some statements
there that, maybe the judge was confused because the issue of nonpayment
actually aroused from a different but related proceeding for non-payment. But,
the warrant was actually for the violation of the tariff and customs Code. The
warrant should be issued for an offense applied for. Otherwise if you’re going
to issue a diff warrant, then, there is that presumption that you were not
thoroughly and personally examining the witnesses.
Reasonable particularity as long it is easily identifiable to prevent the seizure of
wrong items, then that is reasonable enough.

What questions to ask? Dependent largely on the discretion of the judge. But,
bottomline, he must make his (judge) own inquiry. It must be probing and
It is as specific as the circumstances will ordinarily allow. So let’s say drug exhausting not merely proporma.
paraphernalia, “He is keeping in his house--- tooters, glass tooters.” Because
tooters can take different form: glass tooters, paper tooters, etc.

29 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

Complainant and his witnesses but the Court in GABIOSA said, “It is perfectly
alright if he(judge) examines the witnesses themselves.” What he must be Daytime is the most ideal for implementing a search warrant. But, may also be
satisfied with is that a crime has been committed and then there’s evidence in conducted at night especially if the property that is supposed to be searched
that place relating to the same offense. and seized is in the person of the accused.
So, he can examine both, one or the other. It doesn’t have to be both as long
he is satisfied.

It’s only valid for ten days. After that 10 days from issuance, automatically
becomes void. No order is required.

When you’re executing a warrant… This is no longer like the warrant of arrest,
wherein you don’t have to bring the warrant with you and it is sufficient that
the person to be arrested knows that a warrant of arrest has been issued for
his arrest. Here, the search warrant must be shown. If refused admittance they
can break in. If they are unlawfully detained therein, they can break out.

Whenever search warrant is implemented you have a designated searcher. He

is the one whose going to go throughout the house looking for evidence.
You have a recorder. He is going to be the stationary at a particular place in the
house. He will wait for the searcher to bring to him what items were recovered.
He will make a list of all the items recovered which is usually called a ”receipt
of seized property.”
1) He’ll sign it.
2) He will make the accused sign it, but the accused can also choose to
refuse to sign.
3) The witnesses will also sign the receipt.

After everything has been prepared, a copy is given to the lawful occupant. Or,
left in to the place if there’s no one to give it to.
GR: To prevent irregularities like planting of evidence, the search itself must be
witnessed:
1) By the owner, lawful occupant or the person who has control over the place
to be searched;
If not around 2) a member of the family with reasonable discretion;
In the absence of the first two 3) you can have 2 witnesses residing in the
locality---usually, Bgry. Tanods.

But w/ respect to RA 9165 as amended by RA 10640, lahi na. Witnesses to the

search:
• Accused---the subject, the lawful occupant, the person in
control/representative—no longer a member of accused’
family/counsel,
• An elected public official---EXAMPLE: Brgy. Captain
• member of the National Prosecution Service (NPS) or Media

Now under the amendments, it says “member of the NPS or Media.” Before Exceptions to a search that requires a warrant. Here, no need for warrant.
10640, this was a member of the NPS and Media. Meaning to say you had to (gibasa ra ppt)
have 3 witnesses aside from the counsel himself. Before 10640 it was
accused/representative/counsel; elected public official; member of the NPS
and media.
Now, accused/his representative/his counsel; elected public official; either a
member of the NPS or a member of media.

30 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

If a person has been validly arrested under the instances of a warrantless arrest,
such as committing a crime. After he has been arrested a search may be Arrested in one place, house search in another place. Seen 10 bags of
conducted upon him to: Marijuana. Inadmissible as evidence.
1) Search for dangerous weapon;
2) They can look for property used in the commission of the offense;
or
3) Any kind of proof of the commission or the place under his
immediate control. That is why you can make a search his body or
the place under his immediate control.

How about a moving vehicle. Warrantless search in a moving vehicle, SC said in

Padilla, it satisfies.
A search conducted incidental to a lawful arrest. Whatever was in the car, there
was a gun found at the passenger seat. It was in his immediate control. It was
done during the search and seizure of the gun was contemporaneous to his
arrest. Nabangga siya; hit something. Instead of police chase him, when they
were able to corner him they found a gun in the passenger seat of his car. They
CASE said, that was a valid search incidental to an arrest in a vehicle.
A person was arrested, it was no longer valid for the police officers to search
his house located at several meters away. Clearly such is not within his reach.
First, you must have to establish that it was a lawful arrest. Either arrest by
virtue of a warrant or it was a valid warrantless arrest. The search there is
limited to his person. Any kind of weapon inserted in his clothes and the
premises within his immediate control. He might throw something at a nearby
table.

GR: You don’t need a warrant to search a vehicle. What is required is that the
police have reasonable or probable cause to search a vehicle.

REMEMBER: A tip by itself is not a ground to conduct a search.

So, bisan gi-ingnan ka, there’s a blue car going to pass by and it’s going to be
Why you can conduct a search incidental to any lawful arrest? It is either to
loaded with “shabu”. So a blue car passes by, but person inside doesn’t doing
prevent the person from destroying evidence or using a weapon against the
anything yet gi-deretso ninyog search. Court said, the search was done due to
arresting officers.
a tip, nothing else.
It would be different if---for example: there’s this person, he is going to be
bringing a package. When the police found this person matching the
description, he(person) started acting suspicious and tried to run away. Here,
aside from the tip, you have other circumstances which would justify a search.
If a person is in a POJ. Then, there’s this person wearing a blue shirt he is going
to be in this POJ. Passengers were asked to disembark. You search a person in
a blue shirt, who is just standing in line. SC said, that’s an illegal search. He is
not doing anything. Why did you search him? Because of the tip. SC said, that
is not probable cause.

Arresting officer who searches a person incidental to a lawful arrest, he can look
for any of this: used in the commission of the crime, fruits of the crime, means
of committing violence and used as evidence in the trial of the case.

A search of a moving vehicle is different from a check point. In a search of a

moving vehicle you can actually get inside the vehicle and open up the
compartment, etc.. But a check point is different. Here, you are limited to a
visual search. Meaning to say, from the outside then look at the window of what
He was arrested in one place. His house situated several meters away from the can be seen from outside.
place where he was arrested was also subjected to a search. Police said, I’m not sure about this but I don’t think you can insert your head to the window.
incidental to a lawful arrest. SC said, strained beyond its purpose because it is Invasive na kuno na’. So, from outside to the window ra daw ka kutob. Limited
no longer with in his (person arrested) immediate control. to a visual search
If Check Point is done normally. That’s a valid search even though there’s no
warrant.

31 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

However, while it may be a check point, but once the law enforcers have
probable cause to believe that the crime has been committed, they can conduct
a more extensive search. This relates to the training and experience of the
policemen to establish probable cause that a crime is being committed inside
the vehicle.
CASE Plain view - inadvertent; you were not looking for drugs.
The decisions here are quite conflicting.
There’s a decision which said that the moment that a motorist saw the check
point, he did a u-turn and went the other way. Police gave chase and saw
contraband in his motor vehicle. SC there said, “No probable cause, it’s not
illegal to u-turn.”
BUT, there was a later case where the SC said, “His executing a u-turn, indicated
suspicious activity on his part.” Equivalent to him running away after seeing
policemen. After seeing a check point in other cases its say probable cause. -
GREY AREA- HOPEFULLY THE SC WILL CLARIFY THIS PART.
But it is clear, when it’s not a check point but the moment a person sees a
policeman, though he is on foot. Then, he runs away. That is enough especially
if there is a preliminary information from a tip. But, executing a u-turn, grey
area pa.

Because in 1 case, the officers were said, “you go to that place because I think
he has marihuana”. So they went to that place and they saw marihuanas. The
SC said, then it’s not inadvertent. When they went to Acosta’s house, they were
already alert to the fact that he may have marihuana in his area. So we cannot
say that it was inadvertent. I guess the SC here is saying that if you have
evidence, then he may have marihuana in his house and you’re going to go
there, you might as well get a warrant before actually conducting a search.
Administrative Search, when you go to the airport or ports, it not exactly the
policemen who do that but employees of the ports.
The justification there was safety of the passengers.
People vs. O’choclain
In this case, the accused was seen smoking something suspicious in the parking
lot. When he was to pass the check point for boarding, he was subjected to a
search. Then, they found drugs (marijuana). Was that a valid search? YES. An
administrative search in an airport is a valid exercise of police power.

You either choose: is this a plain view doctrine search or was this a search
incidental to lawful arrest?
Property found in plain view. The elements before the plain view doctrine can
apply: If this is a plain view, there’s no arrest yet. You’re conducting a search and you
1) Justification for the intrusion/search inadvertently came upon something else, some other contraband. Here, since
2) The discovery is inadvertent; there was a lawful arrest, then do not use plain view. You use search incidental
-You were looking for drugs, but you found guns. to a lawful arrest, and the search would still be valid.
3) And it is immediately apparent in the search.
-Meaning tosay, youre searching for guns, walay nakit’an. Youre
searching for guns, then in the course of searching for guns, you
found drugs. Plain view, inadvertent. You were not looking for drugs.

Consent. There are some affidavits where the policeman would say, “We
respectfully ask the person to raise his t-shirt.” When he raised his shirt, we saw
32 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

the handle of a firearm protruding from the waistline of his pants. Technically why, it’s very important that the arrest must be lawful. First, lawful arrest, then
what the policemen were doing there was that, “this is a consented search.” you have the search.

I do not know if this can be considered consent - raising your t-shirt because In a plain view, what is important is that the intrusion is valid like a search
policeman said so. Di na kay ug muraise sa imong t-shirt ingnan ka sa police, warrant. Again, the arrest is after the search OR it’s even possible that there’s
“isaka imong t-shirt!” Is that an express and unqualified acquiescence that you no arrest to be made at all. What if the person is not there? Meaning, there is
are to be searched? I don’t think so. I’m not so sure, ambot tan.awan tog mga no arrest before the search.
decisions ana. Murag I don’t think that should be considered as a consented
search. It must be: Same thing with the terry search - there is no arrest YET. A terry search is done,
1. Unequivocal it is a limited protective search of outer clothing. He does this in the light of the
2. Specific officer’s experience and surrounding conditions. Here, the search is not as
3. Intelligently given extensive as a search done incidental to a lawful arrest. Nadakpan naman to.
4. No duress or coercion
Search extensive lawful arrest - you can do a more extensive search of his body
Katong O’Cochlain, mao man ning didto sa airport, he was a foreigner seen and the immediate premises. Here, no arrest has been made but the police,
smoking what looked like a marihuana cigarette. When he tried to board the because of his experiene and training, has reasonable ground to conduct a stop
flight, they said, “we would like to conduct a search” and he said yes. The court and frisk. It is a limited search of the outer clothing so kapkapan man nira to
said, he is a well-travelled person etc, so we can presume that his consent to look for weapons where that may be used against him.
the search was intelligent.

The purpose of a terry search:

It has to be (refer to the previous slide), so mere silence is no consent at all. 1. Crime prevention
Mag*inaudible* ra ky basig nahadlok ky pulis. Or doesn’t what’s going on so he 2. Safety
doesn’t say anything, doesn’t invoke his rights, doesn’t say no, doesn’t say yes
either; doesn’t mean a consented search. Remember, search incidental to a lawful arrest, naa naman to. You still have
safety and self-preservation but evidence, commission of a crime, because they
already arrested him. Meaning to say, it is presumed that he has committed a
crime and that he has evidence on his body, on his person, that would related
to the crime committed.

Here, no crime yet. There’s just that limited protective search of his person for
weapons.

For consented search to be valid, it must be clear-it must be unequivocal,

meaning to say he knows that he has that right, he has knowledge of that right.
Said person has actual intention to relinquish it. It must be an expressed
consent search to be conducted.

What is your remedy against invalidl warrant?

QUASH THE WARRANT.

How about there’s no warrant, but there has been evidence recovered without
a warrant suprression of evidence.

You can question the validity of an arrest BEFORE arraignment. AFTER

arraignment, all irregularities of an arrest is deemed waived. HOWEVER, even
if you have waived your objections to the validity of the arrest, if the arrest
resulted in evidence unlawfully recovered, that objection has not been waived.
Only the objection to the illegal arrest has been waived/illegality of the arrest
has been waived. Even if you have waived the right because you were not able
to question the valdity of the arrest before arraignment, (arraignment na then
trial) but during trial it was clear that the search or the arrest was not validly
done and consequently the search is also not valid. You can still have the
evidence supressed. Under the Constitution, any evidence recovered -
inadmissible. You can still do that. There’s still 1 remedy if the illegality of the
Terry search.
arrest has already become moot and academic because it’s already after
arraignment.
One way of distinguishing these types of searches: plain view, incidental to a
lawful arrest, terry search, one important factor - when was the arrest
Where do you file the motion to quash the search warrant or to supress
conducted? Was it before or after the search? Because obviously, in a search
evidence? If the case has already been filed,
that is incidental to a lawful arrest, the search is done after the arrest. That’s

33 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

GR: file it where the criminal case is pending. 2.

HOWEVER, if no case has yet been filed, kay bag.o pa naissue ang warrant,
bag.o pa naimplement ang warrant, and let’s say the police are still preparing
the complaint to be filed with the prosecutor, the prosecutor still has to file it
in court, you can file your motion to quash warrant or supress evidence with
the court that ISSUED the warrant.

It is where the criminal case is pending. That’s the first rule: where the criminal
case is pending, that’s where you file the motion. It’s only when the case is not
yet pending that you file it with the court that issued the warrant.

In this particular case (Securities and Ex.Com.vs Mendoza), although what was
filed was a petition for injunction, in sum, it was actually a motion to supress
evidence. Because it was a motion to supress evidence, Court said you should
have filed it where the case was pending not where the warrant was issued
because the case was already filed.

In a 1994 case, the SC said search warrants can be issued by the court for a
crime committed outside its territorial jurisdiction. Compelling reasons, if you
remember?

Diba appeal can only be filed by any party, here, it can be filed by ANY PERSON
whose rights is impaired.

A company whose property is the subject of the warrant, can actually file the
motion even if the subject of the warrant is a different person. So much more
if THAT person is an authorized employee of that company. What is important
is that, anyone whose rights will be impaired by the unlawful search and
seizure, can file a motion to quash.

Just take note of the rules.

GR: Where the case is already pending, that’s where you file it.

Or that’s where the warrant is issued.

Motion to quash - same court, where it was issued.

If there is no motion to quash, the motion shall be filed in the case - so

If no case is pending yet, then the court where the warrant is issued.

Of course, if you are not a proper party, then that right does NOT belong to you.
Here, even if you are not the subject of the warrant, but you are clearly affected
by the warrant, you can file a motion.

34 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

Delivery of personal property, support pendente lite - might be, again, can also
be proper, again VAWC.

This one I said, (read the slide above)

This one case for VAWC.

What the wife merely asked was the temporary restraining order. “Stay away
order” that the husband cannot approach the wife within 50 meters. Judge
granted the motion, but aside from that, nasobrahan ba tong judge. The
husband apparently was running a used-car business, wife was a stay-at-home
wife. The judge, aside from issuing that stay away order, also granted
management of the used-car business to the wife. The wife was quite surprised
because she did not asked for it, and she does not how to run a used-car
business so ambot unsaon ton niya. Sya na nagproblema sa order sa judge,
something that not asked for was given.

Remember that when a criminal case is filed, the civil case is deemed instituted.
If you look at the nature of these provisional remedies (refer to previous slide),
these are the remedies that the private offended party will take advantage of
or can benefit from. The State cannot usually benefit - well, I guess the
attachment and injunction, pwede siguro, the State can benefit from that or
the State can ask for that. But, normally, these would be the interest of the
private offended party and technically, the action of the private offended party
is a civi case, so whatever provisional remedies are available in a civil case
should also be available in the criminal case where the civil case is deemed
instituted.

Although it’s sometimes not that practical but all the remedies in civil cases are
actually availabled so - attachment, that’s available in criminal cases.

What if it’s a case of Estafa over a vehicle, and you want the vehicle attached
However, if you have already filed a separate civil action, no application for a
because let’s it’s the possesion of accused and it’s going to be properly taken
provisional remedy, especially one applied for by the private complainant will
of while the case is pending, it’s going to deteriorate etc, you can file a petition
be entertained in the criminal case. Di ka sugtan.
for attachment.

You can file an injunction, which is common in VAWC cases.

Receivership might be proper in the criminal violations of your corporation

code.

35 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

In this particular case of Ramcar, even though the civil case was suspened, why When you apply for a preliminary attachment, you can - most of these
would you suspend a separate civil action - because of the pendency of the provisional remedies, ex-parte. Because otherwise, especially in attachment
criminal case. where your ground is the accused might abscond, he’s going to abscond before
the petition or application can be resolved.
This contemplates of a situation where the private offended party filed his civil
action first, then the criminal case was filed suspending this civil action. Now No notice to the adverse party is required. If you want to make an attachment
the court here said, while the civil case is suspended, it doesn’t mean that the permanent, then you have to give the other party that opportunity - ang
private offended party cannot ask for provisional remedies. Just because it’s preliminary mao ang importante so that it can be attached.
suspended, doesn’t mean that the anciliary proccesses cannot - what is merely
suspended is the main civil action.

Three stages:

Same thing. 1. Court issues the order - you apply for a writ, Court says granted.
2. Writ is issued (writ to attachment)
3. The writ is implemented

You apply, it’s granted. Then you wait for the issuance of the writ, then the writ
is implemented. Usually the writ is directed to the sheriff of the court who will
be the one who will implement the writ of attachment.

When do you attach property of the accused?

Accused is about to abscond, flee to a foreign country.

Again, probably if it’s civil liability we’re talking about then the interest - but
what if it’s government property that he might also ran away with? State can
ask for that attachment.
While the app may be ex-parte, for puposes of implementing the 3rd stage, you
The action is based on a claim for money or property fraudulently misapplied - need to have jurisdiction over the person. Meaning to say, he has to be notified
that can apply to government officials in custody of public property. that the writ is about to be implemented. There must be either voluntary
appearance on the part of the person of the defendant of the writ.
If the accused has disposed, or is about to dispose of his property - making any
kind of victory or conviction, futile. **END**

Accused resides outside of the Philippines - you can ask for the attachment of
his property.

36 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | FISCAL CARRILLO 2020-2021

37 | ANDRIN-CABASAG-MARCELO-RUBENACIA-ODCHIGUE