Arraignment
-procedure where the accused is brought
before the court to plead to the criminal
charge against him. The charge is read to
him and he is asked to plead guilty or not
guilty.
Note:
NO TRIAL IN ABSENTIA UNLESS THE
ACCUSED HAS BEEN ARRAIGNED; NO
ARRAIGNMENT IN ABSENTIA
Plea
-response made by the accused in open
court upon arraignment
Plea of guilty
-plea where the accused admits his guilt
Freely
Voluntarily
And with full knowledge of the
consequences and meaning of his act, and
With clear understanding of the precise
nature of the crime charged in the
complaint or information
Plea of not guilty
-plea where the accused denies guilt, or
-admits to some of the allegations but sets
up new or additional facts, that if proven,
would exempt him in whole or in part of the
criminal liability that would attach
When plea of not guilty entered
1. When the accused pleads not guilty
2. When he refuses to make a plea
3. When he makes a conditional plea of
guilty
4. When he admits to the truth of some
allegations but interposes excuses or
additional facts which, if duly
established, would exempt him in
whole or in part of the criminal
responsibility
5. When, after a plea of guilt, he
introduces evidence of self-defense or
other exculpatory circumstances
6. When plea is indefinite, ambiguous or
vague
When re-arraignment proper
1. Where it appears that accused is a
deaf-mute, a mental retardate whose
mental age is only 7 years and 9
months and with low IQ of 80 only,
and was tried without the benefit of a
sign language expert (Pp vs Parazo,
1999)
2. Where the trial court failed in its
obligation to explain fully to the
accused the consequences of his plea
of guilt and the probable penalty that
may be imposed (Pp vs Abapo, 2000)
3. Where the information was
substantially amended (Binabay vs Pp,
1971)
Grounds of objection waived by
pleading to the information
1. That the info does not conform
substantially to the prescribed form
and all possible objections to the
sufficiency of info against him
2. Failure of info to allege time with
sufficient definiteness
3. Multiplicity of charges in violation of
Sec 13, Rule 110 [objection may be
made before trial not necessarily
during arraignment]
4. Defects in the manner of his arrest
5. Illegality of his arrest [does not mean
waiver inadmissibility of evidence
seized during illegal arrest]
6. Violation of rights to PI
7. Violation of rights against
unreasonable search and seizure
Four-fold pre-arraignment duties of the
judge
1. To inform the accused that he has the
right to have his own counsel before
being arraigned
2. To ask whether he desires the aid of
counsel
3. To procure the services of counsel, the
court must grant him reasonable time
to do so
4. if he is unable to employ one, the
court must assign a counsel de officio
to defend him
Bill of particulars
-pleading which provides for a more definite
statement of the allegations in the
complaint or info. found to be vague to
enable the accused to properly plead
-purpose: to define, clarify, particularize
and limit or circumscribe the issues in the
case, expedite trial, and assist the court
-issue: whether the allegations of the comp
or info are averred with sufficient
definiteness or particularity to enable the
movant to properly prepare his responsive
pleading and to prepare for trial
Modes of compliance
1. by filing and serving a bill of
particulars containing the statement
sought for, which will become part of
the comp or info
2. by amending the orig info and
indicating therein the amendments by
appropriate marks
Requisites for the issuance of order of
production and inspection
1. there must be a motion showing good
cause therefor
2. the doc must contain evidence
material to any matter involved in the
case
3. the doc must be in possession or
under control of the prosecution,
police or other law investigating
agencies
Guidelines in conducting searching
inquiry
(1) Ascertain from the accused himself:
(a) How he was brought into the custody of
the law;
(b) Whether he had the assistance of a
competent counsel during the custodial and
preliminary investigations; and
(c) Under what conditions he was detained
and interrogated during the investigations.
This is intended to rule out the possibility
that the accused has been coerced or
placed under a state of duress either by
actual threats of physical harm coming from
malevolent quarters or simply because of
the judges intimidating robes.
(2) Ask the defense counsel a series of
questions as to whether he had conferred
with, and completely explained to, the
accused the meaning and consequences of
a plea of guilty.
(3) Elicit information about the personality
profile of the accused, such as his age,
socio-economic status, and educational
background, which may serve as a
trustworthy index of his capacity to give a
free and informed plea of guilty.
(4) Inform the accused the exact length of
imprisonment or nature of the penalty
under the law and the certainty that he will
serve such sentence. For not infrequently,
an accused pleads guilty in the hope of a
lenient treatment or upon bad advice or
because of promises of the authorities or
parties of a lighter penalty should he admit
guilt or express remorse. It is the duty of
the judge to ensure that the accused does
not labor under these mistaken impressions
because a plea of guilty carries with it not
only the admission of authorship of the
crime proper but also of the aggravating
circumstances attending it, that increase
punishment.
(5) Inquire if the accused knows the crime
with which he is charged and fully explain
to him the elements of the crime which is
the basis of his indictment. Failure of the
court to do so would constitute a violation
of his fundamental right to be informed of
the precise nature of the accusation against
him and a denial of his right to due process.
(6) All questions posed to the accused
should be in a language known and
understood by the latter.
(7) The trial judge must satisfy himself that
the accused, in pleading guilty, is truly
guilty. The accused must be required to
narrate the tragedy or reenact the crime or
furnish its missing details [People v. Pastor,
G.R. No. 140208 (2002)].