199796361-rule-119-trial

8/10/2019 199796361-Rule-119-Trial

1/16

Review on the 2000 Revised Rules on Criminal

Procedure 2002 Edition draft copy; pls. check for errors>

Rule 119

Trial

Rule 119TRIAL

SECTION 1. Time to prepare for trial. After a plea of not guilty is entered, te a!!usedsall a"e at least fifteen #1$% days to prepare for trial. Te trial sall !o&&en!e 'itin

tirty #()% days fro& re!eipt of te pre*trial order. #se!. +, !ir. (*9%

SEC. -. Continuous trial until terminated; postponements. Trial on!e !o&&en!ed sall!ontinue fro& day to day as far as pra!ti!ale until ter&inated. It &ay e postponed for areasonale period of ti&e for good !ause. #-a%

Te !ourt sall, after !onsultation 'it te prose!utor and defense !ounsel, set te!ase for !ontinuous trail on a 'ee/ly or oter sort*ter& trial !alendar at te earliestpossile ti&e so as to ensure speedy trial. In no !ase sall te entire trial period e0!eedone undred eigty #1)% days fro& te first day of trial, e0!ept as oter'ise autoried yte Supre&e Court. #se!. , !ir. (*9%.

Te ti&e li&itations pro"ided under tis se!tion and te pre!eding se!tion sall notapply 'ere spe!ial la's or !ir!ulars of te Supre&e Court pro"ide for a sorter period oftrial. #n%

After the accused is arraigned, there is a minimum of 15 days to prepared for the trial. And then continuoustrial until terminated. The trial period shall not exceed 180 days, taken from the Speedy Trial Act and SC CircularsThey are no incorporated in the ne rules.

There are many pro!isions here hich are ne in the sense that they are found in the rules for the first time."oe!er, e!en #efore the ne rules took effect, they ere considered as already existing pro!isions #ecause ofthe Speedy Trial Act and SC Circular $8%&8. 'gayon, nandito na. So e ill not go o!er them one #y one. ( ill

)ust point them out.

The ne pro!isions are Section $ up to Section 10*

SEC. (. Exclusions.* Te follo'ing periods of delay sall e e0!luded in !o&puting teti&e 'itin 'i! trial &ust !o&&en!e2

#a% Any period of delay resulting fro& oter pro!eedings !on!erning te a!!used,in!luding ut not li&ited to te follo'ing2

#1% 3elay resulting fro& an e0a&ination of te pysi!al and &ental !ondition of tea!!used4

#-% 3elay resulting fro& pro!eedings 'it respe!t to oter !ri&inal !arges against tea!!used4

#(% 3elay resulting fro& e0traordinary re&edies against interlo!utory orders4#5% 3elay resulting fro& pre*trial pro!eedings4 pro"ided, tat te delay does not e0!eed

tirty #()% days4#$% 3elay resulting fro& orders of iniition, or pro!eedings relating to !ange of

"enue of !ases or transfer fro& oter !ourts4#+% 3elay resulting fro& a finding of e0isten!e of a pre6udi!ial 7uestion4 and#8% 3elay reasonaly attriutale to any period, not to e0!eed tirty #()% days, during

'i! any pro!eeding !on!erning te a!!used is a!tually under ad"ise&ent.#% Any period of delay resulting fro& te asen!e or una"ailaility of an essential

'itness.or purposes of tis suparagrap, an essential 'itness sall e !onsidered asent

'en is 'ereaouts are un/no'n or is 'ereaouts !annot e deter&ined y duediligen!e. :e sall e !onsidered una"ailale 'ene"er is 'ereaouts are /no'n utis presen!e for trial !annot e otained y due diligen!e.

#!% Any period of delay resulting fro& te &ental in!o&peten!e or pysi!al inaility ofte a!!used to stand trial.

#d% If te infor&ation is dis&issed upon &otion of te prose!ution and tereafter a!arge is filed against te a!!used for te sa&e offense, any period of delay fro& te date

159

8/10/2019 199796361-Rule-119-Trial

2/16



Rule 119

Trial

te !arge 'as dis&issed to te date te ti&e li&itation 'ould !o&&en!e to run as to tesuse7uent !arge ad tere een no pre"ious !arge.

#e% A reasonale period of delay 'en te a!!used is 6oined for trial 'it a !o*a!!usedo"er 'o& te !ourt as not a!7uired 6urisdi!tion, or, as to 'o& te ti&e for trial as notrun and no &otion for separate trial as een granted.

#f% Any period of delay resulting fro& a !ontinuan!e granted y any !ourt &otu

proprio, or on &otion of eiter te a!!used or is !ounsel, or te prose!ution, if te !ourtgranted te !ontinuan!e on te asis of its findings set fort in te order tat te ends of6usti!e ser"ed y ta/ing su! a!tion out'eig te est interestof te puli! and tea!!used in a speedy trial. #se!. 9, !ir. (*9%

SEC. 5. Factors for granting continuance. Te follo'ing fa!tors, a&ong oters, sall e!onsidered y a !ourt in deter&ining 'eter to grant a !ontinuan!e under se!tion (#f% oftis Rule.

#a% ;eter or not te failure to grant a !ontinuan!e in te pro!eeding 'ould li/ely&a/e a !ontinuation of su! pro!eeding i&possile or result in a &is!arriage of 6usti!e4and

#% ;eter or not te !ase ta/en as a 'ole is so no"el, unusual and !o&ple0, due tote nu&er of a!!used or te nature of te prose!ution, or tat it is unreasonale toe0pe!t ade7uate preparation 'itin te periods of ti&e estalised terein.

In addition, no !ontinuan!e under se!tion (#f% of tis Rule sall e granted e!ause of!ongestion of te !ourt

8/10/2019 199796361-Rule-119-Trial

3/16



Rule 119

Trial

SEC. . Sanctions. In any !ase in 'i! pri"ate !ounsel for te a!!used, te puli!attorney, or te prose!utor2

#a% >no'ingly allo's te !ase to e set for trial 'itout dis!losing tat a ne!essary'itness 'ould e una"ailale for trial4

#% iles a &otion solely for delay 'i! e /no's is totally fri"olous and 'itout&erit4

#!% ?a/es a state&ent for te purpose of otaining !ontinuan!e 'i! e /no's to efalse and 'i! is &aterial to te granting of a !ontinuan!e4 or#d% ;illfully fails to pro!eed to trial 'itout 6ustifi!ation !onsistent 'it te pro"isions

ereof, te !ourt &ay punis su! !ounsel, attorney, or prose!utor, as follo's2#1% @y i&posing on a !ounsel pri"ately retained in !onne!tion 'it te defense o fan

a!!used, a fine not e0!eeding t'enty tousand pesos #-),))).))%4#-% @y i&posing on any appointed !ounsel de ofi!io, puli! attorney, or prose!utor a

fine not e0!eeding fi"e tousand pesos #$,))).))%4 and#(% @y denying any defense !ounsel or prose!utor te rigt to pra!ti!e efore te !ourt

trying te !ase for a period not e0!eeding tirty #()% days. Te punis&ent pro"ided for ytis se!tion sall e 'itout pre6udi!e to any appropriate !ri&inal a!tion or oter san!tionautoried under tese rules. #se!. 1(, !ir. (*9%

There is something here in Section 8 that ( ant to #ring out + mga kastigo, sanctions #a Alam mo angkaaa dito, mga a#ogado eh + fiscals, defense counsels, e!en the -A layers + if they are responsi#le fordelaying the trial of the criminal case.

/ust imagine, -0,000 if it is the pri!ate defense layer. That is the maximum of course. Ang -A naman,-5,000 + 52 discount 3a%suspend ka pa.

SEC. 9. Remedy where accused is not brought to trial within the time limit If te a!!usedis not rougt to trial 'itin te ti&e li&it re7uired y Se!tion 1#g%, Rule 11+ and Se!tion 1,as e0tended y Se!tion + of tis rule, te infor&ation &ay e dis&issed on &otion of tea!!used on te ground of denial of is rigt to speedy trial. Te a!!used sall a"e teurden of pro"ing te &otion ut te prose!ution sall a"e te urden of going for'ard'it te e"iden!e to estalis te e0!lusion of ti&e under se!tion ( of tis rule. Tedis&issal sall e su6e!t to te rules on doule 6eopardy.

ailure of te a!!used to &o"e for dis&issal prior to trial sall !onstitute a 'ai"er ofte rigt to dis&iss under tis se!tion. #se!. 15, !ir. (*9%

SEC. 1). !aw on speedy trial not a bar to pro"ision on speedy trial in the Constitution Nopro"ision of la' on speedy trial and no rule i&ple&enting te sa&e sall e interpreted asa ar to any !arge of denial of te rigt to speedy trial guaranteed y se!tion 15#-%, arti!leIII, of te 198 Constitution. #se!. 1$, !ir. (*9%

Take note of Section & and 10. -lease correlate this on the rights of the accused to speedy trial as mention inSection 14h of 6ule 115 on the rights of the accused.

SEC. 11. #rder of trial. Te trial sall pro!eed in te follo'ing order2#a% Te prose!ution sall present e"iden!e to pro"e te !arge and, in te proper !ase,

te !i"il liaility.#% Te a!!used &ay present e"iden!e to pro"e is defense and da&ages, if any,

arising, fro& te issuan!e of a pro"isional re&edy in te !ase.#!% Te prose!ution and te defense &ay, in tat order, present reuttal and sur*

reuttal e"iden!e unless te !ourt, in furteran!e of 6usti!e, per&its te& to presentadditional e"iden!e earing upon te &ain issue.

#d% =pon ad&ission of e"iden!e of te parties, te !ase sall e dee&ed su&itted forde!ision unless te !ourt dire!ts te& to argue orally or to su&it 'ritten &e&oranda.

#e% ;en te a!!used ad&its te a!t or o&ission !arged in te !o&plaint orinfor&ation ut interposes a la'ful defense, te order of trial &ay e &odified. #(a%

161

8/10/2019 199796361-Rule-119-Trial

4/16



Rule 119

Trial

The order of the trial in the criminal case is almost the same pattern as in ci!il cases.

7* ho presents e!idence first9A* The prosecution. :nder Section 11 4a, ;The prosecution shall present e!idence to pro!e the charge and, in

the proper case, the ci!il lia#ility.< So you pro!e the charge and the ci!il lia#ility.

7* Ano yung $in the proper case%9A* That is #ecause if the ci!il lia#ility has already #een reser!ed, ah ala na + forget e!idence of ci!il lia#ilityhere there is already reser!ation. -ero kung hindi, then it is deemed instituted ith the criminal case.

:nder paragraph 4#, pro!isional remedies are alloed in criminal cases, like attachments, etc. in the sameay if the ci!il action is deem instituted, the offended party can ask a preliminary attachment of the property under6ule 1.

-aragraph 4e refers to ;trial in re!erse.< The #est example is hen the accused raises self%defense. The#urden of proof is automatically shifted to the accused. =ut this should #e included during the pre%trial as pro!idedunder 6ule 118, Section 1 4e*

SECTION 1. Pre&trial; mandatory in criminal cases. In all !ri&inal !ases !ogniale yte Sandiganayan, Regional Trial Court, ?etropolitan Trial Court, ?uni!ipal Trial Court inCities, ?uni!ipal Trial Court and ?uni!ipal Cir!uit Trial Court, te !ourt sall, afterarraign&ent and 'itin tirty #()% days fro& te date te !ourt a!7uires 6urisdi!tion o"erte person of te a!!used, unless a sorter period is pro"ided for in spe!ial la's or!ir!ulars of te Supre&e Court, order a pre*trial !onferen!e to !onsider te follo'ing2

0 0 0 0 0 0 0#e% &odifi!ation of te order of trial if te a!!used ad&its te !arge ut interposes a

la'ful defense40 0 0 0 0 0 0

7* (s there such a thing as deposition%taking in criminal cases9A* >?S, under Section 1*

SEC. 1-. 'pplication for examination of witness for accused before trial. ;en te

a!!used as een eld to ans'er for an offense, e &ay, upon &otion 'it noti!e to teoter parties, a"e 'itnesses !onditionally e0a&ined in is ealf. Te &otion sall state2#a% te na&e and residen!e of te 'itness4 #% te sustan!e of is testi&ony4 and #!% tatte 'itness is si!/ or infir& as to afford reasonale ground for elie"ing tat te 'ill note ale to attend te trial, or resides &ore tan one undred #1))% /ilo&eters fro& tepla!e of trial and as no &eans to attend te sa&e, or tat oter si&ilar !ir!u&stan!ese0ist tat 'ould &a/e i& una"ailale or pre"ent i& fro& attending te trial. Te &otionsall e supported y an affida"it of te a!!used and su! oter e"iden!e as te !ourt&ay re7uire. #5a%

7* "o is deposition in criminal cases #eing done9A* 6ead Section 1$*

SEC. 1(. Examination of defense witness; how made . If te !ourt is satisfied tat tee0a&ination of a 'itness for te a!!used is ne!essary, an order sall e &ade dire!tingtat te 'itness e e0a&ined at a spe!ifi! date, ti&e and pla!e and tat a !opy of te ordere ser"ed on te prose!utor at least tree #(% days efore te s!eduled e0a&ination. Tee0a&ination sall e ta/en efore a 6udge, or, if not pra!ti!ale, a &e&er of te @ar ingood standing so designated y te 6udge in te order, or if te order e &ade y a !ourtof superior 6urisdi!tion, efore an inferior !ourt to e designated terein. Te e0a&inationsall pro!eed not'itstanding te asen!e of te prose!utor pro"ided e 'as dulynotified of te earing. A 'ritten re!ord of te testi&ony sall e ta/en. #$a%

The grounds are almost identical. This is deposition actually. nly, it is called conditional examination. That is

162

8/10/2019 199796361-Rule-119-Trial

5/16



Rule 119

Trial

the term used here.

Take note, connect this ith Section 14f, 6ule 115 + rights of the accused. Section 1 is an exception to theright to confront and cross%examine #ecause you cannot insist during the trial to confront and cross%examine theitness under 6ule 115 Section 14f hen e as already examined under Section 1.

7* (s the remedy of deposition%taking also a!aila#le to the prosecution9A* >?S, under Section 15*

SEC. 1$.Examination of witness for the prosecution. ;en it is satisfa!torily appearstat a 'itness for te prose!ution is too si!/ or infir& to appear at te trial as dire!ted yte !ourt, of as to lea"e te ilippines 'it no definite date of returning, e &ayfort'it e !onditionally e0a&ined efore te !ourt 'ere te !ase is pending. Su!e0a&ination, in te presen!e of te a!!used, or in is asen!e after reasonale noti!e toattend te e0a&ination as een ser"ed on i&, sall e !ondu!ted in te sa&e &anneras an e0a&ination at te trial. ailure or refusal of te a!!used to attend te e0a&inationat te trial. ailure or refusal of te a!!used to attend te e0a&ination after noti!e sall e!onsidered a 'ai"er. Te state&ent ta/en &ay e ad&itted in ealf of or against tea!!used. #8a%

@et us try to compare Section 1$ defenseB and Section 15 prosecutionB* @ets go to the defense itnessunder Section 1$*

7* =efore hom ill the examination of the itness #e taken9A* (t D?-?'DS + #efore the )udge, or if not practica#le, a mem#er of the #ar in good standing designated #y

the )udge in the order.

'o, you compare that ith Section 15. (n Section 15, you ill notice* $he may forthwith be conditionallyexamined before the court where the case is pending% :nlike in Section 1$ + #efore the )udge, or if nopractica#le, a mem#er of the #ar in good standingE it is more lenient no9

7* hat is the reason hy the la is more generous to the defense itness9A* According to one case through (usticeFeria, this is #ecause the go!ernment has the resources to get he

testimony of its itnesses. -ero ang defense may ha!e a hard time lalo na kapag po#re.

SEC. 15. )ail to secure appearance of material witness. ;en te !ourt is satisfied,upon proof of oat, tat a &aterial 'itness 'ill not testify 'en re7uired, it &ay, upon&otion of eiter party, order te 'itness to post ail in su! su& as &ay e dee&edproper. =pon refusal to post ail, te !ourt sall !o&&it i& to prison until e !o&plies oris legally dis!arged after is testi&ony as een ta/en. #+a%

(t seems that the prosecution here is under the mercy of his itnesses. 3eaning, kung aya ng testigo, alakang magaa. =ut under Section 1G, you can ask the court to order the itness to post #ail. And if he refusesto post #ail, he can #e arrested. This is an instance here a itness can #e )ailed ahead of the accused.

=ut actually the truth is in most cases, prosecution itnesses do not appear not #ecause aya #ut #ecause

takot They are afraid of hat ill happen like the accused might harass them. And the la knos that. That ishy there is also another alternati!e + 6A H&81, The itness -rotection -rogram hich took effect last April of1&&1. >ou read that so you ill ha!e an idea.

SEC. 1+. Trial of se"eral accused. ;en t'o or &ore a!!used are 6ointly !arged 'itan offense, tey sall e tried 6ointly unless te !ourt, in its dis!retion and upon &otion ofte prose!utor or any a!!used, orders separate trial for one or &ore a!!used. #a%

6emem#er that there can #e a )oint trial of to or more criminal cases if they arose of the same incident like/udee fired her AI%G and killed to or more people one after the other. =ut you cannot file one information#ecause that ill #e duplicitous. There must #e one information for e!ery one homicide and then you mo!e for a

163

8/10/2019 199796361-Rule-119-Trial

6/16



Rule 119

Trial

)oint trial.

7* 'o, ho do you compare this rule ith ci!il cases9A* (n ci!il cases, hen there is a common Juestion of fact or la in!ol!ing to or more parties, there is such a

thing as filing only one complaint + )oinder of causes of action or parties. =ut in criminal cases, that is not alloedConsolidation in criminal cases in only for the purpose of )oint trial lang and you cannot ha!e one information

charging more than one offense.

3ISC:ARBE O AN ACC=SE3 TO @E STATE ;ITNESS

SEC. 18. *ischarge of accused to be state witness. ;en t'o or &ore persons are6ointly !arged 'it te !o&&ission of any offense, upon &otion of te prose!utionefore resting its !ase, te !ourt &ay dire!t one or &ore of te a!!used to e dis!arged'it teir !onsent so tat tey &ay e 'itnesses for te state 'en, after re7uiring teprose!ution to present e"iden!e and te s'orn state&ent of ea! proposed state 'itnessat a earing in support of te dis!arge, te !ourt is satisfied tat2

#a% Tere is asolute ne!essity for te testi&ony of te a!!used 'ose dis!arge isre7uested4

#% Tere is no oter dire!t e"iden!e a"ailale for te proper prose!ution of te offense!o&&itted, e0!ept te testi&ony of said a!!used4

#!% Te testi&ony of said a!!used !an e sustantially !orroorated in its &aterialpoints4

#d% Said a!!used does not appear to e te &ost guilty4 and#e% Said a!!used as not at any ti&e een !on"i!ted of any offense in"ol"ing &oral

turpitude.E"iden!e addu!ed in support of te dis!arge sall auto&ati!ally for& part of te trial.

If te !ourt denies te &otion for dis!arge of te a!!used as state 'itness, is s'ornstate&ent sall e inad&issile in e"iden!e. #9a%

SEC. 1. *ischarge of accused operates as ac+uittal. Te order indi!ated in tepre!eding se!tion sall a&ount to an a!7uittal of te dis!arged a!!used and sall e aar to future prose!ution for te sa&e offense, unless te a!!used fails or refuses totestify against is !o*a!!used in a!!ordan!e 'it is s'orn state&ent !onstituting te

asis for is dis!arge. #1)a%

@ets take Section 1 and Section 18 together. *ischarge of an accused to be state witness means that youill con!ert an accused to #ecome ;"udas,< sa!e his neck #ut hang them all

:nder Section 18, once the itness is discharged under Section 1, he is no C'S(D?6?D AC7:(TT?Dand there is no ay for him to #e #rought #ack in the case ?KC?-T hen he changes his mind and aya naniyang mag%testify. That is the only exception.

7* hat are the reJuirements #efore a itness can #e discharged9A* Section 1 enumerates the reJuirements.

$S',* 'CC-SE* *#ES .#T 'PPE'R T# )E T/E 0#ST 1-,!T2%

@ets comment on some of the reJuirements. ne of the most important reJuirements for the discharge of anaccused is the fourth one + $Said accused does not appear to be the most guilty% =ased from hat ( read fromtime to time, e!en layers ha!e #een commenting on this. (t seems they are misJuoting this eh, like days ago, alayer said that e must discharge the accused #ecause he is the least guilty.

That is not hat the la says hat the la says is, "? D?S 'T A--?A6 T =? T"? 3ST L:(@T>.And it is not the same ith "? (S T"? @?AST L:(@T>.

?KA3-@?* 3ortM, -ao and /et. 3ortM +principalN -ao + accompliceN /et + accessory. -ag%sina#i mong $theleast guilty3% hindi mo puedeng gamitin si -ao. Si /et dapat ang gamitin mo #ecause he is the least guilty4Ts5

164

8/10/2019 199796361-Rule-119-Trial

7/16



Rule 119

Trial

ts56 1inamit si (et 1inamit67-?6, pag%sina#i mong $he does not appear to be the most guilty%, you can use-ao, although there is some#ody to #e less guilty. =asta ang importante, hindi si 3ortM. So, there is a difference#eteen the to phrases.

7* hat do you mean #y the phrase $does not appear to be the most guilty%9A* There are cases*

EOLE "sOCI?ARAugust 18, 199-

ACTS* This case in!ol!ed a hold%upping incident, committed in a #us in 3anila hile tra!eling inthe 'orth ?xpress ay. There ere four GB hold%uppers ho rode in the #us. hen they reach acertain point, they stood up and pulled to their guns and ro##ed the passengers. And they placedthemsel!es strategically* ne of them stood #ehind the dri!er, $o3 wag 5ang 5i5ilos3 dri"e 5a lang%>ung i#a namang dito. Ianya%kanyang silang role eh. The others ere the ones ho di!ested thepassengers, $mga pita5a ninyo3 relo8 lahat6%

'o, there as one passenger there ho as a military man earing ci!ilian clothes and may#aril siya. So he anted to fight #ack #ut one of them sa him. -ag%#unot niya, inunahan siya Soaccused A shot that passenger. Accused D naman sa A shoot the !ictim. And of course all of themere charged ith 6o##ery ith "omicide in conspiracy % the act of one is the act of all.

The prosecution ants to utiliMe D + the one ho is #ehind the dri!er + as state itness. Theother accused o#)ected claiming conspiracy + ;e are all co%principal + the act of one is the act of all.So hy do you say you are not the most guilty9 -are%pareho lang tayo. Same penalty.?S. hen you say $he does not appear to be the most guilty%, you do not apply the ruleon conspiracy. =ut you apply the rule on indi!idual acts. (n reality, ho is more guilty9 The one horeally shot the !ictim or the one ho is )ust #ehind the dri!er9 The reality is, the most guilty is the oneho shot, although for purposes of the 6-C #oth of you are co%principal. So, you look at it that ay.Do not apply the principle of the act%of%the%one%is%the%act%of%all. >ou consider the most guilty in termsof the participation.

;=y 9most guilty means the highest degree of culpa#ility in terms of participation in the

commission of the offense and not the se!erity of the penalty imposed. hile all the accused may#egi!en the same penalty #ut #y reason of culpa#ility one may #e least guilty if e take into account hisdegree of participation in the perpetuation of the offense. hat happens hen an accused is discharged, and after he is discharged, sa#i ngprosecution, $Te5a muna nag5amali a5o3 di pala 5ita 5ailangan )ali5 5a6% Can it #e done9

A* Sa#i ng SC, ', acJuitted na yan The only reason for him to come #ack is, he is asked to testify peroaya niya. -rosecution* $)ut , dont need him% SC* that is your fault #ecause first, hy did you ask for hisdischarge9 So once he is discharged, he is deemed acJuitted hether you use him or do not use him. The only

ay for him to come #ack is, you ant to use him #ut he does not ant to testify #ecause he is dou#le%crossingthe Lo!ernment.

@ets go further. There is another la, a#out this itness. >ou try to compare this principle ith the pro!ision of6A H&81 + The itness -rotection Act. :nder 6A H&81, the fiscal ould not e!en include you in the chargeanymore, for as long as the D/ ill say that he is Jualified, he is co!ered #y the itness -rotection -rogram.:nder the la, the fiscal should not include him anymore.

:nlike in criminal procedure kailangan isali ka muna #ago ka i%discharge. Sa 6A H&81 naman, hindi ka nakasali. That is hy the constitutionality of the la as challenged in the case of

;E@@ "s 3E LEON

167

8/10/2019 199796361-Rule-119-Trial

10/16



Rule 119

Trial

August -(, 199$

ACTS* State itness Alfaro admitted that she as ith them. She admitted kasama siyangnagpunta sa #ahay ng mga OiMconde. And then she as placed in the itness -rotection -rogramand as used against "u#ert e##. And according to e##, the pro!ision of the itness -rotection

Act + hich authoriMes the D/ to place some#ody in the itness -rotection -rogram, and once he

certifies that she is co!ered, the fiscal is no longer alloed to file a case against her state itnessB +is !iolati!e of the )udicial prerogati!e to discharge a itness #ecause you )umping the gun on thecourt.

According to e##, it should #e the court that ill discharge and not the D/. The la is not !alid#ecause it is an encroachment of a )udicial prerogati!e. (t is an intrusion for it is only the court hichhas the poer under the rules on criminal procedure to discharge an accused as state itness.

ISS=E F1* (s e##s argument !alid9:EL3* ;e##s argument lacks appeal for it lies on the faulty assumption that the decision hom

to prosecute is a )udicial function, the sole prerogati!e of courts and #eyond executi!e and legislati!einterference. (n truth, the prosecution of crimes appertains to the executi!e department of go!ernmenthose principal poer and responsi#ility is to see that our las are faithfully executed. A necessarycomponent of this poer to execute our las is the right to prosecute their !iolators. The right toprosecute !ests the prosecutor ith a ide range of discretion Q the discretion of hether, hat andhom to charge, the exercise of hich depends on a smorgas#ord of factors hich are #estappreciated #y prosecutors. e thus hold that it is not constitutionally impermissi#le for Congress toenact 6.A. 'o. H&81 !esting in the Department of /ustice the poer to determine ho can Jualify asa itness in the program and ho shall #e granted immunity from prosecution.aan

. on motion of the accused, the court may exclude the pu#lic. That is his right to speedy trial. Iung ayaniya, e di okey lang

Aside from the to exceptions, the other grounds here the pu#lic can #e excluded, #ased on American/urisprudence are*

1. To pre!ent disorderN. To pre!ent em#arrassment to a itnessN$. To limit attendance to seating capacity.

This is the !ery issue no. (!e #een reading current nespaper reports that e!ery#ody is anticipating that thecase against ?rap ill #e filed in the Sandigan#ayan. The D/ ants e!erything to #e tele!ised all o!er againThey are filing a petition #efore the Supreme Court. There is a standing order of the Supreme Court prohi#iting it(t should not #e tele!ised #ecause of hat happened in the '+uino li#el case 4AJuino !s. =eltran. =ecause ofthat, aya na ng SC na i%tele!ised. (t #ecomes a sarsela + sho #a + rather than an a pu#lic trial.

'o, they ant to )ustify it on the ground that this in!ol!es pu#lic interest so the SC should relax the rules. cannot anticipate ho the SC ill resol!e the matter #ecause e!ery#ody has gotten used to the impeachment triaso e!ery#ody ants to hear hat is happening, especially if the person in!ol!ed is ?rap. Such a standingmemorandum as not applied to the impeachment trial #ecause it as not a )udicial trial #ut a political trial. (t isthe Senate hich controls the rules, not the courts. This is the difference. =ut this case is #efore theSandigan#ayan hich is a different story.

=ecause definitely many people ould like to go there #ut ho do you get a seat them all in theSandigan#ayan9 >ou ill ha!e to exclude hundreds, if not thousands and allo only the entry of a fe. =ut if it istele!ised, then e!ery#ody can atch again.

SEC. --. Consolidation of trials of related offenses. Carges for offenses founded on tesa&e fa!ts or for&ing part of a series of offenses of si&ilar !ara!ter &ay e tried 6ointlyat te dis!retion of te !ourt. #15a%

Do not confuse this consolidation here in 6ule 11& ith the consolidation in 6ule 111.

(n 6ule 111, you are consolidating the criminal case and the ci!il case + the ci!il case hich is #roughtseparately ill #e consolidated ith the criminal case. "ere in 6ule 11&, you are consolidating to or more

criminal cases hich are identical, founded on the same facts or forming part of the same series of offense ofsimilar character. This is similar to consolidation in 6ule $1 on ci!il cases.

=ut in ci!il cases, e can allo related cases to #e filed together eh + )oinder of parties, hich is not alloedin criminal cases. The only practice alloed in criminal cases is consolidation. =ut there could #e no such thingas )oinder of accused in one information.

@ets go to Section $ on Demurrer + one of the most important pro!isions in 6ule 11&.

SEC. -(. *emurrer to e"idence. After te prose!ution rests its !ase, te !ourt &aydis&iss te a!tion on te ground of insuffi!ien!y of e"iden!e #1% on its o'n initiati"e after

170

8/10/2019 199796361-Rule-119-Trial

13/16



Rule 119

Trial

gi"ing te prose!ution te opportunity to e eard or #-% upon de&urrer to e"iden!e filedy te a!!used 'it or 'itout lea"e of !ourt.

If te !ourt denies te de&urrer to e"iden!e filed 'it lea"e of !ourt, te a!!used &ayaddu!e e"iden!e in is defense. ;en te de&urrer to e"iden!e is filed 'itout lea"e of!ourt, te a!!used 'ai"es te rigt to present e"iden!e and su&its te !ase for 6udg&enton te asis of te e"iden!e for te prose!ution. #1$a%

Te &otion for lea"e of !ourt to file de&urrer to e"iden!e sall spe!ifi!ally state itsgrounds and sall e filed 'itin a non*e0tendile period of fi"e #$% days after teprose!ution rests its !ase. Te prose!ution &ay oppose te &otion 'itin a non*e0tendile period of fi"e #$% days fro& its re!eipt.

If lea"e of !ourt is granted, te a!!used sall file te de&urrer to e"iden!e 'itin anon*e0tendile period of ten #1)% days fro& noti!e. Te prose!ution &ay oppose tede&urrer to e"iden!e 'itin a si&ilar period fro& its re!eipt.

Te order denying te &otion for lea"e of !ourt to file de&urrer to e"iden!e or tede&urrer itself sall not e re"ie'ale y appeal or y !ertiorari efore 6udg&ent. #n%

*emurrer is a motion to dismiss. After the prosecution has rested its case, #ased on the order of trial, theaccused no presents his case. =ut sa#i ng accused, ;ell, ( ill present e!idence on the assumption that theprosecution has pro!en prima facie the crime and my guilt. 4meaning the presumption of innocence has already#een disputi!ely re#utted #a.< =ut suppose the prosecution has not pro!en the facts or not pro!en the crime ormy guilt, ;hy ill ( present e!idence9 hy ill ( pro!e my innocence hen (m still presumed innocent9< >aan>an ang demurrer. The same thing in ci!il cases + hy ill you pro!e your defense hen the plaintiff failed topro!e his cause of action9 So instead of presenting e!idence, he ill file a demurrer. Actually its a motion todismiss.

'o of course, it is no emphasiMed in paragraph 1 that a demurrer may #e filed ith or ithout lea!e ofcourt. !ea"e of court means #efore your demurrer, you file muna a motion for permission to file the demurrer. Thecourt grants permission, you file the demurrer. >ou can still file the demurrer e!en ithout the permission of thecourt. (f you file demurrer ith or ithout lea!e and it is granted, then you ha!e no pro#lem #ecause the accusedill #e acJuitted.

The pro#lem is, if your demurrer is denied. 3eaning, the court says that there is sufficient e!idence to pro!eat least the guilt of the accused. (f the demurrer as filed ith prior lea!e of court and it is su#seJuently denied,

the accused is alloed to present e!idence to pro!e his defense.

=ut if you filed the demurrer ithout prior lea!e of court and the demurrer is denied, then you are alreadycon!icted #ecause the accused has forfeited his right to present e!idence. (t is practically eJui!alent to a ai!er ofhis right to present e!idence. So con!iction automatically follos. This is hat the rules say.

hat is the rationale#ehind this9 The 1&& case of

EOLE "sT=RINBAN-- SCRA 5-5

:EL3* ;The rationale for the rule is that hen the accused mo!es for dismissal on the groundof insufficiency of the prosecution e!idence, he does so in the #elief that said e!idence is

insufficient to con!ict and, therefore, any need for him to present any e!idence is negated. (t issaid that an accused cannot #e alloed to ager on the outcome of )udicial proceedings #yespousing inconsistent !iepoints hene!er dictated #y con!enience. The purpose #ehind therule is also to a!oid the dilatory practice of filing motions for dismissal as a demurrer to thee!idence of the prosecution and, after denial thereof, the defense ould then claim the right topresent its e!idence.

Rule 119

Trial

These deadlines ere not found #efore. (f you ant to file lea!e, pag%rest, 5 days lang, you file a motion forlea!e. The prosecution may oppose the lea!e of ithin 5 days. After the court grants lea!e, you file the demurrerithin 10 days lang. The o#!ious purpose here is not to delay the trial.

hen the court denies the motion for lea!e or the demurrer itself, as a rule, it is not re!iea#le. >ou cannotre!ie it. The remedy is to go to trial and if you are con!icted, appeal on the )udgment of con!iction. =ut as a

general rule, hen a demurrer is denied, you cannot go on certiorari. (m not saying that this is 1002 #ut thereare some instances hen the court, #ased on eJuity, allos it.

Take note that hen you file a lea!e of court to file a demurrer, the accused must specifically state thegrounds.

The 1&85 6ules )ust says you get prior lea!e. This is hat ( noticed here among trial courts* after theprosecution rests, sometimes the defense counsel ill say, $2our honor3 we will file a demurrer 0ay we as5 forlea"e of court to file the demurrer

8/10/2019 199796361-Rule-119-Trial

16/16



Rule 119

Trial

7* (n the example, ala pang decision eh. hat is the proper remedy9A* The correct remedy is motion to reopen the trial #ecause there is no )udgment yet.

7* n hat grounds9A* /ustice and eJuity. This is the only ground for re%opening #ecause there is no specific ground.

7* 'o can the court on its on, re%open a trial, ci!il or criminal9A* >?S. This has happened se!eral times. The case has already #een su#mitted for trial, this happened to

me se!eral years ago. The court said ;#efore the court renders a decision, the court ould like to conduct anocular inspection and re%enactment of the alleged crime in the place here the crime as committed.< 0otu

propio, the court ordered the re%enactment. This is an instance of re%opening the trial. This is alloed #ecausethis is an inherent poer of the court, if it really ants to find out the truth. >ou cannot find any pro!ision in therules regulating that kind of remedy. This is alloed ithout any specific rule except )ustice and eJuity.

For the first time, reopening of trial in a criminal case is no found in Section G of the 000 6ules. =ut thereis something wronghere. (n reopening of trial, you do it #efore the case is decided. Dito naman, you do it $at anytime before the finality of the Dudgment of con"iction%Anong klase ito9 "o can this #e9 There is already a

)udgment of con!iction and then, you reopen99 ( think the correct motion is a ne trial.

( remem#er hen Lal!eM as here to lecture on the 6ules on Criminal -rocedure. "e said that some#ody inthe Supreme Court nakialam dito eh. The original draft was $anytime before Dudgment there can be re&openingupon motu propio or motion%=ut hen the ne rules came out, it said $at any time before finality of the Dudgmentof con"iction%+ dinagdagan #a The person ho changed it must ha!e thought the committee had erred #ut thechange made it e!en orse. Thats hy the committee rote a letter to the SC to amend this mistake.

'o, there are some special las that are related to the su#)ect of trial and they are considered as part andparcel of the criminal procedure. ( am referring to 6A G&08, 6A H0$$, 6A H0$G and 6A H0$5. 6As H0$$, H0$G andH0$5 are also knon as the @aurel @as #ecause the author of these las is Senator @aurel in the 0s.

RA 59)+ A' ACT 6?7:(6('L /:DL?S F C:6TS T S-??D(@> T6> C6(3('A@ CAS?S "?6?('T"? FF?'D?D -A6T> (S A -?6S' A=:T T D?-A6T F63 T"? -"(@(--('?S (T"' D?F('(T? DAT? F 6?T:6'

RA +)((+ A' ACT 6?7:(6('L C:6TS T L(O? -6?F?6?'C? T C6(3('A@ CAS?S "?6? T"?-A6T> 6 -A6T(?S ('O@O? A6? ('D(L?'TS

RA +)(5 + A' ACT -6O(D('L T6A'S-6TAT(' A'D T"?6 A@@A'C?S F6 ('D(L?'T@(T(LA'TS.

RA +)($ + A' ACT 6?7:(6('L ST?'L6A-"?6S T L(O? F6?? T6A'SC6(-T F 'T?S T('D(L?'T A'D @ ('C3? @(T(LA'TS A'D -6O(D('L A -?'A@T> F6 T"?O(@AT(' T"?6?F

So that takes care of 6ule 11&.

editor&in&chief>&ort&ort editors:6ay!eeelle alite G 6*6 torres G &i!ael peloton G &aying dadula G 6essa&ynagustin G lyle santos G paul ryan ong/ing!o G dynn gutierre G &aya 7uitain G riel lo!sin G patri!/ taar G

&aritess gonales G &ari!el !ulpale G /ennet ley"a G 6enny na&o! G ferdinand "ido G &elissa suare Grayda sullano G ru!el !ayetano G rod 7uia!on G anna e0a&en G &yra &onte!al"o G genie sal"aHa G gra!e

salesaU leo gillesania G ge&&a etonio G 6enny a7uiatan G &i!ael pitoU /aren de leon G el&a tor&on G6udee uy G pao angeles G 6et pas!ua G contributing editors> aang aldoa G &arlo &asang/ay

199796361-rule-119-trial

Documents