RULE 119: TRIAL a)Any period of delay resulting from other proceedings in the order that the ends
s in the order that the ends of justice served by taking such
Trial Must Be Continuous (Rule 119 Sec. 2)
Trial once commenced, shall continue from day to day as
far as practicable until terminated. It may be postponed
for a reasonable period of time for good cause.
The court shall, after consultation with the prosecutor
and defense counsel, set the case for continuous trial on
a weekly or other short-term trial calendar at the earliest
possible time so as to ensure speedy trial.In no case shall
the entire trial period exceed one hundred eighty (180)
days from the first day of trial, except as otherwise
authorized by the Supreme Court.
Note: The time limitations provided under this section and
the preceding section shall not apply where special laws or
circulars of the Supreme Court provide for a shorter period
of trial.
NOTE:
A.M. No.15-06-10-SC (REVISED GUIDELINES FOR
CONTINUOUS TRIAL OF CRIMINAL CASES)
1. Hearing Days and Calendar Call:
Trial shall be held from Monday to Thursday, and courts
shall call the cases at exactly 8:30 A.M. and 2:00 P.M.,
pursuant to Administrative Circular No. 3-99. Hearing on
motions, arraignment and pretrial, and promulgation of
decisions shall be held in the morning of Fridays, pursuant
to Sec. 7, Rule 15 of the Rules of Court.
When is a case set for trial? (Rule 119 Sec. 1)
After a plea of not guilty is entered, the accused shall have
at least fifteen (15) days to prepare for trial. The trial shall
commence within thirty (30) days from receipt of the pre-
trial order.
What is the remedy of the accused that is not brought to
trial within the prescribed period? (Rule 119 Sec 9)
Ans: If the accused is not brought to trial within the
time limit required by section 1 (g), Rule 116 and section 1,
as extended by section 6 of this Rule, 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 the motion but the prosecution shall have
the burden of going forward with the evidence to establish
the exclusion of time under section 3 of this Rule. 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 under this
section.
The following periods of delay shall be excluded in
computing the time within which trial must commence:
b)The accused may present evidence to prove his defense
concerning the accused, including but not limited to the
following:
1)Delay resulting from an examination of the physical and
mental condition of the accused.
2)Delay resulting from proceedings with respect to other
criminal charges against the accused.
3)Delay resulting from extraordinary remedies against
interlocutory orders.
4)Delay resulting from pre-trial proceedings; provided that
the delay does not exceed thirty (30) days.
5)Delay resulting from orders of inhibition, or proceedings
relating to change of venue of cases or transfer from other
courts.
6)Delay resulting from a finding of the existence of a
prejudicial question; and
7)Delay reasonably attributable to any period, not to exceed
thirty (30) days, during which any proceeding concerning
the accused is actually under advisement.
b)Any period of delay resulting from the absence or
unavailability of an essential witness.
For purposes of this sub-paragraph, an essential witness
shall be considered absent when his whereabouts are
unknown or whose whereabouts cannot be determined by
due diligence. He shall be considered unavailable whenever
his whereabouts are known but his presence for trial cannot
be obtained by due diligence.
c)Any period of delay resulting from the mental
incompetence or physical inability of the accused 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, 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.
e)A reasonable period of delay when the accused is joined
for trial with a co-accused over whom the court has not
acquired jurisdiction, or, as to whom the time for trial has
not run and no motion for separate trial has been granted.
f)Any period of delay resulting from a continuance granted
by any court motu proprio, or on motion of either the
accused or his counsel, or the prosecution, if the court
granted the continuance on the basis of its findings set forth
in the order that the ends of justice served by taking such
action outweigh the best interest of the public and the
accused in a speedy trial.
f)Any period of delay resulting from a continuance granted
by any court motu proprio, or on motion of either the
accused or his counsel, or the prosecution, if the court
granted the continuance on the basis of its findings set forth
action outweigh the best interest of the public and the and damages, if any, arising from the issuance of a
accused in a speedy trial. provisional remedy in the case.
c)The prosecution and the defense may in that order,
Factors in Granting Postponements or Continuance (Rule present rebuttal and sur-rebuttal evidence unless the court,
119 Sec. 4) in furtherance of justice, permits them to present additional
Note: Granting a postponement is discretionary upon evidence bearing upon the main issue.
the court.
d)Upon admission of the evidence of the parties, the case
What are the factors to be considered in granting shall be deemed submitted for decision unless the court
continuance or a postponement? directs them to argue orally or to submit written
memoranda.
The Court considers the following in granting continuance
or postponement: e)When the accused admits the act or omission charged in
the complaint or information but interposes a lawful
a)Whether or not the failure to grant a continuance in the defense, the order of trial may be modified.
proceeding would likely 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 that it is unreasonable to
expect adequate preparation within the periods of time
established therein.
Eg. Ampatuan trials – consider the sheer number of all the
accused, evidence against them, availability of witnesses,
etc.
What are not valid grounds for continuance?
No continuance 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 prosecutor.
A.M. No.15-06-10-SC (REVISED GUIDELINES FOR
CONTINUOUS TRIAL OF CRIMINAL CASES)
A motion for postponement is prohibited, except if it
is based on acts of God, force majeure or physical inability of Reverse Order of Trial.
the witness to appear and testify. If the motion is granted
based on such exceptions, the moving party shall be warned When the accused admits the act or omission charged in the
that the presentation of its evidence must still be finished complaint or information but interposes a lawful defense,
on the dates previously agreed upon. the order of trial may be modified.
A motion for postponement, whether written or oral, shall In such case, (In a strict sense) the burden of evidence (not
at all times be accompanied by the original official receipt the burden of proof) will switch to the accused.
from the Office of the Clerk of Court evidencing payment of
the postponement fee under Sec. 21 (b), Rule 141, to be Trial in Absentia
submitted either at the time of the filing of said motion or What are the requisites of a valid trial in absentia?
not later than the next hearing date. The Clerk of Court shall The following are the requisites of a valid trial in absentia.
not accept the motion unless accompanied by the original
receipt. a.The accused has been validly arraigned.
b.The accused has been duly notified of the trial or hearings.
Order of Trial (Rule 119 Sec. 11) c.The absence of the accused or his failure to appear is
Trial shall proceed in the following order: unjustified.
a)The prosecution shall present evidence to prove the
charge and, in the proper case, the civil liability. Discharge of an Accused as a State Witness (Rule 119 Sec.
17, 18 and 19)
1
Procedure for the Discharge of an Accused as a State constituting the basis for his discharge, he may be Some other forms of immunity statues are the following: Authority The immunity is The immunity is
Witness: prosecuted again/re-included in the same offense. a)Republic Act No. 6700 or the Ombudsman Law – Authority granting the granted by the granted by the
1)Two or more persons are jointly charged with the same Note: Evidence adduced in support of the discharge shall is granted to the Ombudsman to grant immunity in cases immunity: DOJ. courts.
offense in the complaint or information. automatically form part of the trial. If the court denies the involving Government Officials and employees Witness being In order to qualify No such
2)Before the prosecution rests its case, it must file a motion motion for discharge of the accused as state witness, his b)Republic Act No. 9165 or the Dangerous Drugs Act – a law enforcer: under the WPP, requirement
for the discharge of one or more accused to be a state sworn statement shall be inadmissible in evidence. Authority is given to the DOJ to grant immunity in drug cases the witness must exists.
witness or witnesses. c)Executive Order No. 14 – Authority is given to the PCGG to not be a member
3)The motion for discharge must be with the consent of the Mistake made in charging the proper offense. grant immunity in cases involving ill-gotten wealth of a law
accused. When it becomes manifest at any time before d)Presidential Decree 749 – Immunity may be given to enforcement
judgment that a mistake has been made in charging the informants for certain crimes punished by the RPC, NIRC (tax agency.
4)There must be a hearing on the motion. It is in this hearing proper offense and the accused cannot be convicted of the code), and Tariff and Customs Code.
Benefits The witness The accused who
that the prosecution must prove the requisites for one to be offense charged or any other offense necessarily included e)Republic Act No. 6981 or the Witness Protection Program.
Received: receives certain has been
a state witness. At the said hearing, the prosecution must therein, the accused shall not be discharged if there appears
benefits such as discharged as a
present evidence along with the sworn statement of the good cause to detain him. In such case, the court shall Effect of Admission into the Witness Protection Program
relocation and state witness
accused whose discharge as a state witness is sought. The commit the accused to answer for the proper offense and
change of identity. receives no such
sworn statement of the accused must show how the crime dismiss the original case upon the filing of the proper Admission into the Program shall entitle such witness to
benefits.
was committed and his and his co-accused’s participation. information. immunity from criminal prosecution for the offense or
5)The court is satisfied that: Note: In case a mistake has been made in charging the offenses in which his testimony will be given or used and
a.There is absolute necessity for the testimony of the proper offense and there can be no conviction on any all the rights and benefits provided. Dismissal due to Insufficiency of Evidence (Rule 119, Sec.
accused whose discharge is requested. offense necessarily included in the offense charged, the 23)
b.There is no other direct evidence available for the proper accused that has been discharged as a state witness may be Witness Protection Program under RA 6981 distinguished Note: After the prosecution has presented its evidence in
prosecution of the offense committed, except the testimony prosecuted if the proper offense has been filed. from Rule 119 Sec. 17 chief and rests, the court has two options – (1) dismiss the
of the said accused. case on its own or upon demurrer to evidence filed by the
Witness Protection Discharge of an accused or (2) allow the case to proceed.
Problem:
Program (WPP) Accused to be State
c.The testimony of the said accused can be substantially
Witness
corroborated in its material points. The court issued an order granting the prosecutor’s motion
d.Said accused has not at anytime been convicted of any for the discharge of one of the accused, A, to be a state Offense The offense charged Applies to all
offense involving moral turpitude. witness. The prosecution though no longer presented A, as Charged: must be a grave felony offenses whether
it felt that it may secure a conviction even without his punishable by the RPC or light, less grave, or
6)After the court is satisfied of the above requisites, it issues testimony. Even if A was available to testify, he was never special laws. grave.
an order granting the motion for discharge of the accused called to do it. The prosecution then moved to reinclude A’s
Necessity of the Any witness, The witness
to be a state witness. name among those currently prosecuted.
Witness being an whether a plain is one or
Q: May A be prosecuted?
Accused: witness or the more
accused himself accused
Q: Who may file the motion for the discharge of an accused Suggested Answer:
may be qualified testifying
to be a state witness?
under the WPP. against his
Ans: It is the prosecution who files the motion. Not anymore. The accused will not be reincluded in the
co-accused.
same complaint or information since it was not his fault
Q: What is the nature of a court order granting the motion that he could not testify. Necessity of being The witness need The witness
of an accused asking for his discharge to be a state charged in court: not be charged in is
witness?Ans:A court order granting the motion of an Requisites for one to be discharged as a state witness? court in order to necessarily
accused asking for his discharge to be a state witness is In order for one to be a state witness, the court must be qualify in WPP. charged in
void. satisfied of the following: court.
a)There is absolute necessity for the testimony of the Necessity of the The witness and No such
Q: When must the motion be filed?Ans:The prosecution accused whose discharge is requested. witness receiving his relatives by requirement
must file the motion before resting its case. b)There is no other direct evidence available for the proper threats: affinity or exists.
prosecution of the offense committed, except the testimony consanguinity
Effect of Becoming a State Witness of the accused. within the second
Note: An order granting the discharge of an accused to be a c)The testimony of the accused can be substantially degree is being
state witness operates as an acquittal for the accused. Thus, corroborated in its material points. threatened with
the accused cannot be re-included in the same complaint or d)Said accused does not appear to be the most guilty; and bodily harm, in
information. e)Said accused has not at any time been convicted of any order for the
But if the accused fails or refuses to testify against his co- offense involving moral turpitude. witness to qualify
accused in accordance with his sworn statement under WPP.
Note: Being a State Witness is a form of immunity statute.

2
Note: After the prosecution has presented its evidence in
chief and rests, the accused has two options – (1) File a
demurrer to evidence or (2) present its evidence.
Note: If the court dismisses the criminal action on its own, it
must afford the prosecution a chance to be heard.
What then constitutes “opportunity to be heard for the
prosecution”?
Ans: Before the court dismisses a criminal action on its
own after the prosecution rests its case, the court must
issue an order directing the prosecution to explain why the
case must not be dismissed on ground of insufficiency of
evidence.
Demurrer to Evidence.
What is the nature of a demurrer to evidence?
A demurrer to evidence has the nature of a motion to
dismiss.
When is a demurrer to evidence filed?
A demurrer to evidence is filed after the prosecution
rests.
What is the ground of a demurrer to evidence?
In a criminal case, the ground for filing a demurrer to
evidence is insufficiency of evidence. In a civil case, the
ground for filing a demurrer to evidence is lack of cause of
action.
Procedure for filing a demurer to evidence:
1.Prosecution rests
2.Accused files a motion for leave of court to file demurrer
to evidence within five (5) days after the prosecution rests.
3.The prosecution files its opposition, or comment to the
motion for leave within five (5) days from its receipt of the
motion for leave.
4.The court issues an order granting or denying the motion
for leave.
5.The accused files his demurrer to evidence either with
leave or without leave of court. If the motion for leave has
been granted, the accused has ten (10) days from notice of
the order within which, to file his demurrer to evidence.
6.The court either issues an order granting or denying the
demurrer to evidence.
Note:Granting a demurrer to evidence operates as an
acquittal of the accused.
Note: The order denying the motion for leave or the
demurrer to evidence itself is not reviewable by appeal or
certiorari before judgment.
What is the significance of obtaining prior leave of court in
filing a demurer to evidence?
If the court denies the demurrer to evidence filed with
leave of court, the accused may adduce evidence in his
defense. When the demurrer to evidence is filed without
leave of court, the accused waives the right to present
evidence and submits the case for judgment on the basis of
the evidence for the prosecution.
When is demurrer to evidence filed with leave of court?
A demurrer to evidence is filed with leave of court if
the earlier-filed motion for leave to file demurrer to
evidence is granted by the court.
What is the remedy of the accused, whose demurrer to
evidence filed with leave of court was denied?
The accused must now present his evidence.
When is a demurrer to evidence filed without leave of
court?
There is no prior leave of court to file demurrer to
evidence in the following instances:
1.The accused files a demurrer to evidence without first
filing a motion for leave of court.
2.The accused filed a demurrer to evidence notwithstanding
that his earlier filed motion for leave of court has been
denied. (the motion for leave has been denied but the
accused still filed a demurrer to evidence)
Additional notes:
Demurrer to Evidence and the Civil Aspect of the Criminal
Action:
Case: After the prosecution has rested its case, the accused
files a demurrer to evidence.
Q:In resolving the demurrer to evidence, should the trial
court likewise decide the civil aspect of the case and
determine the civil liability of the accused?
A:The answer should be qualified as follows:
a) If the demurrer to evidence is filed without leave of court:
i.If the demurrer to evidence is filed without leave of court,
the whole case is submitted for judgment on the basis of the
evidence for the prosecution as the accused is deemed to
have waived his right to present evidence.
ii.In case of conviction, the trial court should state in its
judgment the civil liability or damages to be recovered by
the offended party from the accused.
iii. In case of acquittal, the accused may still be adjudged
civilly liable where: (a) the acquittal is based on reasonable
doubt; (b) the court declares that the liability of the accused
is only civil; or (c) the civil liability of the accused does not
arise from or is not based upon the crime of which the
accused is acquitted.
iv. But if the accused is acquitted and there is a finding in the
final judgment in the criminal action that the act or omission
from which the civil liability may arise did not exist, then the
civil action based on the delict is deemed extinguished.
b)If the demurrer to evidence is filed with leave of court:
i.If the court denies the demurrer to evidence because the
evidence presented by the prosecution is sufficient, the
accused may present evidence regarding both the criminal
and civil aspect of the case.
ii.If the court grants the demurrer to evidence because the
evidence so far presented by the prosecution is insufficient
as proof beyond reasonable doubt, it does not follow that
the same evidence is insufficient to establish a
preponderance of evidence. Thus, if the court grants the
demurrer, proceedings on the civil aspect of the case shall
proceed, except if the trial court finds that the act or
omission from which the civil liability may arise did not exist.
(Hun Hyung Park v. Eung Won Choi, G.R. No. 165496, Feb.
12, 2007)
Scenario:
A filed a demurrer to evidence with leave of court. The court
granted it.
Q:How will the court proceed as to the civil aspect of the
case?
A:As to the civil aspect of the case, the court may require
the complainant to prove accused’s civil liability by
preponderance of evidence.
Q:What if in granting the demurrer to evidence, the court
failed to resolve the civil aspect of the case?
A:In such instance, the remedy by the offended party is to
appeal the civil aspect of the case.
Q: Is denial of a demurrer to evidence without prior leave
of court equivalent to conviction?
No. The denial of a demurrer to evidence filed without
prior leave of court is not equivalent to conviction. It does
not even warrant an automatic conviction. The court will
still determine whether the evidence presented by the
prosecution can sustain a conviction beyond reasonable
doubt. If it does not, then the case will be dismissed.
What is the prosecution’s remedy against an order
granting a demurrer to evidence?
The remedy is not appeal, but a petition for certiorari under
Rule 65 on the ground of grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction or a denial of due
process or lack or excess of jurisdiction and upon showing
that there is no appeal, or any other plain, adequate, and
speedy remedy in the ordinary course of law.
Q: What is the remedy of the prosecution when the court
dismissed the criminal action on its own on the ground of
insufficiency of evidence, but without first affording an
opportunity for the prosecution to be heard?
The prosecution’s remedy is to file a petition for
certiorari under Rule 65. The court acted with grave abuse
of discretion when it did not afford the prosecution an
opportunity to be heard.
*Note: Rule 15, Section 9. A motion for leave to file a
pleading or motion shall be accompanied by the pleading or
motion sought to be admitted.
The motion for leave to file demurrer to evidence
must then be accompanied by the demurer to evidence
itself.
Rule 120: Judgment.
What is judgment? (Rule 120, Sec. 1)
Judgment is the adjudication by the court that the
accused is guilty or not guilty of the offense charged and the
imposition on him of the proper penalty and civil liability, if
any.
Requisites of a valid judgment (Rule 120, Sec. 1)
1.It must be written and in the official language.
2.It must be personally and directly prepared by the judge.
3.It must contain clearly and distinctly a statement of the
facts and the law upon which it is based.
4.It must be signed by the judge preparing it and filed with
the Clerk of Court.
Why must the judgment state clearly and distinctly the
facts and law upon which it is based?
A decision that does not clearly and distinctly state the facts
and law upon which it is based is precisely prejudicial to the
losing party, who is unable to pinpoint to possible errors of
the court for review by a higher tribunal. (Lumanog, et. al. v.
People, GR No. 182555, September 7, 2010)
Note: A judgment that fails to state clearly and distinctly the
facts upon which it is based, is called a sin perjuicio
judgment. It is void.
What is a Memorandum decision?
A memorandum decision is a decision which adopts by
reference the findings of fact and conclusions of law
contained in the decision of an inferior tribunal. (Oil and
Natural Gas Commission v. CA GR No. 114323, July 23, 1998)
It is allowed and is not violative of the Constitutional
provision that a decision shall contain the facts and the law
upon which it is based. By its very nature, a memorandum
decision may be rendered only by an appellate tribunal.
What is a minute resolution?
Simply put, a minute resolution is a resolution denying
petitions for review, appeal, etc., in the shortest possible
way.
3
Eg. “Please take notice that the Court issued a resolution in
this case, dated ______ and reads as follows: The petition is
denied for lack of merit.” No further explanation is added. It
is a one page resolution that has nothing attached to explain
why the said judgment was arrived at.
Is a minute resolution valid?
Its validity must be qualified. It is valid for dismissing
a petition for review. It is an adjudication by merit which
becomes final.
Rationale: (As quoted from Jandy J. Agoy v. Araneta Inc.,
GR No. 196358, March 21, 2012)
“Minute resolutions are issued for the prompt dispatch of
the actions of the Court. While they are the results of the
deliberations by the Justices of the Court, they are
promulgated by the Clerk of Court or his assistants whose
duty is to inform the parties of the action taken on their
cases by quoting verbatim the resolutions adopted by the
Court. Neither the Clerk of Court nor his assistants take part
in the deliberations of the case.”
“As the Court explained in Borromeo v. Court of Appeals, no
law or rule requires its members to sign minute resolutions
that deny due course to actions filed before it or the Chief
Justice to enter his certification on the same. The notices
quote the Court’s actual resolutions denying due course to
the subject actions and these already state the required
legal basis for such denial.”xxx
“While the Constitution requires every court to state in its
decision clearly and distinctly the fact and the law on which
it is based, the Constitution requires the court, in denying
due course to a petition for review, merely to state the legal
basis for such denial.”
Note:Even the Validity of a Criminal Information may be
Ruled Upon in a Minute Resolution (Jose B. Del Rosario Jr. V
People of the Phil., GR No. 143419, June 22, 2006).
Error of Judgment and Error of Jurisdiction
Error of jurisdiction arises from failure to comply with
the requisites of a valid judgment. It is a void judgment, the
remedy for which is a petition for certiorari under Rule 65.
An error of judgment arises when the wrong and
inapplicable set of facts and law was used. It is a valid
judgment though it may be wrong. Such judgment is a valid
subject of appeal. (People v. CA G.R. No. 144332, June 10,
2004, 431 SCRA 610 as cited in Almuete v People. These
cases shall be discussed later in the topics of appeal and
promulgation of judgment)
Contents of a Judgment of Conviction (Rule 119 Sec. 2)
1)The legal qualification of the offense constituted by the
acts committed by the accused;
2)The aggravating and mitigating circumstances which
attended the commission of the offense;
3)The participation of the accused in the offense whether as
principal, accomplice, or accessory;
4)The penalty imposed upon the accused;
5)The civil liability or damages caused by his wrongful act or
omission to be recovered from the accused by the offended
party, if there is any, unless the enforcement of the civil
liability by a separate civil action has been reserved or
waived.
Contents of a Judgment of Acquittal (Rule 119 Sec. 2)
a.Whether or not the evidence of the prosecution
absolutely failed to prove the guilty of the accused, OR
merely failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt;
b.Determination if the act or omission from which the civil
liability might arise did not exist;
Duplicity of Complaint or Information (Rule 120, Sec. 3)
When two or more offenses are charged in a single
complaint or information but the accused fails to object to
it before trial, the court may convict him of as many offenses
as are charged and proved, and impose on him the penalty
for each, offense, setting out separately the findings of fact
and law in each offense.
For what offense may the accused be convicted of? (Rule
120, Sec. 4)-The Rule on Variance.
The accused may be convicted of the crime charged
provided it is duly proved.
However, in case of variance between the offense charged
and that proved, the accused shall be convicted of:
a)the offense proved which is included in the offense
charged, OR
b)of the offense charged which is included in the offense
proved.
When does the offense charged include the offense
proved? (Rule 120, Sec. 5)
An offense charged necessarily includes the offense
proved when some of the essential elements or ingredients
of the former, as alleged in the complaint or information,
constitute the latter.
When is the offense charged necessarily included in the
offense proved? (Rule 120, Sec. 5)
An offense charged is necessarily included in the
offense proved, when the essential ingredients of the
former constitute or form part of the latter.
Promulgation of Judgment (Rule 120, Section 6)
The judgment is promulgated by reading it in the
presence of the accused and any judge of the court in which
it was 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.
How is judgment promulgated if the accused is absent
during the date of promulgation?
In case the accused fails to appear at the scheduled date of
promulgation of judgment despite notice, the promulgation
shall be made by recording the judgment in the criminal
docket and serving him a copy thereof at his last known
address or thru his counsel.
Promulgation must be made during the incumbency of the
judge who penned the decision.
Case: Judge X prepared and signed a judgment which was
dated on June 1, 2011. The accused received the notice of
promulgation on July 1, 2011. In the said notice, the
promulgation was set on July 16, 2011. Before the
promulgation, Judge X died on July 10, 2011. Nonetheless,
the promulgation proceeded as the Clerk of Court relied on
the provision of the rules stating that “when the judge is
absent or outside the province or city, the judgment may be
promulgated by the Clerk of Court”.
Q:Is the judgment valid?
Answer:No, the judgment is void. The said judgment may
never be promulgated. Promulgation must be made during
the incumbency of the judge who penned the decision. The
absence referred to in the said rule refers to temporary
absence. In case of a judge’s death, dismissal, resignation,
or promotion, the absence is permanent and the judge
ceases to be the judge of the court.
Note: Always remember, an earlier penned decision may
not be promulgated after the judge who prepared and
signed it becomes permanently absent – dismissed, dead,
resigned, or promoted.
Is a judgment void due to the reason that the judge who
prepared, signed, and promulgated it, is not the one who
heard the case?
No. The fact that the trial judge who rendered
judgment was not the one who had the occasion to observe
the demeanor of the witnesses, during trial, but merely
relied on the records of the case, does not render the
judgment erroneous, especially where the evidence on
records is sufficient to support its conclusion. (People v.
Alfredo, GR No. 188560, December 15, 2010)
Promulgation must be made where the court sits
Case: The criminal action is filed in Baguio City. Nonetheless,
after a change of venue, trial was conducted in La Union.
The judgment was promulgated in La Union. The date of the
promulgation though, falls on a Baguio holiday. Is the
promulgation valid?
Answer: Yes, the promulgation is valid. The judgment must
be promulgated where the court sits. In this case, the court
sits in La Union, and not in Baguio.
Notice of the Promulgation to the Bondsman, Warden, or
Counsel is Notice to the Accused.
The proper clerk of court shall give notice to the
accused personally or through his bondsman or warden and
counsel, requiring him to be present at the decision.
Notice in case of Trial in Absentia
If the accused was tried in absentia because he jumped
bail or escaped from prison, the notice to him shall be
served at his last known address.
What is the effect of the accused’s absence during
promulgation?
In case the accused fails to appear at the scheduled
date of promulgation of judgment despite notice, and the
judgment is one of conviction, the accused shall lose his
right to appeal or avail of any of the post-conviction
remedies provided his absence was without justification.
Note: Just remember that absence of the accused during
promulgation will not invalidate the proceedings, unlike in
arraignment and in-court identification.
The post-conviction remedies of the accused are the
following.
1)Motion for Reconsideration.
2)Appeal
3)Motion for New Trial
4)Motion to Reopen Trial
Note: In the above list, the remedies of Habeas Corpus and
reliance upon DNA Testing may als
May a judgment be promulgated in a criminal case even
in the absence of the counsel for the accused?
Answer: Yes. The presence of counsel for the accused is not
indispensable for promulgation. (Icdang v. Sandiganbayan,
G.R. No. 185960, Jan. 25, 2012)
4
Are there instances when the accused does not appear
during the promulgation yet he does not lose his right to
appeal or to avail of his post-conviction remedies?
Yes. If the conviction is for a light offense, the
judgment may be pronounced in the presence of the
accused’s counsel or his representative. In such instance,
even if the accused was absent, he does not lose his right to
avail of the post-conviction remedies.
Remedy of the accused who failed to attend the
promulgation of judgment?
Within fifteen (15) days from the promulgation of
judgment, the accused must surrender and file a motion for
leave of court to avail of the post-conviction 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 the said
remedies within fifteen (15) days from notice.
• Note: The accused needs to surrender, and not
just file the motion for leave. New Trial distinguished
from Reopening of Trial
Q: What if, instead of surrendering, the accused was
arrested. Nonetheless, he still filed a motion for leave to
avail of the post-conviction remedies. May the court act
upon his motion?
Suggested Ans: Yes, the court must still act upon his
motion. The rules must be construed in favor of the accused.
The word surrender is synonymous with or includes the
concept of arrest. Even if he did not surrender, but he was
arrested just the same, the Court and the proper authority
have custody over his person. Thus, if he can show that his
absence during the promulgation despite due notice is j
Note: Availing of any of the post-conviction remedies
without first filing a motion for leave to avail of the said
remedies, is the wrong remedy. The court may simply deny
the accused’s application for the said remedies, and the
judgment becomes final.
Case: A, B, C, and D were convicted of violation of PD 705.
They were absent during the promulgation of the judgment.
Their lawyer claimed that A, B, and C were ill while D was
not notified of the promulgation. All the accused filed a
motion for reconsideration questioning the legality of the
promulgation. The trial court denied their motion. All the
accused filed a petition for certiorari before the CA asking
for a repromulgation. The CA granted their petition. The
State through the Solicitor General filed appealed the CA’s
decision to the SC. The SC ruled in favor of the State and
reinstated the trial court’s judgment. The judgment has
become final and has been entered into the entry of
judgments. All of the accused still filed a 2nd and 3rd motion
for reconsideration which were still denied by the Supreme
Court. All of the accused now filed a motion for clarification
before the SC asking whether they may still appeal the trial
court’s judgment of conviction. Without any resolution on
their motion, all
accused filed a motion for repromulgation before the trial
court that convicted them. It was denied. On appeal, they
argued that the trial court ought to have repromulgated the
judgment of conviction by the Supreme Court in order for
them not to lose their right to appeal. By this reason their
right to appeal still exists.
Issues: A) May the accused still appeal?
B) Is there a need to promulgate a decision by the
appellate court in the trial court before the said decision
becomes valid?
Ruling:
A) No, the accused’s right to appeal has already prescribed.
The judgment has long become final. In fact, there has
already been an entry of judgment.
B) No, a repromulgation of either the affirmed or modified
judgment of conviction by the trial court is not
necessary.Under Administrative Circular No. 16-93, issued
on September 9, 1993, the promulgation of judgments for
the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals is effected by
filing the signed copy of the judgment with the Clerk of
Court who causes true copies thereof to be served upon the
parties.
Question No. 1 for the 2014 Bar Examination in Remedial
Law
Ludong, Balatong, and Labong were charged with murder.
After trial, the court announced that the case was
considered submitted for decision. Subsequently, the Court
issued the notices of promulgation of judgment which were
duly received. On promulgation day, Ludong and his lawyer
appeared. The lawyers of Balatong and Labong appeared
but without their clients and failed to satisfactorily explain
their absence when queried by the court. Thus, the judge
ordered the Clerk of Court to proceed with the reading of
the judgment convicting all the accused. With respect to
Balatong and Labong, the judge ordered that the judgment
be entered in the criminal docket and copies be furnished to
their lawyers. The lawyers of Ludong, Balatong, and Labong,
filed within the reglementary period a Joint Motion for
Reconsideration. The court favorably granted the motion of
Ludong downgrading his conviction from murder to
homicide but denied the motion as regards Balatong and
Labong.
a)Was the court correct in taking cognizance on the Joint
Motion for Reconsideration?
b)Can Balatong and Labong appeal their conviction in case
Ludong accepts his conviction for homicide?
Answer:
a) Yes, the court was correct in taking cognizance on the
Joint Motion for Reconsideration, but only as to Ludong. The
court should treat the motion as if it has been filed only by
Ludong. Any resolution made by the court on the motion
will only affect Ludong. Balatong and Labong have already
lost their right to avail of post conviction remedies. (People
v. Delgado, 2009)
b) No, Balatong and Labong can no longer appeal their
judgment of conviction. They are deemed to have waived
their right to appeal and other post conviction remedies.
The judgment simply lapses into finality.
Q: Suppose, in the situation above, this question was asked.
Will the judgment downgrading the offense committed by
Ludong benefit Balatong and Labong?
Answer:
No, such judgment in Ludong’s favor will not benefit
Balatong and Labong. Although the rules provide that a
favorable judgment for an accused who appealed, will
benefit his other other co-accused if the judgment is
favorable and applicable to them, this is not the case for a
motion for reconsideration. The rules do not provide for a
similar effect of rendering a favorable judgment.
Finality of Judgment. (Rule 120, Section 7)
A judgment of acquittal is immediately final and executory.
A judgment imposing the death penalty is always subject to
automatic review. (This part is better discussed in the
subject matter of appeal)
A judgment of conviction becomes final upon the
following instances:
a)After the lapse of the period for perfecting an appeal
without an appeal having been perfected.
b)When the sentence has been partially or totally satisfied/
Total or partial service of sentence.
c)When the accused has waived in writing his right to appeal
d)When the accused has applied for a probation.
Notes:
Even though the rules of court mention that a judgment of
conviction becomes final after the lapse of the period for
perfecting an appeal, it is understood that in such instance,
no appeal was ever perfected.
Application for probation must be filed within the same
period for perfecting an appeal.
Probation and appeal are two exclusive and incompatible
remedies. Jurisprudence dictates that they are mutually
exclusive remedies. Applying for probation excludes the
right to appeal. The former is a waiver of the latter. In
applying for probation, the accused is deemed to have
accepted the correctness of the judgment of conviction
against him.
To apply for probation, the judgment needs to become final.
In the opposite side, appealing the case excludes one from
applying for probation. Resorting to appeal is a waiver of the
privilege to apply for probation. In appeal, judgment is
stayed and does not become final. The accused does not
accept the correctness of the judgment and throws the
whole case for review.
BUT appealing the penalty alone and not the conviction for
a crime, may entitle one for Probation. (Colinares v.
People, GR No. 182748, December 13, 2011)
Entry of Judgment (Rule 120, Section 8)
After a judgment has become final, it shall be entered
into the book or entry of judgments.
RULE 121-POST CONVICTION REMEDIES
New Trial or Reconsideration (Rule 121)
At any time before a judgment of conviction becomes
final, the court may, on motion of the accused or at its own
instance but with the consent of the accused, grant a new
trial or reconsideration.
Note: The court, on its own initiative, may grant or cause
new trial or reconsideration of its judgment.
If the accused wants to avail of new trial or
reconsideration, he must file a motion before the judgment
of conviction becomes final.
Grounds for New Trial (Rule 121 Section 2)
The court shall grant a new trial on any of the following
grounds:
a)Errors of law or irregularities prejudicial to the substantial
rights of the accused have been committed during the trial;
5
Eg. The accused calls for a witness but the court disallowed
it.
The court forces a witness to testify against himself.
The judge/court is the one conducting the preliminary
investigation, conducts trial without notice to parties, and
capriciously denies demurrer to evidence (Gacayan v
Pamintuan)
b)New and material evidence has been discovered which the
accused could not with reasonable diligence have discovered
and produced at the trial and which if introduced and
admitted would probably change the judgment.
Note: The rules speak of newly discovered evidence and not
forgotten evidence.
Is the discovery of new witness/es a ground for new trial?
It depends. If the testimony of the witness pertains to
new and material evidence, then it is. If not, then it will not
be a ground for new trial.
How about a witness retracting his testimony? Is it a newly
discovered evidence?
No. Recantation of testimonies is not allowed. A
recantation is the renunciation or is a formal or public
withdrawal of a prior statement of a witness. This is frowned
upon by the courts. The original testimony should be given
more credence.
But what if the sole evidence for the prosecution is a lone
witness’s testimony, which was later discovered to be
false, is the subsequent recantation of the sole witness,
now a newly discovered evidence?
Suggested Ans: In that case, yes.
What about DNA Evidence as a Post-Conviction Remedy?
What is the rule regarding Post-Conviction DNA Testing?
The rule on post-conviction DNA testing is expressed in A.M.
No. 06-11-5-SC, Effective Oct. 15, 2007, as follows:
“Sec. 6. Post-conviction DNA Testing. – Post-conviction DNA
testing may be available, without need of prior court order,
to the prosecution or any person convicted by final and
executory judgment provided that (a) a biological sample
exists, (b) such sample is relevant to the case, and (c) the
testing would probably result in the reversal or modification
of the judgment of conviction.” (Rule on DNA Evidence, A.M.
No. 06-11-5-SC, Effective Oct. 15, 2007)
“Sec. 10. Post-conviction DNA Testing – Remedy if the b)the court had no jurisdiction to impose the sentence;
Results Are Favorable to the Convict. – The convict or the c)the imposed penalty is excessive, thus voiding the
prosecution may file a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in sentence as to such excess.
the court of origin if the results of the post-conviction DNA
testing are favorable to the convict. In case the court, after Notes:
due hearing, finds the petition to be meritorious, it shall Under the Rule on DNA Evidence, habeas corpus may also
reverse or modify the judgment of conviction and order the be resorted to as post-conviction remedy where the result
release of the convict, unless continued detention is of the DNA examination is favorable to the accused.
justified for a lawful cause. Thus, the writ of habeas corpus was held available where an
accused was deprived of his right against self-incrimination.
A similar petition may be filed either in the Court of Appeals (cited in de Villa v. The Director, New Bilibid Prisons, G.R. No.
or the Supreme Court, or with any member of said courts, 158802, Nov. 17, 2004).
which may conduct a hearing thereon or remand the But habeas corpus is not available as post-conviction
petition to the court of origin and issue the appropriate remedy where the appeal is still pending. (People v.
orders.” Maquilan, G.R. No. 126170, Aug. 27, 1998).
Rule 122: Appeal
Ground for Reconsideration (Rule 121 Section 3) Who may appeal?
The court shall grant reconsideration on the ground of a)The State – Any appeal made by the State must yield to
errors of law or fact in judgment, which requires no further Double Jeopardy.
proceedings. b)The Accused.
c)The Private Offended Party with respect to the civil
Reopening of trial (Rule 119, Section 24) aspect of the case.
At any time before finality of the judgment of
conviction, the judge may, motu proprio or upon motion, Note: The State Questioning or Appealing a Judgment of
with hearing in either case, reopen the proceedings to Acquittal
avoid a miscarriage of justice. *The more proper term is “The State Questioning/ Assailing/
(other similar terms) a Judgment of Acquittal. A petition for
New Trial distinguished from Reopening of Trial Certiorari under Rule 65 is not, as it is never, a mode of
New Trial Reopening of Trial appeal. A petition for certiorari is an independent and a
When Filed: Anytime before Any time before special civil action. It is not a continuance of the
judgment of finality of judgment proceedings of the lower court.
conviction becomes of conviction.
final. Note:
The Supreme Court ruled, in Ysidoro v. Hon. Leonardo-de
Grounds: Limited only to To avoid
Castro et al., G.R. No. 171513, Feb. 6, 2012, that the rule
those mentioned in miscarriage of
against double jeopardy cannot be properly invoked in a
Rule 121, Sec. 2 justice. *Note: This
Rule 65 petition, predicated on two exceptional grounds,
is a very broad
namely: in a judgment of acquittal rendered with 1) grave
ground. It will
abuse of discretion by the court; and 2) where the
warrant resorting to
prosecution had been deprived of due process.
Reopening of Trial
in case the grounds
Exceptional case of Galman v. Sandiganbayan. 228 Phil, 42
for appeal, new
1986
trial, or
This case has something to do with the Aquino-Galman
reconsideration are
double murder case. Just to appease the public’s hunger for
not available.
speedy disposition of the case, the case was fast- tracked. In
the process, everything seemed to be framed, scripted, and
Habeas Corpus as a Post-conviction Remedy the trial was later ruled out to be a sham or mock trial. The
In what instances may habeas corpus be resorted to as court acquitted all the accused. The prosecutors though
post-conviction remedy? were never given a decent chance to present its evidence
The writ of habeas corpus may be resorted to as post- and witnesses. The judgment of acquittal was appealed.
conviction remedy in any of the following exceptional Upon review, the SC ruled that the judgment of acquittal
circumstances: came about as a result of grave abuse of discretion by the
a)there has been a deprivation of a constitutional right courts leading to a denial or deprivation of the State’s due
resulting in the restraint of a person; process.
Grave Abuse of Discretion in Granting a Demurrer to
Evidence Deprives the State or Prosecution of its Due
Process
In Sanvicente v. People, 441 Phil. 139 (2002), the
Supreme Court upheld the decision of the CA which
reversed the acquittal of the accused upon a demurrer to
evidence, holding that the trial court committed grave
abuse of discretion in preventing the prosecution from
establishing the due execution and authenticity of a certain
letter marked as Exh. “LL” which positively identified the
accused as the perpetrator of the crime charged.
In another case, People v CA G.R. No. 144332, June 10, 2004,
431 SCRA 610 as cited in Almuete v People, 2013, the
Supreme Court reversed and set aside an order of acquittal
by the CA. In this case though, the CA acted with grave abuse
of discretion in issuing the judgment. It entertained the case
despite the wrong mode of appeal resorted to.
Period for Perfection of the Appeal
Note: The accused has 15 days from the date of
promulgation to appeal.
Note: The private offended party has 15 days from actual or
constructive notice of the judgment to perfect his appeal.
What is the fresh 15-day period doctrine, or the fresh
period rule, or the Neypes doctrine? (Neypes v CA, GR No.
141524, Sept. 14, 2005)
This doctrine provides that the 15 day period to
perfect an appeal is counted not only within 15 days from
the notice of the judgment but also within 15 days from the
notice of the final order appealed from. If a motion for
reconsideration or a motion for new trial is denied, such
denial is deemed as the final order. From receipt of such
notice of denial, the movant has another “fresh period”
within which to appeal. The new 15-day period may be
availed of only if either motion is filed; otherwise, the
decision becomes final and executory after the lapse of the
original appeal period from notice of the judgment.
Effect of Appeal: A duly perfected appeal stays the
judgment
Note: Sec. 11 of Rule 122.
Effect of appeal by any of several accused.
a)An appeal taken by one or more of several accused shall
not affect those who did not appeal, except insofar as the
judgment of the appellate court is favourable and
applicable to the latter.
b)The appeal of the offended party from the civil aspect
shall not affect the criminal aspect of the judgment or order
appealed from.
6
c)Upon perfection of the appeal, the execution of the
judgment or final order appealed from shall be stayed as to
the appealing party.
Case: A and B are charged with murder. During the trial, B
claimed insanity. A raised another defense. The trial court
found both of them guilty beyond reasonable doubt. B
appealed, and the CA appreciated his defense of insanity,
thus he obtained a judgment of acquittal. Will the judgment
rendered by the CA applied to A?
Ans:No. While the judgment is favorable to A, it is not
applicable to him. The defense of B, which is insanity, is a
personal one. It is not applicable to A.
Note: Personal circumstances – imbecility, insanity,
minority, etc. cannot be appreciated in favor of the other
co-accused
Note: General Rule: Absconding or jumping bail during the
pendency of appeal results to abandonment of the appeal.
Exception: When the death penalty is imposed. Automatic
review is still conducted by the Supreme Court even if the
accused absconds or jumps bail during the pendency of his
appeal, if the penalty imposed is death. Automatic review
affords a second chance to life.
Note: Death extinguishes a criminal obligation. As a rule,
death of the accused pending appeal will result to the
dismissal of his appeal. In certain instances though, if two
or more co-accused appealed separately, death of one will
not necessarily result in the dismissal of his appeal.
Illustration: (Constantino v. Sandiganbayan, et al., G.R. No.
140656, Sept. 13, 2007; Lindong v. People, et al., G.R. No.
154482, Sept. 13, 2007.)
C and L, who were charged as co-conspirators, were
convicted of violation of R.A. No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and
Corrupt Practices Act) in a judgment rendered by the
Sandiganbayan, imposing upon each of them the penalty of
imprisonment from six years and one month to twelve years
and one month. They filed separate appeals to the Supreme
Court by filing their respective petitions for review on
certiorari. L’s appeal was dismissed on technicality. During
the pendency of the appeal, C died.
a) Should C’s appeal be dismissed on the ground that his
death has rendered his appeal moot and academic as his
death has already extinguished his criminal liability?
Ans: No. C’s appeal should not be dismissed. The two
petitions are so intertwined that the absolution of C is
ultimately determinative of the absolution of L. The
exoneration of C will necessarily signify the injustice of
carrying out the penalty imposed on L. Thus, the SC, in this
instance, has to ascertain the merits of C’s appeal to prevent
a developing miscarriage of justice against L.
Courts must still decide cases, otherwise moot and
academic, in the following instances: (1) there is a grave
violation of the Constitution; (2) the exceptional character
of the situation and the paramount public interest is
involved; (3) when constitutional issue raised requires
formulation of controlling principles to guide the bench, the
bar, and the public; (4) the case is capable of repetition yet
evading review.
In the problem presented, the exceptional character of the
appeal of C and L in relation to each other, as well as the
higher interest of justice, requires that the Court determine
the merits of C’s petition and not dismiss it outright on the
ground of mootness.
b) Does the reversal of the decision of the Sandiganbayan as
against C benefit L whose appeal was dismissed on
technicality?
Ans: Section 11(a), Rule 122 of the Revised Rules of Criminal
Procedure provides: “An appeal taken by one or more of
several accused shall not affect those who did not appeal,
except insofar as the judgment of the appellate court is
favorable and applicable to the latter.” The phrase “did not
appeal” applies also to a co-accused who withdrew his
appeal, failed to file an appellant’s brief, or filed a notice of
appeal with the trial court but eventually withdrew the
same. The Supreme Court has at various times applied the
foregoing provision without regard to the filing or non-filing
of an appeal by a co-accused, so long as the judgment was
favorable to him.Thus, the foregoing provision should be
applied to L whose appeal was dismissed on technicality.
Change of Theory or Raising New Issues on Appeal for the
First time is not allowed.
As a rule, points of law, theories, issues and arguments
not adequately brought to the attention of the trial court
ordinarily will not be considered by a reviewing court as they
cannot be raised for the first time on appeal because this
would be offensive to the basic rules of fair play, justice and
due process. It is only for exceptional and compelling
reasons in the interest of substantial justice or to avoid
miscarriage of justice that the court may relax entertain
new issues on appeal.
On Appeal, a Higher Penalty may be Imposed
An appeal throws the entire case open for review.
Even the correct penalty may be increased if it is proper.
Modes of Appeal
Always remember:
a)Ordinary appeal under Rule 41 is perfected by filing a a penalty lesser than death, reclusion, perpetua, or life
notice of appeal with the RTC that rendered the judgment, imprisonment.
and never with the appellate court.
b)Ordinary appeal under Rule 40 is perfected by filing a
notice of appeal with MTC that rendered the judgment, and
never with the appellate court.
c)The only way to appeal a decision rendered by the CA to
the SC is through a petition for review under Rule 45 on pure
questions of law. There are certain exceptions though, such
as in cases of automatic review.
Resorting to Wrong Mode of Appeal.
As a rule, resorting to the wrong mode of appeal will not
stay the judgment. The judgment simply becomes final as if
no appeal has ever been filed or perfected. Once more, it is
only for exceptional and compelling reasons in the interest
of substantial justice or to avoid miscarriage of justice that
the court may relax the rules on technicality of appeals.
People v CA, G.R. No. 144332, June 10, 2004, 431 SCRA 610
A, B, C, and D, failed to appear in the promulgation of
the judgment of conviction against them. They alleged that
they were ill. They never filed any motion for leave to avail
of post conviction remedies. Instead they filed a motion for Note:
reconsideration questioning the validity of the The above is a peculiar appeal.
promulgation. Their motion was denied. They appealed the In appealing cases from the Sandiganbayan (SB), it never
decision of the RTC to the CA. Alleging grave abuse of passes through the Court of Appeals (CA). As a rule, cases
discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in the from the SB are never appealed to the CA.
conduct of the promulgation and in the denial of their Ordinarily, the decision of the RTC exercising its original
motion for reconsideration, they resorted to a petition for jurisdiction is not appealed via a rule 42 petition. A Rule 42
certiorari under Rule 65. It was granted, and the CA’s petition supposedly is the one resorted to in appealing cases
decision set aside or reversed the trial court’s judgment of decided by the RTC in its appellate jurisdiction.
conviction. 2)The Sandiganbayan in the exercise of its original
jurisdiction imposes the penalty of either reclusion perpetua
The State through the Solicitor General appealed the case to or life imprisonment.
the SC alleging grave abuse of discretion on the part of the
CA. The proper remedy of the accused should have been
ordinary appeal, and not a petition for certiorari. The SC
subsequently reversed the CA’s judgment of acquittal and
reinstated the judgment of conviction by the RTC. In doing
so, the SC ruled that a petition for certiorari is only available
when there is no appeal or any other plain, adequate and
speedy remedy in the ordinary course of law. In the case of
the accused, the judgment of conviction was not tainted
with grave abuse of discretion. It was a valid judgment. The
proper remedy is appeal.
Note: this case used the phrase, writ of error – it is another
term for ordinary appeal.
Modes of Appeal in Sandiganbayan Cases:
1)The Sandiganbayan imposes (SB exercising original
jurisdiction) or affirms (SB exercising appellate jurisdiction)
7
3)The Sandiganbayan in the exercise of its original
jurisdiction imposes the death penalty.
4)The Sandiganbayan in the exercise of its appellate
jurisdiction affirms the penalty of death, reclusion perpetua,
or life imprisonment
Appeal for Regular Courts.
1)Appealing decision of the MTC/ Appellate jurisdiction of
the RTC (It is understood that the RTC in its appellate
jurisdiction can only impose penalties less than death,
reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment.)
2)The RTC in its original jurisdiction imposes a penalty less
than death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment.
3)The RTC in its original jurisdiction imposes the penalty of
either reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment.
4)The RTC in its original jurisdiction imposes the death
penalty.
Rules 123 - 125.
Just read these rules. Note uniformity of procedure, how
judgment is promulgated in the appellate courts, and their
mode of appeals as amended by relevant Supreme Court
Circulars. (The simplified diagrams showing the modes of
appeal in criminal cases are shown in the preceding topic.)
RULE 126 - SEARCH AND SEIZURE
Note: This topic is a better scope for Political law. The
presumption for students taking criminal procedure is that
they were able to pass criminal law 1 and 2 and
Constitutional law 1 and 2. For Criminal Procedure, the focus
is on the remedies such as motion to quash, and the
remedies for denial of a motion to quash. The requisites as
to probable cause, examination of witnesses, instances of
lawful warrantless searches, and others are better covered
by the subjects on Political law.
What is a search warrant? (Rule 126 Section 1)
A search warrant is an order in writing issued in the
name of the People of the Philippines, signed by a judge and
directed to a peace officer, commanding him to search for
personal property described therein and bring it before the
court.
Where is the application for a search warrant filed? (Rule
126, Section 2)
An application for search warrant shall be filed with the
following:
a)Any court within whose territorial jurisdiction a crime was
committed.
b)For compelling reasons stated in the application, any court
within the judicial region where the crime was committed
if the place of the commission of the crime is known, or any
court within the judicial region where the warrant shall be
enforced.
c)However, if the criminal action has already been filed, the
application shall only be made in the court where the
criminal action is pending.
d) In cases involving heinous crimes, illegal gambling,
dangerous drugs and illegal possession of firearms, the
application may be filed with the Regional Trial Courts of
Manila and Quezon City if the application is filed by the
Philippine National Police (PNP), the National Bureau of
Investigation (NBI), the Presidential Anti-Organized Crime
Task Force (PAOC-TF), and the Reaction Against Crime Task
Force (REACT-TF). The applications shall be personally
endorsed by the Heads of the said agencies, for the search
of places to be particularly described therein, and the
seizure of property or things as described in the Rules of
Court, and to issue the arrest warrant, if justified, which may
be served in places outside the territorial jurisdiction of said
courts. (AM No. 99-20-09 SC)
Note: Search and Arrest warrants issued pursuant to AM No.
99-20-09 SC may be served outside the territorial
jurisdiction of the RTC of Manila or Quezon City.
Under AM No. 99-20-09-SC, who acts upon the application?
The Executive Judge and Vice Executive Judges of Regional
Trial Courts in Manila and Quezon City shall act upon all
8
applications for search warrants involving heinous crimes,
illegal gambling, dangerous drugs and illegal possession of
firearms.
Is it necessary that the heads of the offices mentioned
under AM No. 99-20-09-SC be the ones to personally
endorse the application for search warrants?
No, nothing in AM No. 99-10-09-SC prohibits the head
of NBI and of other law enforcement agencies mentioned
from delegating their ministerial duty of endorsing the
application to their assistant heads. Besides, under Section
31, Chapter 6, Book IV of the Administrative Code of 1987,
an assistant head or other subordinate in every bureau may
perform such duties as may be specified by their superior or
head, as long as it is not inconsistent with law. (Sps. Marimla
v People GR No. 158467, October 16, 2009)
Does an application for a search warrant partake of a
criminal action or at least in the nature of a criminal
action?
No. A search warrant is not a criminal action nor does
it represent a commencement of a criminal prosecution
even if it is entitled like a criminal action. It is not a
proceeding against a person but is solely for the discovery
and to get possession of personal property. It is a special
and peculiar remedy, drastic in nature, and made
necessary because of public necessity. It resembles in some
respects with what is commonly known as John Doe
proceedings. (United Laboratories, Inc. V. Isip, 461 SCRA
574)
Note:
The proceedings for the application for a search warrant
need not be initiated by the state prosecutor, and the court
may not quash the application for a search warrant or the
search warrant itself due to the fact that it does not bear the
conformity of the public prosecutor.
Although it is a criminal process, it is not a criminal action
that needs the conformity of the state
prosecutor.(Worldwide Web Corporation et al. v. People of
the Philippines et al., G.R. No. 161106, Jan. 13, 2014)
Is it necessary to furnish a notice or copy of the application
for a search warrant to the party against whom, properties
will be seized?
No. An application for a search warrant is heard ex-
parte. It is neither a trial nor a part of the trial. Action on
these applications must be expedited for time is of the
essence. Great reliance has to be accorded by the judge to
the testimonies under oath of the complainant and the
witnesses. (Chemise Lacoste, S.A. v Fernandez, 214 Phil. 332;
Santos v Pryce Gases, Inc., GR No. 165122, November 23,
2007)
Does an application for a search warrant need to have a
certification of non-forum shopping?
No, there is no rule requiring that it bears a
certification of non-forum shopping.
What property may be seized? (Rule 126, Section 3)
The property subject of a search warrant is personal
property, not real property. A search warrant may be
issued not only for the search but also for the seizure of the
following.
a)Personal property subject of the offense
b)Personal property stolen or embezzled and other
proceeds, or fruits of the offense; or
c)Personal property used or intended to be used as a means
of committing an offense.
Requisites for a search warrant under the Rules of Court:
(Rule 126, Section 4)
The following are the requisites for a search warrant under
the Rules of Court.
a)There must be probable cause in connection with one
specific offense.
b)The presence of probable cause is to be determined by the
judge personally.
c)The determination by the judge must be made after an
examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant
and the witnesses he may produce.
d)The warrant must specifically describe the place to be
searched and the things to be seized which may be
anywhere in the Philippines.
Note:
Roving or scattershot warrants are void. They are issued for
more than one offense.
Adherence to the above requisites is necessary to prevent a
fishing expedition.
Note: The topics under this section are better discussed in
Constitutional Law or Political Law.
What must a judge do before issuing a search warrant?
(Rule 126 Sec. 4)
The judge must, before issuing the warrant personally
examine in the form of searching questions and answers, in
writing and under oath, the complainant, and the witnesses
he may produce on facts personally known to them and
attach to the record their sworn statements, together with
the affidavits submitted.
Are witnesses needed during the conduct of the search and
seizure? (Rule 126 Section)
Yes, at least two witnesses are needed. The Rules
provide that no search of a house, room, or any other
premises shall be made except in the presence of the lawful
occupant thereof or any member of his family or in the
absence of the latter, two witnesses of sufficient age and
discretion residing in the same locality.
How long is a search warrant valid? (Rule 126, Section 10)
A search warrant shall be valid for ten (10) days from its
date. Thereafter, it shall be void.
What time must the search be made? (Rule 126 Section 9)
The warrant must direct that it be served in the day time,
unless the affidavit asserts that the property is on the
person or in the place ordered to be searched, in which case
a direction may be inserted that it be served at any time of
the day or night.
What is the remedy of an accused should he want to
question a search warrant?
The accused must file a motion to quash the search warrant
on the ground that it is improperly issued or that it is void.
What is the issue in a motion to quash a search warrant?
In a motion to quash a search warrant, what is assailed is
the validity of the issuance of the warrant. The manner of
serving the warrant and of effecting the search are not an
issue to be resolved in said motion. (People v CFI of Rizal,
101 SCRA 86, [1980])
Who may question a search warrant?
Any party whose interests may be adversely affected
may question the search warrant. It is settled rule that the
legality of a seizure can be contested only by the party
whose rights have been impaired thereby, and that the
objection to an unlawful search and seizure is purely
personal and cannot be availed by third parties. (Nasiad v.
CTA, 61 SCRA 238 [1974]; Santos v Pryce Gases, Inc. GR No.
165122, November 23, 2007)
When must one file a motion to quash the search warrant?
The motion to quash must be filed before arraignment
and entry of plea. An accused may be estopped from
questioning the defects in the issuance or enforcement of
the search warrant by failing to move to quash the search
warrant or by entering a plea and participating in trial.
(People v. Guillermo, 291 SCRA 761 [1998])
What is the remedy available as against the items seized
by virtue of an illegal or void warrant?
The following are the remedies available in relation to
the items that were seized by virtue of an illegal or void
search warrant.
1)Motion to suppress illegally obtained or seized evidence.
2)Replevin
3)Petition for Certiorari
Note:
Motion to suppress illegally obtained or seized evidence will
prevent the presentation of these pieces of evidence before
the court.
Replevin is a remedy to regain or take possession over
personal properties.
Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 is available only in
instances of grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
excess of jurisdiction. Again, what is assailed is the validity
of the search warrant, and nothing else.
Where must one file his motion to quash a search warrant
or to suppress evidence? (Rule 126, Section 14)
a) A motion to quash a search warrant and/or to
suppress evidence obtained by virtue of the warrant may be
filed and acted upon only by the court where the action has
been instituted.
b) If no criminal action has been instituted the motion
may be filed in and resolved by the court that issued the
search warrant. However, if such court failed to resolve the
motion and a criminal case is subsequently filed in another
court, the motion shall be resolved by the latter court.
Otherwise stated, the preceding question may be
answered this way.
The motion to quash a search warrant or to suppress
evidence may be filed as follows:
a)In the court where the criminal case has been filed.
This presupposes that a criminal case has been
filed. It also contemplates a situation where the
court that issued the search warrant and the
court where the information was filed are
different.
b)If no case has yet been filed, the motion is filed with the
court that issued the search warrant.
c)But if the motion to quash a search warrant filed with a
court that issued the search warrant has not yet been
resolved, and subsequently, a criminal case has been filed,
the court where the criminal case has been filed will resolve
the motion.
Case: A search warrant was obtained leading to search and
seizure of some items under X’s custody. X filed a motion to
quash the search warrant, which was subsequently denied.
Q: May X still file a motion to suppress illegally obtained
evidence?
Answer: No, X may no longer file a motion to
suppress illegally obtained evidence. It will simply be a
rehash of the issues in the earlier filed motion to quash the
warrant. In order to resolve X’s motion to suppress, the
court will dwell once more on the issue of legality of the
9
search, which has already been duly tackled in denying the
motion to quash.
What then is the remedy of an accused whose motion to
quash the search warrant has been denied?
It depends. It is either a petition for certiorari under
Rule 65 or an ordinary appeal. A petition for certiorari is the
remedy when the application for a search warrant is filed
incidental to a criminal action, or in anticipation of a criminal
action. In this case, the denial of the motion to quash the
search warrant is merely an interlocutory order, which
cannot be appealed. Appeal is the remedy when the
application for a search warrant is filed independently
from/of a criminal action. In such instance, the denial of the
motion to quash is a final order, which is the proper subject
of an appeal. (Worldwide Web Corporation et al. v. People
of the Philippines et al., G.R. No. 161106, Jan. 13, 2014)
When is an application for a search warrant filed incidental
to a criminal action? When is it filed independently from/of
a criminal action?
An application for search warrant may be filed as an
incident in a main criminal case already filed in court. Or,
such an application may be filed in court in anticipation of
one yet to be filed (here, the application for search warrant
is instituted as a principal proceeding prior to the filing of
the criminal action). (Wordlwide Web Corporation et al. v.
People. Supra)
If the application is filed not within the circumstances
mentioned above, it is said to be independent from/of a
criminal action. The application is independent from/of a
criminal action, if it is not incidental thereto. (by analogy.
Hehe)
2014 Bar Essay Type Question in Remedial Law.
- A search warrant was issued for the purpose of looking for
unlicensed firearms in the house of Ass-asin, a notorious gun
for hire. When the police served the warrant, they also
sought the assistance of the barangay tanods who were
assigned to look at other portions of the premises around
the house. In a Nipa hut, thirty (30) meters away from the
house of Ass-asin, a baranggay tanod came upon a kilo of
marijuana that was wrapped in news print. Ass-asin
objected to the introduction of such evidence claiming that
it was illegally seized. Is the objection valid?
So if I were to answer the above question in an essay form,
I will do it this way.
Yes, Ass-asin’s objection is valid. Foremost, the search
warrant is for the house, and not the nipa hut. The place
described in the warrant is controlling, and the searching
party does not have any authority to search for places not
included in it. Further, under the facts of the case, there was
no compliance with the two-witness rule.
1) When the injunction is necessary to afford adequate
protection to the constitutional rights of the accused;
RULE 127: PROVISIONAL REMEDIES 2) When it is necessary for the orderly administration of
Are provisional remedies available in criminal cases? justice or to avoid oppression or multiplicity of actions;
Yes, the provisional remedies in civil actions, insofar as 3)When there is a prejudicial question which is sub judice;
they are applicable, may be availed of in connection with the 4) When the acts of the officer are without or in excess of
civil action deemed instituted with the criminal action. authority;
*Note: To avail of a provisional remedy in a criminal action, 5) When the prosecution is under an invalid law,
it must be one with a corresponding civil liability. If there is ordinance or regulation;
civil liability, the civil action must be one arising from the 6)When double jeopardy is clearly apparent;
offense charged and which action must be one arising from
the action. 7)When the court has no jurisdiction over the offense;
8)When it is a case of persecution rather than prosecution;
What then are these provisional remedies? 9)When the charges are manifestly false and motivated by
The following are the provisional remedies available in the lust for vengeance;
a criminal action. 10)When there is clearly no prima facie case against the
a)Preliminary attachment accused and a motion to quash on that ground has been
b)Preliminary injunction denied. (Borlongan Jr. v. Pena, et al. G.R. No. 143591, Nov.
c)Receivership 23, 2007)
d)Replevin
e)Support Pendent elite
The reference to provisional remedies in Rule 127 is made
in general terms.
When is preliminary attachment available?
When the civil action is properly instituted in the
criminal action as provided in Rule 111, the offended party
may have the property of the accused attached as security
for the satisfaction of any judgment that may be recovered
from the accused in the following cases:
a)When the accused is about to abscond from the
Philippines;
b)When the criminal action is based on a claim for money or
property embezzled or fraudulently misapplied or
converted to the use of the accused who is a public officer,
officer of a corporation, attorney, factor, broker, agent or
clerk, in the course of his employment as such, or by any
other person in a fiduciary capacity, or for a wilful violation
of a duty;
c)When the accused has concealed, removed, or disposed
of his property, or is about to do so; and
d)When the accused resides outside the Philippines.
May an Accused avail of the Writs of Preliminary or Final
Injunction, or Prohibition to restrain the criminal action
from proceeding?
As a general rule, courts will not issue writs of
prohibition or injunction, preliminary or final, to enjoin or
restrain criminal prosecution.
However, there are exceptions. In these instances,
prohibition or injunction may be availed of to restrain the
criminal action from proceeding. The exceptions are the
following:
10