ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA

Q: What is arraignment?
A: It is the formal mode and manner of the implementing the accused
constitutional right of an accused to be informed of the nature and cause
of the accusation against him

Q: Why is arraignment important in a criminal procedure?

A: It is in order to appraise the accused of the constitutionally protected
right and in order for the accused to be able to, inform the accused of the
nature of the accusation against him and in order for the accused to
prepare a defense

Q: So you are telling me that it is upon arraignment that the accused is

informed of the charges against him? Then why is it so important?
A: its in order to give rise to the plea of the accused of guilty or not guilty
and in order to know if when the accused plead guilty to know if it is
done with full knowledge of the accused
Q: Arraignment is so important because this is not actually the first time
that the accused will be inform of the crimes against him at the very start
of the preliminary investigation when the resolution was issued by the
prosecutor the accused is required to be furnished a copy otherwise the
resolution shall not be promulgated at the same time verified in the
information and warrant of arrest issued the accused is being inform of
why he is being arrested for. Then what is the purpose and importance of
arraignment in the first place it is the avenue with all off the circumstance
in a criminal case not only the charges will be brought to the accused,
jurisdiction over the subject matter, jurisdiction over the person of the
accused, the bill of particulars, whether it will be suspended or not so
everything from the preliminary investigation until before arraignment
will accumulate when he enters plea during arraignment.

Q: From rule 110 - 115 can you cite procedures that requires arraignment?
Since the beginning we have been discussing about arraignment and I
wanted to know what specific procedure from rule 110 - 115 has this
concept we discuss
A: Preliminary Investigation?
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA

Q: so arraignment is discuss in preliminary investigation? I’ll give one

arraignment is discuss when you will file a formal or substantial
amendment because when you file a substantial amendment it can only be
filed before arraignment but if it is formal you can it before or after
arraignment. Any other procedure in which we have discuss arraignment
from rule 110 - 115?
A: the legality of the preliminary investigation?
Q: so to determine the legality of the preliminary investigation? What?
A: legality of the warrant of arrest

Q: so class that is another concept where you can question the legality of
the warrant of arrest before the accused enters its plea. Okay now last
procedure?
A: search warrant?

Q: no. This has been discuss in rule 110. Arraignment is also important in
determining the sufficiency of the information because that is the last
time when they would be able to question the sufficiency of the
information before arraignment afterwards after you enter the plea you
cannot anymore question the validity or sufficiency of the information for
it is deem waived.

Q: Why do you waived the right to question the arrest and sufficiency of
the information upon arraignment, upon entering the plea during
arraignment?
A: because upon there is a failure upon the part of the dependent to raise
such irregularities

Q: why not during pre trial or trial why not in joining bill of particulars
why is in arraignment why is it that the reckoning point of the waiver is
arraignment?
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
A: Because arraignment is the time where the accused is fully informed
of everything in regards to the crime. This is the time where he has the
full opportunity po to exercise such rights

Q: Arraignment is the only official time when the accused will give
positive reaction to the court. What is this positive action while entering
his plea what is the significance of this positive action by entering his
plea in court. It means that you are accepting the jurisdiction and
authority of the court that is why upon arraignment entering of plea you
now waived the defects in the information and warrant of arrest because
you have accepted the jurisdiction and authority of the court from
entering your plea

Q: When is arraignment made?

A: Arraignment is made after the filling of the information

Q: that it? After filling of information then arraignment?

A: and then there is a determination
Q: the rules of court is very specific when the arraignment is made so
specific that it actually the actual period
A: it is made within 30 days from the determination of the jurisdiction
over the person who is the accused

Q: so all cases you will have arraignment 30 days from acquiring the
jurisdiction over the person of the accused
A: there is this exception of 30 days from making the arraignment if it is
provided by the special law

Q: what?
A: there is an exception

Q: what is the exception? It is very important to determine the period for

arraignment because in actual trial arraignment is your actual deadline
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
when you give everything, bill of particulars motion to quash motion to
suspension the you are dead meat so you must know the period when
arraignment shall be made
A: in so cases where arraignment is given when the complainant is about
to leave for another country

Q: so when one would leave for another country there would be shorter
period to arraign?
A: yes sir

Q: Really?
A: and when there is a violation of child abuse acts and when the accused
is in preventive detention

Q: what happens when the accused is in preventive detention

A: when the accused is in preventive detention the case shall be raffled

Q: in how many days? *nag comment siya na wag daw tumingin sa note*
A: I don’t know how many days sir

Q: 3 days and then?

A: all the information will be transferred to the judge in the span of those
2 days

Q: and then? When is arraignment made? As a general rule arraignment is

made 30 days from the time the court acquires jurisdiction over the
accused the exception is when the accused is in preventive detention,
where he is detained in the city jail or provincial jail. The arraignment
should be conducted first there would be 15 days, raffle then you will
count 10 days from the said raffle that is when you will have your
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
arraignment. The reason why there is a shorter period for arraignment in a
preventive detention because there is a deprivation of the right to liberty

Q: What happens during arraignment?

A: During arraignment the court or the clerk of court where in the case is
held must inform the accused of the nature and cause of the accusation
against him

Q: really? Have you attended arraignment?

A: yes

Q: okay so what happen

A: in arraignment the information against the accused would be read to
him

Q: in the information? When there is 70 counts of bouncing check law

you will have to
A: the offense charge sir

Q: the offense charge or the information?

A: information

Q: can you read section 1 of rule 116? what happens during arraignment?
A: the accused must be arraign before the court where the complaint or
information was filed or assigned in trial the arraignment shall be made in
open court

Q: Step in arraignment 1) made in open court 2) the judge or clerk of

court shall furnish the accused a copy of the complain or information 3)
reading the same in the language or dialect known to him 4) asking him
whether he pleads guilty or not guilty.
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA

Q: Suppose the court did not read the complaint or information to the
accused is it valid?
A: it is not necessarily invalid

Q: so even though it is provided in section 1 rule 116 that during

arraignment the information must be read in a language known to the
accused and if the court does not follow that their is no invalid
arraignment
A: because there are other ways
Q: it is stated in section 1 that there are other ways to read the
information if not in a open court?
A: No sir such is an exception

Q: so you can see such exception in section 1 rule 116 the why are you
making such rules
A: the supreme court

Q: the supreme court make such rules? yet it is stated that the information
shall be read for the accused so if the court does not read the information
to the accused during arraignment what happens
A: if the court did not read the information against the accused during the
arraignment the accused would be deprived of the constitutional right to
be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him
therefore

Q: so not reading the information is one of the grounds to dismiss the

case due to improper arraignment?
A: the accused may file a motion to quash
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
Q: the accused can file a motion to quash due to failure to read the
information in an open court
A: the jurisdiction of the accused is not acquired

Q: because the information was not read?

A: yes sir

Q: so it is one of the grounds to dismiss the case

A: yes sir because if the information is not read

Q: okay class I will tell you a story this happened to me when I was a
student intern in law school so I attend my first arraignment in my 3rd
year as a legal intern. So I attend the first hearing and it was called 8:30
am and it is an arraignment the charge against the accused is violation
(hindi ko po maintindihan yung english term na sinsabi niya basta yung
pag tambay daw po) the penalty for the “pagtambay” is one month
imprisonment to arresto minor so the accused who is obviously a tambay
goes to court and then he was furnished a copy of the information that is
written in english so I have memorized section1 rule 116 and I know the
next step after furnishing the copy of the information the step is the
reading of the information in open court and you know what happen class
the judge ask guilty or not guilty is that correct. I was looking in the court
room and thinking that he was committing a mistake for it was stated in
rule 116 sec 1 that the information should be read in open court then why
is it the clerk of court is not reading the information. Apparently what has
been stated in the rules of court may not actually reflect what happens in
real life so in that case class you only read the information to the accused
in open court if the accused invokes his right to be read the information if
not then the court will presume that the accused has sufficiently read the
information by himself the reason is because of the number of cases read
before the court if you have visited one of the courts I don’t know here in
lipa city but in metro manila we have 30 cases 40 cases in one morning so
to read all those information would cause so much time so the reason is
for speedy trial non reading of the information in open court is not grave
violation of the rules of court but then again personally I disagree because
it is written in section 1 of rule 116 that it should be read in open court so
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
why are you making an exception. So you know what happen to that case
so the judge ask him of guilty or not guilty the accused said ahh and the
judge said according to the information tumambay ka daw sa ilalim ng C5
bridge totoo ba yun o hindi? Judge 2 months na po akong nakakulong
anong penalty nung violation ng ordinance 1 month okay so if you plead
guilty you will now be released if you do not plead guilty you will remain
in detention even though you have served the maximum period so what
will you say. Sabi nung accused guilty na lang judge then the judge said
oh PAO talk to your client explain first what will be the impact if the
accused would plead guilty. So thats what happen in actual court trial
even if the rules of court is very perfect the actual thing is not actually
letter per letter followed in actual practice.

Q: How about before arraignment what is the duty of the court. Because
during arraignment it must be done in open court furnish a copy of the
information to the accused read the information and ask him whether he
is guilty or not guilty. Before the actual procedure for arraignment what
happens
A: the duty of the court before arraignment is to provide for a counsel de
officio

Q: thats not like that the duty of the court is to inform the accused that he
has right to counsel whats the second duty of the court
A: the second duty when the accused has no counsel of his choice then
the court shall provide for a counsel de officio coming from the member
of the bar which is in good standing

Q: that is not 100% correct you will ask whether he wants a counsel and
the third one is if the accused said he wants a counsel then it is the only
time that he would be provided by a counsel de officio. When can an
accused represent himself without a counsel
A: When he waives po his right to counsel

Q: When nga? When can the accused represent himself without a counsel
so suppose the crime charge is rape with homicide can you waive your
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
right to counsel. So judge I wont be represented by a counsel I will
defend myself can he do that?
A: no po

Q: then when can he represent himself without counsel. When can he

appear in court without a counsel. Common it is stated in rule 115 and
116 when can an accused represent himself without a counsel. There is
this I misconception that when you appear in court you will always have
a lawyer for there is an instance when you could appear in court without a
lawyer even in criminal case when is that. Alright in rule 115 it provides
for that unless the court is convince that the accused can represent himself
without a counsel then he would be allowed to hear the case without
counsel. However in rule 116 the provides a specification the accused is
allowed to represent himself if base on the gravity of the offense the
offense is not serious and next if the questions in the trial is no difficult so
that are the 2 cases when an accused could represent himself without
counsel. The gravity of the offense and the difficulty of the question
found in the arraignment case. But then again I believe that it is very
vague so in the internal rules of the clerk of court it is very specific where
you can have no counsel at all this happen it is in the first level courts
municipal trial court and metropolitan trial court unless the judge finds
the case to be very difficult and the crime is very grave however when
you step in the regional trial court you will always have a counsel
because it is not only base on the gravity of the offense but because it is
also an appellate court. In appellate court you always need to have a
counsel if you do not have one it will be provided for you is it not a
matter of choice for the accused

Q: is the accused required to be present during arraignment

A: yes po the accused must be personally enters his plea

Q: is the counsel of the accused allowed to represent him during his plea?
A: no po.

Q: why not
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
A: because it is merely stated in the rules of court that the accused should
personally enter his plea
Q: what is the purpose again of arraignment
A: to inform the accused po of the nature and causes of the accusation or
charged against him

Q: so let say the counsel appears in the arraignment and the charges
against his clients was read in open court then the counsel texted the
allegation to the accused with legal basis and legal interpretation.
Therefore the accused is actually informed of the nature and causes of the
accusation against him thus complying with the purpose of arraignment is
that allowed?
A: no po because it is the duty of the court po to that the accused is
inform of the

Q: yes the accused was informed through text then the counsel would tell
the judge that he had already informed the accused therefore the purpose
of the arraignment has already been complied with which is to inform the
accused of the nature and causes of action against him
A: No po

Q: why not
A: because the accused should personally appear

Q: why to be informed? Again the counsel can do that. Actually it would

be more beneficial for the counsel to do that for he could interpret it in a
way that the accused could actually understand it. Why cant it be the
counsel be the one to be present during arraignment. The answer is
because the jurisdiction over the person of the accused is required to be
secured first before arraignment if the accused is not present personally
before the court during arraignment then it is not clear whether the
jurisdiction over the person has been acquired by the court thats the
reason why not only to inform but also to insure that jurisdiction over the
person is acquired
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA

Q: supposed an warrant of arrest is issued to the accused and the accused

evaded arrest from the police operatives will there be an arraignment
A: yes po

Q: so the accused evaded arrest then there is still arraignment

A: yes po

Q: then who would be present in the arraignment? The lawyer?

A: no po there would be no arraignment
Q: so you are telling me that you would not continue the criminal case
just because the accused evaded arrest?
A: yes po

Q: so we will _______ the wills of justice because the accused evaded the
police operatives
A: it is stated po that if no

Q: so we could not continue preliminary investigation, presentation of

evidence, demurer to evidence, trial because the accused evaded arrest
A: yes atty if there is no valid arraignment then there can be no trial in
absensia

Q: so you can easily evade criminal cases before arraignment. Is that fair?
It is actually fair because before arraignment there is no jurisdiction over
the person of the accused. If there is no jurisdiction over the person of the
accused then the courts have no authority in the criminal case.

Q: when is the offended party required to be present in a arraignment

A: during the plea bargaining, determination of in case of civil liability
and other instance when there presence is required
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA

Q: what are these other instance when the presence of the offended party
is required? We actually discuss this during rule 110 and 111
A: during the reimbursement po

Q: Reimbursement of bail? That happens during the decision. We are

talking about instance where the presence of the offended party is
required to be present during arraignment
A: during the determination of the validity of the warrant of arrest

Q: so during the determination of the validity of the warrant of arrest the

presence of the offended is required in court?
A: yes po

Q: no thats the main difference between search warrant and warrant of

arrest. In warrant of arrest you don’t need to examine personally the
witness and the complainant
A: the sufficiency of evidence

Q: you only do that after arraignment. The prosecution has already

presented there evidence that is what you call demurer of evidence. Come
on we have discuss this in rule 110 and 111
A: preliminary investigation?

Q: during preliminary investigation the offended party is present in the

court? All right I’ll give you one example when the presence of the
offended party is required in court. When there would be a substantial
amendment before arraignment when it downgrades the crime the
offended party in that there would be a notice to the offended party to
actually attend the hearing can you give another instance
A: Substitution po
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
Q: the offended party is required to be present in court?
A: in terms po of the change of the nature of the crime

Q: those the rules of court required that the offended party be present
during the substitution. Alright the other instance when the offended
party is required by the court to be present under rule 111 when there is a
compromise when it comes to the civil liability of the offended party so
you do not determine anymore the civil liability because the parties had
already compromise with each other in that instance class the offended
party is required to be present in open court

Q: so what happens when the offended party refuses to appear despite due
notice given by the court during arraignment ?
A: when the offended party

Q: what is the effect if the offended party did not appear in the
arraignment despite due notice
A: it will continue po in absentia

Q: in absentia? There is no arraignment tapus mag trial in absentia na?

Under section 1(f) of rule 116 Arraignment will continue despite the
absence of the offended party provided that the prosecutor is present

Q: Supposed the information is read by the judge or the clerk of court in

open court whats the next step
A: the party will enter his plea whether he is guilty or not guilty

Q: the court will ask the accused whether he would plea guilty or not
guilty however it is not as simple as that because there are types of plea
can you give me atleast 4 types of plea. The first two is already bonus
guilty or not guilty give me the 2 more
A: a plea for lesser offense po and plea of guilty for a capital offense
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA

Q: *pertains dun sa padalawa* that a plea of guilty so its the same.

Another kind of plea? Conditional plea Improvident plea plea with
exculpatory evidence

Q: What are the instances when plea of guilty is entered during

arraignment
A: when the accused plea guilty

Q: we are talking about not guilty

A: when the accused refuses to enter his plea, when the accused plead not
guilty, conditional plea, plead guilty but present exculpatory evidence

Q: what is a conditional plea

A: it is a plea where the accused would accept the plea of guilt but there
would be a condition of lesser penalty

Q: give me an example
A: rather than murder the accused would plea guilty for homicide

Q: is it not a plea for a lesser offence charge? It is really difficult to

identify if it is a conditional plea or plea of lesser offense. The difference
is in conditional plea you plea for the same crime however in the
condition that lesser penalty for that crime would be imposed. So if it is
murder the penalty would be reclusion perpetua you will be having a plea
of guilty provided that you would be having been served for the penalty
of reclusion temporal that is a conditional plea. When you do that you
will be entered with a plea of not guilty. Now the plea for a lesser offense
bagong crime tas lesser offense

Q: when does the accused refuse to enter his plea? Why and when is it
allowed. What is the reason behind this provision? It is because of free
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
will the court cannot force a person to answer otherwise it would be
involuntary servitude. Can you give me an example when the accused
would refuse to enter his plea
A: when an accused was ask to plea but he did not plea

Q: when should the accused do that? That is actually a trial technique,

any way I will tell you a story this was famously utilize by the former
sentor enrile for the crime of plunder during his arraignment he was ask
in the sandiganbayan if he would plea guilty or not guilty senator enrile
did not make a word what is the reason why senator enrile did not enter
any plea because it is a trial technique because at that time he has a
pending motion in the ombudsman to quash the warrant of arrest against
him. If he would enter his plea while a motion to quash is pending he was
actually waiving his right to question the warrant of arrest so its like a
protest to ensure that his quashal of the motion will be entertained even if
there is already arraignment. And enrile is very successful for he was
release 1 month later because according to the court he is ill and old
person that must be release in furtherance of human rights

Q: what is a exculpatory evidence?

A: An exculpatory evidence are evidence which are favorable to the
defense

Q: did you say evidences? Its pieces of evidence. Can you give me an
example? In your criminal law 1 I assume you have discuss exculpatory
circumstances
A: An example of exculpatory evidence is fingerprint or dna

Q: I’ll give you an example, minority is an exculpatory evidence if it is

found in trial, even if he would plea guilty and he is minor of 11 years old
that is an exculpatory evidence what the common part of art 12 of the
revised penal code exempting circumstance so those are the exculpatory
evidence. If you present that evidence automatically your guilt would be
abolished. Alright so when you plead guilty what is the effect?
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
A: when accused pleads guilty its like a judicial confession of admitting
all facts against him

Q: when you plead guilty is the accused allowed to present evidence?

A: when accused pleads guilty it is duty of the court to determine whether
fully understands the consequence of pleading guilty.

Q: the question is may the accused present evidence when he plead guilty?
A: Yes po

Q: yes or do you qualify it? If it is plead guilty on a capital offense they

could still present evidence if it is for not capital offense the general rule
is that you could no longer present evidence because you have admitted
everything exception is if its purpose is for the determination of the
imposed penalty

Q: what is the meaning of the determination of the imposed penalty? It

means that the party may still present evidence with it comes to the
mitigating and aggravating circumstance

Q: lets go first to the mitigating circumstance, if there is a mitigating

circumstance and you plead guilty you may still required to present
evidence the reason behind is because rule 116 very clear to determine
the imposed penalty if there is a plea of guilty. Can you give me the most
common mitigating circumstance in a plea of guilty. You have 10
mitigating circumstance under article 13 choose the most common one
A: voluntary surrender

Q: that is the partner of plea of guilty voluntary surrender. The reason

why it is the most common tandem for it is automatic 1 degree lower
except if it is indivisible penalty so if there is a crime of homicide and the
accused voluntary surrender and plead guilty the penalty would be 1
degree lower so if it is reclusion temporal it would be prision mayor so
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
that one of the common mitigating circumstance when a person plead
guilty

Q: what is the effect when it comes to aggravating circumstance

A: it increases the penalty imposed by the court

Q: so if you plead guilty in an offense you also suffer the penalty of the
aggravating circumstance. So for example you plead guilty on a crime of
murder the you would suffer the aggravating circumstance of treachery,
evident premeditation therefore you will be punish with reclusion
perpetua? Alright again if you plead guilty just like in mitigating you can
still present evidence or you can refute evidence with respect to the other
one is aggravating circumstance and the reason behind it is because the
plea of guilty to a non capital offense you still have the right to counter
the evidence of aggravating circumstance. It that instance you could still
actually question the treachery, evident premeditation even if plead guilty
to that offense

Q: what is a capital offense?

A: capital offense is one where the law imposed death as punishment for
the acts or omission committed

Q: is capital offense suspended or abolish?

A: suspended

Q: not abolish? So any time it can be revived?

A: upon passing of a law

Q: so there must first be a law, the law merely suspend it and the law can
lift the suspension
A: yes attorney
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
Q: in your criminal law 1 it is already discuss the law ra 9341 has abolish
death penalty not merely suspended it. Again it is abolish not suspended
because if it is suspended it can be easily lift by the congress if it is
abolish it must go to the rigorous process of law making power

Q: so according to the constitution death penalty may be imposed subject

to the law pass by congress. Then can you give me a crime which is
punishable by death
A: qualified rape

Q: qualified rape is punishable by death but because of the abolition of

the death penalty what is the imposable penalty
A: reclusion perpetua po

Q: do you know the penalty for rape?

A: reclusion perpetua po

Q: so rape is reclusion perpetua qualified rape reclusion perpetua

A: yes po

Q: is that fair?
A: yes po

Q: its not fair actually thats why I tell you last time and I will tell you
again AM no. 15- 08- 02-sc it that circular the supreme court stated that
when the penalty for example for qualified rape is reclusion perpetua it is
not in the same level as a simple rape the difference is it would now be
reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parol. So in simple rape it can be
subject to pardon within for example 20 years he could avail pardon. If it
is qualified rape were in the penalty is reclusion perpetua without
eligibility for parol you cannot have a pardon from 1 st year until 40 year
that the difference
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA

Q: what is improvident plea of guilt

A: an improvident plea of guilt is one where by the accused pleads guilty
and the accused does not fully comprehend the consequence of such plea

Q: what is the effect

A: the court will explain the consequences of the, the counsel will explain
the nature and consequences of the

Q: so the counsel would explain the improvident plea of guilty

A: yes po

Q: or the improvident guilt will be set aside

A: yes po the counsel would explain the nature and consequence and then
the court will get the plea again of the accused

Q: so the effect of the improvident plea of guilt would be to set aside the
plea because it is a plea which is given without the accused consent.
Supposed there is a plea of guilt in a capital offense what is the duty of
the court?
A: the duty of the court is to conduct searching inquiry to the
voluntariness of the plea and to determine whether the accused is given
the full comprehension and the prosecutors duty is to determine the guilt
of the accused and the particularity of his plea

Q: what is a plea to a lesser offense

A: it is a plea where in the accused pleas guilty but a crime different from
those originally charge? (sorry po hindi ko talaga maintindihan yung
sinsabi ni lian yan lang yung nagets ko)
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
Q: so the plea to a lesser offense the accused will voluntary plea guilty
with respect to a lesser charge. When there is a voluntary agreement
between the parties to plea on a lesser offense would the court have the
discretion to deny the the plea for a lesser offense?
A: no the prosecutor or the offend party

Q: so the judge has no authority to set aside? Because it is in the part of

the prosecutor or the offended party?
A: After trail the court the offender … lesser offense

Q: we are talking about the discretion of the court? If the court has
discretion to set aside the voluntary agreement of the parties to plea to a
lesser offense
A: yes sir

Q: so it is not automatic that it is vested to the offended party or the

prosecutor? Is that what is provided in the rules of court? It is the court
that has discretion to determine if the plea to a lesser charge is valid or in
valid. This is actually discuss in the case of lobrigo. The answer to that is
that the court has discretion to whether they would accept the plea for
lesser offense. How did the court know that because of the use of the
word may. Since the word used is may the court has discretion. Even if
the parties voluntary agreed to plea of a lesser offense it is not automatic
that the court would accept it. For example the court founds that there is a
connivance between the parties then he has discretion to deny the the plea
for lesser offense

Q: when there is a plea for lesser offense is the parties allowed to present
evidence for example to prove the mitigating and aggravating
circumstance
A: yes po
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
Q: is it provided in the rules of court. What rianon stated is presenting
evidence when there is a plea of guilty but what if there is a plea for a
lesser offense
A: the court is still mandated to determine whether or not the offense has
been actually committed

Q: we are not talking the offense we are talking about the aggravating and
mitigating circumstance if they could still present evidence
A: yes sir it is the right of the party to present evidence….. (hindi ko na
naman po maintindihan sinsabi ni lian)

Q: it is provided in the rules of court that they may still provide evidence
when there is a plea for lesser offense? Actually there is non there is
nothing in the rules which states that the parties can present additional
evidence when there is a plea for a lesser offense what the rules of court
provides that they could present evidence when there is a plea of guilty
but if it is a plea of guilty for a lesser offense the rules is very silent one
school of thought states that there must be a presentation of evidence
because thats the right of the parties another school of thought states that
they could no longer present evidence because pressingly the parties
already agreed on the lesser offense charge which includes the mitigating
and aggravating circumstance so if you allow additional presentation of
evidence then you defeat the purpose of the voluntary agreement of the
parties for the lesser offense. So which school of thought was applied by
the supreme court the answer that is it still pending in the court. So we
will know in the near future the ruling of the court

Q: what again are the requisites for the plea of lesser offense
A: the lesser offense must be necessarily included in the offense
originally charge. Then if the plea to the lesser offense is done at
arraignment there must be a consent of the parties and the prosecutor.
Then if such plea is done after arraignment but before trial there must be
the withdrawal of the previous plea
Q: alright lets go to the first requisite can you give me an example of an
offense included in another offense
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
A: for example po ay robber and theft

Q: so when you are charge with robbery you can plead a lesser offense of
theft?
A: yes po if there is no … (hindi ko marinig yung last word)

Q: how about use of drugs, is it necessary include the possession of drugs.

So when you are in possession of drugs you can plead guilty to use of
drugs.
A: No po

Q: so use of drugs does not necessarily include possession of drugs? My

professor as in me this very difficult question in criminal law 1. What if
the accused placed a shabu in foil and then he sniff 1/2 of the foil and the
police came in what is the offense charge? Use or possession and the
answer to that is possession what happened to the use is it absorbed or not.
The answer to that is it is absorbed because use is necessarily included in
the crime of possession of drugs

Q: again when can you plea for a lesser offense?

A: it could be at arraignment or after arraignment but before trial

Q: how about after trial can you make a plea for lesser offense
A: No

Q: No? Because the rules only allowed before trial?

A: yes po

Q: jurisprudence allows the enter of plea for lesser offense even during or
after trial when there are exceptional circumstance because it expedite
everything. Actually class there are two reason why it is allowed for a
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
plea of lesser offense 1. is for speedy trial 2. if the prosecution is
convince that they could not convict the accused in the greater offense so
they would just convict him for a lesser offense. A classic example of a
plea for lesser offense is when there has been a drug raid and during the
drug raid the police the sees/seized the shabu and paraphernalia it is very
difficult to follow the chain of custody so during trial they would present
the shabu the shabu will be invalidated due to the violation of the chain of
custody so they would have now the remaining drug paraphernalia so the
prosecution would do as it could not prove the possession of the shabu
then they would only proved for the possession of the drug paraphernalia
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
to expiated that he would plea for a lesser offense of possession of drug
paraphernalia. In that instance we reduce court docket, we convict the
accused at the same time we have reach a amicable settlement between
the parties. That is the purpose of a plea to a lesser offense

Q: what is the case of judge estipona vs lobrigo

A: it is a drug case po where by

Q: who is the ponente

A: peralta

Q: he is the ponente of this very famous and important case. I am very

sure that this would be ask in the bar examination. So what happen to this
case. Alright I will tell you the facts. In this case the crime if for
possession of shabu it is .08 gram so what happen is the accused in this
case estipona plead guilty for a lesser offense which is possession of a
drug paraphernalia however the prosecution did not agree because under
the law RA No. 9165 there is a specific provision there that plea
bargaining is not allowed in drug cases so therefore it reach the supreme
court. So the issue here is do we allow plea bargaining under the rules of
court even though it is not allowed in the law?
A: yes that the plea bargaining is allowed in drug cases

Q: why is it allowed even though it is prohibited in that specific provision

that plea bargaining is not allowed in drug cases
A: plea bargaining is allowed even though it provided in the rules of court
that it cannot…because base on the definition po of plea bargaining
which provides that there is a mutual satisfactory decision between the
parties upon the discretion of the court regarding in the case po whereby

Q: you did not read the case ano? The case is very interesting it is so well
written from those other cases of justice peralta. In this case class the
supreme court and the rules of court prevails over the law. Why is that
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
because plea bargaining is a matter of procedure and under section 5
article 5 of the constitution only the supreme court has the sole and only
jurisdiction to promulgate rules on procedure including plea bargaining
the congress has no authority what so ever to impose or prevent rules of
procedure before the supreme court so therefore the court may allow plea
bargaining in drug cases. The reason why that is the ruling of the SC the
advent of the current administration we pay big focus on drug cases
before the court so much it consist of 600% of the drug cases increase
because of the present administration. And what happen there is that there
is so many cases and there are so may accused detained as you can see on
the television. So the reform is to allow plea bargaining, so there is plea
bargaining in drug cases who is that possible just like what I have stated
earlier when there is possession of drugs and you cannot prove the chain
of custody then you would resort into plea bargaining for a lesser offense
of possession of paraphernalia so from 12 years to 20 years then it would
be lessen to 4 months to 6 months imprisonment is that a win win
situation? I believe so because you expedite court cases at the same time
it would ensure that the offenders are place behind bars although not for a
very long time but atleast they are put behind bars for order for them to
reform, be given a chance to reform in the future. And you know what
happen class after that ruling? President duterte is very angry with that
ruling because many drug offender would be release to the public but
thankfully he still choose Justice peralta as his new chief justice

Q: what is the effect of lack of arraignment

A: the decision of the court would render be invalid for they are not able
to acquire jurisdiction over the person of the accused

Q: why? Do we determine the jurisdiction over the person of the accused

during arraignment or when arrest?
A: during arraignment

Q: during arrest, to acquire jurisdiction over the person of the accused

 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
Q: so what is the effect when there is no arraignment in a criminal case?
Obviously the criminal case is void but what is the reason
A: the accused is not fully informed of his rights the nature and cause of
the accusation and was not able to avail other remedies available before
arraignment

Q: you can nullify a criminal case not just base on the rules of court but
also base in the constitution if you deprive him of any of the
constitutional rights of the accused then it is a valid ground to null and set
aside the criminal case. When there is no arraignment class there is a
violation of his constitutional right of the accused to be inform of the
nature and causes of the accusation charged against him thats why when
there is no arraignment of the case it shall be dismiss. And it is void so it
can be dismiss in any case of the proceeding.

Q: supposed there is no arraignment and the trial proceeded when the

case was submitted for decision the court allowed the arraignment of the
accused in that case is the decision of the court valid?
A: yes if the counsel of the accused is allowed to cross examine… it will
cure the defect of the arraignment

Q: if there is no arraignment supposed during trial the counsel actively

participated in the examination of the witnesses present his evidence
prepare a memorandum then the case was submitted for decision there is
no arraignment at all and the court render judgment is the judgement
valid
A: no sir since it is clearly specify that after the examination an
arraignment shall be

Q; why is it provided in the rules of court that after cross examination

there should be an arraignment but I though base on your answer is that
its valid because the counsel is allowed to cross examine and was given
the opportunity to controvert the evidence against him
A: if the intention is to cure the defect there should be an arraignment
after the cross examination
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA

Q: suppose there is no arraignment but the counsel is allowed to cross

examine and do everything then the court rendered judgement is the
judgement valid? It is invalid for again it violated the constitutional right
of the accused to be informed of accusation against him because there is
no arraignment at all. The only way that a proceeding without
arraignment would be valid if there would be a latter arraignment if there
is no arraignment at all even the late on then there is a violation of the
constitutional right of the accused

Q: what are the instances when you can suspend arraignment

A: if the accused is of unsound mind, if there is a pending motion..

Q: if the accused is of unsound mind? Is that an exempting circumstance?

A: because it cannot inform the accused of the nature and causes of the
crime for…

Q: is an unsound mind a exempting circumstance therefore it cannot be

charge with crime, not only for arraignment but any crime
A: no sir because if the accused can be rehabilitated and eventually can
be cured his mental illness then the court could eventually proceeds to the
trial

Q: if you have read the rules of court, the accused of unsound mind at the
time of the arraignment only, if the unsound mind is only during the
arraignment then would be suspended until the accused would be in his
lucid interval to be available for arraignment. You cannot just state that
the arraignment would be suspended if the accused is of unsound mind
otherwise that is an exempting circumstance. Next
A: there is pending petition for review if there is pending motion to quash
and motion to move for a bill of particular and

Q: you have civil procedure? Anyways what is a bill of particular

 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
A: a bill of particular is an asking for the more detail on the allegations in
preparation for arraignment

Q: what is the difference between bill of particular and a motion for a bill
of particular. The motion for a bill of particular is asking for further
details for the prosecution as to the allegation in the information or in the
complaint. The bill of particular is the list of the details in the allegations

Q: who files the motion for bill of particular

A: in the criminal procedure it is the accused

Q: who files the bill of particular

A: the counsel of the accused, the accused files a motion for bill of
particular and it is also the accuse who would file for the bill of
particulars

Q: the motion for bill of particular is filed by the accused and the bill of
particular is filed by the prosecutor. A motion for a bill of particular
under rule 116 it is the motion of the accused to imposed the prosecutor
to clarify the matters alleged in the information. On the other hand the bill
of particular is the compliance to the motion of a bill of particulars, the
compliance clarifying what are alleged defects in the information

Q: so you file a bill of particular when there is a defect in the information?

right? So when there are unclear matters in the allegation in the
information you will file a motion bill of particulars?
A: yes if

Q: why not a motion to quash

A: if there only a details from the information that needs to be clarified in
the information then motion of a bill of particulars
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
Q: you just wanted to clarify a defect right? If the defect affects the
sufficiency of the information therefore that those not __ the offense and
therefore it must be quash

A: not the over all defect of the information basically the filling of the
motion of a bill of particular the information is still sufficient

Q: so the information is sufficient but there are defects is that what you
mean? It is very difficult to differentiate the difference between a motion
for a bill of particular and a motion to quash. The difference is in a
motion to quash you are attacking the sufficiency of the information
therefore you are attacking the 6 parts of the information. Anything other
than that is covered by the bill of particular. So when do you file a motion
to quash and when do you file a motion for a bill of particular? Again it is
a trial technique which was used by senator enrile again. Again in the
plunder case of senator enrile he filed a motion of a bill of particular
questioning the defects in the information. Why not a motion to quash it
is because he had already filed an earlier motion to quash and he wanted
to follow it up with a motion for a bill of particular he therefore questions
the allegations in the information not only upon the sufficiency of the 6
parts of the information but also the other matters in the information that
is a trial technique to question everything in the information

Q: what is a mode of discovery?

A: production of evidence po

Q: what is the purpose of the mode of discovery

A: the purpose of a mode of discovery is to ascertain whether the accused
is guilty or not guilty

Q: so the prosecution would used the mode of discovery to determine if

the accused it guilty or not guilty
A: no po
 ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA

Q: mode of discovery is a procedure to file and discover evidence so that

is the main purpose

Q: is there a mode of discovery in a criminal procedure? Where?

A: in arraignment po section 10 rule 116

Q: what is section 10?

A: production or inspection of material evidence

Q: so what is that mode of discovery. Section 10 provides for the

inspection and production of evidence in favor of whom in favor of the
accused. In here class section 10 is in favor of the accused it is the only
mode of discovery which is attainable of only one of the parties which is
the accused in other instances both parties can attain from the modes of
discovery however in this provision it is only for the accused

Q: can you described what is this mode of discovery? In this mode of

discover there are two parts 1 is the production of any written document
or statement of the complainant. In this case any written statement shall
be disclosed to the accused 2. any material evidence which can be used in
the criminal case

Q: why is it there is a mode of discovery in arraignment?

A: there is a mode of discovery in a arraignment because it is the for the
benefit of the accused that the plea. That the written statement or that the

Q: the answer to that class is because to fully infom the accused of all the
charges and accusation against him. It is to inform the accused about the
written statement which could be use against him and other relevant
evidence which can be used against him. It is a strong remedy for the
accused can ask or demand a copy or inspection of this important
documents to be fully informed of the accusations against him
ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA