Sie sind auf Seite 1von 28

SEPTEMBER 15 | PRE-TRIAL

*Why the significance of the pre-trial cannot be underestimated?

What is pre-trial?

It is a device to bring the parties together to work on a mutually acceptable concession. For example-
plea bargaining.

-Prior to amendment of Rules of Criminal Procedure, pre-trial is merely optional as far as criminal cases.
However, today, pre-trial becomes mandatory in order to expedite trial and expedite the resolution of
the case.

-Purpose is to mark exhibits of evidences as only those evidences marked shall be presented during trial
unless evidence is reserved and allowed by the Court for good cause shown.

Bottom line:

For the consideration of the following:

 Plea-bargaining
 Stipulation of facts
 Marking for identification of evidence of parties
 Waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence
 Matters as will promote fair and expeditious trial of criminal and civil aspects of case

*All agreements and admissions made during pre-trial conference shall be (must be followed in order
for admissions to be used against accused and to make it binding):

 Reduced in writing, and


 Signed by accused and counsel

-If not followed, evidences become inadmissible.

What is stipulation of facts?

Illustration: Prosecution and defense, during the pre-trial proper. Pre-trial shall be conducted by the
judge. Suppose accused is charged with estafa on account of issuing bounced cheque. Now during the
pre-trial, prosecution proposed stipulation of facts, accused admitting or denying is stipulation of facts.

What are the cases subject to mediation?

 Civil aspect of BP 22 cases


 All civil cases, settlement of estates, and cases covered by Summary Rules of Procedure except
violation of traffic rules and regulations and violation of municipal or city ordinances
 Cases cognizable by the Lupong Tagapamayapa under Katarungang Pambarangay
 Civil aspect of quasi-offenses:
o Sample of quasi-offenses:
 Acts committed by reckless or simple imprudence or negligence
resulting in slight or serious physical injuries
 Imprudence resulting in damage to property
 Reckless or simple imprudence with violation of motor vehicle law
 Civil aspect of estafa and libel
 Civil aspect of theft

What happens after pre-trial?

Court will issue a pre-trial order. The pre-trial order sets the course of trial. Order sets the course of
parameters of trial and cannot present further evidences aside from those presented during pre-trial.

*When it comes to trial under Rule 119, rule is continuous trial, why? To avoid delay.

SEPTEMBER 20| TRIAL

Trial (Rule 119)

 Presupposes presentation of evidence by prosecution and defense.


 Case is tried on the merits.
 Court will only arrive at a proper judgment after trial.
 One of cardinal requisites of due process is that there must be hearing.

Trial v. Hearing

TRIAL HEARING
-confined to presentation of evidence and -includes incidental matters
determination of the merits of the case

Can a criminal case or a civil case be disposed without trial?

The normal answer would be no as trial is part of due process however, if we come to think of it, the
Court can dispose of a case even without trial. Instances where a case can be disposed of without trial:

 Cases where accused pleads guilty to the charge


o In such instances there will no more be trial because after accused enters plea of guilty
then Court will sentence accused accordingly and impose corresponding punishment
 Filing a motion to quash for prescription
 Filing motion to quash based on double jeopardy
 In civil cases where party files motion on the judgment of pleadings
o Trial is not anymore necessary
 Court renders summary judgment based on the pleadings and depositions
*Aside from all these, trial is necessary for the Court to try merits of the case.

Rule of thumb in Rule 119: CONTINUOUS TRIAL; avoidance of delays

Suppose the accused pleaded guilty to charge but presented exculpatory evidence, what shall the
Court do?
The Court will issue order for reverse trial, take note, this is discretionary for the Court to do so because
the Court may very well follow the order of trial despite the accused presenting exculpatory evidences.

ORDER OF TRIAL (Sec. 11, Rule 119)

Nowadays, we observe the judicial affidavit rule in the sense that prior to the scheduled presentation of
evidence, parties will file and serve to the other party the affidavit of witnesses in general which
includes that of private offended party and including affidavit of police.

* JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT RULE: Under the new rule, instead of conducting direct testimony in court,
attorneys will submit affidavits with questions and answers that witnesses have supplied while under
oath. To give opposing counsel sufficient review time, the affidavits must be submitted at least five
days prior to a preliminary conference in a case or the hearing of motions. Its purpose is to serve as
the direct testimony of the witness.

Illustration of Order of Trial-

 Prosecution present evidence to prove charge and prove civil liability (thru judicial affidavit)
o Mr. Witness do you recall executing a judicial affidavit?
 Mr. W: Yes, sir.
o I’m showing you the judicial affidavit and what is the relation of this affidavit to the one
you have just mentioned? Evidence has already been pre-marked.
 Mr. W: Yes, bla, blaa
o Did you horn your blow hahahaha ataya dimada brah
o Will you confirm to the truth and veracity of your affidavit?
 Yes, sir.
o Cross-examination, Direct-examination, Recross-examination, Redirect-examination
*Formal offer of documentary evidence (still needs ruling from Court whether to admit the
evidence or not even after prosecution rests his case)
 Accused presents defense and damages sustained (thru judicial affidavit)
 Prosecution present its rebuttal evidence, unless Court allows presentation of additional
evidence
 Accused presents sur-rebuttal evidence unless Court allows presentation of additional evidence
 Upon submission of evidence of parties, case shall be deemed submitted for decision unless
Court directs them to argue orally or submit written memoranda

*TAKE NOTE: One of the cardinal rights of a witness is right against self-degradation; not to be degraded,
not to be asked in an insulting manner.

*TAKE NOTE: Formal offer of evidence: this happens when all testimonial evidences are presented.
Why do evidences need to be offered?

Because only those evidences or documents offered will be taken into consideration by the Court in the
judgment. Exhibits although marked but not offered will be considered useless. Normally Court will give
you 10 days to formally offer evidences written or oral. Sub-markings and signatures are included in the
formal offer of evidence.

Can accused right away present his own evidences after the prosecution rests its case?

No, as the accused has an option whether to proceed with the presentation of the evidence or file a
demurrer to evidence based on the sole ground of insufficiency of evidence.

*IMPORTANT: Accused shall file a demurrer to evidence with leave of Court because there is danger
when motion is denied as filing a demurrer to evidence without leave of Court as it bars accused from
presenting his own evidence and equates to case being submitted for decision based only on the
evidences of the prosecution.

*In civil case, demurrer to evidence is Rule 33 and there is no need of leave of Court.

SEPTEMEBER 27 | TRIAL

**daghan daw syag kwaon sa 119, 120 for exam**

Revised Guidelines for Continuous Trial

Read:
- prohibited motions
- motions allowed

Sec 12. Conditional examination of witness for the accused

Why “conditional”?
Because examination of the witness is prior to the scheduled date of the hearing.
There is a big probability that a witness, during his time to testify, will not be able to do so because of
(grounds).

Grounds where it may be allowed:


1. When the witness is sick or infirm as to afford a reasonable ground to believe he will not be able to
attend trial
2. Resides more than 100 kilometers from the place of trial AND he has no means to attend the same
 These two shall concur, because even if he resides more than 100km from the place of trial, but
he has the means/he can afford to attend the trial, he should be compelled to testify by
subpoena.
 This is a criminal case, he should testify. He cannot invoke his right to remain silent, he has no
right against self-incrimination, because he is an ordinary witness, unlike the accused.
 Unlike in a civil case, if the witness resides more than 100km from the place of trial (ex. Cebu
ang trial, the witness lives in Oslob), can you compel the witness to go to the trial? No, the
witness may invoke his viatory right.

Effect:
Prior to the time he should be called to testify, gipakuha na daan iyang testimony.

Purpose:
To preserve his testimony. Because whatever may happen to him, na-preserve na iyang testimony. That’s
why it’s like trial because you need notice to the other party and it must be taken before a judge or any
member of the bar in good standing. So unsaon man sir? Iyang testimony na i-ingon sa scheduled date
of hearing, mao sad iyang i-sulti.
Pero conditional lang. Because in the event maabot ang September 29, na ayo na siya, he should be
presented in trial. But in a case where the witness is sick or infirm, there is a big probability he cannot
attend the scheduled date of hearing, he should be conditionally examined to preserve his/her testimony.

T/N: “upon motion with notice to the other party”


Why? Because the court will evaluate the propriety, the soundness for the request of conditional
examination. Thus why, the motion shall state (mandatory):
a. The name and residence of the witness
b. The substance of his testimony
c. Ground

The motion shall have an affidavit attached, under oath, and such other evidence as the court may
require. It should be taken before the judge or a member of the bar in good standing.

Sec. 14. bail to secure attendance of material witness

“Material witness”:
A witness whose testimony is essential to establish the guilt of the accused. Example an eyewitness.

Sec. 15. Conditional examination for the witness of the prosecution

Grounds:
1. Sick or inform
2. Has to leave the Philippines with no definite date of returning

The same concept as that of conditional examination for witness of the accused.

Sec 16. Trial of the accused

Trial of several accused or Joint Trial


Joint trial is mandatory and automatic when there are two or more persons jointly charged under one
information. Separate trial is the exception. In fact, separate trial is purely discretionary with the court.

Any one of the accused can always ask for a separate trial. Even if they’re charged together, you cannot
prevent any one of them from asking for a separate trial. Example, kaning latest na hazing incident. The
information will be filed with court, 18 sila kabuok. Aning 18, naa jud ani nila ang mu file for separate
trial because they have separate defenses. That’s the reason nga magpa-separate trial sila. Most
especially they’ll be charged for conspiracy, but you expect some of them will ask for separate trial.
That’s why it’s purely discretionary.

The main objection against separate trial is that it’s repetitive. Mas mayo na lang i-joint trial, kaisa ra i-
present ang evidence, human dayon.

Time to file motion for separate trial:


Must be presented before the prosecution starts to file evidence, because once the evidence is presented,
it will be applicable to ALL the accused since they were charged under one information. Most especially if
conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all. *isuwat na lang nako ang conspiracy basin mao ni iyang i-
exam HAHA* Conspiracy must be proven as an independent fact, not just because they were in a group
and they congregated in one place. There must be an independent evidence to prove that they acted
concertedly. Mere conspiracy is not a crime unless provided for by the RPC.

What about after the prosecution has rested its case? The prosecution is done with both testimonial and
documentary evidence. Can a separate trial be allowed?
GR: No, because as a rule must be presented prior to evidence.
EXC: When there is antagonism in the respective defences of the accused. In other words, lahi-lahi ug
defense ang accused. (CASE: Talino v. Sandiganbayan, 1997)

Effect if separate trial is granted:


1. Regarding the testimony of one accused, as against the other accused who move for separate trial
 The testimony of one accused imputing the crime against his co-accused who asked for separate
trial is INADMISSIBLE in evidence.
 Why? The absence of the opportunity to cross-examine that co-accused. One of the rights of the
accused is to cross-examine the witness and he can’t do that if he was not around.
 As far as evidence of the prosecution is concerned, it will remain ON RECORD.
 Why? Because the prosecution’s evidence is against everyone/all accused, notwithstanding the
other accused’s separate trial.
 Fairness demands this rule since he cannot cross-examine the accused in the separate trial.

Effect in joint trial on testimony of one accused as against another accused:


 Testimony is ADMISSIBLE. There was notice, he has the opportunity to cross-examine.
 If he doesn’t cross-examine, it’s his fault luoy sya.
 As long as there is opportunity for examination, the testimony imputing the other accused is
admissible.

Sec 17. Discharge of accused as state witness


May a potential accused be dropped from the information without any order from the court?
Usual answer: No, because under Sec 17 it must be by approval of the court.
BUT: RA 6981, the witness protection act. Even prior to the trial, the prosecution has the option to drop
one of the accused to be utilized as state witness. CASE: Webb v. De Leon, wherein Jessica Albaro (?),
one of the principal suspects was dropped from the information, and utilized as state witness. Not
through the order of the court but by RA 6981. (read this case daw)

AS far as this charge of the accused to be utilized as state witness, this particular section should be
STRICTLY followed. The conditions should be strictly followed before any charge shall be effected by the
court. DON’T confuse the conditions with the requisites!! Conditions is (A-E).

When itcomes to requisites, it means the procedural requirements:


1. Two or more persons are jointly charged with the commission of any offense
2. Upon motion of the prosecution before resting its case
3. Prosecution is required to present evidence and the sworn statement of each proposed state
witness at a hearing in support of the discharge
4. Accused gives his consent to be a state witness and the trial court is satisfied with the conditions.

In addition to these requirements, you have the conditions.The discharge should be strictly construed on
the basis of the conditions under Sec 17:

a. Absolute necessity as far as the testimony of the proposed state witness is concerned.
 It connotes that the testimony is essential to establish the commission of the crime, and
is not merely corroborative. Essential in the sense that, example, he is the only
eyewitness to the scene of the crime. He was present when the crime was committed.
Kita jud siya na ang isa gikuptan ang ulo, ang isa sa kamot, ang isa nibunal. Siya ang ni
serve as a lookout. Sa ila tanan, upat sila kabuok, who does not appear the most guilty?
Of course, ang lookout.
 Pwede ba sya ma state witness? Yes, ni-qualify na siya under the conditions of number
one.
 Unsay pasabot anang corroborative? Aside from nay nisulti ana, naa pa juy lain na nisulti,
pareho sila. Ang gisulti sa usa na pareho sa usa, is merely corroborative. Nag-abot sila.
Pareho sila in all its material points.
b. No other direct evidence available…
 Between direct and circumstantial evidence, of course direct evidence is preferred.
 Why? Because in direct evidence, like an eyewitness, he witnessed the commission of the
crime. That’s why he’s a material witness. For the prosecution, it’s very easy to prove.
Remember: because the testimony is based on personal knowledge, not merely heresay.
 Whereas, if circumstantial evidence may be the basis for conviction, direct evidence is
better. Why? Lisod i-prove ang crime kay circumstantial evidence is akin to tapestry, it
creates a pattern when interwoven. So it’s like a puzzle – to get the entire thing, you
need all the parts of the puzzle. Matangtang ang duha or tulo, di na mabuo ang picture.
c. Testimony is substantially corroborated in its material points.
 Bisan nay lain witness, nakalabang lang sya nya nakakita siya “uy, tulo to ka laki ang
nibunal” nya mao sad iyang gisulti – corroboration in its material points.
 We are talking here about pila sila kabuok na nibunal. Pag sulti sa katong nakalabay lang,
ug ang gisulti sa accused who is sought to be discharged kay THE SAME, then the
accused can be discharged as state witness. Why? Because the testimony can be
substantially corroborated in its material points.
 Why is this important? Because the objective is to test the truthfulness of this testimony.
The rule proceeds with caution because accused gud siya. His testimony is self-serving,
that it is coming from a tainted source. To eliminate that doubt na iya ra ning gisulti to
save his own ass, his testimony should be corroborated in its material points by the
testimiony of other witnesses.
d. Said accused does not appear to be the most guilty
 Do not use “said accused is the least guilty”. Dapat not appear the most guilty jud.
 CASE: Jimenez Jr. v. People (2014)
 Objective/Purpose: In order to arrive at a conviction with a greater number. So dapat i-
discharge namo ni si accused A, sigurado ma convict si B, C, D.
 It doesn’t mean he did not participate in the crime. But take note: considering that as far
as his participation is concerned, he is not the most guilty then he should be discharged,
in order to arrive with a judgment of conviction as against the greater number. Sayon na
kaayo sa prosecutor to convict the rest.
e. Not convicted of any offense involving moral turpitude
 This means a judgment that is final and executory. If, for example, the case is still on
appeal, par. 5 is absent.
 “Moral turpitude” – anything contrary to justice, modesty, or good morals, a vileness.
 Example: Estafa, malversation of private funds. Conviction of it carries with it moral
turpitude. Even homicide carries with it moral turpitude.

Effect of discharge:
Equivalent to dismissal and is tantamount to ACQUITTAL. He can no longer be accused for the same
offense.

Effect on evidence during the hearing for the discharge:


Automatically forms part of the evidence during the trial.

If the accused who executed a sworn statement/affidavit, did not honor or reneged on his promise to
testify against his co-accused, his testimony is ADMISSIBLE AS EVIDENCE AGAINST HIM (THE
DISCHARGED ACCUSED). He did not testify against his co-accused, and after such discharge, he is
nowhere to be found, his sworn statement is ADMISSIBLE as evidence and he will be reinstated as an
accused. The statement admitting to the crime will be used as evidence against him.

**joint trial will DEFINITELY come out. Discharge as state witness too**

Sec 22. Consolidation

Different from Rule 111. Under Rule 111, it provides that when a civil action arising from a crime is
instituted separately from a criminal action, what happens to the civil action? The civil action shall be
suspended in whatever stage it may be to give way to the criminal action, unless it is an independent civil
action. HOWEVER! The party may ask for consolidation of the civil action with the criminal action, and
joint trial will proceed.

In this rule, there are two or more cases pending against the accused. Founded on the same facts/same
factual milieu.

CASE: People v. Mejia (1997) *take note!*


You have a situation where nay jeep, ang drive gipatay, ang pasahero frustrated murder, and, not
contended with the crimes, gidala pa gyud sa accused ang jeep. Accused was charged and the cases
were pending in two court. In Castillo court, the case pending was the violation of the Anti-Carnapping
because of the jeep. In Laron court, you have the case of murder and frustrated murder.
Suko ang SC kay ngano daw wa gi-consolidate. The purpose of consolidation is to avoid multiplicity of
suits, to guard against oppression, to avoid delay. Kaysa mag pending sa duha or tulo ka korte, ngano
din a lang i-usa, considering the case rose out of the same facts and circumstances by the same accused.
Go by the objective: the avoidance of multiplicity of suits. The attainment of justice at the least expense
of the litigants.

Although! It’s discretionary. Pero pagkita sa court na all the requisites are present for consolidation, i-
consolidate jud na.

Scenario:
1. Two or more cases are tried under the same court.
Example, Branch 6 of the RTC. Two cases pending against the accused, lain-lain ug docket
number. Puro estafa, pero different counts. Can it be consolidated? Yes, by placing one with the
other, conducting one trial and one judgment.
2. Two or more cases pending in different branches of the SAME LEVEL court.
Example, if we have cases pending in RTC Branch 6, 5, 4, and 3. The court with the lowest court
docket is where the other three will be consolidated. There will be only one trial and one
judgment.
If there are 2 in MTC and 2 in RTC, cannot be consolidated, because of issues of jurisdiction.

Sec 23. Demurrer to evidence

The only basis for demurrer is insufficiency of evidence for the prosecution. In the sense that between
presumption of innocence and the evidence presented, the prosecution was not able to override
presumption, so the accused moves for demurrer to evidence.

1. Filed without leave and demurrer denied


 Defense can no longer present evidence and the judgment is based only on evidence by the
prosecution.
2. Filed with leave and demurrer denied
 Defense can still present evidence
3. Demurrer granted
 Case will be dismissed on the merits and it tantamount to ACQUITTAL.

When you file for leave, do you file the demurrer with it?
No. Wait for order to file the demurrer, because it is purely discretionary on the court. It is not a matter
of right to file for demurrer. Why? Because presentation of evidence for the defense is still preferred. BUT
if very clear that the defense won’t be convicted, then demurrer to evidence is proper.

Purpose:
To avoid wager on the outcome of the case. Di dapat tugtan ang accused na magtag-an2 sa iyang kaso,
otherwise he will make a mockery of the justice system.

In a civil case (Rule 33), you may or may not file a leave of court. There is no effect. The danger is if the
demurrer is granted, the effect is the dismissal of the case as against the plaintiff. Plaintiff appeals and
the judgment was reversed and the case is reinstated, the reversal bars the defendant from presenting
evidence on appeal. The case is submitted for decision based on plaintiff’s evidence.

Sec 24. Reopening

Ground:
In order to avoid a miscarriage of justice.

Purpose:
To allow further reception of evidence.

Before the finality of judgment of conviction, the court may motu proprio or upon motion, reopen the
proceedings to allow further reception of evidence. Gituyo jud ni para naay leeway.

As compared to Rule 121, Motion for New Trial.


Sa motion for new trial, very specific and well-defined grounds otherwise the new trial will not be granted.
What are the grounds? Errors of law or irregularities in the proceeding which prejudice the accused or
new evidence. Exclusive!
Whereas in reopening, it is to avoid miscarriage of justice.

**Rule 119 on reopening, Rule 120 modification of judgment, Rule 121 motion for new trial. Mangutana
daw siya, discuss the three in accordance with its importance and objective**
On modification, accused moves to modify the judgment of CONVICTION (not acquittal lol).

OCTOBER 1 | JUDGMENT

JUDGMENT (Section 1, Rule 120)

Section 14 of the Constitution provides no decision shall be rendered by any Court without expressly and
distinctly setting forth the facts and the law upon which the decision is based. [FACTS+LAW]

What is the purpose of this constitutional mandate?

So that the accused will know what to appeal and for purposes of information. In accordance also of the
right of the accused to information.

What is judgment?
It is in adjudication by the Court, the determination by the Court whether accused is guilty or not guilty.
(Sec.1, Rule 120)

What should constitute the judgment?


The judgment should constitute the facts and the law. The facts are those statements established during
trial by the prosecution and by the defense; while law in the judgment is one which is applicable to the
certain set of specific facts.

What are the contents of the judgment?

It should be noted whether such judgment is for conviction or for acquittal. In the judgment for
conviction, it should consist of the following: 1) the legal qualifications, 2) the participation of the
accused whether as principal, accomplice, or accessory, 3) penalty to be imposed, 4) civil liability if any,
5) damages against accused. In judgment for acquittal, it should consist the following: 1) guilt of accused
must be determined whether if guilt was not proven beyond reasonable doubt or facts which the
criminal liability of the accused was based did not exist, 2) civil liability

What are the possible judgments the Court may render?

 The accused is convicted with civil liability


 The accused is convicted without civil liability
 The accused is acquitted without civil liability
 The accused is acquitted with civil liability

What are the requisites for a judgment to be valid and binding? (Section 1, Rule 120)

 It must be in writing (in official language)


 It must be signed by the judge who is incumbent
o Take note of instances where the judge was the one who tried and heard the case,
prepared and signed it but that he passed away and therefore, another judge was the
one who promulgated the decision, in such instance, promulgation of the judgment was
invalid. The judgment must be promulgated during the incumbency of the judge who
signed and penned the judgment.
o Suppose the judge who signed and penned the judgment was appointed to a higher
court, can the judge still promulgate the judgment? No, because during the time of such
promulgation he has no more authority and is no longer the judge in said court.
o Suppose the judge was not the one who tried the case as the judge before him was
promoted and appointed to a higher court, he only entered the scenario after trial of
the case, now can he decide the case, sign and promulgate it? Yes because there is no
violation considering that even if he was not the one who started the case or conducted
the trial or even received the evidence, remember that our Courts are courts of record.
In courts, we have the stenographic notes which the judges can rely on. Hence, it
doesn’t matter if the judge before him was appointed, died, or resigned as long as there
is no judgment or signed by the previous judge yet, the new judge can very well take
over the case and promulgate it.
o Suppose the judge who handled the case was appointed to a higher court, can said
judge insist on rendering his judgment to the said case even if there is already another
judge assigned to subject case? No, as he is no longer the incumbent judge therefore he
is bereft of authority and is already outside of his jurisdiction. You cannot promulgate
what is not yours. (Let go na lagi, you are not a can of sardines hahahahahahahahaaha
charot)
o REMEMBER: JUDGMENT ONLY BECOMES NULL AND VOID IF THE JUDGE WHO
PROMULGATED IT WAS NOT THE ONE WHO PREPARED AND SIGNED IT CONSIDERING
THAT IT MUST BE PROMULGATED BY AN INCUMBENT JUDGE.
 Must be promulgated (judgment is recorded either in the absence of the accused as the rule
allows it or upon presence of accused)
o Take note on instances where presence of accused is required:
 Arraignment
 For purposes of identification
 Promulgation of judgment

Can a judgment be promulgated in the absence of the accused?

Yes, by the recording in the criminal docket as far as the judgment is considered. However, you should
take note of the instances where judgment is for conviction where accused is absent and that his
absence is unjustifiable because you will see that accused loses his right to avail of the remedies. This
means that if his judgment is promulgated and it is proven that his absence is unjustifiable, the
judgment becomes final and executory in the sense that accused loses his right to appeal or move for
reconsideration or move for new trial.

*Certiorari is not a remedy.

Suppose the information is duplicitous and during the trial, all the charges as alleged in the
information were proven, can the accused be convicted of all the charges notwithstanding the rule
under Rule 110 that information should only consist of one offense?

Yes, as an exception to Rule 110 if the accused fails to object to such duplicity before entering his plea.
Take note that however that allegations and proof should go together. Even if accused is charged with
two or more offenses as alleged in the information but during the trial, only one of the charges was
proven, the accused therefore can only be convicted of the charge which was proven.

RULE OF THUMB: ALLEGATIONS + PROOF TO SUSTAIN CONVICTION BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT;


Non allegata non probata (That which has not been alleged cannot be proved) (!!!!)

Judgment in cases of variance between allegation and proof (Section 4, Rule 120)
What is the rationale in Section 4, Rule 120?

It implements the constitutional right of the accused to be informed of the nature and cause of his
accusation such that the accused can only be convicted knows what he is proceeded against and the
charges against him. Otherwise, it is a violation of his right to due process. Remember also the right to
presumption of innocence.

Suppose the accused was charged for homicide but what was proven during trial was reckless
imprudence resulting to homicide, if you were the judge will you convict accused of reckless
imprudence resulting to homicide?

Yes, because reckless imprudence resulting to homicide forms part of the crime of homicide and being a
lesser penalty it does not violate the right of the accused to be informed of the nature and cause of the
accusation or offense charged. Greater offense includes the lesser offense but not vice versa.

Now suppose we flip the scenario, the accused was charged of reckless imprudence (negligence)
resulting to homicide (intentional felony) but what was proven was homicide, if you were the judge
will you convict accused for homicide?

No, because it will now violate the right of the accused to be informed of the nature and cause of
accusation or offense charged against him.

RULE OF THUMB: GREATER OFFENSE INCLUDES THE LESSER OFFENSE and not the other way around.

Accused was charged for rape thru sexual intercourse, what was proven was accused committed rape
by sexual assault, if you were the judge can you convict the accused with rape thru sexual assault
which was proven during the trial?

No. Even if there is rape by sexual assault and what was alleged was rape thru sexual intercourse,
accused cannot be convicted with rape thru sexual assault as there is difference between the two.
Violates right to be informed of the nature and cause of accusation of charge against him.

In the same case, can the accused be convicted of another crime?

Yes, with acts of lasciviousness as it is a lesser offense of rape thru sexual intercourse.

Accused was charged with rape, can the accused be convicted with simple seduction as proven during
trial?

No because of lack of factual allegations as far as simple seduction is concerned. Even if during the trial
what was proven was that the accused committed simple seduction he cannot be convicted with simple
seduction if he was charged in information with rape.

Accused was charged with one count of rape, what was proven however during the trial was that
accused committed 4 counts of rape, can the accused be convicted with multiple rape?
No, because it will violate right of accused to be informed of nature of cause and accusation of charge
against him.

Accused was charged with intentional malversation, during the trial however, what was proven was
commission of malversation thru negligence, can the accused be convicted of malversation thru
negligence?

Yes because malversation thru negligence is a lesser offense.

Accused was charged with intentional crime of falsification of public documents what was proven
however during the trial was, reckless imprudence resulting to falsification of public documents; can
the accused be convicted of reckless imprudence resulting to falsification of public documents?

Yes because reckless imprudence resulting to falsification of public documents is a lesser offense but not
the other way around.

Accused was charged with illegal detention can he be convicted with grave coercion?

Yes because illegal detention is higher than grave coercion which is deprivation of personal liberty.
Greater offense includes lesser offense.

Accused was charged with higher offense what was proven was a lesser offense and the Court is ready
to convict the accused with the said lesser offense, now what happened was, lesser offense has
already prescribed, can the Judge insist that the accused be convicted with a lesser offense?

No, even if he is found guilty with the lesser offense because the offense has already prescribed and the
accused shall therefore be set free.

Accused was charged with distribution or dealing of shabu or acted as broker, what was proven was
accused committed illegal possession; can he be convicted with illegal possession?

Yes, because illegal possession is a lesser offense than being a dealer or distributor of shabu. GREATER
OFFENSE INCLUDES LESSER OFFENSE NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.

What is promulgation and is presence of accused necessary? (Sec. 6, Rule 120)

Promulgation is done in open court. The general rule is that, accused must be present during
promulgation of judgment. Exceptions are:

 When it is a light offense (provided accused will send a representative or his counsel)
o When it comes to graver offenses, presence of accused is necessary.
o Suppose the accused is absent during promulgation, can promulgation be moved to
another date? NO. (So ang courts ang ma-adjust, te? Pa-chix lang?)
 accused jumped bail or escaped prison [Promulgation in absentia]
 Despite due notice, accused fails to appear without justifiable reason [Promulgation in absentia]
o Effect of failure to appear:
 Promulgation in absentia
 Accused loses his entitlement to all remedies available against judgment
 Court shall order his arrest

What constitutes promulgation? (Sec. 6, Rule 120)


Recording and reading of the judgment in the criminal dockets and the accused is furnished of it in his
last known address.

In cases where the judgment is conviction and the absence of the accused is not justified, accused loses
all remedies provided by law, such that judgment becomes final and executory. However, within 15 days
from the date of promulgation, if the accused surrenders in Court and explains and justifies his absence
during promulgation, his right to remedies may then be reinstated.

When does judgment become final and executory?

From the date of entry of the judgment.

Modification of judgment v. Reopening of Case

MODIFICATION OF JUDGMENT REOPENING OF CASE


(SEC. 7, RULE 120) (SEC. 19, RULE 119)
The judgment of conviction is modified. It is only What is re-opened is the proceeding
the accused who can move for modification of
judgment. Before the judgment of conviction
becomes final (within 15 days), the accused may
move for a motion to modify the judgment.

Can you move a modification of judgment of


acquittal? HAHAHAHA BOGO DAW KA IF
MUINGON KAG YES
*Take Note: People v. Veneracion, De Vera v. De Vera

The right to move for modification of judgment shall only be done by the accused however in the above
cases; judgment was allowed to be modified upon motion of prosecution. In what situations where
modification of judgment by the public prosecutor was allowed?
-Accused was charged with a penalty of death, after trial accused was found guilty but judge refused to
impose the penalty of death because of his personal opinion against, instead the judge imposed the
penalty of reclusion perpetua. The public prosecutor raised the matter to SC which the SC ruled that:

The right to move for modification of judgment only rests upon the accused but the SC makes
this case an exemption to such general rule as in this case, the judge committed grave abuse of
discretion in imposing penalty.

When it comes to erroneous judgment why does erroneous judgment be valid? Does it not violate the
right of the accused to know the nature and cause of accusation against him?
Erroneous judgment although how erroneous it is, is still a valid judgment as long as the Court has
jurisdiction over the case and in imposing the penalty, instead remedy of an error of judgment is appeal.
So even though how you perceive the judgment as erroneous either in the appreciation of facts or in the
application of the law, remedy is appeal and you should take it to higher Court for review.

When it comes to Nepys Rule, if mu-appeal sha after 15 days, is the judgment already final and
unappeasable?

Final order is different from final and executory. When it comes to final order is that it completely
disposes off the case. For example, accused is convicted and he has within 15 days to move for
reconsideration. Now prior to the lapse of 15 day period, ni-move sha for reconsideration and his
motion therefore becomes pending.

In case of affirmance of judgment of conviction, the judge will issue an order denying the motion for
reconsideration. The character of such order is a final order. Now in such scenario, does the accused
loses his right to appeal? NO, because the filing of the motion for reconsideration was done prior to the
expiry of period to appeal in fact the rule provides, that he has the remaining period within which the
balance of the period to appeal but that is no longer the situation because under the ruling of Hon.
Samson v. Yu, the accused has a fresh period of 15 days within which to take the appeal from the receipt
of the denial of the motion for reconsideration. That order denying motion for reconsideration is
considered a final order wherein the accused can take now his appeal but it doesn’t prevent the accused
from after the promulgation of judgment of conviction, instead of filing a motion for reconsideration, he
can directly appeal the case.

*The 15-day period of appeal starts from the promulgation of the judgment; exclude the first day,
include the last day

-Availability of remedies is not automatically given to the accused as the accused has to wait for the
order granting his request to avail of the remedies and he has 15 days from the receipt of order granting
him to avail of the remedies to avail on what remedy he shall apply for. (15-15 scenario)

REMEDIES FOR JUDGMENT

What are the different kinds of remedies against a judgment?

 Motion for New Trial (Rule 121)


 Motion for Reconsideration (Rule 121)
 Appeal (Rule 122)
o Cannot re-open a case.
o Pertains to review of error of judgment
Is certiorari an appeal?

No. It is an original action granted upon extraordinary and exceptional circumstances. Just like in the
judgment was already final and executory in the case of Galman v. Pamaran for example, the accused
was acquitted, because of acquittal you have double jeopardy to apply, how come the case was
reopened? Rule 65-Certiorari; exceptional circumstances

APPEAL, MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION CERTIORARI


In cases of error of judgment Question the exercise of jurisdiction of court
whether done in a capricious or despotic manner

Grounds for reopening of new trial? (SPECIFIC AND WELL-DEFINED)

1. Errors of law
2. Irregularities in the proceedings which affect the substantial rights of the accused
3. Newly discovered evidence

-Specificity of the grounds are such because there is already a judgment promulgated thus justified on
presumption of regularity in the performance of official duties. Also for this remedy not be abused.

-Negligence of counsel is not a ground for new trial. Negligence of counsel binds client unless the
negligence is so gross as it tantamount to violation of due process, then only then shall it be a ground for
new trial.

1. Errors of Law

ERROR OF LAW ERROR OF FACT


When there is an error or question or doubt as Pertains to when there is doubt or any
to the law applied in the case falsehood in appreciation of facts. Not a
ground for new trial, only for motion of
Example: Accused was convicted with consideration. It’s something to do with
homicide but the Court imposed penalty of evidence.
reclusion perpetua, is the penalty imposed
proper?
No. There is therefore an error of law as far as
crime is concerned.

2. Irregularities in the proceedings which affect the substantial rights of the accused
-Substantial rights: Violation of right of accused under the Constitution like right to counsel, be
heard, presumption of innocence.

3. Newly discovered evidence

Requisites:
 Evidence is new
 Evidence is only discovered after trial
 Evidence presented has a probability to alter or change the outcome of the trial

NEWLY DISCOVERED EVIDENCE FORGOTTEN EVIDENCE


-A ground for new trial -Not a ground for new trial
-New and only discovered after trial which has -Evidence was already inexistent during trial
probability to alter the outcome of trial but for failure or by sheer negligence by
Counsel, said evidence was never presented
during trial.

*Suppose one day after the crime was committed, the accused underwent a ballistic test.
Result came out that he was negative of powder burn. However, during trial, result was not
presented by defense. It was only after conviction that the counsel for the accused, moved for
new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence, being the Judge, will you consider the
said evidence?

NO. This is an example of forgotten evidence as the evidence is already inexistent during the
trial.

*Accused moved for new trial on ground of DNA testing, if you were the Judge, will you grant
the DNA testing?
NO because at the time the trial commenced, accused could have moved for DNA Testing. It
cannot be considered as newly discovered evidence.

*PP v. CALAYAN: Judgment became final and executory already, case reached SC. Accused was
charged and convicted and penalty of death was imposed, but SC granted new trial. Accused
was charged with kidnapping and naay namatay. Now, kaning duha na-convict of course
automatic review by SC and judgment became final. Subsequently, the remaining 2 accused
executed a sworn statement that actually, Calayan and other accused were not at the scene of
the crime. In other words, they did not participated in the crime. The SC, even if the judgment
was already final and executory, granted new trial and remanded case to lower court. SC
justified that they relaxed the rules in this case because to allow accused to rot in jail and
disregard the sworn statement would be an injustice. Pro hac vice- only in this particular case;
this case is not controlling to other cases to accommodate new trial.

What is the effect if the Court grants new trial?

This is a sweeping question actually. What you need to do first is to determine the grounds first because
if the ground is error of law or irregularities, proceedings are set aside and vacated and the evidence will
be taken anew. Trial de novo then happens. But when it comes to the ground of newly discovered
evidence, evidences that were taken remain in the records and the newly evidence shall then be added
to existing evidences.
What happens if motion for new trial is denied?

Upon receipt of denial, you have another 15 day period within which to appeal by virtue of Nepys Rule
but subsequently you have the case of Samson Tatad v. Judith Yu. (Fresh period rule in appeal cases)
(ehehe di pa end of the world gurl, may another 15 days pa)

Oct 6 | APPEALS

*Appeal is not a constitutional right; it is merely a statutory privilege. It should be exercised in the
manner as provided by law.

How are appeals taken?

When it comes to death penalty, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, take note of the ff:

-Remember the court of origin which is the Regional Trial Court, the judgment of conviction imposing
the penalty of death is reviewed automatically by the Court of Appeals in view of the ruling in People v.
Mateo.

-Suppose CA affirms judgment of conviction and affirms penalty of death, CA will render decision but
refrain from making an entry of judgment and instead certify the case for its final review. When it comes
to penalty of reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, there is no automatic review to the Court of
Appeals. The mode of review however, is notice of appeal filed in the Trial Court and then to the Court
of Appeals.

-Subsequently, let us suppose that the case is in Court of Appeals and now Court of Appeals will affirm
the judgment of conviction imposing the penalty of reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment. Courts of
Appeals will then render judgment and make an entry of the judgment.

-The mode of appeal to SC is by notice of appeal filed in CA. It has been discussed that as a general rule,
all appeals to the Supreme Court is by way of Rule 45 except in penalties of reclusion perpetua or life
imprisonment because from the CA you can appeal to SC by way of notice of appeal only filed in the CA.

Why is it notice of appeal? Because in the first place, CA will not only render judgment but also make an
entry of judgment unlike in the death penalty, CA is prohibited in making an entry of judgment.

What comprises a division in CA?

The Court of Appeals do business by divisions and not in en banc and is composed of:

 Chairman,
 Senior Member,
 Junior Member (hehehee super junior hehehehehe)
The only time the Court of Appeals meet in en banc is when they decide and promulgate for the internal
rules or having special occasions or someone retires but never to decide a case.

How are appeals taken in CA?

To constitute a quorum upon doing business in Court of Appeals, the 3 justices should be present to
deliberate a case. This is what we call a collegiate body.

To arrive at a vote upon deciding a case, the required number of votes to consider a valid disposition of
the Court of Appeals, is the unanimous vote of the 3 justices.

In case they are not unanimous or 2 did not agree to the ponente, what happens?

The presiding justice through a special raffle will designate 2 additional justices to sit in the division
comprising now of 5 justices and is considered a special division (maypa ang division special hiiiing
charot hahahaha ew) just to render a decision regarding a particular case.

What is then the required number of votes in this special division to promulgate a decision?

Majority and not unanimous.

How are appeals taken in Supreme Court?

The Supreme Court conducts business either in division or en banc. Presently we have 15 justices in the
SC and there are 3 divisions.

Take note of the cases which the SC will decide in en banc or by division:

BY EN BANC BY DIVISION
By the command of the constitution, the following When it comes to deciding case in division is not
must be heard in en banc: (Sec. 4, par. 1, Article 8, the unanimous vote of 5 but only majority which is
1987 Consti) 3 unlike in CA.

-All cases involving the constitutionality of a treaty,


international or executive agreement, or law,
which shall be heard by the Supreme Court en
banc,
-cases involving constitutionality, application, or
operation of presidential decrees, proclamations,
orders, instructions, ordinances, and other
regulations
-cases heard by division when required majority in
division is not obtained
-cases where SC modifies or reverses a doctrine or
principle of law previously laid down either en
banc or in division
-administrative cases where vote is for dismissal of
judge of lower court or otherwise to discipline
such a one
-election contests for President or Vice-President

To constitute a quorum, the required number of


members is 8. Suppose 8 are present and 7 are
absent, can they proceed in deciding a case? YES,
because they constitute a quorum. Now in
deciding a case, shall all 8 members concur with
each other’s decision? NO because what we have
here is simple majority which is 5 and will already
constitute decision of the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court is not a trier of facts; it is a court of law. However, there are exceptions to the rule:

(a) the conclusion is a finding grounded entirely on speculation, surmise and conjecture;

(b) the inference made is manifestly mistaken;

(c) there is grave abuse of discretion;

(d) the judgment is based on a misapprehension of facts;

(e) the findings of fact are conflicting;

(f) the collegial appellate courts went beyond the issues of the case, and their findings are contrary
to the admissions of both appellant and appellee;

(g) the findings of fact of the collegial appellate courts are contrary to those of the trial court;

(h) said findings of fact are conclusions without citation specific evidence on which they are based;

(i) the facts set forth in the petition as well as in the petitioner’s main and reply briefs are not
disputed by the respondents;

(j) the findings of fact of the collegial appellate courts are premised on the supposed evidence, but
are contradicted by the evidence on record; and

(k) all other similar and exceptional cases warranting a review of the lower courts’ findings of fact.

All appeals to SC except by Consti or by law are by virtue of Rule 45-Petition for review on Certiorari. SC
cannot order a new trial but in Pp v. Calayan, the two accused were not part of the crime was
discovered only upon finality of judgment, SC moved for a new trial.

Power of Supreme Court whether to avoid miscarriage of justice

In the case of Echegaray, at the time he was convicted the penalty was death penalty, the judgment
became final and executory such that there is no other way but to implement the judgment and he must
therefore, be executed in regards to penalty. However, somebody in the pre-legal assistance group
questioned the constitutionality of death penalty by certiorari with prohibition, SC then put a halt in the
execution of the judgment by issuing a TRO, stating that it is to relax its rules in order to avoid
miscarriage of justice.

WORDS OF WISDOM: (OR WA NA JUD KAY LINGAW ATE GURL? BORING GYUD GRABI)

-Mag effort ka ate gurl

-Effort then keep going charot then remember why you started

(T/N: Ngano way klaro iya discussion huhuhuhuhuhuhu lagpas lagpas man why sir why ge lang lami man
ang kaon ani na day hehehehee sucha happy day)

OCTOBER 11 | INTERNAL RULES OF SC + RULE 125+ RULE 126: SEARCH AND SEIZURE

Jurisdiction of Sandiganbayan:

Sandiganbayan exercises both original and appellate jurisdiction.

Procedure of appeal in Sandiganbayan:

 Exercise of its original jurisdiction:

-From RTC to Sandiganbayan is Rule 41 in relation to Rule 44- notice of appeal.

-From the Sandiganbayan to Supreme Court imposing penalty of Reclusion temporal or lower than RT,
appeal is by way of Rule 45 within 15 days.

-Sandiganbayan imposes reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, appeal to Supreme Court by way of
notice of appeal. Filed in court of origin which is Sandiganbayan.

-Sandiganbayan imposes death of penalty, mode of appeal is by way automatic review by Supreme
Court.

 Exercise of its appellate jurisdiction:

-Court of origin is not Sandiganbayan but other Courts (MTC, RTC)

-From RTC to Sandiganbayan, mode of appeal is Rule 40- notice of appeal.

-Suppose case originated in RTC, Sandiganbayan exercised its appellate jurisdiction, what then is the
mode of appeal when it comes to decision of RTC convicting accused imposing the penalty of reclusion
temporal or lower than RT?

From the RTC to Sandiganbayan mode of appeal is Rule 42-Petition for review on both questions of fact
and law.

-From Sandiganbayan to Supreme Court, the mode of appeal is Rule 45-Petition for review on Certiorari.
-When Sandiganbayan imposes penalty of death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment,
Sandiganbayan shall render judgment but refrain from making an entry of judgment and forthwith
certify case to SC for its review and final disposition.

*No more mechanism of appeal for Supreme Court.

Important topics in Internal Rules of Supreme Court:

 Rule 3- Exercise of Judicial Review, Judicial Function


o Secs.1-4
o Most important section is the 4th one as it enumerates 11 situations as exception to the
rule that Courts are not Courts of trier of facts.
 Rule 12- Voting Requirements
o Secs. 1, 2, par.b of sec.2, 3
o As for en banc voting shall be made in the concurrence of majority of members of the
Court who actually took part in the deliberation on the issue or issues involved.
o As far as division is concerned, concurrence of majority is needed.
o As far as tie voting, skip civil case and go directly to criminal case.
o Where the necessary majority of the vote is not obtained as far as division is concerned,
case shall be elevated en banc unlike in CA where majority is not obtained they will add
2 justices to sit in.
o No second motion for reconsideration is entertained (prohibited motion) however, in
the higher consideration of justice; a second motion for reconsideration may be
entertained by SC.
 Rule 15
o Secs. 2 and 3
o Court shall not entertain 2nd motion for reconsideration as a rule except in higher
interest of justice by the Court en banc upon at least 2/3 vote and not majority.
o In division, 2nd motion for reconsideration is not allowed because after all decision of
division is decision of SC but may be allowed in higher interest of justice.
o Date of finality of decision is the date of its entry.

WORDS OF WISDOM:

-Life is meaningful when you get out of your comfort zone. (PAK!)

-After all, it is not the number of years in your life but the life you put in your years that will matter.
(MOTIVATED NA KAAYO KO ATTY HOOOO CHAROT)
SEARCH AND SEIZURE (Rule 126)

 Constitutional basis: Article 3, Sec.2: The right of the people to be secure in their persons,
houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature
and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue
except upon probable cause to be determined personally by the judge after examination under
oath or affirmation of complainant and witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing
place to be searched and persons or things to be seized. (Right to be let alone) (Does not need
enabling law anymore)(Presumption of regularity will not apply)(Burden of proof lies with officer)

What is the purpose of the constitutional provision?

To protect the privacy and sanctity of persons, houses, papers, and effect against arbitrary intrusion by
police officers.

-Generally all searches are unreasonable unless procedural requirements are followed and safeguards
are followed. (Ay lagi patakag panghikap bad bad na tsk)

Lifetime of a search warrant

Only 10 days and after lapse of said days, police officer shall then make a report to Court because after
the lapse, search warrant becomes null and void and becomes functus officio. Unlike in warrant of arrest
which has no lifetime.

SEARCH WARRANT WARRANT OF ARREST


It is a process issued by Court to obtain things, A written order issued by a judge directing a police
goods, as described in the warrant. To prevent officer to take into custody a person who upon
abuses in procuring and implementation of search probable cause may have committed a crime, to
warrant, the lifetime of 10 days is provided. answer for the commission of said crime.

Applicant must specifically describe the places to


be searched in order to avoid witch hunt.

When you enter room, or premise to be searched:


2 witness rule to avoid abuses in implementation Does not need witnesses
of search warrant

What happens when the place to be searched or things to be searched are not properly or specifically
described in the warrant?

The warrant shall be considered a general warrant and shall be null and void.
-Picop v. Asuncion: Applicant applied for search warrant for a compound in Iligan but applicant and
warrant was in the form of general warrant (scatter shot warrant). Warrant is invalidated by the SC.
[MAGPANIC DAYUN UNSAY SCATTER SHOT LELS NYWAYS, IT IS A SEARCH WARRANT ISSUED FOR MORE
THAN ONE OFFENSE, INVALID]

Take note also: 20th Century Fox case and Burgos case.

Requisites for application of search warrant:

 Shall be issued only upon finding of a probable cause to be determined personally by the judge
 Warrant issued must particularly describe place to be searched or things to be seized
 Searching questions addressed to applicant must be thorough and must illicit the required
information as far as search warrant is concerned, otherwise, Court cannot issue it if it lacks
specificity. [Rationale: Article 3, Sec.2 par.1]

Where to apply search warrant? (Sec. 2, Rule 124)

 General Rule: Any court whose territorial jurisdiction crime was committed.
o A warehouse in Pier 1 is under surveillance because it is storing contraband goods,
where then shall you apply search warrant? Pier 1 is part in Cebu City, then file it in
Cebu City Courts.
 Exceptions:
o For compelling reasons stated in application, any Court within judicial region where
crime was committed if place of commission of crime is known, or any Court within
judicial region where warrant shall be enforced.
 Bisan pa i-enforce sa Bohol considering that Bohol is included in 7th judicial
region, you can get search warrant there. But again, know the enumeration by
heart.
o However, if criminal action has already been filed, application shall only be made in
Court where criminal action is pending.

*Judicial Region: Refers for example to Cebu City as part of Region 7, hence, 7 th judicial
region which is composed of Cebu, Cebu Province, Bohol

Where do you file a motion to quash a search warrant? (Sec.14, Rule 126)

It may be filed in and acted upon only by Court where action has been instituted. If no criminal action
has been instituted, motion may be filed in and resolved by Court that issued search warrant. However,
if such Court failed to resolve motion and criminal case is subsequently filed in another court, motion
shall be resolved in latter Court.

*When it comes to motion to quash a search warrant, what is being assailed is validity of search
warrant and not as to its implementation.
* Normally when you assail validity of a search warrant you file a motion to quash but in Pp v. Burgos, SC
went to the extent that the aggrieved party may file petition for certiorari under Rule 65 if illegality of
search warrant has a far-reaching implications.

As to the manner of effecting or implementing the search warrant, does the motion to quash cover
this particular situation?

NO because what is being assailed is validity of search warrant hence remedy should be filing a criminal
offense under RPC. File violation of domicile, maliciously obtained search warrant against police officers,
search of dwelling without witnesses. [Article 128, 129, 130, RPC] Can also ask for damages.

Warrantless searches and seizures:

-Except for searches incidental to lawful arrest, the rest are already warrantless searches and seizures.
Under Article 126, what is only covered is search incidental to lawful arrest.

-By search incidental to lawful arrest, what is important is that arrest must be lawful before you can
effect a lawful search because if arrest is unlawful, then subsequent search shall also be unlawful. In fact,
any evidence obtained shall be considered fruit of poisonous tree.

-However, just because there is a lawful arrest, it does not follow that the subsequent search is also
lawful because you have to consider the time element; from the time the accused is lawfully arrested
and from the time of actual search. If sufficient lapse of time will occur from the actual search then you
can no longer justify search incidental to lawful arrest. [TIME ELEMENT IMPORTANT, REMEMBER!]

-What you should remember: Search must be contemporaneous to lawful arrest and must be made
within permissible area of search. Pag-arrest nimo sa isa ka tao, diha-diha isearch nimo dayun sha for
weapons or dangerous drugs, etc dili kay pagkadakop nimo, dal-on nimo shas laing lugar. (hmmmm
beshie lahi na na nga search and seizure hahahahahaha) Classic example of search and seizure would be
buy bust operations.

When it comes to permissible area of search, the SC explained the guidelines:

>It extends beyond the person arrested as long as it is within the surroundings of immediate
control. Example: standby sa iya car, nag-tabako marijuana, car can also be searched.

>Example: Accused was standing at the front of door, subsequently search was also conducted
inside the house, SC held no, search was invalid as beyond the door is already not within the
immediate control of person arrested.

Seizure of evidence in Plain View


-Plain view doctrine: Objects failing in plain view of officer who has a right to be in that position to have
that view, are subject to seizure and may be presented as evidence. It applies when the following
requisites concur:

(a) the law enforcement officer in search of the evidence has a prior justification for an intrusion or is in
a position from which he can view a particular area; (there is prior valid intrusion)

Example: Police nangukab ug aparador, search is invalid. Authority ceases upon arrest of person.

(b) the discovery of the evidence in plain view is inadvertent; and

-Wa tuyua, nakit-an.

(c) it is immediately apparent to the officer that the item he observes may be evidence of a crime,
contraband, or otherwise subject to seizure. (Without further search) (Seen by naked eyes)

Checkpoints

o They are not illegal per se as long as search is limited to visual search and does not extend to
bodily and vehicular extensive search. VISUAL SEARCH ONLY.
o Anyag v. Comelec: Accused just left Batasan Premised, there was checkpoint, police officer
extended the search in the baggage compartment and found high powered weapons in the car
tire.

Consented Searches

Elements:

 The right exists


 Person knows he has the right that’s why he consented
 Intentional relinquishment of such right

-Consent which was given under coercive atmosphere is no longer within the ambit of consented search.
It must be given voluntarily and freely.

-Example: Search was allowed to proceed when it comes to search with the rebels but it so happened,
officers opened the doors to rooms and cabinets, SC said no, search not covered under consented
search.

Stop and Frisk (Terry Doctrine)

STOP AND FRISK SEARCH INCIDENTAL TO LAWFUL ARREST


-Justified because of reasonableness and -Probable cause is required.
experience of the act of officer. Probable cause is
not required however, a mere hunch is not
justified what is needed is reasonableness of act of -Arrest must be lawful for search to be lawful
officer in the light of his experience for the
prevention of crime and for safety and self-
preservation of officer.

-Malacat v. CA!

Take note as well:

 Customs searches
o Person did not pay correct tariffs, can vehicle used to transport with contraband goods
be searched? YES as exception to search warrant.
 Cases:
o People v. Salanguit: there is search warrant to search for shabu and its paraphernalia
but after police officers came across in the premises which was wrapped in newspaper,
is the search for the items inside the newspaper wrapped things? NO.
o Pp v. De Garcia: exigent and emergency situations

WORD OF WISDOM:

I missed so many shots in my lifetime that’s why I succeeded. Keep on trying. –by Jude Jordan
hahahahah charot