RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Lectures of Atty. Catherine M. Guerzo
2 Manresa 2016
SEPTEMBER 8, 2016 – Glorybelle Ressureccion PRE-TRIAL IN CIVIL CASE
RULE 118
It is set when the plaintiff
PRE-TRIAL moves ex parte to set the
case for pre-trial (Sec. 1, Rule
18)
Section 1. Pre-trial; mandatory in criminal cases. — In all
criminal cases cognizable by the Sandiganbayan, Regional
Trial Court, Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court in
Cities, Municipal Trial Court and Municipal Circuit Trial Court, The motion to set the case for
the court shall after arraignment and within thirty (30) days pre-trial is made after the last
from the date the court acquires jurisdiction over the person of pleading has been served and
the accused, unless a shorter period is provided for in special filed (Sec. 1, Rule 18)
laws or circulars of the Supreme Court, order a pre-trial
conference to consider the following:
(a) plea bargaining;
It considers the possibility of
an amicable settlement as an
(b) stipulation of facts;
important objective.
(c) marking for identification of evidence of the parties;
(d) waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence;
Requires the proceeding
(e) modification of the order of trial if the accused during the preliminary
admits the charge but interposes a lawful defense; conference to be recorded in
and the “minutes of preliminary
conference” to be signed by
both parties and/or counsel.
(f) such other matters as will promote a fair and The rule allows either the
expeditious trial of the criminal and civil aspects of the party or his counsel to sign
case. (secs. 2 and 3, cir. 38-98) the minutes (A.M. No. 03-1-
09-SC).
Sanctions for non-appearance
Q: Is Pre-trial mandatory? in a pre-trial are imposed
upon the plaintiff and the
defendant in a civil case (Sec.
A: Yes. Under “Speedy Trial Act of 1997”, in all criminal cases 4, Rule 18).
cognizable by the MTC, MCTC, MeTC, RTC and
Sandiganbayan, pretrial is mandatory.
Q: If the arrest warrant has already been served or the Specifically required to be
accused voluntarily surrendered, should we immediately submitted in a civil case (Sec.
proceed to trial? 6, Rule 18)
A: No. There should be arraignment first. Pre-trial comes after
arraignment. The presence of the
defendant is required unless
he is duly represented at the
Q: Distinguish pre-trial in civil cases from pre-trial in criminal pre-trial conference by his
cases. counsel with the requisite
authority to enter into a
A: compromise agreement.
PRE-TRIAL IN CRIMINAL
CASE
It is ordered by the court and
no motion to set the case for
pre-trial is required from either
the prosecution or the
defense
The pre-trial is ordered by the
court after arraignment and
within thirty (30) days from the
date the court acquires
jurisdiction over the person of
the accused.
It does not include the
possibility of amicable
settlement of criminal liability
as one of its purposes (Sec.
1, Rule 118).
All agreements or admissions
made or entered during the
pre-trial conference shall be
reduced in writing and signed
by both the accused and
counsel, otherwise, they
cannot be used against the
accused (Sec. 2, Rule 18)
The sanctions in a criminal
case are imposed upon the
counsel for the accused or the
prosecutor (Sec. 3, Rule 18)
Not specifically required in a
criminal case.
The accused is merely
required to sign the written
agreement arrived at in the
pre-trial conference, if he is in
conformity therewith. Unless
otherwise required by the
court, his presence therefore
 RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Lectures of Atty. Catherine M. Guerzo
2 Manresa 2016

Failing in either of which, the
case shall proceed as if the
defendant has been declared
in default.
The presence of the plaintiff is
required unless excused
therefrom for valid cause or if
he is represented therein by a
person fully authorized in
writing to perform the acts
specified in Sec. 4, Rule 18.
Absent such justification, the
case may be dismissed with
or without prejudice.
A pre-trial brief is required
with the particulars and the
sanctions provided by Sec. 6,
Rule 18.
is not indispensable.
Note: This is aside from the
consideration that the
accused may waive his
presence at all stages of the
criminal action, except at the
arraignment, promulgation of
judgment or when required to
appear for identification.
The presence of the private
offended party is not required.
Instead, he is priorly required
to appear at the arraignment
of the accused for purpose of
plea bargaining,
determination of civil liability
and other matters requiring
his presence.
Should he fail to appear
therein and the accused
offers to plead guilty to a
lesser offense necessarily
included in the offense
charged, the accused may be
allowed to do so with the
conformity of the trial
prosecutor alone.
The filing of a pre-trial brief is
not required. It only requires
attendance at a pre-trial
conference to consider the
matters stated in Sec. 1, Rule
118. (1997 Bar Question)
defendant is absent, the plaintiff is allowed to present evidence
ex parte. However, this is NOT allowed in criminal cases
because of the due process requirement.
Q: What is then the remedy of the prosecution if the accused is
not present during pre-trial?
A:
Atty. Guerzo: Regarding the necessity of personal
appearance of parties during conduct of pre-trial, the rule is
that unless especially ordered by the court, there is no
requirement for the personal appearance of the accused or the
offended party at pre-trial.
Note: Even if absent, the accused cannot be arrested, nor can
his bail be forfeited.
Q: What are those instances where the presence of the
accused is mandatory?
A:
1. During arraignment
2. During promulgation of judgment
3. During trial for the purpose of identification
Q: During pre-trial, we can conduct plea bargaining and
stipulation of facts. Why is that allowed?
A: Plea bargaining is encouraged because it leads to prompt
and final disposition of most criminal cases. It shortens the
time between charge and disposition and enhances
whatever may be the rehabilitative prospects of the guilty
when they are ultimately
imprisoned.(http://www.batasnatin.com/law-library/remedial-
law/criminal-procedure/621-plea-bargaining.html)
Stipulation of facts should be allowed during pre-trial in further
pursuit of the objective of expediting trial by dispensing with the
presentation of evidence on matters that the accused is willing
to admit (People vs. Hernandez, 1996).

Q: What will be signed by the parties and their counsel?

Source: UST Golden Notes, 2011
A: See Sec. 2, Rule 118
Q: Is the presence of the accused on pre-trial mandatory?

A: No, it is NOT mandatory. To include him among the
mandatory parties to appear [in pre-trial] might violate his
constitutional right to remain silent (Ibid.)
Q: If accused is absent during pre-trial, can the prosecution
present evidence ex parte?
Section 2. Pre-trial agreement. — All agreements or
admissions made or entered during the pre-trial conference
shall be reduced in writing and signed by the accused and
counsel, otherwise, they cannot be used against the accused.
The agreements covering the matters referred to in section 1 of
this Rule shall be approved by the court. (sec. 4, cir. 38-98)

A: No, because the right of the accused to due process will be

violated. The rule on pre-trial in civil cases is that when the
 RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Lectures of Atty. Catherine M. Guerzo
2 Manresa 2016
Section 4. Pre-trial order. — After the pre-trial conference, the
court shall issue an order reciting the actions taken, the facts
stipulated, and evidence marked. Such order shall bind the
parties, limit the trial to matters not disposed of, and control the
course of the action during the trial, unless modified by the
court to prevent manifest injustice. (3)
Q: What is the importance pre-trial order?
A: To limit the trial to matters not disposed of, and CONTROL
the course of the action during the trial, unless modified by the
court to prevent manifest injustice.
Q: The parties can agree as to facts. Assume that there is a
fact that was inadvertently not taken up during pre-trial. During
trial proper can either of the parties present evidence to prove
this fact?
A: No.
Atty. Guerzo: Before a pre-trial order is issued by the court,
there is a pre-trial agreement. This pre-trial agreement, before
the parties will sign the same, it is read by the accused and
complainant and their respective counsels in case there are
some omissions or there are things to be included/added in the
said pre-trial agreement. The basis of the pre-trial order (PTO)
is the pre-trial agreement. Hence, anything not included in
PTO is already deemed WAIVED. Take note of that.
For emphasis, it will control the proceedings in the said case.
That’s why pre-trial order is very important.
Q: What “other matters” should be included in the pre-trial
agreement [referring to Sec. 1 (f)]?
A:
1. Number of witnesses to be presented by each party
(the complainant and the accused)
2. Names and addresses of the witnesses to be
presented
3. Specific trial dates needed to complete evidence
presentation by all parties which must be within a
period of 3 months from first trial
Q: How about reservation? For example, fiscal would say “five
days (of trial) for me and can I reserve additional one day to
present a surprise witness?”
A: The answer depends. If the other party will agree, then yes.
Q: Admissions of the parties, are these allowed? What is the
basis of saying that the accused can make admission during
pre-trial?
A: Admissions made by parties during pretrial are allowed
(through stipulation of facts). Once the stipulations are reduced
into writing and signed by the parties and their counsels, they
become binding on the parties who made them. They become
judicial admissions of the fact or facts stipulated. If the accused
are allowed to plead guilty under appropriate circumstances, by
parity of reasoning, they should likewise be allowed to enter
into a fair and true pretrial agreement under appropriate
circumstances. (Bayas vs. Sandiganbayan, 2002)
Further, stipulation of facts is expressly allowed under Sec. 1,
Rule 118.
Q: If the counsel of the accused makes a waiver in behalf of
the accused during the pre-trial, is that allowed?
A: It will not bind the accused.
Q: Is preliminary conference the same with pre-trial
conference?
A: No. Pre-trial is governed by Rule 118. Preliminary
conference also cmes first before pre-trial.
During the preliminary conference, the branch clerk of court
shall assist the parties in reaching a settlement of the civil
aspect of the case, mark the documents to be presented as
exhibits and copies thereof attached to the records after
comparison, ascertain from the parties the undisputed facts
and admissions on the genuineness and due execution of
documents marked as exhibits and consider such other
matters as may aid in the prompt disposition of the case. The
proceedings during the preliminary conference shall be
recorded in the minutes of preliminary conference to be signed
by both parties and counsel. (A.M.NO.03-1-09-SC)
Atty. Guerzo: During preliminary conference, we don’t
facilitate the settlement. Ordinarily, we just mark the evidence
that the party presented to us. We compare the original
documents from the photocopy, etc.
People vs.Hermanez (379 SCRA) – Error 404 not found
People vs. Maceda (73 SCRA) – Error 404 not found
PEOPLE vs. BALISORO
“An admission made in the pleadings cannot be controverted
by the party making such admission and is conclusive as to
 RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Lectures of Atty. Catherine M. Guerzo
2 Manresa 2016
him.”
CHUA-BURCE vs. CA
Facts: While the trial of the criminal case for estafa against
Chua-Burce was suspended, the trial of the civil case
continued. At the time of arraignment, the civil case was
already submitted for decision. Hence, during the pre-trial
conference of the criminal case, the parties agreed to adopt
their respective evidence in the civil case as their respective
evidence in the criminal case. The trial court ordered the
parties to submit their written agreement pursuant to Section 4
of Rule 118 of the Rules of Court.
But Chua-Burce now assails the validity of the proceedings in
the trial court on the ground that the public prosecutor did not
present any evidence during the trial of the criminal case.
Issue: WON prosecutor should present evidence in the
criminal case
Ruling: No. The records clearly show that the pre-trial
agreement was prepared by petitioner with the conforme of the
public prosecutor. It was during pre-trial conference when the
parties agreed to adopt their respective evidence in the civil
case to the criminal case. This is allowed under Section 2 (e) of
Rule 118 of the Rules of Court which provides that during pre-
trial conference, the parties shall consider "such other matters
as will promote a fair and expeditious trial." The parties, in
compliance with Section 4 of Rule 118,reduced to writing such
agreement. Petitioner, her counsel, and the public prosecutor
signed the agreement. Petitioner is bound by the pre-trial
agreement, and she cannot now belatedly disavow its
contents.
PEOPLE vs. JUDGE TAC-AN
Facts: When the case was called for pre-trial, the trial court
discovered that none of the three witnesses for the prosecution
who were allegedly earlier notified by the court was in
attendance. On motion of the accused and over the objection
of the public prosecutor, the trial court issued an order
dismissing the case for failure of said witnesses to appear
before it.
The trial court posits that under R.A. No. 8493 pre-trial is
mandatory and the presence of the complaining witnesses is
likewise required during the trial for the parties to participate in
the plea bargaining and stipulation of facts during said
proceedings. If the complaining witnesses are absent, the
principal purpose of the pre-trial cannot be achieved.
Issue: WON the presence of the witnesses during pre-trial is
mandatory
Ruling: No. Under R.A. 8493, the absence during pre-trial of
any witness for the prosecution listed in the Information,
whether or not said witness is the offended party or the
complaining witness, is not a valid ground for the dismissal of a
criminal case.Although under the law, pre-trial is mandatory in
criminal cases, the presence of the private complainant or the
complaining witness is however not required. Even the
presence of the accused is not required unless directed by the
trial court. It is enough that the accused is represented by his
counsel.
Indeed, even if none of the witnesses listed in the information
for the State appeared for the pre-trial, the same can and
should proceed. After all, the public prosecutor appeared for
the State. The public prosecutor is vested with authority to
consider those matters catalogued in Section 2 of R.A. 8493.
The trial court thus acted without jurisdiction when it dismissed
the case merely because none of the witnesses notified by the
trial court appeared for the pre-trial. The State, like the accused
is also entitled to due process in criminal cases. The order of
the trial court dismissing the criminal case deprived the State of
its right to prosecute and prove its case. Said order is,
therefore, void for lack of jurisdiction, and is of no effect.
Q: Is it necessary for the court stenographer to write down
whatever is taken during pre-trial? How about prelim. con?
A: Yes. On prelim. con., the proceedings during the preliminary
conference shall be recorded in the minutes of preliminary
conference to be signed by both parties and counsel (A.M. No.
03-1-09-SC).
The clerk of court is mandated to make a report on the matter
and the same is part of the records of the case.
Note: Preliminary conference is mandatory and the same
happens before the pre-trial stage.
BAYAS vs. SANDIGANBAYAN
Facts: Bayas and Matuday (petitioners herein) were charged
with violation of Section 3(e) of RA No. 3019. The pretrial
conference had several cancellations due to unavailability of
 RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Lectures of Atty. Catherine M. Guerzo
2 Manresa 2016
the accused’s counsel, Atty. Molintas. The court urged the
accused to discuss with their counsel the stipulation of facts
drafted by Ombudsman Prosecutor II Evelyn T. Lucero. They
were asked to do so, so that at the resumption of the pretrial,
they could expeditiously pass upon all other matters that still
remained to be resolved. The pretrial conference had to be re-
scheduled six times, just to ensure the attendance of the
parties and their counsels and to prepare them for the
conference.
The parties then submitted a Joint Stipulation of Facts and
Documents, which had been duly signed by the two accused,
Atty. Molintas and Prosecutor Lucero.
Subsequently, the Atty. Molintas moved to withdraw as counsel
for the accused. His motion was granted by the anti-graft court.
On April 26, 2000, the accused, represented by their new
counsel, Atty. Cecilia M. Cinco, moved to withdraw the Joint
Stipulation of Facts and Documents. Specifically, they sought
to withdraw some stipulations admitted by the accused in the
same document. They invoked their constitutional right to be
presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Petitioners contend that pretrial stipulations may be unilaterally
withdrawn by the accused because allegedly, they are not
binding until after the trial court has issued a pretrial order
approving them.
Issue: WON the Joint Stipulation of Facts and Documents may
be withdrawn by the accused
Ruling: No.
Withdrawal from the Joint Stipulation
Petitioners contend that pretrial stipulations may be unilaterally
withdrawn by the accused because allegedly, they are not
binding until after the trial court has issued a pretrial order
approving them. We are not persuaded.
Petitioners fail to appreciate the indispensable role of
stipulations in the speedy disposition of cases. The new Rules
on Criminal Procedure mandate parties to agree on matters of
facts, issues and evidence. Such stipulations are greatly
favored because they simplify, shorten or settle litigations in a
faster and more convenient manner. They save costs, time and
resources of the parties and, at the same time, help unclog
court dockets.
Once validly entered into, stipulations will not be set aside
unless for good cause. They should be enforced especially
when they are not false, unreasonable or against good morals
and sound public policy. When made before the court, they are
conclusive. And the party who validly made them can be
relieved therefrom only upon a showing of collusion, duress,
fraud, misrepresentation as to facts, and undue influence; or
upon a showing of sufficient cause on such terms as will serve
justice in a particular case. Moreover, the power to relieve a
party from a stipulation validly made lies in the courts sound
discretion which, unless exercised with grave abuse, will not be
disturbed on appeal.
Validity of the Joint Stipulations
While petitioners wish to be relieved from the stipulations, they,
however, do not allege that these were false or misleading or
were obtained through force or fraud. On the contrary, they do
not dispute the finding of the anti-graft court that no fraud or
serious mistake vitiated their and their counsel’s consent to the
signing of these stipulations. They even admitted, in answer to
its query, that they had freely given their consent.
Nonetheless, in a desperate bid to strengthen their position,
petitioners lay the blame on the alleged incompetence of their
former counsel. They claim that, in agreeing to the Joint
Stipulation, he failed to consider their legal interests.
To be a ground for relief against a stipulation, a mistake must
be one of fact -- not, as in this case, a mere lack of full
knowledge of fact because of failure to exercise due diligence
in ascertaining it.
Moreover, it is hornbook doctrine that parties are bound by the
action or the inaction of their counsel. To all intents and
purposes, the acts of a lawyer in the defense or the
prosecution of a case are the acts of the client. The rule
extends even to the mistakes and the simple negligence
committed by the counsel.
Necessity of a Pretrial Order
Petitioners further contend that the law on pretrial requires the
issuance of a pretrial order to make pretrial stipulations
binding. We do not agree.
Section 2 of Rule 118 of the Rules of Court states:
Sec. 2. Pre-trial agreement. -- All agreements or
admissions made or entered [into] during the pre-trial
conference shall be reduced in writing and signed by the
accused and counsel, otherwise, they cannot be used
against the accused. The agreements covering the
matters referred to in section 1 of this Rule shall be
approved by the court.
Based on the foregoing provision, for a pretrial agreement to
be binding on the accused, it must satisfy the following
conditions:
(1) the agreement or admission must be in writing, and
 RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Lectures of Atty. Catherine M. Guerzo
2 Manresa 2016

(2) it must be signed by both the accused and their
counsel.
The courts approval, mentioned in the last sentence of the
above-quoted Section, is not needed to make the
stipulations binding on the parties. Such approval is
necessary merely to emphasize the supervision by the court
over the case and to enable it to control the flow of the
proceedings.
Once the stipulations are reduced into writing and signed by
the parties and their counsels, they become binding on the
parties who made them. They become judicial admissions of
the fact or facts stipulated. Even if placed at a disadvantageous
position, a party may not be allowed to rescind them
unilaterally; it must assume the consequences of the
disadvantage.
into during the course of pretrial proceedings, there would be
no end to litigations. Lawyers can wiggle in and out of
agreements the moment they are disadvantaged. Lawyers
should remember, however, that they are not merely
representatives of the parties but, first and foremost, officers of
the court. As such, one of their duties -- assisting in the speedy
and efficient administration of justice -- is more significant than
that of acquitting their client, rightly or wrongly.
We stress that candor in all dealings is the very essence of
membership in the legal profession. Lawyers are obliged to
observe rules of procedure in good faith, not to misuse them to
defeat the ends of justice. They should realize that the earlier
they dispose of their cases, especially at the pretrial stage, the
better for them. In doing so, they can now concentrate and
work more efficiently on their other cases.

If the accused are allowed to plead guilty under appropriate

circumstances, by parity of reasoning, they should likewise be
allowed to enter into a fair and true pretrial agreement under
appropriate circumstances. Section 3. Non-appearance at pre-trial conference. — If the
counsel for the accused or the prosecutor does not appear at
Role of Lawyers in Pretrials the pre-trial conference and does not offer an acceptable
excuse for his lack of cooperation, the court may impose
proper sanctions or penalties. (sec. 5, cir. 38-98)
Pretrial is meant to simplify, if not fully dispose of, the case at
its early stage. It is therefore important that the parties take
active roles in the proceedings. The Rules on Criminal
Procedure provide that if the counsel for the accused and/or
the prosecutor do not appear at the pretrial and do not offer an
acceptable excuse for their lack of cooperation, the court may Q: What can be imposed by court in case of non-appearance
impose proper sanctions or penalties. of parties’ counsel during conduct of pre-trial conference
(PTC)?
Verily, during pretrial, attorneys must make a full disclosure of
their positions as to what the real issues of the trial would A: (This is the best I could find)
be. They should not be allowed to embarrass or inconvenience
the court or injure the opposing litigant by their careless
preparation for a case; or by their failure to raise relevant Sec. 3, Rule 71, ROC. Indirect contempt to be punished after
issues at the outset of a trial; or, as in this case, by their charge and hearing.- x x x a person guilty of any of the
unilateral withdrawal of valid stipulations that they signed and following acts may be punished for indirect contempt:
that their clients fully assented to.
(a) Misbehavior of an officer of a court in the
The records reveal that the parties were the ones who performance of his official duties or in his official
volunteered to make the Joint Stipulation of the facts of the transactions;
case. Thus, the anti-graft court can rightfully expect that both
parties arrived upon it with fairness and honesty. Therefore, xxx
petitioners may not assail it on the mere ground that it would
allegedly put the accused at a disadvantage. Furthermore, a
new counsel cannot justify such withdrawal by the simple (d) Any improper conduct tending, directly or
expedient of passing the blame on the previous counsel, who indirectly, to impede, obstruct, or degrade the
had supposedly not sufficiently discharged his duty to the administration of justice;
client.

Sec. 4. . How proceedings commenced.-Proceedings for

If we allow parties to renege on stipulations they validly entered indirect contempt may be initiated motu proprio by the court
against which the contempt was committed by an order or any
 RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Lectures of Atty. Catherine M. Guerzo
2 Manresa 2016

other formal charge requiring the respondent to show cause

why he should not be punished for contempt.

NOTE: The most important matters on Rule 118 are the pre-
trial agreement and the pre-trial order, and the difference
between pre-trial in civil cases and criminal cases.

Q: Assume today is the scheduled date for PTC, can that be

postponed on motion of the party?

A: The decision rests in the discretion of the judge.

Q: Can the counsel present before the branch clerk of court

photocopies of the documents?

A: No. Always bring the original copies:

Best Evidence Rule

Section 3, Rule 130, ROC. When the subject of inquiry is the

contents of a document, no evidence shall be admissible other
than the original document itself x x x