Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 100

C.

Part II Original Actions.


Rule IV Sessions and Trials..
Rule VII Motions
Rule VIII Rendition of Judgment or Final Order..
Part IV Provisions Common to Original and
Appealed Cases and Petitions for Review..
Rule XII Assignment, Distribution and
Consolidation of Cases..

41
41
42
42

Commercial and Intellectual Property Courts.

46

1.

43

Re: Interim Rules of Procedure on Corporate


Rehabilitation (A.M. No. 00-8-10-SC,
November 21, 2000)

46

Rule 3 General Provisions..


Rule 4 Rehabilitation

46
47

Appendix A A.M. No. 00-11-03-SC,


Resolution Designating Certain Branches
Of Regional Trial Courts to Try and
Decide Cases Formerly Cognizable by
The Securities and Exchange Commission

49

Re: Proposed Interim Rules of Procedure


Governing Intra-Corporate
Controversies Under RA 8799
(A.M. No. 01-2-04-SC, March 13, 2001)

51

Rule 1 General Provisions.


Rule 2 Commencement of Action and Pleadings
Rule 3 Modes of Discovery.
Rule 4 Pre-Trial.
Rule 5 Trial.
Rule 10 Provisional Remedies

51
53
56
56
57
58

Regional Trial Courts

58

Pre-Trial: Criminal Cases

58

CASES ON SPEEDY TRIAL/DISPOSITION OF CASES..

62

2.

D.

VI.

43

1.
2.

Lilany Yulo y Billones v. People of the Philippines,


G.R. No. 142762, March 4, 2005
Domingo Neypes, Luz, Faustino, Rogelio
Faustino, Lolito Victoriano, Jacob
Obania and Domingo Cabacungan v.
Hon. Court of Appeals, Heirs of
Bernardo del Mundo, namely: Fe,
Corazon, Josefa, Salvador and Carmen,

62

I. CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION ON SPEEDY TRIAL


Section 15, Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines provides:
(1) All cases or matters filed after the effectivity of this Constitution must be decided
or resolved within twenty-four months from date of submission for the Supreme
Court, and, unless reduced by the Supreme Court, twelve months for all lower
collegiate courts, and three months for all other lower courts.

II. PERTINENT LAWS ON SPEEDY TRIAL/DISPOSITION OF CASES


A. REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8493 (The Speedy Trial Act)
1. What is R.A. No. 8493?
A: R.A. No. 8493 (The Speedy Trial Act),which took effect on February 12, 1998,
ensures the speedy trial of all criminal cases.
2. To what courts does the Act apply?
A: The Act applies to cases tried before the Sandiganbayan, Regional Trial Court,
Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial C ourt, and Municipal Circuit Trial Court.
3. When shall arraignment take place?
A: The arraignment of an accused shall be held within thirty (30) days from the filing
of the information, or from the date the accused has appeared before the justice,
judge or court in which the charge is pending, whichever date last occurs.1
4. How long is the time limit given for trial?
A: In no case shall the entire tria l period exceed one hundred eighty (180) days
from the first day of trial, except as otherwise authorized by the Chief Justice of
the Supreme Court pursuant to Section 3, Rule 22 of the Rules of Court. 2
5. When shall trial commence?
A: Where a plea of not guilty is entered, the accused shall have at least fifteen (15)
days to prepare for trial. Trial shall commence within thirty (30) days from
arraignment as fixed by the court. 3

Section 7, R.A. No. 8493


Section 6, R.A. No. 8493
3
Section 7, R.A. No. 8493
2

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 2

6. How long is the extended time limit given for trial?


A: For the first twelve-calendar-month period following the effectivity of the Act, the
time limit with respect to the period from the arraignment to the trial shall be one
hundred eighty (180) days. For the second twelve-month period, the time limit
shall be one hundred twenty (120) days, and, for the third twelve-month period,
the time limit with respect to the period from the arraignment to the trial shall be
eighty (80) days. 4
7. What are the periods of delay to be excluded from the computation of the time
within which the trial must commence?
A: The following periods of delay are to be excluded:
(a) Any period of delay resulting from other proceedings concerning the
accused, including but not limited to the following:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)

delay resulting from an examination of the accused, and hearing on


his/her mental competency, or physical incapacity;
delay resulting from trials with respect to charges against the
accused;
delay resulting from interlocutory appeals;
delay resulting from hearings on pre-trial motions: provided that the
delay does not exceed thirty (30) days,
delay resulting from orders of inhibition, or proceedings relating to
change of venue of cases or transfer from other courts;
delay resulting from a finding of the existence of a valid prejudicial
question; and
delay reasonably attributable to any period, not to exceed thirty (30)
days, during which any proceeding concerning the accused is
actually under advisement. 5

(b) Any period of delay resulting from the absence or unavailability of the
accused or an essential witness.
(c) Any period of delay resulting from the fact that the accused is mentally
incompetent or physically unable to stand trial.
(d) If the information is dismissed upon motion of the prosecution and thereafter
a charge is filed against the accused for the same offense, or any offense
required to be joined with that offense, any period of delay from the date the
charge was dismissed to the date the time limitation would commence to
run as to the subsequent charge had there been no previous charge.

4
5

Section 9, R.A. No. 8493


Section 10, R.A. No. 8493

3 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

(e) A reasonable period of delay when the accused is joined for trial with a coaccused over whom the court has not acquired jurisdiction, or as to whom
the time for trial has not run and no motion for severance has been granted.
(f) Any period of delay resulting from a continuance granted by any justice or
judge motu proprio or on motion of the accused or his/her counsel or at the
request of the public prosecutor, if the justice or j udge granted such
continuance on the basis of his/her findings that the ends of justice served
by taking such action outweigh the best interest of the public and the
defendant in a speedy trial. No such period of delay resulting from a
continuance granted by the court in accordance with this subparagraph shall
be excludable under this section unless the court sets forth, in the record of
the case, either orally or in writing, its reasons for finding that the ends of
justice served by the granting of such continuance outweigh the best
interests of the public and the accused in a speedy trial.
8. How long is the time limit given following an order for new trial?
A: Trial shall commence within thirty (30) days from the date the order for a new trial
becomes final, except that the court retrying the case may extend such period
but in any case shall not exceed one hundred eighty (180) days from the date the
order for a new trial becomes final if unavailability of witnesses or other factors
resulting from the passage of time shall make trial within thirty (30) days
impractical. 6

Implementing Circular on RA 8493 (The Speedy Trial Act)


CIRCULAR NO. 38-98 7
1. When is pre-trial mandatory in criminal cases?
A: In all criminal cases cognizable by the Sandiganbayan, Regional Trial Court,
Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Municipal Trial Court and
Municipal Circuit Trial Court, the Court shall, after arraignment, order a pre-trial
conference to consider the following:
(a) Plea bargaining;
(b) Stipulation of facts;
(c) Marking for identification of evidence of the parties;
(d) Waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence; and
(e) Such other matters as will promote a fair and expeditious trial of the
criminal and civil aspects of the case. 8

Section 8, R.A. No. 8493


Issued August 15, 1998; took effect on September 15, 1998
8
Section 3, Circular No. 38-98
7

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 4

2. What are the factors to be considered by a court in determining whether to grant


a continuance?
A: The following factors are considered:
(a) Whether or not the failure to grant a continuance in the proceeding would be
likely to make a continuation of such proceeding impossible, or result in a
miscarriage of justice; and
(b) Whether or not the case taken as a whole is so novel, unusual and complex,
due to the number of accused or the nature of the prosecution or otherwise,
that it is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation within the period of
time established herein.
No continuance under subparagraph (f) of Section 9 hereof shall be granted
because of congestion of the court's calendar, or lack of diligent preparation or
failure to obtain available witnesses on the part of the public prosecutor. 9
3. What are the public attorneys duties where the accused is imprisoned?
A: If the public attorney assigned to defend a person charged with a crime knows
that the accused is preventively detained, either because he is charged with a
bailable crime but has no means to post bail, or is charged with a non-bailable
crime, or is serving a term of imprisonment in any penal institution:
(a) The public attorney shall promptly undertake to obtain the presence of the
prisoner for trial, or cause a notice to be served on the person having
custody of the prisoner requiring such person to so advise the prisoner of
his right to demand trial.
(b) Upon receipt of that notice, the person having custody of the prisoner shall
promptly advise the prisoner of the charge and of his right to demand trial. If
at anytime thereafter the prisoner informs his custodian that he demands
such trial, the latter shall cause notice to that effect to be sent promptly to
the public attorney.
(c) Upon receipt of that notice, the public attorney shall promptly seek to obtain
the presence of the prisoner for trial.
(d) When the person having custody of t he prisoner receives from the public
attorney a properly supported request for the availability of the prisoner for
purposes of the trial, the prisoner shall be made available accordingly. 10
4. In what instances can counsel be sanctioned under these Rules?
A: In any case in which private counsel for the accused, the public attorney or the
public prosecutor:
9

Section 10, Circular No. 38-98


Section 12, Circular No. 38-98

10

5 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

(a) Knowingly allows the case to be set for trial without disclosing the fact that a
necessary witness would be unavailable for trial;
(b) Files a motion solely for the purpose of delay which he knows is totally
frivolous and without merit;
(c) Makes a statement for the purpose of obtaining continuance which he knows
to be false and which is material to the granting of a continuance; or
(d) Otherwise willfully fails to proceed to trial without justification consistent with
the provision hereof, the court may punish any such counsel, attorney or
prosecutor, as follows:
(1) in the case of a counsel privately retained in connection with
the defense of an accused, by imposing a fine not exceeding
twenty thousand pesos (P20,000.00);
(2) by imposing on any appointe d counsel de officio, public
attorney or public prosecutor a fine not exceeding five
thousand pesos (P5,000.00); and
(3) by denying any defense counsel or public prosecutor the right
to practice before the court considering the case for a period
not exceeding thirty (30) days. 11
5. What is the remedy if the accused is not brought to trial within the time limit?
A: If the accused is not brought to trial within the time limit, the information may be
dismissed on motion of the accused on the ground of denial of his right to speedy
trial. The accused shall have the burden of proving such motion but the
prosecution shall have the burden of going forward with the evidence in
connection with the exclusion of time. The dismissal shall be subject to the rules
on double jeopardy.
Failure of the accused to move for dismissal prior to trial shall constitute a waiver
of the right to dismiss. 12

B. OTHER LAWS RELATIVE TO SPEEDY TRIAL/DISPOSITION OF CASES


REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002)
1. Which court has jurisdiction over violations of R.A. No. 9165 (Comprehensive
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002)?
A: Section 90 of R.A. No. 9165 provides that the Supreme Court shall designate
special courts from among the existing Regional Trial Courts in each judicial
region to exclusively try and hear cases involving violations of R.A. No. 9165.

11
12

Section 13, Circular No. 38-98


Section 14, Circular No. 38-98

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 6

The number of courts designated in each judicial region shall be based on


the population and the number of cases pending in their respective jurisdictions,
while the DOJ shall designate special prosecutors to exclusively handle cases
involving violations of R.A. No. 9165.
2. What is the time period given for preliminary investigation of cases filed under
R.A. No. 9165?
A: Preliminary investigation of cases filed under R.A. No. 9165 shall be terminated
within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of their filing. 13
3. When should the information be issued?
A: After the preliminary investigation is conducted by a public prosecutor and a
probable cause is established, the corresponding information shall be filed in
court within twenty-four (24) hours from the termination of the investigation. If the
preliminary investigation is conducted by a judge and a probable cause is found
to exist, the corresponding information shall be filed by the proper prosecutor
within forty-eight (48) hours from the date of receipt of the records of the case.14
4. When shall trial commence?
A: Trial of the case under R.A. No. 9165 shall be finished by the court not later than
sixty (60) days from the date of the filing of the information. Decision on the case
shall be rendered within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of submission
of the case for resolution. 15

III.

RELATED ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCULARS


A. ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCULAR NO. 3-99 16 (Strict Observance of Session
Hours of Trial Courts and Effective Management of Cases to Ensure their
Speedy Disposition)
1. To what Courts does Admini strative Circular No. 3-99 apply?
A: A.C. Circular No. 3-99 applies to all trial court judges, their personnel and the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines.
2. What are the session hours of the trial courts?

13

Section 90, R.A. No. 9165


Ibid.
15
Ibid.
16
Issued January 15, 1999; took effect February 1, 1999.
14

7 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

A: The session hours of all Regional Trial Courts, Metropolitan Trial Courts,
Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Court, and Municipal Circuit Trial
Courts shall be from 8:30 A.M. to noon and from 2:00 P.M. to4:30 P.M., from
Monday to Friday. The hoursin the morning s hall be devoted to the conduct of
trial, while the hours in the afternoon shall be utilized for (1) the conduct of pretrial conferences; (2) writing of decisions, resolutions, or orders; or (3) the
continuation of trial on the merits whenever rendered necessary, as may be
required by the Rules of Court, statutes, or circulars in specified cases.
However, in multi-sala courts in places where there are few practicing lawyers,
the schedule may be modified upon request of the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines such that one-half of the branches may holdtheir trial in the morning
and the other half in the afternoon. Except those requiring immediate action, all
motions should be scheduled for hearing on Friday afternoons, or if Friday is a
non-working day, in the afternoon of the next business day. The unauthorized
practice of some judges of entertaining motions or setting them for hearing on
any other day or time must be immediately stopped.
3. With what provision should the Clerk of Court comply as to calendar of cases?
A: The Clerk of Court, under the direct supervision of the Judge, must comply with
Rule 20 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure 17 regarding the calendar of cases.
4.

What provisions of the Rules of Court must be followed to avoid postponements


and needless delay?

A: Section 2 (adjournments and postponements), Section 3 (requisites of a motion


to postpone trial for absence of evidence) and Section 4 (requisites of a motion
to postpone trial for illness of a party or counsel) of Rule 30, 1997 Rules on Civil
Procedure, 18 should be faithfully observed.

17

Rule 20. Calendar of Cases:


SECTION 1. Calendar of cases. The clerk of court, under the direct supervision of the
judge, shall keep a calendar of cases for pre-trial, for trial, those whose trials were adjourned or
postponed, and those with motions to set for hearing. Preference shall be given to habeas
corpus cases, election cases, special civil actions, and those so required by law. (1a, R22)
SECTION 2. Assignment of cases. The assignment of cases to the different branches of
a court shall be done exclusively by raffle. The assignment shall be done in open session of
which adequate notice shall be given so as to afford interested parties the opportunity to be
present. (7a, R22)
18
Rule 30. Trial:
SECTION 2. Adjournments and postponements. A court may adjourn a trial from day to
day, and to any stated time, as the expeditious and convenient transaction of business may
require, but shall have no power to adjourn a trial for a longer period than one month for each
adjournment, nor more than three months in all, except when authorized in writing by the Court
Administrator, Supreme Court. (3a, R22)

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 8

5. When shall the case be set for pre-trial?


A: Within five (5) days after the last pleading joining the issues has been filed and
served, the plaintiff must move ex parte that the case be set for pre-trial
conference.
6. What must the pre-trial briefs contain?
A: The pre-trial briefs should contain the following:
a. A statement of their willingness to enter into an amicable settlement indicating
the desired terms thereof, or to submit the case to any of the alternative
modes of dispute resolution;
b. A summary of admitted facts and proposed stipulation of facts;
c. The issues to be tried or resolved;
d. The number and names of the witnesses to be presented, an abstract of their
testimonies, and the approximate number of hours that will be required by the
parties for the presentation of their respective evidence;
e. Copies of all documents intended to be presented with a statement of the
purpose of their offer;
f. A manifestation of their having availed or their intention to avail themselves of
any discovery procedure, or of the need of referral of any issues to
commissioners;
g. Applicable laws and jurisprudence;
h. The available trial dates of counsel for complete presentation of evidence,
which must be within a period of three months from the first day of trial.
7. What must the judge do before the pre-trial conference?
A: The judge must study the pleadings of every case, and determine the issues
thereof and the respective positions of the parties thereon to enable him to
intelligently steer the parties toward a possible amicable settlement of the case
or, at the very least, to help reduce and limit the issues. The judge should avoid
the undesirable practice of terminating the pre-trial as soon as the parties have
indicated that they cannot settle the controversy. He must be mindful that there
SECTION 3. Requisites of motion to postpone trial for absence of evidence. A motion to
postpone a trial on the ground of absence of evidence can be granted only upon affidavit
showing the materiality or relevancy of such evidence, and that due diligence has been used to
procure it. But if the adverse party admits the facts to be given in evidence, even if he objects or
reserves the right to object to their admissibility, the trial shall not be postponed. (4a, R22)
(Corrected by Bar Matter No. 803, Resolution of the Supreme Court dated July 21, 1998)
SECTION 4. Requisites of motion to postpone trial for illness of party or counsel. A
motion to postpone a trial on the ground of illness of a party or counsel may be granted if it
appears upon affidavit or sworn certification that the presence of such party or counsel at the
trial is indispensable and that the character of his illness is such as to render his non-attendance
excusable. (5a, R22)
9 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

are other important aspects of the pre-trail that ought to be taken up to expedite
the disposition of the case.
8. What must be done during pre-trial conference?
A: During pre-trial conference, the following shall be done:
a. The judge with all tact, patience and impartiality shall endeavor to persuade
the parties to arrive at a settlement of the dispute; if no amicable settlement is
reached, then he must effectively direct the parties toward the achievement of
the other objectives or goals of pre-trail set forth in Section 2 Rule 18, 1997
Rules of Civil Procedure.
b. If warranted by the disclosures at the pre-trial, the judge may either forthwith
dismiss the action, or determine the propriety of rendering a judgment on the
pleadings or a summary judgment.
c. The judge shall define the factual issues arising from the pleadings and
endeavor to cull the material issues.
d. If only legal issues are presented, the judge shall require the parties to submit
their respective memoranda and thereafter render judgment.
e. If trial is necessary, the judge shall fix the trial dates required to complete
presentation of evidence by both parties within ninety (90) days from the date
of initial hearing.
9. What must the judge do after the pre-trial conference?
A: The judge should not fail to prepare and issue the requisite pre-trial order, which
shall embody the matters mentioned in Sec. 7, Rule 18 of the 1997 Rules of Civil
Procedure.
10. What are the causes for dismissal of the action?
A:

Failure of the plaintiff to appear at the pre-trial shall be a cause for dismissal of
the action. A similar failure of the defendant shall be a cause to allow the plaintiff
to present his evidence ex parte and the court to render udgment
j
on the basis
thereof.
Failure to file pre-trial briefs shall have the same effect as failure to appear at the
pre-trial.

11. How many cases may be scheduled for trial per day?
A: Unless the docket of the court requires otherwise, not more than four (4) cases
shall be scheduled for trial daily.

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 10

12. How should the judge conduct trial?


A: The judge shall conduct trial with utmost dispatch, with judicious exercise of the
courts power to control trial proceedings to avoid delay.
The judge must take notes of the material and relevant testimonies of witnesses
to facilitate his decision making.
13. How long should trial be determined?
A: The trial shall be determined within ninety (90) days from initial hearing.
Appropriate disciplinary sanctions may be imposed on the judge and the lawyers
for failure to comply with this requirement due to causes attributable to them.
14. When may the judge allow additional trial dates?
A: Each party is bound to complete the presentation of his evidence within the trial
dates assigned to him. After the lapse of said dates, the party is deemed to have
completed the presentation of evidence. However, upon verified motion based on
compelling reasons, the judge may allow a party additional trial dates in the
afternoon; provided that said extension will not go beyond the three-month limit
computed from the first trial date except when authorized in writing by the Court
Administrator, Supreme Court.
15. What must the judge do to keep track of cases?
A: As a constant reminder of what cases must be decided or resolved, the judge
must keep a calendar of cases submitted for decision, noting therein the exact
day, month and year when the 90-day period is to expire. As soon as a case is
submitted for decision, it must be noted in the calendar of the judge; moreover,
the records shall be duly collected with the exhibits and the transcripts of
stenographic notes, as well as the trial notes of the judge, and placed in the
judge's chamber.
16. When are decisions promulgated?
A: The date of the promulgation of the decision should be set within ninety (90) days
from the submission of the case for decision.

11 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

B. ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCULAR No. 58-2002 19


1. What is mandated under Administrative Circular No. 58-2002?
A: This Circular requires the speedy disposition of cases of all persons before
judicial bodies, as mandated by the Constitution. It also gives priority to cases
involving tourists, whose stay in the country is temporary or for a short time only.
2. What measures has the Supreme Court undertaken for the speedy disposition of
cases?
A: The Supreme Court has adopted the following measures:
(a) The reopening/revival of night courts in the Metropolitan Trial Court of Manila
to try and decide all special cases enumerated in the Rule on Summary
Procedure under Administrative Order No. 72 dated 30 June 1988; and
(b) The opening of two branches of the Metropolitan Trial Court of Quezon City
as night courts to be assigned cases involving nighttime apprehensions
and special cases enumerated in the Rule on Summary Procedure under
the Resolution of 2 October 1990 in A.M. No. 90-9-1437-MeTC. 20
Note - Administrative Circular No. 2-99 dated 15 January 1999 also requires (1)
judges, assisted by a skeletal force of personnel, to be on duty, on rotation basis,
from 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. on Saturdays to act on petitions for bail and other
urgent matters, as well as to act on bailable offenses on Saturday afternoons,
Sundays and non-working holidays; and (2) court offices and units that deal
directly with the public to provide for a skeletal force of personnel from 8:00 a.m.
to 12:00 noon and 12:30 to 4:30 p.m. on Saturdays.

3. What measures has the Supreme Court undertaken for the speedy disposition of
cases?
A: Pursuant to the Resolution of 10 September 2002 in A.M. No. 02-8-12-SC, 21 the
Supreme Court directs that:
1. Criminal cases where the offended party or complainant is a tourist or
transient in this country shall be given priority in disposition in accordance
with the pertinent provisions of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure and
decided within twenty-four (24) hours from the date of filing in court,
2. All Executive Judges are directed to inform the Philippine National Police
(PNP) and the Prosecutors Office of the provisions of Administrative Circular
19

Issued November 14, 2002


Re Request for the Opening of Two Branches of the Metropolitan Trial Court to Conduct
Night Sessions
21
Re: In the Matter of the Creation of Night Courts or Special Tourist Courts Exclusively to
Attend to Tourist-Related Crimes
20

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 12

No. 2-99 dated 15 January 1999, specifically the assignment of judges on


duty every Saturday and the courts duty to act on bailable Offenses on
Saturday afternoons, Sundays and non-working holidays; and
3. The Executive Judges of the Regional Trial Courts of Manila and Quezon City
shall (a) inform the PNP and the Prosecutors Office within their jurisdiction of
the schedule of the branches of the first level courts assigned to hold night
sessions; and (b) make representations with the PNP and local government
units to ensure that appropriate security measures are adopted to protect
judges and their staff on night sessions.

C. RULES AND REGULATIONS ON THE REPORTING AND INVESTIGATION OF


CHILD ABUSE CASES (October 10, 2003)
1. What do the rules mandate as to the trial of child abuse cases?
A: Section 21 of Implementing Rules and Regulations 10-1993 provides that the trial
of child abuse cases shall take precedence over all other cases before the
courts, except election and habeas corpus cases.
2. When does trial commence for child abuse cases?
A: Trial in child abuse cases shall commence within three (3) days from the date the
accused is arraigned. No postponement of the initial hearing is granted except for
illness of the accused or other grounds beyond his control.

13 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

IV. STAGES IN CRIMINAL ACTIONS


Filing of Complaint before the Fiscals office for
Preliminary Investigation, or no Preliminary Investigation

Preliminary Investigation

Filing of Complaint or Information

Within ten (10) days from filing of Complaint or Information,


warrant of arrest or commitment order may issue

The accused must be arraigned within thirty (30) days


from the time the court acquires jurisdiction over the
person of the accused.

After the arraignment, the court shall order a pre-trial.

Thirty (30) days after parties receipt of the pre-trial


order, trial shall commence, but parties are given 15
days to prepare for trial.

Trial is terminated within 180 days from initial trial.

Within ninety (90) days from


termination of trial, judgment
shall be rendered/promulgated.

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 14

A. Preliminary Investigation
1. When required
Preliminary Investigation is required to be conducted before the filing of an
information for an offense where the penalty prescribed by law is at least 4 years,
2 months and 1 day without regard to the fine. 22
There is no right of preliminary investigation when a person is lawfully
arrested without a warrant unless there is a waiver of the provisions of Article 125
of the Revised Penal Code. 23
2. Procedure
The complaint is filed accompanied by the affidavits and supporting
documents. Within ten (10) days after the filing, the investigating officer shall
either dismiss or issue subpoena. If subpoena is issued, the respondent shall
submit a counter-affidavit and other supporting documents within ten (10) days
from receipt thereof. Hearing, if any, shall be held within t en (10) days from
submission of counter-affidavits or from the expiration of the period of their
submission. 24 The investigating prosecutor shall then prepare the resolution and
information. 25

B. Filing of Complaint or Information


1. Procedure
For offenses where a preliminary investigation is required pursuant to
section 1 of Rule 112, the complaint is filed with the proper officer for the purpose
of conducting the requisite preliminary investigation. 26 Except as provided in
section 7 of Rule 112, a preliminary investigation is required to be conducted
before the filing of a complaint of information for an offense where the penalty
prescribed by law is at least four (4) years, two (2) months and one (1) day
without regard to the fine. 27
For all other offenses, the complaint or information is filed directly with the
Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts, or with the office of the

22

Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 112, Section 1,


Id., Id., Sec.7, now Section 6 under A.M. 05-8-26-SC.
24
Id., Id., Sec. 3.
25
Id., Id. , Sec.4.
26
Id., Rule 110, Sec. 1.
27
Id., Rule 112, Sec. 1.
23

15 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

prosecutor. In Manila and other chartered cities, the complaint shall be filed with
the office of the public prosecutor unless otherwise provided in their charters. 28
The institution of the criminal action shall interrupt the running of the
period of prescription of the offense charged unless otherwise provided in special
laws. 29

2. Causes of delay after receipt of the information and before arraignment,


and remedies therefor
When a judge receives the Information, he has ten (10) days to act on the
Information. If he does not find the existence of probable cause, he can
immediately dismiss the case for lack of probable cause. This dismissal is
without prejudice. If, however, he finds th e existence of probable cause, the
judge should issue an order finding probable cause and issuing the
corresponding warrant of arrest against the accused. Thus, if an accused then
files a motion for judicial determination of probable cause, the judge can deny the
motion outrightly because he has already issued an order whereby he
determined the existence of probable cause.
Under DOJ Circular No. ,70 30 an aggrieved party may appeal the
resolution of the Chief State Prosecutor, Regional State Prosecutor, or Provincial
or City Prosecutor to the Secretary of Justice by filing a verified petition for
review. The Secretary of Justice may dismissthe petition outrightly if he finds it
to be patently without merit or manifestly intended for delay, or when the issues
raised therein are too unsubstantial to require consideration.
If an information has been filed in court pursuant to the appealed
resolution, the petition shall not be given due course if the accused had already
been arraigned. Any arraignment made after the filing of the petition shall not bar
the Secretary of Justice from exercising his power of review. 31
Unless the Secretary of Justice directs otherwise, the appeal shall not hold
the filing of the corresponding information in court on the basis of the finding of
probable cause in the appealed resolution. The appellant and the trial prosecutor
shall see to it that, pending resolution of the appeal, the proceedings in court are
held in abeyance. 32
If the Secretary of Justice finds it necessary to reinvestigate the case, the
reinvestigation shall be held by the investigating prosecutor, unless, for
28

Id., Rule 110, Sec. 1.


Id.
30
Dated July 3, 2000 (2000 National Prosecution Service Rule on Appeal).
31
DOJ Circular No. 70, Section 7
32
Id., Section 9
29

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 16

compelling reasons, another public prosecutor is designated to conduct the


same. 33
The Secretary may reverse, affirm or modify the appealed resolution. He
may, motu proprio or upon motion, dismiss the petition for review on any of the
grounds stated in Section 12. 34
The accused may file amotion for preliminary investigation within five
(5) days from knowledge of filing of the Information. However, where the accused
files a motion for preliminary investigation and the judge finds from the records
that the former was given the chance to present countervailing evidence, the
judge should deny the motion.
The accused may also file a
motion for reconsideration or
reinvestigation. Where a motion for reconsideration was filed with the
prosecutor but the same was left unresolved and the case was filed in court, the
judge may deny the motion considering that he has already acquired jurisdiction
over the case and has the discretion whether or not to suspend proceedings until
the public prosecutor resolves the motion for reconsideration.
When a motion for reinvestigation is filed by the accused, the judge
should determine first whether the accused was afforded a regular preliminary
investigation. If a preliminary investigation was conducted and the accused had
the opportunity to file his counter-affidavit and he would raise no new matters of
evidence or defense, the motion for reinvestigation should be denied. If,
however, there was no preliminary investigation or that the same was
incomplete, jurisprudence has held that the judge should first allow a preliminary
investigation and suspend the proceedings.
Since the absence of a preliminary investigation does not invalidate an
information already filed in court and the judge has the discretion to deny a
motion for reinvestigation when the accused was not given a preliminary
investigation or when the preliminary investigation is not complete, it is part of
due process to allow preliminary investigation or reinvestigation as a matter of
due process. The judge should consider al so that if the reinvestigation would
only delay the proceedings and defense counsel believes that his client has a
good defense or that the evidence against his client is weak, the judge can order
trial to proceed.
If there is a motion to withdraw the Information, the judge must
determine if grounds exist to allow the motion. The preliminary investigation
conducted by the public prosecutor for the purpose of determining whether a
prima facie case exists warranting the prosecution of the accused is terminated
upon the filing of the information in the proper court. While it is true that the
33
34

Id., Section 11
Id., Section 12

17 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

public prosecutor has the quasi-judicial discretion to determine whether or not a


criminal case should be filed in court, whatever disposition the public prosecutor
may feel should be proper in the case thereafter should be addressed for the
consideration of the Court once the case had already been brought to Court. 35
The only qualification is that the action of the Court must not impair the
substantial rights of the accused, or the right of the Peop le to due process of law.
Thus, the Court, once it has acquired jurisdiction over the case, has the
discretion whether or not to allow the withdrawal of the information.
The accused may also file a motion for determination of prejudicial
question. It is up to the judge to determine whether there exists a prejudicial
question that may warrant a suspension of the proceedings under Section 6,
Rule 111 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedures. The elements of a
prejudicial question as provided in Section 7, Rule 111 of the Revised Rules of
Criminal Procedure are, to wit: (a) the previously instituted civil action involves
an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the subsequent
criminal action; and (b) the resolution of such issue determines whether or not
the criminal action may proceed.
Where the accused does not get a favorable resolution from the Court, or
his motions are denied, he may file a petition for certiorari and then ask for a
suspension of the proceedings to enable him to avail of his remedy under Rule
65.
Rule 65 allows a 60-day period fr om notice of the judgment, order or
resolution, or from notice of the denial of the motion for reconsideration or new
trial timely filed, whether such motion is required or not, to file a petition for
certiorari if the subject matter is an interlocutory order that does not dispose of
the case.
Suppose, the accused files a petition for certiorari on the 15th day from
receipt of the order denying the motion for reconsideration and then pleads that
he was still entitled to the full 60-day period during which the trial court should
suspend its proceedings. What can the trial judge do? Under Section 7, Rule 65,
as amended, 36 the mere filing of the petition shall not interrupt the course of the
principal case, unless a temporary restraining order or a writ of preliminary
injunction has been issued by the higher court where the petition is filed,
enjoining the trial judge from further proceeding with the case. The same rule
mandates the trial judge to proceed with the principal case within ten (10) days
from the filing of a petition for certiorari with a higher court or tribunal, absent a
temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction, or upon its expiration.
Failure of respondent trial judge to proceed with the principal case may be a
ground for an administrative charge.
35
36

See Crespo vs. Mogul, 151 SCRA 462 (1987)


A.M. No. 07-7-12-SC, December 4, 2007.

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 18

Under Section 8, Rule 65, 37 disciplinary actions may now be taken against
patently dilatory and unmeritorious petitions for certiorari. The lawyer and the
party represented by the lawyer may be required to pay solidarily triple judicial
cost. The lawyer may also be subjected to Rule 139-B of the Rules of Court and
other disciplinary actions based on res ipsa loquitur. 38

C. Arraignment
1. Procedure
The accused must be arraigned bef ore the court where the Complaint or
Information is filed or assigned for trial. The arraignment is made in open court by
the judge or clerk by furnishing the accused with a copy of the Complaint or
Information, reading it in the language or dialect known to him, and asking him
whether he pleads guilty or not guilty. The Prosecution may call at the trial
witnesses other than those named in the Complaint or Information.
The accused must be present at the arraignment and must personally
enter his/her plea. Both arraignment and plea are made of record, but failure to
do so does not affect the validity of the proceedings. 39
Before the reading of the Information, the court should inform the accused
who is not assisted by counsel de officio of his/her right to counsel and inquire
from him/her if he/she desires to engage his/her own counsel. Unless the
accused is allowed to defend in person (pro se), and the accused is amenable to
a counsel de officio, the court should appoint a competent and responsible
counsel de officio for him/her. 40

37

Rule 65. Certiorari, Prohibition and Mandamus.


SECTION 8. Proceedings after comment is filed. After the comment or other pleadings
required by the court are filed, or the time for the filing thereof has expired, the court may hear
the case or require the parties to submit memoranda. If, after such hearing or filing of
memoranda or upon the expiration of the period for filing, the court finds that the allegations of
the petition are true, it shall render judgment for such relief to which the petitioner is entitled.
However, the court may dismiss the petition if it finds the same patently without merit or
prosecuted manifestly for delay, or if the questions raised therein are too unsubstantial to
require consideration. In such event, the court may award in favor of the respondent treble costs
solidarily against the petitioner and counsel, in addition to subjecting counsel to administrative
sanctions under Rules 139 and 139-B of the Rules of Court.
The Court may impose motu proprio, based on res ipsa loquitur, other disciplinary sanctions
or measures on erring lawyers for patently dilatory and unmeritorious petitions for certiorari. (As
amended by A.M. No. 07-7-12-SC, December 4, 2007)
38
Rule 139-B. Disbarment and Discipline of Attorneys.
39
Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 116, Sec.1.
40
Id. Sec.6.
19 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

A counsel de officio appointed to defend the accused at the arraignment


shall be given a reasonable time to consult with the accused as to his/her plea
before proceeding with the arraignment. 41

2. Plea bargaining
At arraignment, the accused may be allowed by the trial court, with the
consent of the offended party and the public prosecutor, to plead guilty to a
lesser offense that is necessarily included in the offense charged. After
arraignment but before trial, the accused may still be allowed to plead guilty to a
lesser offense after withdrawing his/her plea of not guilty. No amendment of the
complaint or information is necessary. 42
If the accused is under preventive detention, the pre-trial conference of the
case is held within ten (10) days after arraignment. 43
In other cases, the arraignment is held within thirty (30) days from the date
the court acquires jurisdiction over the person of the accused unless a shorter
period is provided by special law or Supreme Court circular. The time of the
pendency of a motion to quash or a motion for a bill of particulars or other causes
justifying suspension of the arraignment is excluded in computing the period. 44
There is no plea bargaining in pros ecutions involving violations of the
Dangerous Drugs Act. 45
In prosecutions involving violat ions of B.P. 22 (The Bouncing Checks
Law), the complainant cannot file a separate civil action to recover civil liability,
but there can be a compromise as to the civil liability.
According to People v. Macalalag, 46 the accuseds subsequent payment
of the amount of the check during the pendency of the cases will not free him/her
from criminal liability that already attached upon dishonor of the check. Such
subsequent payments only affect the civil, not criminal, liability. A subsequent
payment by the accused would not obliterate the criminal liability theretofore
already incurred.

41

Id. Sec.8.
SC Circular No. 38-98, Sec. 4.
43
Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 116, Sec.1(e).
44
SC Circular No. 38-98, Sec. 2.
45
Section 90, R.A. No. 9165.
46
G.R. No. 164358, December 20, 2006.
42

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 20

3. Causes of delay during arraignment and remedies therefor


When the accused files a motion to quash prior to arraignment, the judge
must not immediately suspend the proceedings. He must first determine the
grounds for such motion. The accused cannot use a ground that cannot be read
in the Information because the bottomline is that when a motion to quash is filed,
the allegations in the information are deemed hypothetically admitted. Where the
ground invoked by the accused in the motion to quash is not one of the grounds
under Section 3, Rule 117 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, the judge
may outrightly deny the motion for lack of merit and proceed with the
arraignment.
If the ground relied upon in the motion to quash is based on the alleged
defect in the information or complaint that can be cured by amendment, the judge
should order the amendment of the complaint or information, 47 after which he
can set the arraignment.
Before arraignment, the accused may move for a bill of particulars to
enable him properly to plead and prepare for trial. The motion shall specify the
alleged defects of the complaint or information and the details desired. 48 If the
judge finds that the allegations of the information are sufficient in form and
substance and that the accused can enter an intelligent plea without prejudicing
his rights, or that the matters raised in the motion for bill of particulars are
evidentiary in nature, the judge can deny the motion and proceed with the
arraignment.
Where the accused appears to be suffering from an unsound mental
condition which effectively renders him unable to fully understand the charge
against him and to plead intelligently to the charge, the court shall order the
mental examination of the accused and, if necessary, the confinement of the
accused. Consequently, the trial judge shall suspend the arraignment until such
time that the mental condition of the accused is determined. 49
Where the accused moves for the suspension of the arraignment on the
ground that he has not secured the services of counsel, the court may reset the
arraignment and give the accused time to secure a counsel of his/her own
choice. If, at the next setting, the accused still has not secured the services of
counsel, then the court should appoint a counsel de officio for the accused for
purposes of the arraignment in order not to unduly delay the proceedings.
The appointment of a counsel de officio for the accused for purposes of
arraignment also applies where a counsel has entered his appearance for an
47

Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 117, Section 4


Id., Rule 116, Section 9
49
Id., Id., Section 11
48

21 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

accused and was, in fact, duly notified of the date of arraignment but fails to
appear to assist his client.

D. Pre-Trial
1. When mandatory
Pre-trial is mandatory in all criminal cases cognizable by the
Sandiganbayan, Regional Trial Court, Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial
Court in Cities, Municipal Trial Court and Municipal Circuit Trial Court. 50
2. Remedies to avoid delay
It is suggested that the judge should include in his order of arraignment a
flow chart of the trial of the case. After arraignment has been set, the judge
marks 2 dates for the preliminary conference, as well as pre-trial, then sets the
dates when the Prosecution is to present and terminate its evidence and the
dates when the accused should present and terminate his/her evidence.
The judge can already determine from the Information how many trial
dates may be needed. In so doing, he can control the flow of trial and when the
case may be submitted for decision.
Pre-trial should be held within a month or 30 days from the arraignment
while the preliminary conference is held at least 3 days before pre-trial. Then,
after pre-trial, the judge can probably set 8 trial dates which will not exceed two
months.
The judge can expedite cases by par ticipating actively and requiring the
parties to enter into stipulations or admissions. Among the purposes of pre-trial is
the admission of the due execution and authenticity of relevant documents in
order to do away with the time-consuming process of authenticating relevant
documents during the trial.
In People vs. Judge Tac-an, 51 the Supreme Court held that the absence
during the pre-trial of any Prosecution witness listed in the Information, whether
or not such witness is the offended party or the complaining witness, is not a
valid ground for the dismissal of the criminal action. Although pre-trial is
mandatory in a criminal case under Section 2, Republic Act No. 8493 (Speedy
Trial Act of 1998), the presence in court of the private complainant or the
complainant during pre-trial is not required. Even the presence of the accused
during pre-trial is not required, unless the court has ordered the accused to
50
51

Section 3, Circular No. 38-98.


G. R. No. 148000, February 27, 2003.

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 22

appear. It is enough that the accused is represented by counsel. Accordingly,


even if none of the States witnesses appear, pre-trial should proceed. The public
prosecutor is vested with the authority to consider the matters catalogued in Sec.
2, R. A. 8493.

E. Trial
1. Periods to be observed for trial
a. Length of Trial In no case shall the entire trial period exceed one
hundred eighty (180) days from the first day of trial, except when
otherwise authorized by the Chief Justice pursuant to Section 3, Rule 22
of the Rules of Court. 52
b. Preparation for Trial Where a plea of not guilty is entered, the accused
has at least fifteen (15) days to prepare for trial. Trial shall commence
within thirty (30) days from arraignment as fixed by the court. 53
c. Time limit following an order for new trial Trial shall commence within
thirty (30) days from the date the order for a new trial becomes final,
except that the court retrying the case may extend such period but in any
case the extension shall not exceed one hundred eighty (180) days from
the date the order for a new trial becomes final if unavailability of
witnesses or other factors resulting from passage of time shall make trial
within thirty (30) days impractical. 54
d. Extended time limit given for trial For the first twelve-calendar-month
period following the effectivity of R.A. No. 8493, the time limit with respect
to the period from arraignment to trial was one hundred eighty (180) days;
for the second twelve-month period, the time limit was one hundred twenty
(120) days; and for the third twelve-month period, the time limit with was
eighty (80) days. 55

2. Causes of delay and remedies therefor


The filing of a motion to discharge the accused as state witness does
not suspend the proceedings because it does affect the evidence of the
Prosecution. Hence, under Section 17, Rule 119 of the Revised Rules of

52

Section 6, R.A. No. 8493.


Section 7, R.A. No. 8493.
54
Section 8, R.A. No. 8493.
55
Section 9, R.A. No. 8493.
53

23 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

Criminal Procedure, the judge has the discretion whether or not to grant the
motion to discharge.
The denial or grant of bail does not stop the trial because the denial or
grant of bail does not affect the main case. Proceedings on petitions for bail filed
by the accused do not suspend the trial, for, in fact, the evidence presented
during the bail hearing shall be considered automatically reproduced at the trial,
subject to the right of either party, upon motion, to recall any witness for
additional examination (unless the witness is dead, outside of the Philippines, or
otherwise unable to testify). 56
After the Prosecution rests its case , the court may dismiss the action on
the ground of insufficiency of evidence (1) on its own initiative after giving the
Prosecution the opportunity to be heard or (2) upon demurrer to evidence filed by
the accused with or without leave of court. 57 When a motion for leave of court
to file demurrer to evidence is filed, the first thing that the judge has to
determine is whether the motion is filed within the mandatory non-extendible 5day period after the Prosecution has rested its case. 58 If not, the judge can then
deny the motion for leave at once. If the motion is filed within the 5-day period,
the judge must then look into the ground or grounds relied upon by the accused.
If the ground or grounds are not meritorious, or if, upon its assessment, the court
finds that the demurer to evidence does not warrant the acquittal of the accused,
then the judge should deny the motion for leave.
Should the judge deny the motion for leave of court, the accused has no
remedy except to present his/her evidence. He/She cannot file a petition for
certiorari under Rule 65 because a denial of a demurrer to evidence cannot be
the subject matter of a petition for certiorari considering that there is a plain,
speedy and adequate remedy available to the accused, that is, to present his/her
evidence. 59
During trial, an accused may fail to appear despite due notice. Where the
accused is duly notified and required by the court to appear but fails to do so, the
court may order the accused and/or the bonding company to explain why the
bailbond should not be forfeited. If the explanation is not satisfactory, the court
can order the cancellation of the bailbond and render judgment on the bond. The
court can then consider the accused to have waived the right to present evidence
or to cross-examine the Prosecutions witnesses and proceed to render its
judgment.

56

Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 114, Section 8.


Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 119, Section 23.
58
Id.
59
Id.; note that Sec. 23 now expressly provides in its last paragraph that: The order denying the
motion for leave of court to file demurrer to evidence or the demurrer itself shall not be
reviewable by appeal or by certiorari before judgment.
57

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 24

If, during trial, the accused appears without counsel who is duly notified of
the hearing or if counsel fails to appear without justification, the remedy is not to
suspend the proceedings to another date but to continue with the trial, with the
court appointing a counsel de officio for the accused for purposes of trial
provided that such appointment does not prejudice the defense of the accused.
The court can then cite counsel de parte for contempt of court or render a fine for
said counsels failure to appear despite due notice.
If, during trial, an accused appears without counsel because he/she still
has not secured one or he/she cannot afford private counsel, the court should
appoint a counsel de officio from the Public Attorneys Office or from the local
chapter of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines.
After presentation of evidence, a party is required to make an offer of
evidence pursuant to Section 34, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court. Testimonial
evidence is offered at the time the witness is called to testify. 60 On the other
hand, documentary evidence and object evidence are offered after the
presentation of a partys testimonial evidence. To expedite proceedings, the
judge must require the formal offer of documentary evidence and object evidence
to be done orally pursuant to Section 35, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court, unless
they are so voluminous that it is not practical to make an oral offer of them.
Objections to the evidence formally offered must also be done orally immediately
after the offer is made. 61

F. Promulgation of judgment
1. Procedure
Judgment is promulgated by reading it in the presence of the accused and
any judge of the court in which it is rendered. However, if the conviction is for a
light offense, the judgment may be pronounced in the presence of his counsel or
representative. When the judge is absent or outside the province or city, the
judgment may be promulgated by the clerk of court. 62
If the accused is confined or detai ned in another province or city, the
judgment may be promulgated by the executive judge of the Regional Trial Court
having jurisdiction over the place of confinement or detention upon request of the
court rendering the judgment. 63

60

Section 35, Rule 132, Rules of Court


Section 36, Rule 132, Rules of Court.
62
Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 120, Sec. 6.
63
Id.
61

25 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

2. Remedies
If the judgment is for conviction and the failure of the accused to appear at
the promulgation is without justifiable cause, the accused loses the remedies
available in the Rules of Court against the judgment and the court shall order his
arrest. Within fifteen (15) days from promulgation of judgment, however, the
accused may surrender and file a motion for leave of court to avail of said
remedies. He shall state the reasons for his absence at the scheduled
promulgation and if he proves that his absence was for a justifiable cause, he
shall be allowed to avail of said remedies within fifteen (15) days from notice. 64
If the court renders a judgment of conviction and accused appears without
counsel or if counsel fails to appear despite due notice, the court need not reset
the promulgation and should instead appoint a counsel de officio for purposes of
promulgation.
In case the accused fails to appear during promulgation despite due notice
but his counsel is present, judgment is promulgated by recording it in the criminal
docket of the court and with the Clerk of Court who shall enter the judgment in
the judgment book and furnish copy of the judgment to counsel. 65

V.

RULES OF PROCEDURE IN DI FFERENT COURTS RELATIVE TO SPEEDY


DISPOSITION OF CASES
A. COURT OF APPEALS
2002 INTERNAL RULES OF THE COURT OF APPEALS 66

Pursuant to Section 12 of the Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980 (Batas


Pambansa Blg. 129), as amended, the Court of Appeals hereby adopts and
promulgates these rules governing its internal operating procedures. These rules shall
be known and may be cited as the 2002 INTERNAL RULES OF THE COURT OF
APPEALS (IRCA).
RULE I
THE COURT, ITS ORG ANIZATION AND OFFICIALS
SECTION. 1. Composition of the Court of Appeals.
Unless otherwise provided by
law, the Court of Appeals is composed of a Presiding Justice and sixty eight (68)
64
65
66

Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 120, Sec. 6, last paragraph.


Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 120, Sec. 6, fourth paragraph.
Effective February 28, 2005.

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 26

Associate Justices. It shall sit en banc, or in twenty-three (23) Divisions of three (3)
Justices each. The members of the Court are classified into three groups according to
the order of their seniority. The first twenty-three most senior members, including the
Presiding Justice, shall be Chairmen of the twenty-three Divisions in consecutive
numerical sequence. The next twenty-three members shall be the senior members of
the Divisions, while the rest shall be the junior members. (Sec. 1, Rule 1, RIRCA [a])
Until the full implementationof Republic Act No. 8246,
the Court shall sit in
seventeen (17) Divisions of three (3) justices each in Manila, as presently constituted.
When a senior member is designated to act as Chairman of a Division, he shall
be an Acting Chairman. In like manner, a junior member designated to act as senior
member of a Division shall be an Acting Senior Member. (Sec. 5 [c], Rule 1, RIRCA
[a])
SEC. 2. Station and Place of Holding Sessions.
(a) Upon full implementation of Republic Act No. 8246, the Court shall have its
permanent stations as follows: the first seventeen (17) Divisions shall be in the City of
Manila for cases coming from the National Capital Judicial Region and the First,
Second, Third, Fourth and Fifth Judicial Regions; the eighteenth, nineteenth and
twentieth Divisions shall be in Cebu City for cases coming from the Sixth, Seventh and
Eighth Judicial Regions; and the twenty-first, twenty-second and twenty-third Divisions
shall be in Cagayan de Oro City for cases coming from the Ninth, Tenth, Eleventh and
Twelfth Judicial Regions.
(b) Whenever demanded by public interest, or whenever justified by an increase
in case load, the Supreme Court, upon its own initiative or upon recommendation of the
Presiding Justice, may authorize any division of the Court to hold sessions periodically,
or for such periods and at such places as the Supreme Court may determine, for the
purpose of hearing and deciding cases. (Sec. 3, R.A. No. 8246)
SEC. 3. Exercise of Powers and Functions. The Court of Appeals shall
exercise its adjudicative powers, functions and duties through its Divisions. It sits en
banc in the exercise of administrative, ceremonial and non-adjudicative functions. (Sec.
1, Rule 2, RIRCA [a])
SEC. 6. Division of the Court. A Division of the Court shall be presided by the
Chairman or, in his absence, by the senior member thereof. If the substitute member is
the most senior, he shall be the Acting Ch airman. (Sec. 3, Rule 1, RIRCA [a])
SEC. 8. Jurisdiction and Manner of Exercise of Adjudicative Powers of the Court
by Divisions. The Court shall have original and appellate jurisdiction as provided for
by law.

27 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

In the exercise and discharge of the adjudicative powers, functions and duties of
the Court, the Divisions shall hold consultations. (Sec. 3, Rule 2 RIRCA [a])
SEC. 9. Reorganization of Divisions.
(a) Reorganization of Divisions shall be effected whenever a permanent vacancy
occurs in the chairmanship of a Division, in which case assignment of Justices to the
Divisions shall be in accordance with the order of seniority unless a waiver is executed
by the Justice concerned which waiver shall be effective until revoked by him in writing.
xxx
In the exigencies of the service, the Presiding Justice may temporarily assign any
Associate Justice to any station, or defer the reorganization of the Divisions.
(b) Should appointments to the Court require the creation of a new Division or
Divisions, the most ranking senior members shall be the Chairman or Chairmen of such
new Division or Divisions, and the resulting vacancies in the senior membership shall be
filled by the most ranking junior members, subject to the provisions of the preceding
paragraph.. The new appointees shall be assigned to the resulting vacancies as junior
members. (Sec. 5[a], Rule 1, RIRCA)
(c) A permanent vacancy in the ranks of junior members shall be filled by the
most junior member as acting junior member of the Division where the vacancy exists
pending reorganization of the Divisions, in addition to his duties as regular member of
his current Division. (Sec. 5, Rule 1, RIRCA [a])
(d) When the members of a Division fail to reach a unanimous vote, its Chairman
shall direct the Raffle Committee to designate by raffle two (2) additional members to
constitute a Special Division of Five. In the selection of the additional members, the rule
on equal assignment shall be observed. (Sec. 6, Rule 1, RIRCA [a])

RULE II
RULE ON PRECEDENCE AND PROTOCOL
SEC. 5. Conduct of Hearing in Divisions . - The Chairman controls the proceedings
during the hearing. He shall rule on all moti ons and objections interposed therein in
consultation with the members. He may, however, yield the conduct of the proceedings
to any member who shall exercise the powers of the Chairman. (n)
SEC. 6. Attendance of Justices in Hearings. Except where a hearing to receive the
evidence of the parties is referred by a Division to one of its members, the members of
a Division shall be present at all hearings of the Division, otherwise the hearings shall

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 28

be postponed. Unexplained or unjustified absence shall be a ground for disciplinary


action.

RULE IV
PROCESSING OF CASES AND ACTION ON INTERLOCUTORY MATTERS
SEC. 1. Procedure in the Disposition of Pleadings, Motions and Other Papers.
(a) Within two (2) working days, all pleadings, motions and other papers filed with
the Receiving Section of the Judicial Records Division shall be entered in the docket
book, stitched to the rollo of the case, paged consecutively and then forwarded to the
Division Clerk of Court concerned.
(b) If the Division Clerk of Court has no authority to act on such pleadings,
motions and other papers, he shall prepare the agenda and submit the same to the
Division, thru the Justice concerned, within three (3) working days from receipt in his
office of the rollo, together with the pleadings, motions or other papers.
(c) The Division Clerk of Court shall state in the agenda, with page references,
the antecedents of the case which are necessary for an understanding thereof, a
synopsis of the motion or incident and the opposition thereto, if any, the issues involved
and his remarks or recommendations. (Rule 3, Sec. 12, RIRCA [a])
SEC. 2. Action by the Presiding Justice or Executive Justice. When a petition
involves an urgent matter, such as an application for writ of habeas corpus or temporary
restraining order, and there is no way of convening the Raffle Committee or calling any
of its members, the Presiding Justice or the Executive Justice, as the case may be, or in
their absence, the most senior Justice present, may conduct the raffle or act on the
petition, subject to raffle on the next working day in accordance with Rule III hereof. (n)
SEC. 4. Processing of Ordinary Appeals.
(a) In Civil Cases.
(1) Upon receipt of the original record, whether by personal delivery or by mail,
the Civil Cases Section of the Judicial Records Division shall immediately:
(1.1) Check proof of payment of the full amount of the appellate court
docket and other lawful fees and deposits for costs to the clerk of court of the
court which rendered the appealed judgment or order;
(1.2) Check if all the documents and papers required under the Rules of
Court have been transmitted, prepare the corresponding rollo, docket the case
and assign the corresponding CA-G.R. CV number;

29 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

(1.3) Submit the case to the raffle staff for inclusion in the list of cases for
raffle;
(1.4) After the raffle, report to the Division Clerk of Court concerned the
lacking portions of the records for appropriate action, if the records transmitted
are incomplete;
(1.5) Write the branch clerk of the court which rendered the appealed
judgment or order, copy furnished the appellant, if the incomplete record is
received by mail without explanation for its incompleteness, for him to get the
records personally from the Court or submit the missing parts of the records; and
(1.6) Within ten (10) days from completion of the records, issue a notice
to file appellants brief within forty-five (45) days from receipt thereof. The notice
shall require that a certified true copy of the appealed decision or order be
appended to the brief. (Sec. 2, Rule 4, RIRCA [a])
(2) If the records are being transmitted personally, the Civil Cases Section shall
immediately examine the same in the presence of the filer and, if incomplete, issue a list
of the missing portions.
(3) If the transcript of stenographic notes are incomplete , the Civil Cases Section
shall send a notice to the stenographic reporter concerned to submit the missing
transcripts within thirty (30) days from notice. A notice shall also be issued to the
appellants counsel with a warning that failure on his part to take the necessary steps to
complete the transcripts within thirty (30) days from notice may result in the dismissal of
the appeal. (Rule 4, Sec. 2, RIRCA [a])
(4) Issuance of Notices. All notices mentioned in this Rule shall be issued in
the name of the Clerk of Court by the Division Clerk of Court or the Chief, Judicial
Records Division. (Sec. 3, Rule 4, RIRCA)
(5)
When Case Deemed Submitted. After the briefs have been filed or the
period for their filing has expired, the Judicial Records Division shall immediately
forward the rollo to the Division Clerk of Court with a certification that the records of the
case are complete. The Division Clerk of Court shall then report to the Division that the
case may be deemed submitted for decision. (n)
(b)

In Criminal Cases.

The original records of criminal cases shall be processed by the Criminal Cases
Section in accordance with this Section, insofar as applicable, and assigned a
corresponding CA-G.R. CR number. (Rule 5, Sec. 2, RIRCA [a])

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 30

(1) Docket and Other Lawful Fees and Deposit for Costs. No payment of
docket and other lawful fees, and deposit for costs shall be required in criminal cases
except in petitions for review of criminal cases and appeals from confiscation or
forfeiture of bail bonds. (Rule 5, Sec. 3, RIRCA [a])
(2) Appeals from Confiscation of Bond. Appeals from orders of confiscation or
forfeiture of bail bonds shall be treated as appeals in civil cases. The green-colored
rollo cover for civil cases shall be used over the cream-colored cover for criminal cases.
The case shall be re-captioned Republic of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, versus
(the name of the bondsman/surety), defendant-appellant. (Rule 5, Sec. 7, RIRCA)
(3) Appeals from Contempt of Court. Appeals from orders finding a person in
indirect contempt of court shall be treated as appeals in criminal cases. [n]
SEC. 5. Processing of Petitions for Review and Original Actions. (a) The petition shall be accompanied by an amount sufficient to cover payment
of the prescribed docket and other lawful fees and deposit for costs, unless the
petitioner is exempt from such payment and deposit. (Rule 6, Sec. 1, RIRCA [a])
(b) Upon filing of the petition and payment of the docket and other lawful fees as
well as the deposit for costs, the Special Cases Section shall prepare the rollo, record
the same in the docket book for special cases and then assign the corresponding CAG.R. SP number. Upon payment of the full docke t fee, the Special Cases Section shall
assign the petition a docketnumber, otherwise a UDK-SP number. A notation of the
payment or non-payment of the other lawful fee and deposit for costs or the
insufficiency thereof shall be made by the Special Cases Section on the first page of the
rollo. The rollo shall then be forwarded to the Raffle Staff for assignment to a Justice for
appropriate action. The Special Cases Section, through the Division Clerk of Court,
shall likewise make a simultaneous report to the Justice concerned of the non-payment
of the docket fee and other lawful fees and deposit for costs or the insufficiency thereof.
(Rule 6, Sec. 1[b] RIRCA [a])
(c) Certiorari, Prohibition, Mandamus and Quo Warranto. - The provisions of Rule
46 as far as applicable, Rules 65 and 66 of the Rules of Court shall govern petitions for
certiorari, prohibition and mandamus and petitions for quo warranto, respectively. (n)
(d) Habeas corpus. - The provisions of Rule 102 of the Rules of Court shall
govern petitions for habeas corpus. (n)

31 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

Rule VI
PROCESS OF ADJUDICATION
SEC. 1. Justice Assigned For Study and Report. Every case, whether appealed or
original, assigned to a Justice for study and report shall be retained by him even if he is
transferred to another Division in the same station. (Sec. 2, Rule 8, RIRCA [a])
SEC. 2. Justices Who May Participate in the Adjudication of Cases. In the
determination of the two other Justices who shall participate in the adjudication of
cases, the following shall be observed:
(a) The case shall be the subject of consultation among the members of the
Division;
(b) If the Justice to whom the case is assigned for study and report is
disqualified, his replacement shall be chosen by raffle from among the
Justices in the same station;
(c) If one or both of the other members of the Division is/are on leave of absence,
disqualified, transferred or no longer members of the Court, his/their
replacement shall be chosen by raffle from among the Justices in the same
station. The Division shall be called Special (No.) Division;
(d) When, in an original action or petition for review, any of these actions or
proceedings, namely: (1) giving due course; (2) granting writ of preliminary
injunction; (3) granting new trial; and (4) granting execution pending appeal
have been taken, the case shall remain with the Justice to whom the case is
assigned for study and report and the Justices who participated therein,
regardless of their transfer to other Divisions in the same station.
(e) If only one member of the Division who participated in any of the actions or
proceedings mentioned in the preceding paragraph remains, the Raffle
Committee shall automatically assign the case to him;
(f) In situations under paragraph (d) hereof, and if the ponente is no longer a
member of the Court or has transferred to another station but at least one
member of his Division remains, the Division Clerk of Court of the former shall
request the Raffle Committee for substitution of said ponente. However, if all
the members of said Division are no longer with the Court or in the same
station, the Judicial Records Division shall make said request. (n)
(g) Where the composition of a Divisionwhich decided a case has changed, the
Division which shall subsequently act on the case shall be called the Former
(No.) Division; and (Sec. 2, Rule 8, RIRCA [a])

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 32

SEC. 3. Power of the Court to Receive Evidence.


The Court may receive evidence in the following cases:
(a) In actions falling within its original jurisdiction, such as: (1) certiorari,
prohibition and mandamus under Rules 46 and 65 of the Rules of Court; (2) action for
annulment of judgment or final order under Rule 47 of the Rules of Court; (3) quo
warranto under Rule 66 of the Rules of Court; and (4) habeas corpus under Sections 2
and 12, Rule 102 of the Rules of Court;
(b) In appeals in civil cases where the court grants a new trial on the ground of
newly discovered evidence, pursuant to Sec. 3, Rule 53 of the Rules of Court;
(c) In appeals in criminal cases where the court grants a new trial on the ground
of newly discovered evidence, pursuant to Section 12, Rule 124 ofthe Rules of Court;
and
(d) In appeals involving claims for damages arising from provisional remedies.
Sec. 4.Hearing on Preliminary Injunction . The requirement of a hearing on an
application for preliminary injunction is satisfied with the issuance by the Court of a
resolution served upon the party sought to be enjoined requiring him to comment on
said application within a period of not more than ten (10) days from notice. Said party
may attach to his comment documents which may show why the application for
preliminary injunction should be denied. T he Court may require the party seeking the
injunctive relief to file his reply to the comment within five (5) days from receipt of the
latter.
If the party sought to be enjoined fails to file his comment as provided for in the
preceding paragraph, the Court may resolve the application on the basis of the petition
and its annexes.
The preceding paragraphs, notwithstanding, the Court may, in its sound
discretion, set the application for a preliminary injunction for hearing during which the
parties may present their respective positions or submit evidence in support thereof. (n)
SEC. 5. Action by a Justice. All members of the Division shall act upon an
application for a temporary restraining order and writ of preliminary injunction.
However, if the matter is of extreme urgency, and a Justice is absent, the two other
justices shall act upon the application. If only the ponente is present, then he shall act
alone upon the application. The action of the two Justices or of the ponente shall
however be submitted on the next working day to the absent member or members of
the Division for ratification, modification or recall.
SEC. 6. Judicial Action on Certain Petitions. (a) In petitions for review, after the
receipt of the respondents comment on the petition, or if no comment is filed upon the

33 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

expiration of the time to fileit, the Court may dismiss the petit ion if it finds the same to
be patently without merit, prosecuted manifestly for delay, or that the questions raised
therein are too unsubstantial to require consideration, otherwise, it shall give due course
to it.
Before a petition is given due course, the Court shall not require the court a quo
or quasi-judicial agency to elevate the original records of the case. The Court, however,
may require the court a quo or quasi-judicial agency to supply it with copies of relevant
pleadings and documents which the Court needs in acting upon the petition at that
stage of the proceedings.
If the petition is given due course, the Court may consider the case submitted for
decision or require the parties to submit their memoranda or set the case for oral
argument. The Court may require the court a quo or quasi-judicial agency to elevate
the records of the case. After the oral argument or upon submission of the memoranda
or upon the expiration of the time to file it, the case shall be deemed submitted for
decision.
(b) In petitions for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus , the provisions of Rule
65 of the Rules of Court shall apply. (n)
SEC. 7. The Justices Who Shall Act on Motions.
(a)
If during the completion-of-record stage in both appealed civil and criminal
cases, there is no unanimous concurrence of the members of the Division on the
resolution disposing of an interlocutory matter and a Division of Five is constituted, the
latter shall act on said matter only up to the resolution of a motion for reconsideration
thereof. The adjudication on the merits of the appeal shall be made by the current
members of the Division of the Justice to whom the case is assigned for study and
report.
(b)
A motion for reconsideration of a decision or resolution shall be acted
upon by the ponente and the other members of the Division, whether of three or five,
and whether regular or acting, who participated in the rendition of the decision or
resolution sought to be reconsidered, irrespective of whether such members are already
in other Divisions at the time the motion for reconsideration is filed or acted upon,
provided that they are still in the same station; otherwise Sec. 2, Rule VI shall apply.
(c) If the ponente is no longer a member of the Court or has inhibited himself
from acting on the motion or has transferred to another station, he shall be replaced by
another Justice who shall be chosen by raffle from among the remaining members of
the Division in the same station, whether regular or acting, who participated in the
rendition of the decision or resolution, and the resulting vacancy therein shall be filled by
raffle from among the other Justices in the same station.

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 34

If only one member of the Division, whether regular or acting, who participated in
the rendition of the decision or resolution, remains, the motion shall be sent to him by
the Raffle Committee and he shall act thereon with the participation of the other
members of his Division.
(d) If the ponente and all the members of the Division, whether regular or acting,
who rendered the decision or resolution are no longer members of the Court or no
longer in the same station, the case shall be raffled to any Justice in the same station
and the motion shall be acted upon by him with the participation of the other members
of his Division.
SEC. 8. Priorities in Adjudication of Cases. Subject to existing laws and as far as
practicable, cases shall be adjudicated in accordance with the following priorities:
(a) In Civil Cases.
(1) Those where temporary restraining orders, writs of preliminary injunction or
execution pending appeal or other auxiliary writs were issued;
(2) Those involving a prejudicial question; and
(3) The oldest cases submitted for decision.
(b) In Criminal Cases.
(1) Those where the accused is detained;
(2) Those where the Solicitor General recommends the acquittal of the accused;
and
(3) The oldest cases submitted for decision.
(c)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)

In Original Actions and Petitions for Review.


Habeas corpus cases;
Agrarian cases;
Original petitions where injunctive reliefs have been granted; and
Petitions for review which have been pending in the Court for a long time.
(Sec. 3, Rule 8, RIRCA [a])

SEC. 9. Study, Report and Deliberation on the Case.


The Justice to whom the case is assigned for study and report shall submit a
written report thereon to the other members of his Division for consultation. The
Chairman of the Division shall include the case in an agenda for a meeting of the
Division for its deliberation. After such deliberation, if the other members agree with the
report, the ponente shall write the decision for signature and immediate promulgation.
Minutes of the meeting shall be kept. (Sec. 4, Rule 8, RIRCA [a])
SEC. 10. Procedure in Case of Dissent. - When the unanimous vote of the members of
the Division cannot be attained, the following shall be observed:

35 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

(a) Within fifteen (15) days from the date of the deliberation, the dissenting
Justice shall furnish a copy of his written dissent to the two other members of his
Division. The written dissenting opinion shall not be attached to the rollo. The Chairman
of the Division shall then in writing refer the case, together with the rollo, to the Raffle
Committee which shall designate two Justices by raffle from among the Justices in the
same station to sit temporarily with them, forming a Special Division of Five.
However, for compelling reasons, the Chairman, without awaiting the written
dissenting opinion, may forthwith request the Raffle Committee to designate by raffle
the two additional members. The dissenting Justice, however, shall submit his written
dissenting opinion to all members of the Special Division of Five within ten (10) days
from its constitution.
(b) The Special Division of Five shall retain the case until its final disposition
regardless of reorganization provided that all the members thereof remain in the same
station. Any member of the Division of Five may write a separate concurring or
dissenting opinion. (Sec. 4, Rule 8, RIRCA [a])
(c) After a member of the Division has expressed his dissent in writing and the
Special Division of Five is thus constituted, it shall retain the case until its final
disposition despite changes in its membership caused by reorganization or other
causes, provided that they remain in the same station. (Supreme Court Resolution
dated May 25, 1993)
(d) The concurrence of a majority shall be necessary for the pronouncement of a
decision or resolution of the Special Division of Five. The most senior among the five
members shall be the Chairman.
(e) After due consultation, the members of the Special Division of Five whose
opinions constitute the majority shall choose from among them the ponente.
(f) Any member of the Special Division of Five may write a separate concurring or
dissenting opinion which, together with the majority opinion, shall be promulgated and
attached to the rollo. (n)
(g) If the consultation in the Special Division of Five results in a unanimous
concurrence, all its members shall sign the decision or resolution.
SEC. 11. Certification
Every decision shall be accompanied by a certification signed by the Chairman or
the most senior member as the Acting Chairman of the Division in the following form:

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 36

CERTIFICATION
Pursuant to Article VIII, Section 13 of the Constitution, it is hereby
certified that the conclusions in the above decision were reached in
consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of
the Court. (Sec. 5, Rule 8, RIRCA [a])
SEC. 12. Resolutions . Any disposition other than on the merits shall be embodied in
a resolution. (Sec. 6, Rule 8, RIRCA) Any action modifying or reversing a decision of
the Division shall be denominated as Amended Decision. (n)
SEC. 13. Promulgation of Decisions and Resolutions. Promulgation of decisions and
resolutions shall be the direct responsibility of the Division Clerk of Court.
(a)
Promulgation is made by filing the decision or resolution with the Division
Clerk of Court who shall forthwith annotate the date and time thereof and attest to it by
his signature thereon.
(b)
The Division Clerk of Court shall record in the Promulgation Book the
docket number, title of the case, the ponente and other members, nature of the
document (whether decision or resolution), and the action taken by the Division. The
Promulgation Book shall be under his care and custody.
(c)
Within one working day from promulgation of a decision or resolution, the
Division Clerk of Court shall send notices and copies thereof in sealed envelopes to the
parties through their counsel, either personally or by registered mail. However, a
judgment of acquittal of an accused who is detained, shall, whenever practicable, be
served personally on the Director of Prisons or whoever has official custody of said
accused.
(d)
Immediately after promulgation of a decision or resolution, the Division
Clerk of Court shall forward the original and two copies thereof to the Court Reporter
and a copy each to the Information and Statistical Data Division and the Judicial
Records Division, the latter to forward the same copy to the Archives Section. (Sec. 8,
Rule 8, RIRCA [a])
SEC. 15. Effect of Filing an Appeal in the Supreme Court. No motion for
reconsideration or rehearing shall be acted upon if the movant has previously filed in the
Supreme Court a petition for review on certiorari or a motion for extension of time to file
such petition. If such petition or motion is subsequently filed, the motion for
reconsideration pending in this Court shall be deemed abandoned. (Sec. 8, Rule 9,
RIRCA)

37 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

RULE VII
ENTRY OF JUDGMENT AND REMAND OF CASES
SEC. 1. Entry of Judgment. Unless a motion for reconsideration or new trial is filed or
an appeal taken to the Supreme Court, judgments and final resolutions of the Court
shall be entered upon expiration of fifteen (15) days from notice to the parties.
(a) With respect to the criminal aspect, entry of judgment in criminal cases shall
be made immediately when the accused is acquitted or his withdrawal of appeal is
granted. However, if the motion withdrawing an appeal is si gned by the appellant only,
the Court shall first take steps to ensure that the motion is made voluntarily, intelligently
and knowingly or may require his counsel to comment thereon.
When there are several accused in a case, some of whom appealed and others
did not, entry of judgment shall be made only as to those who did not appeal. The
same rule shall apply where there are several accused in a case, some of whom
withdrew their appeal and others did not.
(b)
Entry of judgment in civil cases shall be made immediately when an
appeal is withdrawn or when a decision based on a compromise agreement is rendered.
(Secs. 1 and 7, Rule 11, RIRCA [a])
Sec. 5. Entry of Judgment and Final Resolution. If no appeal or motion for new trial
or reconsideration is filed within the time provided in these Rules, the judgment or final
resolution shall forthwith be entered by the clerk in the book of entries of judgments.
The date when the judgment or final resolution becomes executory shall be deemed as
the date of its entry. The record shall cont ain the dispositive part of the judgment or
final resolution and shall be signed by the clerk, with a certificate that such judgment or
final resolution has become final and executory.
SEC. 6. Transmittal of Records. Within five (5) working days from receipt of the rollo,
the Chief of the Archives Section shall cause the remand of the original records to the
court or quasi-judicial agency of origin. (Sec. 8, Rule 11, RIRCA [a])

B. SANDIGANBAYAN
PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 1606
REVISING PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 1486 CREATING A SPECIAL COURT TO
BE KNOWN AS "SANDIGANBAY AN" AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES (As amended
by RA 7975 and RA 8249)
SECTION 5. Proceedings, how conducted; votes required. The unanimous
vote of the three justices in a division shall be necessary for the pronouncement of a

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 38

judgment. In the event that the three justices do not reach a unanimous vote, the
Presiding Judge shall designate two other justices from among the members of the
Court to sit temporarily with them, forming a division of five justices, and the
concurrence of a majority of such division shall be necessary for rendering judgment.
SECTION 6. Maximum period for termination of cases. As far as practicable, the trial
of cases before the Sandiganbayan once commenced shall be continuous until
terminated and the judgment shall be rendered within three (3) months from the date
the case was submitted for decision.
SECTION 7. Form, finality and enforcement of decisions. Decisions and final orders
of the Sandiganbayan shall contain complete findings of facts on all issues properly
raised before it.
A petition for reconsideration of any final order or decision may be filed within
(15) days from promulgation or notice of the final order or judgment, and such petition
for reconsideration shall be decided within thirty (30) days from submission thereon.
Decisions and final orders shall be subject to review on certiorari by the Supreme
Court in accordance with Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. The Supreme Court shall
decide any case on appeal promptly and without the necessity of placing it upon the
regular calendar. Whenever, in any case decided, the death penalty shall have been
imposed, the records shall be forwarded to the Supreme Court, whether the accused
shall have appealed or not, for review and judgment, as law and justice shall dictate.
Final judgments and orders of the Sandiganbayan shall be executed and
enforced in the manner provided by law.
SECTION 8. Transfer of cases. As of the date of the effectivity of this decree, any
case cognizable by the Sandiganbayan within its exclusive jurisdiction where none of
the accused has been arraigned shall be transferred to the Sandiganbayan.
\SECTION 9. Rule-making Power. The Sandiganbayan shall have the power to
promulgate its own rules of procedure and, pending such promulgation, the Rules of
Court shall govern its proceedings.
SECTION 10. Authority over internal affairs. The Sandiganbayan shall administer its
own internal affairs and may adopt such rules governing the constitution of its divisions,
the allocation of cases among them, the rotation of justices and other matters relating to
its business.

39 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

REVISED INTERNAL RULES OF THE SANDIGANBAYAN


PURSUANT to Section 9 of Presidential Decree No. 1606, as amended, the
Sandiganbayan adopts and promulgates the following REVISED INTERNAL RULES OF
THE SANDIGANBAYAN.
RULE III
Powers and Functions of the Sandiganbayan
SECTION 1. Exercise of Adjudicatory Powers and Functions. The Sandiganbayan
shall exercise its adjudicatory powers, functions and duties through its five (5) Divisions.
It sits en banc for the exercise of its administrative, ceremonial and non-adjudicatory
functions.
SECTION 2. Matters Cognizable by
Sandiganbayan shall sit en banc to:

the

Sandiganbayan

En

banc.

The

(a)
Promulgate rules or orders, amend, revise or repeal existing rules or
orders or parts thereof, and formulate and adopt policies relative to administrative
matters, such as the distribution of cases and the internal operation and management of
the Court.
(b)
Recommend to the Supreme Court the appointment of the Clerk of Court,
Division Clerks of Court and other court employees chosen from a list of all qualified
applicants for each vacant position prepared in accordance with the Civil Service Law
rules and regulations, except for positions that are confidential in nature and coterminous with the term of office of a particu lar Associate Justice to whom they are
assigned who shall make the proper endorsement to the Sandiganbayan en banc for
recommendation to the Supreme Court.
(c)
Act on organizational matters, such as the creation or abolition of offices,
unit or service or their regrouping or merger as the exigencies of the service may
require.
(d)
Receive foreign and local dignitaries, important guests and visitors, honor
a colleague or retiring member of the Sandiganbayan, and hold appropriate funeral
services for deceased members.
(e)
Adopt uniform administrative measures, procedures, and policies for the
protection and preservation of the integrity of the judicial processes, the speedy
disposition of cases and the promotion of efficiency of the personnel.
(f)

Provide a forum for discussion of various issues or matters.

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 40

(g)
Take up other administrative matters which the Presiding Justice or any
member of the Sandiganbayan may suggest for consideration.
SECTION 3. Supreme Court Creation of Special Division. The Sandiganbayan en
banc may request or recommend to the Supreme Court the creation of a Special
Division to try cases where compelling reasons and the interest of justice so require.

PART II
Original Actions
RULE IV
Sessions and Trials
SECTION 1. Official Station; Place of Holding Sessions. The Sandiganbayan shall
have its principal office in the Metro Manila area and shall hold sessions thereat for the
trial and resolution of cases filed with it: Provided, however, that cases originating from
Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao, shall be heard in the region of origin, except only when
the greater convenience of the parties and of the witnesses or other compelling
considerations require the contrary, in which instance a case originating from one region
may be heard in another region: Provided, further, that for this purpose the Presiding
Justice shall authorize any Division or Divisions of the Sandiganbayan to hold sessions
at any time and place outside Metro Manila, and; where the greater interest of justice so
requires, outside the Philippines.
SECTION 2. Support Personnel and Facilities In Sessions Outside of Principal Office in
Metro Manila. In sessions outside of its principal office in Metro Manila, the
Sandiganbayan may require the services of the personnel and the use of facilities of the
courts or other government offices where any of the Divisions is holding sessions and
the personnel of such courts or offices shall be subject to the orders of the
Sandiganbayan acting through the Chairman of the Division.
SECTION 3. Regular Court Sessions.
(a)
Sandiganbayan En banc The regular sessions of the Sandiganbayan
en banc shall be held at least twice a month on a Friday morning, particularly on the first
and third week of the month. The Presiding Justice or at least eight (8) Associate
Justices may call a special session at another date and time.
(b)
Divisions Regular sessions for trial of cases brought to and cognizable
by the Sandiganbayan shall be from 8:30 A.M. to 12:00 noon or from 2:00 P.M. to 4:30
P.M., from Monday to Friday. The Divisi on Chairman, however, for urgent and valid
reasons, may schedule the hearing of a case assigned to his Division on other dates
and time after consultation with the parties.

41 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

RULE VII
Motions
SECTION 1. Motion Day. Except for motions which may be acted upon ex parte, all
motions shall be scheduled for hearings on a Friday, or if that day is a non-working
holiday, on the next working day.
Motions requiring immediate action may be acted upon on shorter notice.
In appealed cases, the provision of Sec. 3, Rule 49 of the 1997 Rules of Civil
Procedure, as amended, on Motions shall apply.
SECTION 2. Resolution on Interlocutory or Incidental Motions. Rulings on all written
motions on interlocutory or incidental matters submitted to any regular Division for
resolution shall be reached in consultation among and by the unanimous vote of the
three (3) Justices participating in the consideration thereof: Provided, however, that
rulings on oral motions or objections made in the course of the trial or hearing shall be
made by the Chairman of the Division: Provided, further, that oral motions or objections
on substantial but interlocutory or incidental matters may be ordered reduced into
writing and shall likewise be resolved by the unanimous vote of the three (3) Justices of
the Division.
In case a unanimous vote cannot be obtained, a Special Division of five (5)
Justices shall be constituted pursuant to Section 1 (b), Rule VIII. A majority vote of such
Special Division shall suffice to decide interlocutory or incidental motions.
A demurrer to evidence shall be resolved or decided within ninety (90) days from
its submission.

RULE VIII
Rendition of Judgment or Final Order
SECTION 1. Votes Required to Decide.
(a)
En banc The vote of at least eight (8) members of the Sandiganbayan
shall be required for the adoption of a resolution.
(b)
In Division The unanimous vote of three (3) Justices in a Division shall
be necessary for the rendition of a judgment or final order. In the event a unanimous
vote is not obtained, the Presiding Justice shall designate by raffle and on rotation basis
two (2) Justices from all the other members of the Sandiganbayan to sit temporarily with

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 42

them, forming a Special Division of five (5) Justices, and the vote of a majority of such
Special Division shall be necessary for the rendition of a judgment or final order.
SECTION 2. Procedure in Deciding Cases. The conclusions of a regular or Special
Division of the Sandiganbayan in any case submitted to it for decision shall be reached
in consultation among the members thereof before the case is assigned to one of them
for the writing of the opinion of the Division.
A certification to this effect signed by the Presiding Justice shall be issued and a
copy thereof attached to the record of the case and served upon the parties. Any
Member who took no part, dissented or abstained from a decision or resolution must
state the reason therefor.
SECTION 3. Judgment in Joint Trials. In a joint trial involving more than one case,
the Division may render a joint or separate judgment when appropriate. In case there
are more than one (1) accused, the Division may also render judgment, for or against
one or more of the accused, when proper. In either case, where the required unanimous
vote is not secured, a Special Division of five (5) Justices shall be constituted to resolve
the remaining case or the criminal or civil liability of the remaining accused. In such
case, a vote of the majority shall be required.
SECTION 4. Promulgation of Judgment. A judgment in a criminal case of a Division
of the Sandiganbayan shall be promulgated by reading the judgment or sentence in the
presence of the accused and any member of the Division which rendered the judgment.
In case an incident arises during the promulgation, the same shall be submitted
in writing for resolution to the Division which rendered the judgment.
Where the judgment is promulgated outside Metro Manila, the Division which
rendered the judgment may authorize another Division sitting outside Metro Manila to
promulgate the judgment and resolve all incidents during the promulgation therein.
In the absence of the accused, Sec. 6, Rule 120 of the Revised Rules of Court
shall apply.

PART IV
Provisions Common to Original and Appealed Cases
and Petitions for Review
RULE XII
Assignment, Distribution and Consolidation of Cases

43 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

SECTION 1. Distribution of Cases. All cases filed with the Sandiganbayan shall be
distributed among the five (5) Divisions for hearing and decision by regular raffle at 1:30
P.M. of every Friday or if that day is a non-working day, on the next succeeding working
day, at the session hall of the First Division. A special raffle of a case may be conducted
by the Raffle Committee before the next regular raffle day for valid and urgent reasons
determined by the Chairman of the Raffle Committee or, in his absence, by any of the
members thereof.
SECTION 2. Consolidation of Cases. Cases arising from the same incident or series
of incidents, or involving common questions of fact and law, may be consolidated in the
Division to which the case bearing the lowest docket number is raffled.
(a)
Before Cases Are Raffled Should the propriety of consolidation appear
upon the filing of the cases concerned as determined by the Raffle Committee, all such
cases shall be consolidated and considered as one case for purposes of the raffle and
inventory of pending cases assigned to each of the Divisions.
(b)
After Cases Are Raffled Should t he propriety of such consolidation
become apparent only after the cases are raffled, consolidation may be effected upon
written motion of a litigant concerned filed with the Divisi on taking cognizance of the
case to be consolidated. If the motion is granted, consolidation shall be made to the
Division in which the case with the lowest docket number is assigned. The Division to
which the cases are consolidated shall transfer to the Division from which the
consolidated cases came, an equivalent number of cases of approximately the same
age, nature and stage in the proceedings, with proper notice to the parties in said
cases.
SECTION 3. Assignment of Cases; Permanent. Cases assigned to a Division of the
Sandiganbayan shall remain with said Division notwithstanding changes in its
composition. All matters raised therein shall be resolved by all the Justices who are
members of the Division at the time said matters were submitted for resolution.
However, only such Justices who are members of the Division at the time the case is
submitted for decision shall take part in the resolution of the case. If a member of the
Division ceases to be a member of the Sandiganbayan for any reason whatsoever, the
Associate Justice chosen to fill the vacancy in accordance with the manner provided in
Sec. 4 or 5, Rule II of these Rules shall participate in the resolution of said case.
SECTION 4. Cases Submitted for Decision; Assignment to Ponente.
(a)
In original actions, a case shall be considered submitted for decision upon
the filing of the last pleading, brief or memorandum required by the Rules of Court or by
the Sandiganbayan or the expiration of the period to do so.
(b)
In appealed cases and petitions for review, the case shall be deemed
submitted for decision or resolution upon the filing of the last pleading, brief or
memorandum required by the Revised Rules of Court or by the Court itself.

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 44

(c)
Motions and other incidents in a case shall be deemed submitted for
resolution when so declared by the Court.
(d)
Within five (5) days from submittal of the case or matter for decision or
resolution, the Chairman of the Division shall assign by raffle a member thereof to study
and make a report on the case or matter. If the Chairman fails to make the assignment,
he shall be deemed to be the one to study and report on the case.
(e)
Within ninety (90) days from the time the case was submitted for decision
or resolution, the Justice to whom the case is assigned for study and report shall submit
a written report thereon to the other members of the Division for consultation. The
Chairman shall include the case in an agenda for a meeting of the Division for its
deliberation.
(f)
After such deliberation, if the other members of the Division agree with the
report, the member to whom the case is assigned for study and report shall write the
decision for signature and immediate promulgation. Minutes of the meeting shall be
kept.
(g)
Within ten (10) days from the date of the deliberation, a justice may submit
his dissent to the other members of the Division. The written dissenting opinion shall not
be attached to the rollo. The Chairman of the Division shall then refer the case to the
Presiding Justice who shall designate by raffle two justices on rotation basis from all the
other members of the Sandiganbayan to sit temporarily with them, forming a Special
Division of Five.
(h)
After a member of the Division has expressed his dissent in writing and
the Special Division of Five is thus constituted, it shall retain the case until its final
disposition despite changes in its membership caused by reorganization or other
causes.
(i)
After due consultation, the members of the Special Division of Five whose
opinion constitute the majority shall choose from among them the ponente. Any member
may write a separate concurring or dissenting opinion, which, together with the majority
opinion shall be duly promulgated and attached to the rollo.
(j)
If the consultation in the Special Division of Five results in a unanimous
concurrence, all its members shall sign the decision or resolution.
(k)
If the justice to whom the case is assigned for study and report is
transferred to another Division as its permanent member, he shall bring with him and
write his report of the cases assigned to him in his original Division together with the
other members of the Division to which the case was submitted for decision.

45 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

The Division from which the Justice to whom the case is assigned for study and
report came shall be known as a Special Division.
(l)
If the Justice to whom the case is assigned for study and report ceases to
be a member of the Sandiganbayan, due to retirement, resignation or for any other
cause, his pending cases shall remain with the Division to which they were assigned.
However, in appropriate cases and for compelling reasons, the Chairman may assign
said cases to the new appointee for study and report.
(m) An Associate Justice who is about to retire shall not be assigned cases for
study and report three (3) months before his retirement date.

C. COMMERCIAL AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY COURTS


1. RE:
INTERIM
RULES
OF
PROCEDURE
ON
CORPORATE
REHABILITATION [A.M. No. 00- 8-10-SC. November 21, 2000.]
RULE 3
General Provisions
SECTION 1. Nature of Proceedings. Any proceeding initiated under these Rules
shall be considered in rem. Jurisdiction over all those a ffected by the proceedings shall
be considered as acquired upon publication of the notice of the commencement of the
proceedings in any newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines in the manner
prescribed by these Rules.
The proceedings shall also be summary and non-adversarial in nature.
The following pleadings are prohibited:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.

Motion to dismiss;
Motion for a bill of particulars;
Motion for new trial or for reconsideration;
Petition for relief;
Motion for extension;
Memorandum;
Motion for postponement;
Reply or Rejoinder;
Third party complaint; and
Intervention.

Any pleading, motion, opposition, defense, or claim filed by any interested party
shall be supported by verified statements that the affiant has read the same and that the
factual allegations therein are true and correct of his personal knowledge or based on
Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 46

authentic records and shall contain as annexes such documents as may be deemed by
the party submitting the same as supportive of the allegations in the affidavits. The court
may decide matters on the basis of affidavits and other documentary evidence. Where
necessary, the court shall conduct clarificatory hearings before resolving any matter
submitted to it for resolution.
SECTION 2. Venue. Petitions for rehabilitation pursuant to these Rules shall be filed
in the Regional Trial Court having jurisdiction over the territory where the debtor's
principal office is located.
SECTION 3. Service of Pleadings and Documents. When so authorized by the court,
any pleading and/or document required by these Rules may be filed with the court
and/or served upon the other parties by facsimile transmission (fax) or electronic mail
(e-mail). In such cases, the date of transmission shall be deemed to be the date of
service. In case of a voluminous pleading or document, the court may, motu proprio or
upon motion, waive the requirement of service, provided, a copy thereof together with
all its attachments is duly filed with the court and is made available for examination and
reproduction by any party, and provided, fu rther, that a notice of such filing and
availability is duly served on the parties.
SECTION 4. Trade Secrets and Other Confidential Information. On motion or on its
own initiative, the court may issue an order to protect tradesecrets or other confidential
research, development, or commercial information belonging to the debtor.
SECTION 5. Executory Nature of Orders. Any order issued by the court under these
Rules is immediately executory. A petition for review or an appeal therefrom shall not
stay the execution of the order unless restrained or enjoined by the appellate court. The
review of any order or decision of the court or an appeal therefrom shall be in
accordance with the Rules of Court; Provided, however, that the reliefs ordered by the
trial or appellate courts shall take into account the need for resolution of proceedings in
a just, equitable, and speedy manner.

RULE 4
Rehabilitation
SECTION 1. Who May Petition. Any debtor who foresees the impossibility of
meeting its debts when they respectively fall due, or any creditor or creditors holding at
least twenty-five percent (25%) of the debtor's total liabilities, may petition the proper
Regional Trial Court to have the debtor placed under rehabilitation.
SECTION 5. Rehabilitation Plan. The rehabilitation plan shall include (a) the desired
business targets or goals and the duration and coverage of the rehabilitation; (b) the
terms and conditions of such rehabilitation which shall include the manner of its
implementation, giving due regard to the interests of secured creditors; (c) the material

47 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

financial commitments to support the rehabilitation plan; (d) the means for the execution
of the rehabilitation plan, which may include conversion of the debts or any portion
thereof to equity, restructuring of the debts, dacion en pago, or sale of assets or of the
controlling interest; (e) a liquidation analysis that estimates the proportion of the claims
that the creditors and shareholders would receive if the debtor's properties were
liquidated; and (f) such other relevant information to enable a reasonable investor to
make an informed decision on the feasibility of the rehabilitation plan.
SECTION 6. Stay Order. If the court finds the petition to be sufficient in form and
substance, it shall, not later than five (5) days from the filing of the petition, issue an
Order (a) appointing a Rehabilitation Receiver and fixing his bond; (b) staying
enforcement of all claims, whether for money or otherwise and whether such
enforcement is by court action or otherwise, against the debtor, its guarantors and
sureties not solidarily liable with the debtor; (c) prohibiting the debtor from selling,
encumbering, transferring, or disposing in any manner any of its properties except in the
ordinary course of business;(d) prohibiting the debtor from making any payment of its
liabilities outstanding as at the date of filing of the petition; (e) prohibiting the debtor's
suppliers of goods or services from withholding supply of goods and services in the
ordinary course of business for as long as the debtor makes payments for the services
and goods supplied after the issuance of the stay order; (f) directing the payment in full
of all administrative expenses incurred after the issuance of the stay order; (g) fixing the
initial hearing on the petition not earlier than forty five (45) days but not later than sixty
(60) days from the filing thereof; (h) directing the petitioner to publish the Order in a
newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines once a week for two (2) consecutive
weeks; (i) directing all creditors and all interested parties (including the Securities and
Exchange Commission) to file and serve on the debtor a verified comment on or
opposition to the petition, with supporting affidavits and documents, not later than ten
(10) days before the date of the initial hearing and putting them on notice that their
failure to do so will bar them from participating in the proceedings; and (j) directing the
creditors and interested parties to secure from the court copies of the petition and its
annexes within such time as to enable themselves to file their comment on or opposition
to the petition and to prepare for the initial hearing of the petition.
SECTION 7. Service of Stay Order on Rehabilitation Receiver. The petitioner shall
immediately serve a copy of the stay order on the Rehabilitation Receiver appointed by
the court, who shall manifest his acceptance or non-acceptance of his appointment not
later than ten (10) days from receipt of the order.
SECTION 9. Initial Hearing. On or before the initial hearing, the petitioner shall file
the publisher's affidavit showing that the publication requirements specified above had
been complied with. If the court is satisfied that said jurisdictional requirement had been
complied with, it shall summarily hear the parties on any matter relating to the petition
as well as any comment and/or opposition filed in connection therewith. The court may
hold additional clarificatory hearings where there is need to further clarify matters but in
no event shall such additional hearings be held beyond one hundred eighty (180) days
from the date of the initial hearing.

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 48

If, after the initial hearing, the court is satisfied that there is merit in the petition, it
shall give due course to the petition and immediately refer the petition and its annexes
to the Rehabilitation Receiver who shall evaluate the rehabilitation plan and submit his
recommendations to the court not laterthan one hundred twenty ( 120) days from the
date of the initial hearing.
SECTION 11. Period of the Stay Order
. The stay order sha ll be effective from the
date of its issuance until the dismissal of the petition or the termination of the
rehabilitation proceedings.
The petition shall be dismissed if no rehabilitation plan is approved by the court
upon the lapse of one hundred eighty (180) days from the date of the initial hearing. The
court may grant an extension beyond this period only if it appears by convincing and
compelling evidence that the debtor may successfully be rehabilitated. In no instance,
however, shall the period for approving or disapproving a rehabilitation plan exceed
eighteen (18) months from the date of filing of the petition.
SECTION 12. Relief from, Modification, or Termination of Stay Order. The court
may, on motion or motu proprio, terminate, modify, or set conditions for the continuance
of the stay order, or relieve a claim from the coverage thereof upon showing that (a) any
of the allegations in the petition, or any of the contents of any attachment, or the
verification thereof has ceased to be true; (b) a creditor does not have adequate
protection over property securing its claim; or (c) the debtor's secured obligation is more
than the fair market value of the property subject of the stay and such property is not
necessary for the rehabilitation of the debtor.

Appendix "A"

A.M. NO. 00-11-03-SC RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CERTAIN


BRANCHES OF REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS TO TRY AND
DECIDE
CASES
FORMERLY
COGNIZABLE
BY
THE
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
To implement the provisions of Sec. 5.2 of Republic Act No. 8799 (The
Securities Regulation Code), and in the interest of a speedy and efficient
administration of justice and subject to the guidelines hereinafter set forth, the
following branches of the Regional Trial Courts (RTC) are hereby designated to try
and decide Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) cases enumerated in Sec. 5
of P.D. No. 902-A (Reorganization of t he Securities and Exchange Commission),
arising within their respective territorial jurisdictions with respect to the National Capital
Judicial Region and within the respective provinces in the First to the Twelfth Judicial
Regions:

49 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION


FIRST JUDICIAL REGION
SECOND JUDICIAL REGION
THIRD JUDICIAL REGION
FOURTH JUDICIAL REGION
FIFTH JUDICIAL REGION
SIXTH JUDICIAL REGION
SEVENTH JUDICIAL REGION
NINTH JUDICIAL REGION
TENTH JUDICIAL REGION
ELEVENTH JUDICIAL REGION
TWELFTH JUDICIAL REGION
The following guidelines shall be observed:
1. In multiple sala courts where one (1) or more branches of the RTC are
herein designated as special courts, there will be no unloading of cases
already pending in the branches designated. They shall continue to try and
decide the said cases in addition to the SEC cases. In the meantime, in
view of the temporary imbalance of caseload as a result of the transfer of
SEC cases, the Executive Judge concerned shall exclude them in the raffle
of newly filed cases in their station until their workload equals to that of the
other branches, in which event they shall be included in the raffle of other
civil and criminal cases.
2. The trial and disposition of SEC cases shall be in accordance with the
procedure to be promulgated by the Supreme Court.
3. In case of temporary incapacity, absence, disability or inhibition of the judge
of the designated special court in multiple sala courts where one (1) or more
branches of the RTC have been designated, the pairing system for multiple

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 50

sala stations subject of Circular No. 7 dated 23 September 1974, as


amended, shall apply.
4. The branches herein designated shall continue to perform the functions of
special courts even after they shall have become vacant due to retirement,
death, incapacity, dismissal, resignation, transfer, detail or promotion of the
incumbent judges herein named. Their successors, whether permanent or
temporary, shall act as Presiding Judges of these special courts unless the
Court directs otherwise.
5. In provinces (for the First to the Twelfth Judicial Regions) where there are
no designated special courts, the Executive Judge of the station where new
SEC cases will be filed shall consult the Supreme Court thru the Office of
the Court Administrator.
6. This Resolution shall take effect on the fifteenth day of December, 2000 and
shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation not later than the
28th day of November 2000.
Promulgated this 21st day of November 2000.

2. RE: PROPOSED INTERIM RULES OF PROCEDURE GOVERNING INTRACORPORATE CONTROVERSIES UNDER R.A. 8799 (A.M. No. 01-2-04-SC,
March 13, 2001)
RULE 1
General Provisions
SECTION 1. (a) Cases covered These Rules shall gov ern the procedure to be
observed in civil cases involving the following:
(1) Devices or schemes employed by, or any act of, the board of directors,
business associates, officers or partners, amounting to fraud or misrepresentation which
may be detrimental to the interest of the public and/or of the stockholders, partners, or
members of any corporation, partnership, or association;
(2) Controversies arising out of intra-corporate, partnership, or association
relations, between and among stockholders, members, or associates; and between, any
or all of them and the corporation, partnership, or association of which they are
stockholders, members, or associates, respectively;
(3) Controversies in the election or appointment of directors, trustees, officers, or
managers of corporations, partnerships, or associations;

51 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

(4) Derivative suits; and


(5) Inspection of corporate books.
(b) Prohibition against nuisance and harassment suits. Nuisance and
harassment suits are prohibited. In determining whether a suit is a nuisance or
harassment suit, the court shall consider, among others, the following:
(1) The extent of the shareholding or interest of the initiating stockholder or
member,
(2) Subject matter of the suit;
(3) Legal and factual basis of the complaint;
(4) Availability of appraisal rights for the act or acts complained of; and
(5) Prejudice or damage to the corporation, partnership, or association in relation
to the relief sought.
In case of nuisance or harassment suits, the court may, motu proprio or upon
motion, forthwith dismiss the case.
SECTION 2. Suppletory application of the Rules of Court. The Rules of Court, in so
far as they may be applicable and are not inconsistent with these Rules, are hereby
adopted to form an integral part of these Rules.
SECTION 3. Construction. These Rules shall be liberally construed in order to
promote their objective of securing a just, summary, speedy and inexpensive
determination of every action or proceeding.
SECTION 4. Executory nature of decisions and orders. All decisions and orders
issued under these Rules shall immediately be executory. No appeal or petition taken
therefrom shall stay the enforcement or implementation of the decision or order, unless
restrained by an appellate court. Interlocutory orders shall not be subject to appeal.
SECTION 5. Venue. All actions covered by these Rules shall be commenced and
tried in the Regional Trial Court which has jurisdiction over the principal office of the
corporation, partnership, or association concerned. Where the principal office of the
corporation, partnership or association is registered in the Securities and Exchange
Commission as Metro Manila, the action must be filed in the city or municipality where
the head office is located.
SECTION 6. Service of pleadings. When so authorized by the court, any pleading
and/or document required by these Rules may be filed with the court and/or served
upon the other parties by facsimile transmission (fax) or electronic mail (e-mail). In such
cases, the date of transmission shall be deemed to be prima facie the date of service.
SECTION 7. Signing of pleadings, motions and other papers. Every pleading,
motion, and other paper of a party represented by an attorney shall be signed by at

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 52

least one attorney of record in the attorney's individual name, whose address shall be
stated. A party who is not repr esented by an attorney shall sign the pleading, motion, or
other paper and state his address.
The signature of an attorney or party constitutes a certification by the signer that
he has read the pleading, motion, or other paper; that to the best of his knowledge,
information, and belief formed after reasonable inquiry, it is well grounded in fact and is
warranted by existing law or a good faith argument for the extension, modification, or
reversal of existing jurisprudence; and that it is not interposed for any improper purpose,
such as to harass or to cause unnecessary delay or needless increase in the cost of
litigation.
If a pleading, motion, or other paper is not signed, it shall be stricken off the
record unless it is promptly signed by the pleader or movant, after he is notified of the
omission.
SECTION 8. Prohibited pleadings. The following pleadings are prohibited:
(1) Motion to dismiss;
(2) Motion for a bill of particulars;
(3) Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of judgment or order, or for reopening of trial;
(4) Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, affidavits or any other paper,
except those filed due to clearly compelling reasons. Such motion must be
verified and under oath; and
(5) Motion for postponement and other motions of similar intent, except those
filed due to clearly compelling reasons. Such motion must be verified and
under oath.
SECTION 9. Assignment of cases. All cases filed under these Rules shall be tried by
judges designated by the Supreme Court to hear and decide cases transferred from the
Securities and Exchange Commission to the Regional Trial Courts and filed directly with
said courts pursuant to Republic Act No. 8799, otherwise known as the Securities and
Regulation Code.

RULE 2
Commencement of Action and Pleadings
SECTION 1. Commencement of action. An action under these Rules is commenced
by the filing of a verified complaint with the proper Regional Trial Court.

53 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

SECTION 2. Pleadings allowed. The only pleadings allowed to be filed under these
Rules are the complaint, answer, compulsory counterclaims or cross-claims pleaded in
the answer, and the answer to the counterclaims or cross-claims.
SECTION 3. Verification. The complaint and the answer shall be verified by an
affidavit stating that the affiant has read the pleading and the allegations therein are true
and correct based on his own personal knowledge or on authentic records.
SECTION 4. Complaint. The complaint shall state or contain:
(1) the names, addresses, and other relevant personal or juridical circumstances
of the parties;
(2) all facts material and relevant to the plaintiff's cause or causes of action,
which shall be supported by affidavits of the plaintiff or his witnesses and
copies of documentary and other evidence supportive of such cause or
causes of action;
(3) the law, rule, or regulation relied upon, violated, or sought to be enforced;
(4) a certification that (a) the plaintiff has not theretofore commenced any action
or filed any claim involving the same issues in any court, tribunal or quasijudicial agency, and, to the best of his knowledge, no such other action or
claim is pending therein; (b) if there is such other action or claim, a complete
statement of the present status thereof; and (c) if he should thereafter learn
that the same or similar action or claim has been filed or is pending, he shall
report that fact within five (5) days therefrom to the court; and
(5) the relief sought.
SECTION 5. Summons. The summons and the complaint shall be served together
not later than five (5) days from the date of filing of the complaint.
(a) Service upon domestic private juridical entities. If the defendant is a
domestic corporation, service shall be deemed adequate if made upon any of
the statutory or corporate officers as fixed by the by-laws or their respective
secretaries. If the defendant is a partnership, service shall be deemed
adequate if made upon any of the managing or general partners or upon their
respective secretaries. If the defendant is an association, service shall be
deemed adequate if made upon any of its officers or their respective
secretaries.
(b) Service upon foreign private juridical entity. When the defendant is a
foreign private juridical entity which is transacting or has transacted business
in the Philippines, service may be made on its resident agent designated in
accordance with law for that purpose, or, if therebe no such agent, on the
government official designated by law to that effect, or on any of its officers or
agents within the Philippines.

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 54

SECTION 6. Answer. The defendant shall file his answer to the complaint, serving a
copy thereof on the plaintiff, within fifteen (15) days from service of summons.
In the answer, the defendant shall:
(1) Specify each material allegation of fact the truth of which he admits;
(2) Specify each material allegation of fact the truth of which he does not admit.
Where the defendant desires to deny only a part of an averment, he shall
specify so much of it as true and material and shall deny only the remainder,
(3) Specify each material allegation of fact as to which truth he has no knowledge
or information sufficient to form a belief, and this shall have the effect of a
denial;
(4) State the defenses, including grounds for a motion to dismiss under the Rules
of Court;
(5) State the law, rule, or regulation relied upon;
(6) Address each of the causes of action stated in the complaint;
(7) State the facts upon which he relies for his defense, including affidavits of
witnesses and copies of documentary and other evidence supportive of such
cause or causes of action;
(8) State any compulsory counterclaim/s and cross-claim/s; and
(9) State the relief sought.
The answer to counterclaims or cross-claims shall be filed within ten (10) days
from service of the answer in which they are pleaded.
SECTION 7. Effect of failure to answer. If the defendant fails to answer within the
period above provided, he shall be considered in default. Upon motion or motu proprio,
the court shall render judgment either dismissing the complaint or granting the relief
prayed for as the records may warrant. In no case shall the court award a relief beyond
or different from that prayed for.
SECTION 8. Affidavits, documentary and other evidence. Affidavits shall be based
on personal knowledge, shall set forth such facts as would be admissible in evidence,
and shall show affirmatively that the affiant is competent to testify on the matters stated
therein. The affidavits shall be in question and answer form, and shall comply with the
rules on admissibility of evidence.

55 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

Affidavits of witnesses as well as documentary and other evidence shall be


attached to the appropriate pleading; Provided, however, that affidavits, documentary
and other evidence not so submitted may be attached to the pre-trial brief required
under these Rules. Affidavits and other evidence not so submitted shall not be admitted
in evidence, except in the following cases:
(1) Testimony of unwilling, hostile, or adverse party witnesses. A witness is
presumed prima facie hostile if he fails or refuses to execute an affidavit after
a written request therefor,
(2) If the failure to submit the evidence is for meritorious and compelling reasons;
and
(3) Newly discovered evidence.
In case of (2) and (3) above, the affidavit and evidence must be submitted not
later than five (5) days prior to its introduction in evidence.
RULE 3
Modes of Discovery
SECTION 1. In general. A party can only avail of an y of the modes of discovery not
later than fifteen (15) days from the joinder of issues.

RULE 4
Pre-Trial
SECTION 1. Pre-trial conference; mandatory nature. Within five (5) days after the
period for availment of, and compliance with, the modes of discovery prescribed in Rule
3 hereof, whichever comes later, the court shall issue and serve an order immediately
setting the case for pre-trial conference and directing the parties to submit their
respective pre-trial briefs. The parties shall file with the court and furnish each other
copies of their respective pre-trial brief in such manner as to ensure its receipt by the
court and the other party at least five (5) days before the date set for the pre-trial.
SECTION 3. Termination. The preliminary conference shall be terminated not later
than ten (10) days after its commencement, whether or not the parties have agreed to
settle amicably.
SECTION 4. Judgment before pre-trial. If, after submission of the pre-trial briefs, the
court determines that, upon consideration of the pleadings, the affidavits and other
evidence submitted by the parties, a judgment may be rendered, the court may order
the parties to file simultaneously their respective memoranda within a non extendible
period of twenty (20) days from receipt of the order. Thereafter, the court shall render

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 56

judgment, either full or otherwise, not later than ninety (90) days from the expiration of
the period to file the memoranda.
SECTION 5. Pre-trial order; judgment after pre-trial. The proceedings in the pre-trial
shall be recorded. Within ten (10) days after the termination of the pre-trial, the court
shall issue an order which shall recite in detail the matters taken up in the conference,
the actions taken thereon, the amendments allowed in the pleadings, and the
agreements or admissions made by the parties as to any of the matters considered. The
court shall rule on all objections to or comments on the admissibility of any documentary
or other evidence, including any affidavit or any part thereof. Should the action proceed
to trial, the order shall explicitly define and limit the issues to be tried and shall strictly
follow the form set forth in Annex "A" of these Rules.
The contents of the order shall control the subsequent course of the action,
unless modified before trial to prevent manifest injustice.
After the pre-trial, the court may render judgment, either full or partial, as the
evidence presented during the pre-trial may warrant.

RULE 5
Trial
SECTION 1. Witnesses. If the court deems necessary to hold hearings to determine
specific factual matters before rendering judgment, it shall, in the pre-trial order, set the
case for trial on the dates agreed upon by the parties.
Only persons whose affidavits were submitted may be presented as witnesses,
except in cases specified in section 8, Rule 2 of these Rules. The affidavits of the
witnesses shall serve as their direct testimonies, subject to cross-examination in
accordance with existing rules on evidence.
SECTION 2. Trial schedule. Unless judgment is rendered pursuant to Rule 4 of
these Rules, the initial hearing shall be held not later than thirty (30) days from the date
of the pre-trial order. The hearings shall be completed not later than sixty (60) days from
the date of the initial hearing, thirty (30) days of which shall be allotted to the plaintiffs
and thirty (30) days to the defendants in the manner prescribed in the pre-trial order.
The failure of a party to present a witness on a scheduled hearing date shall be deemed
a waiver of such hearing date. However, a party may present such witness or witnesses
within his remaining allotted hearing dates.
SECTION 3. Written offer of evidence. Evidence not otherwise admitted by the
parties or ruled upon by the court during the pre-trial conference shall be offered in
writing not later than five (5) days from the completion of the presentation of evidence of
the party concerned. The opposing party shall have five (5) days from receipt of the

57 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

offer to file his comments or objections. The court shall make its ruling on the offer
within five (5) days from the expiration of the period to file comments or objections.
SECTION 4. Memoranda. Immediately after ruling on the last offer of evidence, the
court shall order the parties to simultaneously file, within thirty (30) days from receipt of
the order, their respective memoranda..
SECTION 5. Decision after trial. The court shall render a decision not later than (90)
days from the lapse of the period to file the memoranda, with or without said pleading
having been filed.

RULE 10
Provisional Remedies
SECTION 1. Provisional remedies. A party may apply for any of the provisional
remedies provided in the Rules of Court as may be available for the purposes.
However, no temporary restraining order or status quo order shall be issued save in
exceptional cases and only after hearing the parties and the posting of a bond.
SECTION 2. Disciplinary sanctions on the judge. The presiding judge may, upon a
verified complaint filed with the Office of the Court Administrator, be subject to
disciplinary action under any of the following cases:
(1) Failure to observe the special summary procedures prescribed in these
Rules; or
(2) Failure to issue a pre-trial order in the form prescribed in these Rules.

D. REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS


RULE ON GUIDELINES TO BE OBSERVED BY TRIAL COURT JUDGES AND
CLERKS OF COURT IN THE CONDUCT OF PRE-TRIAL AND USE OF
DEPOSITION-DISCOVERY MEASURES (A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC, Effective
August 16, 2004)

PRE-TRIAL:
Criminal Cases
1. Before arraignment, the Court shall issue an order directing the public prosecutor to
submit the record of the preliminary investigation to the Branch COC for the latter to

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 58

attach the same to the record of the criminal case. Where the accused is under
preventive detention, his case shall be raffled and its records transmitted to the
judge to whom the case was raffled within three days from the filing of the complaint
or information. The accused shall be arraigned within ten days from the date of the
raffle. The pre-trial of his case shall be held within ten days after arraignment unless
a shorter period is provided for by law. (SEC. 1, RULE 116, REVISED RULES OF
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, AS AMENDED)

SECTION 1, RULE 116. Arraignment and plea; how made.(a) The accused must be arraigned before the court where the
complaint or information was filed or assigned for trial. T he arraignment shall
be made in open court by the judge or clerk by furnishing the accused with a
copy of the complaint or information, reading the same in a language or
dialect known to him, and asking him whether he pleads guilty or not guilty.
The prosecution may call at the trial witnesses other than those named in the
complaint or information.
(b) The accused must be present at the arraignment and must
personally enter his plea. Both arraignment and plea shall be made of record,
but failure to do so shall not affect the validity of the proceedings.
(c) When the accused refuses to plead or makes a conditional plea, a
plea of guilty shall be entered for him.
(d) When the accused pleads guilty but presents exculpatory evidence,
his plea shall be deemed withdrawn and a plea of not guilty shall be entered
for him.
(e) When the accused is under preventive detention, his case shall be
raffled and its records transmitted to the judge to whom the case was raffled
and its records transmitted to the judge to whom the case was raffled within
three (3) days from the filing of the information or complaint. The accused
shall be arraigned within ten (10) days from the date of the raffle. The pretrial conference of his case shall be held within ten (10) days after
arraignment.
(f) The private offended party shall be required to appear at the
arraignment for purposes of plea bargaining, determination of civil liability,
and other matters requiring his presence. In case of failure of the offended
party to appear despite due notice, the court may allow the accused to enter a
plea of guilty to a lesser offense which is necessarily included in the offense
charged with the conformity of the trial prosecutor alone.
(g) Unless a shorter period is provided by special law or Supreme
Court circular, the arraignment shall be held within thirty (30) days form the

59 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

date the court acquires jurisdiction over the person of the accused. The time
of the pendency of a motion to quash or for a bill of particulars or other
causes justifying the suspension of the arraignment shall be excluded in
computing the period.
2. After the arraignment, the court shall forthwith set the pre-trial conference within
thirty days from the date of arraignment, and issue an order: (a) requiring the private
offended party to appear thereat for purposes of plea-bargaining except for
violations of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002, and for other
matters requiring his presence; (SECTION 1, RULE 118, REVISED RULES OF
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE) (b) referring the case to the Branch COC, if warranted,
for a preliminary conference to be set at least three days prior to the pre-trial to mark
the documents or exhibits to be presented by the parties and copies thereof to be
attached to the records after comparison and to consider other matters as may aid in
its prompt disposition; and (c) informing the parties that no evidence shall be allowed
to be presented and offered during the trial other than those identified and marked
during the pre-trial except when allowed by the court for good cause shown. A copy
of the order is hereto attached as Annex "E". In mediatable cases, the judge shall
refer the parties and their counsel to the PMC unit for purposes of mediation if
available.
SECTION 1, RULE 118 Pre-trial, mandatory in criminal cases. In all criminal
cases cognizable by the Sandiganbayan, Regional Trial Court, Metropolitan Trial
Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Municipal Trial Court and Municipal Circuit
Trial Court, the court shall, after arraignment and within thirty (30) days from the
date the court acquires jurisdiction over the person of the accused, unless a
shorter period is provided for in special laws or circulars of the Supreme Court,
order a pre-trial conference to consider the following:
(a) plea bargaining;
(b) stipulation of facts;
(c) marking for identification of evidence of the parties;
(d) waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence;
(e) modification of the order of trial if the accused admits the charge but
interposes a lawful defense; and
(f) such matters as will promote a fair and expeditious trial of the criminal
and civil aspects of the case.
3. During the preliminary conference, the Branch COC shall assist the parties in
reaching a settlement of the civil aspect of the case, mark the documents to be
presented as exhibits and copies thereof attached to the records after comparison,
ascertain from the parties the undisputed facts and admissions on the genuineness
and due execution of documents marked as exhibits and consider such other
matters as may aid in the prompt disposition of the case. The proceedings during the

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 60

preliminary conference shall be recorded in the Minutes of Preliminary Conference


to be signed both parties and counsel. (Please see Annex "B")
The Minutes of Preliminary Conference and the exhibits shall be attached by the
Branch COC to the case record before the pre-trial.
4. Before the pre-trial conference the judge must study the allegations of the
information, the statements in the affidavits of witnesses and other documentary
evidence which form part of the record of the preliminary investigation.
5. During the pre-trial, the trial judge shall consider plea-bargaining arrangements
except in cases involving violations of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of
2002. Where the prosecuti on and the offended party agree to the plea offered by
the accused, the court shall:
a. Issue an order which contains the plea bargaining arrived at;
b. Proceed to receive evidence on the civil aspect of the case; and
c. Render and promulgate judgment of conviction, including the civil liability or
damages duly established by the evidence.
6. When plea bargaining fails, the Court shall:
a. Adopt the minutes of preliminary conference as part of the pre-trial
proceedings, confirm markings of exhibits or substituted photocopies and
admissions on the genuineness and due execution of documents and list
object and testimonial evidence;
b. Scrutinize every allegation of the information and the statements in the
affidavits and other documents which form part of the record of the
preliminary investigation and other documents identified and marked as
exhibits in determining further admissions of facts, documents and in
particular as to the following:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

the identity of the accused;


court's territorial jurisdiction relative to the offense/s charged;
qualification of expert witness/es;
amount of damages;
genuineness and due execution of documents;
the cause of death or injury, in proper cases;
adoption of any evidence presented during e thpreliminary
investigation;
8. disclosure of defenses of alibi, insanity, self-defense, exercise of public
authority and justifying or exempting circumstances; and
9. such other matters that would limit the facts in issue.

61 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

c. Define factual and legal issues;


d. Ask parties to agree on the specific trial dates and adhere to the flow chart
determined by the court which shall contain the time frames for the different
stages of the proceeding up to promulgation of decision and use the time
frame for each stage in setting the trial dates;
e. Require the parties to submit to the Branch COC the names, addresses and
contact numbers of witnesses that need to be summoned by subpoena; and
f. Consider modification of order of trial if the accused admits the charge but
interposes a lawful defense.
7. During the pre-trial, the judge shall be the one to ask questions on issues raised
therein and all questions must be directed to him to avoid hostilities between parties.
8. All agreements or admissions made or entered during the pre-trial conference shall
be reduced in writing and signed by the accused and counsel, otherwise, they
cannot be used against the accused. The agreements covering the matters (referred
to in Section 1 of Rule 118 shall be approved by the court. (Section 2, Rule 118)
9. All proceedings during the pre-trial shall be recorded, the transcripts prepared and
the minutes signed by the parties and/or their counsels.
The trial judge shall issue a Pre-trial Order within ten (10) days after the termination
of the pre-trial setting forth the actions taken during the pre-trial conference, the facts
stipulated, the admissions made, evidence marked, the number of witnesses to be
presented and the schedule of trial. Said Order shall bind the parties, limit the trial to
matters not disposed of and control the course of the action during the trial.

VI.

CASES ON SPEEDY TRIAL/DISPOSITION OF CASES


1. LILANY YULO y BILLONES vs. THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, G.R.
No. 142762. March 4, 2005
Article III, Section 16 of the Constitution provides:
Sec. 16. All persons shall have the right to a speedy
disposition of their cases before all judicial, quasi-judicial, or
administrative bodies.
Under the foregoing provision, any party to a case has the right to demand
from all officials tasked with the administration of justice to expedite its
disposition. However, the concept of speedy disposition is a relative term and

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 62

must necessarily be a flexible concept. A mere mathematical reckoning of the


time involved is not sufficient. In applying the Constitutional guarantee, particular
regard must be taken of the facts and circumstances of each case.
The right to a speedy disposition of a case, like the right to speedy trial, is
deemed violated only when the proceedings are attended by vexatious,
capricious, and oppressive delays, or when unjustified postponements of the trial
are asked and secured, or when without cause or justifiable motive a long period
of time is allowed to elapse without the party having his case tried. To determine
whether or not the right has been violated, the following factors may be
considered: (1) the length of the delay; (2) the reasons for such delay; (3) the
assertion or failure to assert such right on the part of the accused; and (4) the
prejudice caused by the delay.
In the instant case, the Supreme Court agrees with the Solicitor General that
the delay was sufficiently explained by the Court of Appeals. The ponente in CAG.R. CR No. 17513, Associate Justice Jainal D. Rasul, retired during the
pendency of the petitioner's motion for reconsideration filed on March 4, 1997.
However, the case was assigned to Associate Justice Mercedes Gozo-Dadole
only on February 28, 2000 and brought to her attention only on March 2, 2000.
The Supreme Court noted that Justice Gozo-Dadole took only two (2) weeks
from notice to resolve the motion. Clearly, Justice Gozo-Dadole did not incur any
delay. Thus, the Supreme Court rules that the petitioner's right to a speedy trial
was not violated.

2. DOMINGO NEYPES, LUZ FAUSTI NO, ROGELIO FAUSTINO, LOLITO


VICTORIANO, JACOB OBANIA AND DOMINGO CABACUNGAN vs. HON.
COURT OF APPEALS, HEIRS OF BERNARDO DEL MUNDO, namely: FE,
CORAZON, JOSEFA, SALVADOR and CARM EN, all surnamed DEL MUNDO,
LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES AND HON. ANTONIO N. ROSALES
,
Presiding Judge, Branch 43, Regional Trial Court, Roxas, Oriental Mindoro,
G.R. No. 141524. September 14, 2005
The Supreme Court may promulgate procedural rules in all courts. It has the
sole prerogative to amend, repeal or even establish new rules for a more
simplified and inexpensive process, and the speedy disposition of cases. In the
rules governing appeals to it and to the Court of Appeals, particularly Rules 42,
43 and 45, the Supreme Court allows extensions of time for parties to file their
appeals, based on justifiable and compelling reasons. These extensions may
consist of 15 days or more.

3.

REPORT ON THE JUDICIAL AUDIT CONDUCTED IN THE REGIONAL TRIAL


COURT, BRANCH 5, ILIGAN CITY, A.M. No. 02-10-628-RTC, October 1, 2004

63 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

Failure of a judge to decide and resolve cases on time is an outright disregard


of the Code of Judicial Conduct which enjoins judges to dispose of their business
promptly and to decide cases within the required period. Judges are tasked to
perform all their duties, including the delivery of reserved decisions, efficiently,
fairly and with reasonable promptness as prerequisites to the due performance of
their judicial office.
When a judge assumes office, duties and restrictions that are peculiar to his
position are cast upon him. He should be punctual in the performance of his
duties, should exhibit an industry and application commensurate with the duties
imposed on him, and should be prompt in disposing all matters submitted to him.
As stated in Cadauan vs. Judge Alivia,
Decision-making, among other duties, is the primordial duty of a
member of the bench. The speedy disposition of cases in our courts is a
primary aim of the judiciary so the ends of justice may not be
compromised and the judiciary will be true to its commitment of providing
all persons the right to a speedy, impartial and public trial and to a speedy
disposition of cases.

This is because delay in the disposition of cases erodes the faith and
confidence of the people in the Judiciary, lowers its standard and brings it into
disrepute. As is often stated, justice delayed is justice denied. Thus, the periods
within which decisions and resolutions should be rendered should not to be
treated lightly.
It is not uncommon for the Supreme Court, upon proper application and in
meritorious cases, especially when difficult questions of lawor complex issues
are involved, to grant judges of lower courts additional time to decide beyond the
90-day period. All that a judge really needs to do, in cases of great difficulty, is to
request an extension of time over which the Court has, almost invariably, been
sympathetic. Judge Libre did not avail such
of remedy, however, which only
manifests his failure to be on top of the cases assigned to him.

4.

ATTY. REYNALDO P. DIMAYACYAC vs. HON. COURT OF APPEALS, HON.


VICENTE Q. ROXAS, IRENE AGBADA-CRUZ, SIXTO AGBADA CRUZ,
MERCEDES ARISTORENAS and ROMEO GOMEZ and PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, G.R. No. 136264, May 28, 2004
We emphasize our ruling in Ty-Dazo vs. Sandiganbayan where we held that:
The right to a speedy disposition of cases, like the right to a speedy
trial, is deemed violated only when the proceedings is attended by
vexatious, capricious, and oppressive delays; or when unjustified
postponements of the trial are asked for and secured, or when without

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 64

cause or unjustifiable motive, a long period of time is allowed to elapse


without the party having his case tried. In the determination of whether or
not that right has been violated, the factors that may be considered and
balanced are: the length of the delay the reasons for such delay, the
assertion or failure to assert such right by the accused, and the prejudice
caused by the delay.
A mere mathematical reckoning of the time involved, therefore, would
not be sufficient. In the application of the constitutional guarantee of the
right to speedy disposition of cases, particular regard must also be taken
of the facts and circumstances peculiar to each case.

Thus, we shall examine how such aforementioned factors affected herein


petitioner's right.
As to the length of delay, it is established that the prosecution did not take
any action on petitioner's case for two years. From the time that Criminal Case
No. Q-91-18037 was dismissed on August 23, 1991, the prosecution failed to
effect the very simple remedy of filing two separate informations against
petitioner until October of 1993. Indeed, there was a delay in the refiling of the
proper informations. However, the prosecution was never given the opportunity
to explain the circumstances that may have caused such delay precisely
because petitioner never raised the issue of the length of time it took the
prosecution to revive the case. There is nothing on record to show what
happened during the two-year lull before the filing of the proper informations.
Hence, it could not be ascertained that peculiar situations existed to prove that
the delay was vexatious, capricious and oppressive, and therefore, a violation of
petitioner's constitutional right to speedy disposition of cases.
What the records clearly show is that petitioner never asserted his right to a
speedy disposition of his case. The only ground he raised in assailing the
subsequent filing of the two informations is that he will be subjected to double
jeopardy. It was only the OSG that brought to light the issue on petitioner's right
to a speedy disposition of his case, and only when the case was brought to the
appellate court on certiorari. Even in this petition before us, petitioner did not
raise the issue of his right to a speedy disposition of his case. Again, it was only
the OSG that presented such issue to us in the Brief for the State which was only
then adopted by petitioner through a Manifestation dated August 3, 1999. We are
not convinced that the filing of the informations against petitioner after two years
was an unreasonable delay. Petitioner himself did not really believe that there
was any violation of his right to a speedy disposition of the case against him.
The case which is more in point with the present one before us is Dela Pea
vs. Sandiganbayan where we ruled that petitioner therein, for failing to assert
their right to a speedy disposition of their cases, was deemed to have waived
such right and thus, not entitled to the "radical relief" granted by the Court in the
cases of Tatad and Angchangco. The factual circumstances surrounding herein

65 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

petitioner's case do not demonstrate that there was any violation of petitioner's
right to a speedy disposition of his case.

5.

THE OFFICERS AND MEMBERS OF THE IBP BAGUIO-BENGUET CHAPTER,


CESAR G. ORACION, PRESIDENT vs. FERNANDO VIL PAMINTUAN,
Presiding Judge, Regional Trial Court, Branch III, Baguio City, A.M. No.
RTJ-02-1691, January 16, 2004
In Surla vs. Dimla (Civil Case No. 3322-R), the respondent judge resolved an
unopposed motion for reconsideration after almost four (4) months. Again, this
contravened the mandate of the Constitution that "all persons shall have the right
to a speedy disposition of cases."
Rule 1.02 of Canon 1 and Rule 3.05 of Canon 3 of the Code of Judicial
Conduct provide:
Rule 1.02. A judge should administer justice impartially and without
delay.
Rule 3.05. A judge shall dispose of the court's business promptly and
decide cases within the required periods.

SC Administrative Circular No. 13-87 enjoins that:


3. Judges shall observe scrupulously the periods prescribed by
Article VIII, Section 15 of the Constitution for the adjudication and
resolution of all cases or matters submitted in their courts. Thus, all cases
or matters must be decided or resolved within twelve months from dates
of submission by all lower collegiate courts while all other lower courts are
given a period of three months to do so . . .

Further, SC Administrative Circular No. 1-88 reads:


6.1. All Presiding Judges must endeavor to act promptly on all
motions and interlocutory matters pending before their courts ...

Conformably with the foregoing mandate, this Court has pronounced


The office of a judge exists for one solemn end to promote the
ends of justice by administering it speedily and impartially. The judge as
the person presiding over that court is the visible representation of the law
and justice. Failure to resolve cases submitted for decision within the
period fixed by law constitutes violation of the constitutional right of the
parties to a speedy disposition of their cases.

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 66

The unreasonable delay of the respondent judge in resolving the motions


submitted for his resolution clearly constituted a violation of the parties'
constitutional right to a speedy disposition of their cases.

6.

ANASTACIO E. GAUDENCIO vs. Judge ED WARD D. PACIS, MTC, Branch 3,


Marilao, Bulacan, A.M. No. MTJ-03-1502, August 6, 2003, (Formerly OCA IPI
No. 01-1121-MTJ)
Administrative Circular No. 3-99 dated January 15, 1999 mandates the "Strict
Observance Of Session Hours Of Trial Courts And Effective Management Of
Cases To Ensure Their Speedy Disposition." Thus
To insure speedy disposition of cases, the following guidelines must
be faithfully observed:
1. The session hours of all Regional Trial Courts, Metropolitan Trial
Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts, and
Municipal Circuit Trial Courts shall be from 8:30 A.M. to noon and from
2:00 P.M. to 4:30 P.M., from Monday to Friday. The hours in the morning
shall be devoted to the conduct of trial, while the hours in the afternoon
shall be utilized for (1) the conduct of pre-trial conferences; (2) writing of
decisions, resolutions or orders; or (3) the continuation of trial on the
merits, whenever rendered necessary, as may be required by the Rules
of Court, statutes, or circulars in specified cases.
xxx

xxx

xxx

II. Judges must be punctual at all times.


xxx

xxx

xxx

IV. There should be strict adherence to the policy on avoiding


postponements and needless delay.
xxx

xxx

xxx

VI. All trial judges must strictly comply with Circular No. 38-98,
entitled "Implementing the Provisions of Republic Act No. 8493" ("An Act
to Ensure a Speedy Trial of All Cases Before the Sandiganbayan,
Regional Trial Court, Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court in
Cities, Municipal Trial Court and Municipal Circuit Trial Court,
Appropriating Funds Therefor, and for Other Purposes") issued by the
Honorable Chief Justice Andres R. Narvasa on 11 August 1998 and
which took effect on 15 September 1998.

These cited circulars are restatements of fundamentals in the Canons of


Judicial Ethics which enjoin judges to be punctual in the performance of their
judicial duties, recognizing that the time of litigants, witnesses, and attorneys are

67 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

of value, and that if the judge is not punctual in the performance of his functions,
he sets a bad example to the bar and tends to create public dissatisfaction in the
administration of justice.

7.

REPORT ON THE JUDICIAL AUDIT CONDUCTED IN THE MUNICIPAL TRIAL


COURT, BOCAUE, BULACAN, A.M. No. 00-3-50-MTC, July 21, 2003
Rule 3.05 of the Code of Judicial Conduct enjoins a judge to dispose of the
court's business promptly and decide cases within the required periods. The
Constitution in fact mandates that lower courts should resolve cases within 3
months, clearly intended to prevent delay in the administration of justice which
erodes the faith and confidence of our people in the judiciary, lowers its
standards, and brings it into disrepute.
Respondent did not indicate in his undated Manifestation of Compliance when
he decided a total of 115 cases. Unquestionably, though, they were decided
beyond the reglementary period. Why he did not comply with the reglementary
period of 90 days to render a decision, he did not also explain.
When judges are unable to render a decision within the required period, they
are not without remedy. It is not uncommon for this Court, upon proper
application and in meritorious cases, especially when difficult questions of law or
complex issues are involved, to grant judges of lower courts additional time to
decide beyond the 90-day period. 30 In respondent's case however, he never
requested for additional time to decide the cases submitted for decision. As
correctly observed by the OCA, the only instance that he attempted to seek
approval for additional time was when he submitted certificates of service after
the conduct of the audit.

8.

SOCORRO R. HOEHNE vs. JUDGE RUBEN R. PLATA, A.M. No. MTJ-021458. October 10, 2002, (formerly OCA I.P.I No. 00-951-MTJ)
Administrative Circular No. 3-99 dated 15 January 1999 directs:
To insure speedy disposition of cases, the following guidelines must
be faithfully observed: . . .
IV. There should be [a] strict adherence to the policy on avoiding
postponements and needless delay.

Litigation must at sometime be terminated, even atthe risk of occasional


errors, for public policy dictates that once a judgment becomes final, executory
and unappealable, the prevailing party should not be denied the fruits of his
victory by some subterfuge devised by the losing party.

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 68

In the recent case of Monterola vs. Caoibes, Jr., this Court imposed the
penalty of fine in the amount of Thirty Thousand Pesos (P30,000.00) for gross
ignorance of procedural law and unreasonable delay in the issuance of an order
for the execution of judgment.
That the respondent finally issued the writ of execution on 14 June 1999 is of
no moment because undue delay and prejudice had already been done. It may
be recalled that in A.M. No. 98-3-119-RTC, respondent was severely
reprimanded for failure to act with dispatch on the criminal and civil issues
pending in his court. Accordingly, we adop t the recommendation of the Office of
the Court Administrator, with the modification that the penalty is hereby increased
from P1,000 to P10,000.

9.

DATUKAN M. GUIANI, ET AL. vs. S ANDIGANBAYAN (FIRST DIVISION), ET


AL., G.R. Nos. 146897-917, August 6, 2002
In the application of the constitutional guaranty of the right to speedy
disposition of cases, particular regard must be taken of the facts and
circumstances peculiar to each case. 21 Well-settled is the rule that the right to a
speedy disposition of cases, like the right to a speedy trial, is deemed violated
only when the proceeding is attended by vexatious, capricious, and oppressive
delay. In the determination of whether or not that right has been violated, the
factors that may be considered and balanced are: the length of delay, the
reasons for such delay, the assertion or failure to assert such right by the
accused, and the prejudice caused by the delay.
The right to a speedy trial as well as other rights conferred by the Constitution
or statute, except when otherwise expressly so provided by law, may be waived.
It must therefore be asserted. Thus, if there was a delay in the trial of the case,
petitioners are not entirely without blame.
Furthermore, the right of an accused to a speedy trial is guaranteed to him by
the Constitution but the same shall not be utilized to deprive the State of a
reasonable opportunity of fairly indicting criminals. While accused persons do
have rights, many of them choose to forget that the aggrieved also have the
same rights. It secures rights to a defendant but it does not preclude the rights of
public justice. A party's i ndividual rights should not work against and preclude the
people's equally important right to public justice.
Given the particular facts of this case, we find that there was no
unreasonable, vexatious and oppressive delay in the preliminary investigation.
Therefore, petitioners' right to speedy disposition of the case was not infringed.

69 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

10. Spouses KIAT & TERESA REAP ORT vs. Judge EFREN S. MARIANO,
Municipal Trial Court, Branch 2, Zamboanga City, A.M. No. MTJ-00-1253,
July 11, 2001
Justice delayed is justice denied. A magistrate who deliberately consents to
or abets needless, groundless and obviously unmeritorious motions for
postponement, especially in ejectment cases, is administratively liable.
Respondent does not deny that after the last Answer had been filed, the
preliminary conference was first set only after 84 days and actually held only
after almost two years. He was duty-bound to comply with the summary rules,
considering that their very purpose is the speedy disposition of cases falling
under the procedure. Yet, his actions cl early and directly contravened them.
Consequently, respondent also violated Rule 1.02 of Canon 1 of the Code of
Judicial Conduct, which states that judges should administer justice without
delay. "Delay in the disposition of cases undermines the people's faith and
confidence in the judiciary. Hence, judges are enjoined to decide cases with
dispatch. Their failure to do so constitutes gross inefficiency and warrants the
imposition of administrative sanctions on them."

11. LUZ CADAUAN and CLARO CADAUAN vs. JUDGE ARTEMIO R. ALIVIA,
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF CAUAYAN, ISABELA, BRANCH 19 , A.M. No.
RTJ-00-1595, October 24, 2000, (formerly A.M. OCA IPI No. 00-881-RTJ)
Rule 3.05 of Canon 3 of the Code of Judicial Conduct admonishes all judges
to dispose of the court's business promptly and decide cases within the required
periods. All judges must be reminded that a case should be decided within ninety
(90) days from its submission, otherwise, the judge would be guilty of gross
inefficiency and neglect of duty. Failure to render a decision beyond the ninety
(90) day period from the submission of the case for decision is detrimental to the
honor and integrity of his office and in derogation of a speedy administration of
justice.
The members of the judiciary have the sworn duty to administer justice
without undue delay. For failing to do so, respondent Judge has to suffer the
consequences of his omission. Any delay in the disposition of cases undermines
the people's faith in the judiciary. The Court has consistently impressed upon
members of the judiciary the need to decide cases promptly and expeditiously
under the time-honored precept that justice delayed is justice denied. It is the
duty of every judge to resolve cases filed before him with good dispatch. Failure
to decide the case within the reglementary period is not excusable and
constitutes inefficiency warranting the imposition of administrative sanctions on
the defaulting judge.

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 70

Decision-making, among other duties, is the primordial duty of a member of


the bench. The speedy disposition of cases in our courts is a primary aim of the
judiciary so the ends of justice may not be compromised and the judiciary will be
true to its commitment of providing all persons the right to a speedy, impartial
and public trial and to a speedy disposition of cases.

12. RICARDO CASTILLO, DEMETRIO CABISON JR., and RODOLFO AGDEPPA


vs. HONORABLE SANDIGANBAYAN (SECO ND DIVISION), and PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, represented by HONORABLE CONRADO VASQUEZ,
OMBUDSMAN, G.R. No. 109271. March 14, 2000
In the case Binay v. Sandiganbayan and Magsaysay v. Sandiganbayan , this
Court has held that:
A mere mathematical reckoning of the time involved, therefore, would
not be sufficient. In the application of the constitutional guarantee of the
right to speedy disposition of cases, particular regard must also be taken
of the facts and circumstances peculiar to each case.

While petitioners certainly have the right to a speedy disposition of their case,
the structural reorganization of the prosecutorial agencies, the procedural
changes brought about by the Zaldivar case as well as the Sandiganbayan's
heavy caseload certainly are valid reasons for the delay in the disposition of
petitioners' case. For those reasons, the delay certainly cannot be considered as
vexatious, capricious and oppressive. Neither is it unreasonable nor inordinate.

13. JUDY CAROL L. DANSAL, RAFAEL T. FLORES, HERMINIO C. ELIZON,


ARNULFO S. SOLORIA vs. THE HON. GIL P. FE RNANDEZ, SR., in his
capacity as the Presiding Judge of the RTC, Quezon City, Branch 217 and
BENIGNO S. MONTERA, G.R. No. 126814, March 2, 2000
The protection under the right to a speedy disposition of cases should not
operate as to deprive the government of its inherent prerogative in prosecuting
criminal cases or generally in seeing to it that all who approach the bar of justice
be afforded a fair opportunity to present their side.
Contrary to the stance of the Solicitor General, the delay adverted to in the
cases under consideration does not measure up to the unreasonableness of the
delay of disposition in Tatad vs. Sandiganbayan, and other allied cases. It cannot
be said that the petitioners found themselves in a situation oppressive to their
rights simply by reason of the delay and without more.

14. Re: PROBLEM OF DELAYS IN CASES BEFORE THE SANDIGANBAYAN,


A.M. No. 00-8-05-SC, En Banc, November 28, 2001
71 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

It need not be overemphasized that any delay in the determination or


resolution of a case no matter how insignificant is, at the bottom line, delay in
the administration of justice in general. The suffering endured by just one person
whether plaintiff, defendant or accused while awaiting a judgment that may
affect his life, honor, liberty or property taints the entire judiciary's performance
in its solemn task of administering justice. Inefficient, indolent or neglectful
judges are as equally impermissible in the Judiciary as the incompetent and
dishonest ones. Any of them tarnishes the image of the judiciary or brings it to
public contempt, dishonor or disrespect and must then be administratively dealt
with or criminally prosecuted, if warranted, and punished accordingly.
The issues presented are the following: (1) What is the reglementary period
within which the Sandiganbayan must decide/resolve cases falling within its
jurisdiction? (2) Are there cases submitted for decision remaining undecided by
the Sandiganbayan or any of its divisions beyond the aforestated reglementary
period? (3) Is Supreme Court Administrative Circular No. 1094 applicable to the
Sandiganbayan?
a. Period to Decide/Resolve Cases.
There are two views. The first view is that from the time a case is submitted
for decision or resolution,the Sandiganbayan has twelve (12) months to decide
or resolve it. The second view is that as a court with trial function, the
Sandiganbayan has three (3) months to decide the case from the date of
submission for decision.
Article VIII, Section 15 (1) and (2), of the 1987 Constitution provides:
Sec. 15. (1) All cases or matters filed after the effectivity of this
Constitution must be decided or resolved within twenty-four months from
date of submission to the Supreme Court, and, unless reduced by the
Supreme Court, twelve months for all lower collegiate courts, and three
months for all other lower courts.
(2) A case or matter shall be deemed submitted for decision or
resolution upon the filing of the last pleading, brief or memorandum
required by the Rules of Court or by the court itself.

The above provision does not apply to the Sandiganbayan. The provision
refers to regular courts of lower co llegiate level that in the present hierarchy
applies only to the Court of Appeals.
The Sandiganbayan is a special court of the same level as the Court of
Appeals and possessing all the inherent powers of a court of justice, with
functions of a trial court.

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 72

Thus, the Sandiganbayan is not a regular court but a special one. The
Sandiganbayan was originally empowered to promulgate its own rules of
procedure. However, on March 30, 1995, Congress repealed the
Sandiganbayans power to promulgate its own rules of procedure and instead
prescribed that the Rules of Court promulgated by the Supreme Court shall apply
to all cases and proceedings filed with the Sandiganbayan.
Special courts are judicial tribunals exercising limited jurisdiction over
particular or specialized categories of actions. They are the Court of Tax
Appeals, the Sandiganbayan, and the Sharia Courts.
Given the clarity of the rule that does not distinguish, we hold that the three
(3) month period, not the twelve (12) month period, to decide cases applies to the
Sandiganbayan. Furthermore, the Sandig anbayan presently sitting in five (5)
divisions, functions as a trial court. The term trial is used in its broad sense,
meaning, it allows introduction of evidence by the parties in the cases before it.
The Sandiganbayan, in original cases within its jurisdiction, conducts trials, has
the discretion to weigh the evidence of the parties, admit the evidence it regards
as credible and reject that which they consider perjurious or fabricated.
The Sandiganbayan is a special court created in an effort to maintain
honesty and efficiency in the bureaucracy, weed out misfits and undesirables in
the government and eventually stamp out graft and corruption. We have held
consistently that a delay of three (3) years in deciding a single case is
inexcusably long. We can not accept the excuses of Presiding Justice
Sandiganbayan Francis E. Garchitorena that the court was reorganized in 1997;
that the new justices had to undergo an orientation and that the Sandiganbayan
relocated to its present premises which required the packing and crating of
records; and that some boxes were still unopened.
We likewise find unacceptable Presiding Justice Garchitorenas excuse that
one case alone comprises more that fifty percent (50%) of the First Divisions
backlog and that the same has been set for promulgation on December 8, 2000.
As we said, a delay in a single case cannot be tolerated, para muestra, basta
un boton. (for an example, one button suffices). It is admitted that there are
several other cases submitted for decision as far back as ten (10) years ago that
have remained undecided by the First Division, of which Justice Garchitorena is
presiding justice and chairman. Indeed, there is ev en one case, which is a
simple motion to withdraw the information filed by the prosecutor. This has
remained unresolved for more than seven (7) years (since 1994). The
compliance submitted by the Sandiganbayan presiding justice incriminates him.
The memorandum submitted by the Court Administrator likewise testifies to the
unacceptable situation in the Sandiganbayan. Indeed, there is a disparity in the
reports submitted by the Sandiganbayan presiding justice and the OCA.
According to the Court Administrator, t he cases submitted for decision that were
still pending promulgation before the five divisions of the Sandiganbayan are:

73 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

We find that Presiding Justice Francis E. Garchitorena failed to devise an


efficient recording and filing system to enable him to monitor the flow of cases
and to manage their speedy and timely disposition. This is his duty on which he
failed.
b. Applicability of SC Adm. Circular No. 10-94.-- Supreme Court Circular No.
10-94 applies to the Sandiganbayan.
Administrative Circular 10-94 directs all trial judges to make a physical
inventory of the cases in their dockets.
Administrative sanctions must be imposed. Mora decidendi reprobatur in lege.
Again, we reiterate the principle that decision-making is the most important of all
judicial functions and responsibilities. In this area, Presiding Justice Francis E.
Garchitorena, as the ponente assigned to the cases submitted for
decision/resolution long ago, some as far back as more than ten (10) years ago,
has been remiss constituting gross neglect of duty and inefficiency. As we said in
Canson, unreasonable delay of a judge in resolving a case amounts to a denial
of justice, bringing the Sandiganbayan into disrepute, eroding the public faith
and confidence in the judiciary.
Consequently, Presiding Justice Francis E. Garchitorena should be relieved
of all trial and administrative work as Presiding Justice and as Chairman, First
Division so that he can devote himself full time to decision-making until his
backlog is cleared. He shall finish this assignment not later than six (6) months
from the promulgation of this resolution.
15. RE: PROBLEM OF DELAYS IN CASES BEFORE THE SANDIGANBAYAN,
A.M. No. 00-8-05-SC, January 31, 2002, En Banc
PJ Garchitorena could not complain that he did not know he was at peril of
sanctions. A judge worthy of the office ought to know that he is in peril of
administrative sanctions, including removal from office, the moment he incurs
delay in deciding cases. Mora decidendi reprobatur in lege. In Canson v.
Garchitorena, we admonished PJ Garchitorena that any act that would deprive a
party of the right to a just and speedy trial shall be dealt with severely.
Furthermore, in the case of Licaros v. Sandiganbayan, we said that Presiding
Justice Garchitorena was in danger of chastisement for delay in the
decision in that case, forcing the Supreme Court to dismiss the charges
against the accused for violation of his Constitutional right to speedy
disposition of the case.
PJ Garchitorena complains that he was singled out. Begrudged is how it
appears to him. Truth is, it was PJ Garchitorenas actions and inactions that
singled him out. PJ Garchitorena stands out in the entire judiciary. He gave the

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 74

backlogs to the other justices unloading to them cases already submitted for
decision long ago in the guise of reorganization. Such unloading of cases
submitted to PJ Garchitorena and re-assignment to the newly appointed justices
was not warranted under the law creating additional divisions of the
Sandiganbayan. First, he has been Presiding Justice for the last sixteen (16)
years. Second, the First Division he chairs suffers from the biggest backlog of
both pending and unassigned cases. He has not assigned the cases, or worse,
he chose the cases to be re-assigned or unloaded.
More, we said, a judge should perform official duties honestly, and with
impartiality and diligence. He should administer justice impartially and without
delay. A magistrate should dispose of t he courts business promptly and decide
cases within the required period. For justice delayed is often justice denied, and
delay in the disposition of cases erodes the faith and confidence of the public in
the institution of justice, lowers standards and brings them into disrepute. It has
been held that every judge must cultivate a capacity for quick decisions. He must
not delay by slothfulness of mind or body, the judgment which a party justly
deserves. For the public trust character of a judges office imposes upon him the
highest degree of responsibility in the discharge of his obligation to promptly
administer justice. No less than the fundamental law requires that cases be
decided with dispatch. The requirement that cases be decided within a specified
period from their submission is designed to prevent delay in the administration of
justice. In fact, a judge may even be held criminally liable for malicious delay
in the administration of justice.
PJ Garchitorena recognizes that it is the Division Chairman who is tasked
with the duty to assign cases. The duty arises as soon as the case is raffled to
the division, if not to a specific member.
Since he failed to make the assignment, he is deemed to have taken on the
task of writing the decision himself. He shall be deemed the ponente. While
there was no advantage to PJ Garchitorena in not distributing the cases at an
earlier time as he submits, still the administration of justice is disadvantaged to
the prejudice of the parties.

oooOOOooo

75 Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases

Handbook on Laws, Circulars and Jurisprudence on Speedy Trial and Disposition of Criminal Cases 76

INDEX

-AActions, causes for dismissal


Arraignment.
- causes of delay.
- duties of judge
- how made
- plea bargaining
- procedure.
- suspension of..
- when held.
Arrest, warrant
- when issued.

10
A-21
21, A-23
A-27
59-60
20
19-20
A-23
2
A-11

-BBail, hearing required A-28


Bill of particulars 21
-CCalendar of cases. 8
Certiorari, petition for 18-9
Certiorari, prohibition, mandamus & quo warranto. 31
Child abuse cases
- precedence over all cases 13
- when commenced.. 13
Clerk of Court
- duties in calendaring cases 8
Complaint or information
- causes of delay after receipt.. 16
-motion to withdraw. 17-18
-petition for review.. 16
- procedure.. 15-16
Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act.. 6-7
Corporate rehabilitation
- confidentiality of trade secrets and information. 47
- executory nature of orders 47
- guidelines to be observed by designated RTCs 49-51
- interim rules of procedure. 46
- nature of proceedings 46-47
- rehabilitation 47-48

- service of pleadings and documents..


- venue
Counsel
- de oficio
- when sanctioned, instances.
Court of Appeals
- action on certain petitions.
- action on motions
- adjudication, process of.
- action by a justice
- who may participate
- assignment of justice for study and report..
- confiscation of bond
- contempt of court
- decisions, certification of
- division.
- docket and other lawful fees
- effect of an appeal to the Supreme Court.
- entry of judgment..
- jurisdiction and manner of exercise
- organization and officials.
- power to receive evidence..
- powers and functions
- precedence and protocol.
- procedure in disposition of pleadings, motions and papers
- processing of cases and interlocutory matters.
- processing of ordinary appeals
- civil cases
- criminal cases
- processing of petitions for review and original actions
- priorities in adjudication of cases
- promulgation of decisions and resolutions
- reorganization of divisions
- resolution, definition of..
- station and place of holding sessions.
- study, report and deliberation on the case
- transmittal of records
Criminal cases
- party or complainant is a tourist.
- stages in.

47
47
21
5-6
33-34
34-35
32
33
32
32
31
31
36-37
27-28
31
37
38
27-28
26-7
33
27
28-29
29
29
29-31
29-30
30-31
31
35
37
28
37
27
35-36
38
12-13
14

-DDangerous Drugs Act of 2002


- jurisdiction of courts.

- preliminary investigation, conduct of.


- trial period..
Decisions, when promulgated..
Delay
- causes of during arraignment
- length of
- periods excluded.
- remedies
Demurrer to evidence
- constitutes a valid acquittal
- when denied.
Due process of law
- temporary appointment of counsel de oficio

7
7
11
A-23
65
3-4
A-23
24
A-29
A-30
A-32

-EEvidence
- offer to be made when witness testified

A-33

-HHabeas Corpus

31

-IInformation, when issued


Intra-Corporate Controversies Under RA 8799
- assignment of cases..
- cases covered.
- commencement of action and pleadings
- affidavits, documentary and other evidence..
- answer.
- complaint.
- pleadings allowed..
- summons.
- verification
- executory nature of decisions and orders..
- interim rules of procedure.
- liberal construction of rules
- modes of discovery
- pre-trial.
- prohibited pleadings
- service of pleadings
- signing of pleadings
- suppletory application of Rules of Court.

7
53
51-52
53-56
55-56
55
54
54
54
54
52
51-58
52
56
56-57
53
52
52-3
52

LAWS CITED
CONSTITUTION
Art.III, sec. 2............................................................................ A-8
sec.14(2).................
..................................................... A-30
Art. VIII sec. 15....................................................................... 2, 66
sec. 15 (1) (2)............................................................ 72
sec. 16....................................................................... 62
Art. IX, sec. 12........................................................................ A-18
ACTS, REPUBLIC ACTS, ETC.
Rev. Penal Code
Art. 8(1), par. 2 (former Art. 12(1), par. 2.................... A-24
Art. 125.............
.......................................................... 15
Pres. Decree No. 1606 (as amended by RA 7975 and
RA 8249).............
....................................................... 38
Rep. Act No. 6770, sec. 13................................................... A-18
Rep. Act No. 8246, sec.3 .................................................... 27
Rep. Act No. 8493 (Speedy Trial Act).. .................................
sec. 6.......................................................................... 2, 23
sec. 7.......................................................................... 2, 23
sec. 9.. 3, 23
sec. 10 3
Rep. Act No. 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs
Act of 2002), sec. 90 6, 20
Revised Rules of Court
1997 Rules of Civil Procedure
Rule 30, sec. 2. 8
secs. 3 & 4. 9
Rule 20, secs. 1 & 2. 8
Rules 42, 43 & 45 63
Rule 65, sec. 7.. 18
sec. 8.. 19
Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure
Rule 110, sec. 2, 6-11 A-5
sec. 3 .. A-4
sec. 13.. A-3
Rule 111 secs. 6 & 7 18
Rule 112, sec. 1 15,
sec. 3.. A-2, A-3, A-5, A-6
sec. 6.. A-11
sec. 7.. 15, A-1
sec. 8(a). A-10
sec. 9.. A-2
Rule 113, sec. 5. A-1

Rule 114, sec. 2 A-38


sec. 8.. 24
Rule 116, sec. 1 19, 20
sec. 2.. A -21, A-22
sec. 6.. 19
sec. 9... 21
sec. 11 21, A-23
sec. 12 A-26
Rule 117, sec. 3. A-5
sec. 4 21
Rule 118, sec. 1. 60
secs. 1 & 2A-21
Rule 119, sec. 9. A-28
sec. 23. 24
Rule 120, sec. 6.. .25, A-34, A-38
Revised Rules on Evidence
Rule 132, sec. 34.. A-33
Rule 132, secs. 35 & 36.. 2, 5
Legal Ethics
Rule 139-B Disbarment and Discipline of
Attorneys 19
Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 1,
Rule 1.02 66
Canon 3, Rule 3.05.. 66, 68
Supreme Court Issuances
Administrative Order No. 72-88. 8
Administrative circular No. 13-87.. 66
No. 1-88. 66
No. 10-94 74
No. 38-98 20, 22, 67
No. 2-99.. 12, 13
No. 3-99.. 7, 67, 68
No. 58-2002 12
A.M. No. 00-11-03-SCReso lution Designating
Certain Branches of Regional Trial Courts to Try
and Decide Cases Formerly Cognizable by the
Securities and Exchange Commission, Promulgated
November 21, 2000.. 49-51
Resolution on the Creation of Night Courts or
Special Tourist Courts Exclusively to Attend to
Tourist-Related Crimes , A.M. No. 02-8-12-SC,
Dated September 10, 2002.. 12
(Re: Proposed) Interim Rules of Procedure Governing
Intra-Corporate Controversies Under RA 8799,
A.M. No. 1-2-04-SC, March 13, 2001. 51

Re: Interim Rules of Procedure on Corporate


Rehabilitation, A.M. No. 00-8-10-SC,
November 21, 2000 46
Rule on Guidelines to be Observed by Trial Court
Judges and Clerks of Court in the Conduct of
Pre-Trial and Use of Deposition-Discovery
Measures, A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC, effective
August 16, 2004. 58, A-21
Rule on Summary Procedure, A.M. No. 90-9-1437MetTC, dated October 2, 1990
12
Court of Appeals 2002 Internal Rules, effective
February 28, 2005.
26
Revised Internal Rules of the Sandiganbayan.
40
Administrative Agencies
DOJ Circular No. 70, dated July 3, 2000..
A-11
sec. 3..
A-16
sec. 7....16, A-12, A-15
sec. 9 16
sec. 11.. 17
sec. 1217, A-12, A-13, A-16
Implementing Circular No. 38-98, re RA 8493,
took effect on September 15, 1998. 4
sec. 8 3
sec. 12. 5
sec. 13.. 6
sec. 14.. 6

CASES CITED
TITLE OF CASE

PAGE

-BBarker v. Wingo, 33 L. ED. 101 (1972)..


Bautista v. Dy Bun Chin, 49 O.G. 179 (1952)..
Bayani v. People, G.R. No. 155619, August. 14, 2007..
Bernardo v. Abeto, C.A.-G.R . No. 6076, January 31, 1940
Binay v. Sandiganbayan; Magsaysay v. Sandiganbayan,
G.R. Nos. 120681-83 & 128136, October 1, 1999,
316 SCRA 65 ..

A-19
A-37
A-33
A-36

71

-CCabugao v. People, G.R. No. 158033, July 30, 2004,


435 SCRA 624 A-33
Cadauan v. Alivia, A.M. No. RT J-00-1595, October 24, 2000,
344 SCRA 174 .................................... 64, 70
Castillo, et al. v. Sandiganbayan (Second Division, et al.,
G.R. No. 109271, March 14, 2000, 328 SCRA 69 .. 71
Cea, et al. v. Cinco, 96 Phil. 31 (1954).. A-36
Cinco v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 92362-67, October 15, 1991,
202 SCRA 726 .. A-5
Congregation of the Religious of the Virgin Mary v. Court of
Appeals, G.R. No. 126363, June 26, 1998,
291 SCRA 385 .. A-29
Corpuz v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 162214, November 11,
2004, 442 SCRA 294 ..
A-18
Crespo v. Mogul, G.R. No. 53373, June 30, 1987,
151 SCRA 462...18, A-17, A-19, A-20
-DDaan v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 163972-77, March 28, 2008.
Dansal, et al. v. Fernandez, Sr., et al., G.R. No. 126814,
March 2, 2000, 327 SCRA 145 .
De Vera v. Layague, A.M. No. RTJ-93-986, September 26, 2000,
341 SCRA 67 ..
De Vera v. Pineda, G.R. No. 96333, September 2, 1992,
213 SCRA 434 .
Diokno v. Rehabilitation Finance Corp., 91 Phil. 608 (1952)
Dimayacyac v. Court of Appeals, et al., G.R. No. 136264,
May 28, 2004, 430 SCRA 121 ..
Doromal v. Sandiganbayan, 177 SCRA 354 (1989).

A-21
71
A-19
A-29
A-14
64
A-2

Dusky v. U.S., 362 U.S. 402, 4 L. ED 2d 824, 80 S. Ct 788 (1960)

A-25

-EEstrada v. People, G.R. No. 162371, August 25, 2005


468 SCRA 233 ..

A-30

-FFernandez v. Fernandez, G.R. No. 143256, August 28, 2001,


416 Phil. 322 .
Florendo v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 110886, December 30,
1994, 239 SCRA 325 ..

A-31
A-38, A-39

-GGamas v. Oco, A.M. No. MTJ-99-1231, March 17, 2004,


425 SCRA 588 ...
Gaudencio v. Pacis, A.M. No . MTJ-03-1502, August 6, 2003,
408 SCRA 350 ..
Gonzales v. Court of A ppeals, 343 Phil. 297
Gonzales v. Presiding Judge of Branch I of the Regional Trial
Court of Bohol, G.R. No. 75856, June 4, 1990
186 SCRA 101 ..
Gorlon v. Regional Trial C ourt of Cebu, Branch 17,
G.R. No. 102131, August 31, 1992, 213 SCRA 138 q
Government v. El Hogar Filipino, 50 Phil. 399 (1927).
Guiani, et al. v. Sandiganbayan (First Division), et al.,
G.R. Nos. 146897-917, August 6, 2002, 386 SCRA 436
Gurbax Singh Pabla & Co, et .al, v. Reyes, et. al, 92 Phil.
177 (1952).

A-27
67
A-16

A-36
A-15
A-14
69
A-37

-HHo v. People, G.R. Nos. 106632 & 106678, October 9, 1997,


280 SCRA 365 ..
Hodges v. U.S., 408 F. 2d 543 (1969)....
Hoehne v. Plata, A.M. No. MT J-02-1458, October 10, 2002,
390 SCRA 555 ..

A-10
A-19
68

-JJose v. Suarez, G.R. No. 176795, June 30, 2008,


556 SCRA 773

A-20

-KKuizon v. Desierto, G.R. Nos. 140619-24, March 9, 2000,


354 SCRA 158 . A-16
-LLadino v. Garcia, 333 Phil. 254 (1996)..
Ladlad, et al. v. Velasco, et. al., G.R. Nos. 172070-72, 172074-76
& 175013, June 1, 2007, 523 SCRA 318..
Larranaga v. Court of Appeals , G.R. No. 130644, March 13,
1998, 287 SCRA 581 ...
Libuit v. People, G.R. No. 154363, September 13, 2005,
469 SCRA 610 .
Lim, Sr. v. Felix, G.R . Nos. 94054-77, 94266-69,
February 19, 1991, 194 SCRA 292 ...
Lugtu v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 42037, March 21, 1990,
183 SCRA 388 ..

A-21
A-5
A-2
A-32
A-11
A-27

-MMaguddatu v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 139599,


February 23, 2000, 326 SCRA 362 ...
Mangubat v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 60613-20, April 20,
1985, 135 SCRA 732 ...
Martinez v. Court of Appeal s, G.R. No. 112387, October 13,
1994, 237 SCRA 575 ...
Martinez v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 168827, April 13, 2007,
521 SCRA 176 ...
Maunlad Savings & Loan Association, Inc. v. Court of Appeals,
399 Phil. 590 (2000)..
Monterola v. Caoibes, Jr., A. M. No. RTJ-01-1620, March 18,
2002, 379 SCRA 334
Morandarte v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 123586, August 12,
2004, 436 SCRA 213 .

A-38
A-28
A-19
A-5
A-33
69
A-31

-NNeypes, et al. v. Court of Appeals, et al., G.R. No. 141524,


September 14, 2005, 469 SCRA 633

63

-OOffice of the Ombudsman v. Castro, G.R. No. 164678,


October 20, 2005, 473 SCRA 608 ..
Officers and Members of the IBP Baguio-Benguet Chapter,

A-16

Cesar G. Oracion, President v. Pamintuan,


A.M. No. RTJ-02-1691, January 16, 2004,
420 SCRA 1 ..
Okabe v. Gutierrez, et al., G.R. No. 150185, May 27, 2004,
429 SCRA 685 .
Olivas v. Office of the Ombudsman, G.R. No. 102420,
December 20, 1994, 239 SCRA 283
Ong v. People, G.R. No. 140904, October 9, 2000,
342 SCRA 372 .
Oporto, Jr. v. Monserat e, 408 Phil. 561 (2001)

66
A-8
A-4
A-29
A-4

-PPaderanga v. Drilon, G.R. No. 96080, April 19, 1991,


196 SCRA 86 .
Pascua v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 140243, December 14,
2000, 348 SCRA 197...
People of the Philippines v. Anion, G.R. No. 39083,
March 16, 1988, 158 SCRA 701
People of the Philippines v. Aruta, G.R. No. 120915, April 3,
1988, 288 SCRA 626 ..
People of the Philippines v. Baluran, 143 Phil. 36 (1981).
People of the Philippines v. Bariquit, G.R. No. 122733,
October 2, 2000, 341 SCRA 600 ..
People of the Philippines v. Bautista, 49 Phil. 389 (1926).
People of the Philippines v. Bautista, 106 Phil. 39 (1959).
People of the Philippines v. Besonia, 466 Phil. 822 (2004)
People of the Philippines v. Court of Appeals, 52 O.G. 5825
(1956)..
People of the Philippines v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 140285,
September 27, 2006.
People of the Philippines v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 159261,
February 21, 2007, 516 SCRA 383
People of the Philippines v. Dawaton, 437 Phil. 861 (2002)..
People of the Philippines v. Historillo, 389 Phil. 141 (2000)..
People of the Philippines v. Ibaez, 92 Phil. 936 (1953)
People of the Philippines v. Inting, G.R. No. 88919, July 25,
1990, 187 SCRA 788 ...
People of the Philippines v. Jaranilla, G.R. No. 28547
February 22, 1974, 55 SCRA 563 ..
People of the Philippines v. Jose, G.R. No. 130487, June 19,
2000.
People of the Philippines v. Larraaga, G.R. Nos. 138874-75,
February 3, 2004, 421 SCRA 530 ....
People of the Philippines v. Macalalag, G.R. No. 164358,
December 20, 2006

A-3
A-34
A-28
A-9
A-16
A-27
A-27
A-27
A-22
A-35
A-38
A-23
A-22
A-4
A-27
A-9, A-10
A-36
A-23
A-31
20

People of the Philippines v. Magpalao, G.R. No. 92415,


May 14, 1991, 197 SCRA 79 .
People of the Philippines v. Mamarion, 459 Phil. 51 (2003)
People of the Philippines v. Mendiola, 82 Phil. 740 (1949).
People of the Philippines v. Poculan, 167 SCRA 176 (1988).
People of the Philippines v. Prades, G.R. No. 127569, July 30,
1998, 293 SCRA 411..
People of the Philippines v. Serzo, Jr., G.R. No. 118435,
June 20, 1997, 274 SCRA 553
People of the Philippines v. Tabag, G.R. No. 116511
February 12, 1997, 268 SCRA 115 .
People of the Philippines v. Tabayoyong, G.R. No. 31084,
May 29, 1981, 104 SCRA 724 ..
People of the Philippines v. Tac-an, G.R. No. 148000
February 27, 2003, 398 SCRA 373 ..
People of the Philippines v. Villarama, Jr., G.R. No. 99287,
June 23, 1992, 210 SCRA 246 ....
People of the Philippines v. Vitancur, G.R. No. 128872,
November 22, 2000, 345 SCRA 414 ...
Perez v. Hagonoy Rural Bank, Inc., G.R. No.12620, March 9,
2000, 327 SCRA 588 ..
Philippine Free Press, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 132864,
October 24, 2005, 473 SCRA 639 .
Po Sun Tun v. Prize, 54 Phil. 192 (1929)..
Problem of Delays in Cases Before the Sandiganbayan,
A.M. No. 00-8-05-SC, En Banc, November 28, 2001
January 31, 2002, En Banc..

A-31
A-22
A-28
A-9, A-11
A-39
A-32
A-30
A-27
22
A-21, A-22
A-32
A-20
A-15
A-37
71
74

-RRamos v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 58876, November 27, 1990,


191 SCRA 671 ..
Register of Deeds of Manila v. Tinoco Vda. De Druz, 95 Phil.
818 (1954)...
Report on the Judicial Audit Conducted in the Municipal Trial
Court, Bocaue, Bulacan, A.M. No. 00-3-50-MTC,
July 21, 2003, 407 SCRA 1 .....
Report on the Judicial Audit Conducted in the Regional Trial
Court, Branch 5, Iligan City, A.M. No. 02-10-628-RTC,
October 1, 2004..
People v. Kayanan, 172 Phil. 728 (1978).
Rizal Commercial Banking Corp. v. Intermediate Appellate Court,
G.R. No. 74851, December 9, 1999, 320 SCRA 279
Roberts, Jr. v. Court of Appeal s, 324 Phil. 568 (1996), 254 SCRA
307 (1996).

A-27
A-39

68

63
A-22
A-12
A-17

Romualdez v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 152259, July 29, 2004,


435 SCRA 371 . A-23
-SSales v. Sandiganbayan, 421 Phil. 176 (2001)
San Agustin v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 158211,
August 31, 2004, 437 SCRA 392 (2004)..
Santos v. Orda, Jr., G.R. No. 158236, September 1, 2004,
437 SCRA 504 ...
Santos-Cancio v. Gonzalez, et al., G.R. No. 175057,
January 29, 2008
Sayson v. People, G.R. No. 51745, October 28, 1988, 160 SCRA
680
Seron v. Rodriguez, 110 Phil. 548 (1960)..
Soliven v. Makasiar, G.R . Nos. 82585, 82827 & 83979,
November 24, 1988, 167 SCRA 394 ..
Soriano v. Casanova, G.R. No. 163400, March 31, 2006,
486 SCRA 431
Spouses Kiat & Reaport v. Mariano, A.M. No. MTJ-00-1253,
July 11, 2001, 361 SCRA 1 ..

A-17
A-1
A-19
A-2
A-33
A-38
A-10
A-3
70

-TTayaban v. People, G.R. No. 150194, March 6, 2007,


517 SCRA 488 .... A-4
Ty-Dazo v. Sandiganbayan, 424 Ph il. 945, 374 SCRA 200 (2002) 64
-UU.S. v. Beecham, 28 Phil. 258 (1914)
U.S. v. Bibal, 4 Phil. 369 (1905).
U.S. v. Guendia, 37 Phil. 337 (1917)
U.S. v. Sermon, 228 F. Supp. 972 (1964)

A-36
A-4
A-24
A-25

-VValencia v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 165996, October 17,


2005, 473 SCRA 279 .... A-29
Victorias Milling Co., Inc. v. Social Security Commission,
114 Phil. 555 (1962) A-12
Villaflor v. Viva, G.R. No. 134744, January 16, 2001,
349 SCRA 194 A-2

-W
Webb v. De Leon, G.R. Nos. 121234, 121245 & 121297,
August 23, 1995, 247 SCRA 652 (1995)

A-9, A-10

-YYoutsey v. U.S., 97 F. 937 (1989)


Yulo v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 142762, March 4,
2005, 452 SCRA 705

A-25
62

-ZZuo v. Cabebe, A.M. OCA No . 03-1800-RTJ, November 26,


2004, 444 SCRA 382

A-28

Похожие интересы