1.

Presence in Promulgation - reading in the presence of the accused and any judge of
the court in which it was rendered. If light offense, may be done in presence of counsel.
Absent judge = clerk of court. If trial courts conviction changed offense from nonbailable to bailable, application for bail can only be filed and resolved by APPELLATE
COURT.
No justifiable reason = lose all remedies available to him and court shall order his
arrest. However within 15 days, he may file a motion for leave of court to avail of these
remedies and shall state the reasons for his absence.
If accused fails to appear at the scheduled promulgation of judgment despite due
notice, the promulgation shall be made by recording the judgment in the criminal docket
and serving him a copy thereof at his last known address or thru his counsel.
Presence of the counsel is not mandatory
2. Automatic Review - SC shall automatically review cases where capital punishment is
imposed, whether or not there was promulgation.
3. Demurrer + Remedies - dismiss case after prosecution rests its case on the ground of
insufficiency of evidence. If made with LOC, denial still allows accused to adduce
evidence in his defense. If w/o LOC, denial is a waiver for accused of his right to present
evidence.
Order denying mLOC or Demurrer itself, can't be appealed or certiorari-ed before
judgment.
Order granting it would amount to an acquittal by jurisprudence and would
preclude the filing of another information or an appeal by the prosecution. Thus Double
Jeopardy will apply even if the the dismissal is made with the express consent of the
accused.
Remedy against a granted Demurrer = Certiorari (can't Appeal since it has the
same effect as acquittal)
Remedy against denied Demurrer = Certiorari ONLY when the denial of a
demurrer tainted with grave abuse of discretion or excess of jurisdiction or oppressive
exercise of judicial authority. Since there is no jurisdiction, there is no valid judgment
(and no 1st jeopardy attached) however Appeal is still not proper since such judgment is
yet to be declared void by the court.
Crim v Civ Demurrer - Civ = "not entitled to relief", LOC not required, no waiver of
right to present evidence when denied, appealable when granted and if reversed
defendant waives right to present evidence ; Crim = predicated upon "insufficiency of
evidence", LOC may be allowed, waives right to present evidence when denied if w/o

LOC, grant is not appealable.

*The court has the discretion on whether or not to require the prosecution to
present additional evidence when a demurrer to evidence was filed. People v
Sandiganbayan case: the court did not abuse its discretion in granting the prosecutions
request to present additional evidence. Admission of additional evidence is addressed
to the sound discretion of the trial court. Considerable latitude is allowed and such
discretion will not be disturbed absent a finding that the accused was denied due
process of law.
4. Questioning Arrest - A warrantless arrest is not a jurisdictional defect and any
objection to it is waived when the person arrested submits to arraignment without any
objection. If the appellants are questioning their arrest for the first time on appeal, they
are, therefore, deemed to have waived their right to the constitutional protection against
illegal arrests and searches.
Any objection involving the procedure by which the court acquired jurisdiction over
the person of the accused must be made before he enters his plea.
Since the legality of an arrest affects only the jurisdiction of the court over the
person of the accused, any defect in the arrest of the accused may be deemed cured
when he voluntarily submits to the jurisdiction of the trial court.
5. Process after entering plea Plea of guilt to capital offense, no immediate rendering of judgment but rather
court must:
-conduct searching inquiry ascertaining (i) voluntariness and (ii) flu
comprehension of consequences
-require prosecution to prove guilt and degree of culpability
-ask if accused wishes to present evidence in his behalf if he desires and
allow him to do so
Plea of guilt to non-capital offense, court may receive evidence from parties to
determine the penalty to be imposed.
A guilty plea admits all the allegations in the information including the quailing and
aggravating circumstances.
Improvident Plea - When the accused pleaded guilty but he presented
controverting/exculpatory evidence, the plea is considered an improvident plea and thus
the court must order a re-arraignment and enter a not guilty plea for the accused. At any
time before the judgment of conviction becomes final, the court may permit an
improvident plea of guilt to be withdrawn and be substituted by a plea of not guilty.

6. MNT vs MR - at any time before judgment of conviction becomes final: [Neypes fresh
period rule applies]
MNT - (1) errors of law have been committed during trial ; (2) irregularities
prejudicial to the substantial rights of the accused have been committed during trial ; (3)
new and material evidence have been discovered which couldn't have been previously
discovered and produced at the trial even with the exercise of reasonable diligence, w/c
if introduced would probably change the judgment.
If based on (1), all proceedings, evidence and judgment shall be set aside
and taken anew and may require additional evidence in the interest of justice. If (2)
evidence already adduced shall stand
MR - (1) errors of law in the judgment w/c requires NO further proceedings (2)
errors of fact w/c also requires No further proceedings.
Original judgment shall be set aside or vacated and new one rendered
accordingly.
7. MNT v Appeal
Rule 124, Sec14 states that "At anytime after the appeal from the lower court has
been perfected and before the judgment of the Court of Appeals convicting the accused
becomes final, the latter may move for a new trial on the ground of newly-discovered
evidence material to his defense." Sec 15 = When a new trial is granted, the CA may
conduct the hearing and receive evidence as provided in Sec 12 of this Rule or refer the
trial to the court of origin
Opens the whole case for review - In criminal cases, an appeal throws the case
wide open for review and the reviewing tribunal can correct errors or even reverse the
trial court's decision on grounds other than those that the parties raised as errors.
It is settled that in a criminal case, an appeal throws the whole case open for
review, and it becomes the duty of the appellate court to correct such errors as may be
found in the judgment appealed from, whether they are made the subject of the
assignment of errors or not.
The above rule is in contrast with the general rule in civil cases where as a rule, no
error will be considered by the appellate court unless stated in the assignment of errors
estept when (a) the error affects the jurisdiction of the court
An appeal taken by one or more of several accused shall not affect those who did
not appeal, except insofar as the judgment of the appellate court is favorable and
applicable to the latter
When do you apply for each?

8. Errors of law in MNT v MR