Rule 115
promulgation will be valid.
Section 1. Rights of the Accused at the trial.- In all
criminal prosecutions , the accused shall be entitled to
the following rights:
(a) To be presumed innocent until the contrary is
proved beyond reasonable doubt.
(b) To be informed of the nature and cause of the
accusation against him.
(c) To be present and defend in person and by
counsel at every stage of the proceedings, from
arraignment to promulgation of the judgement.
The accused may, however, waive his presence
at the trial pursuant to the stipulations set forth
in his bail, unless his presence is specifically
ordered by the court for purposes of
identification. The absence of the accused
without justifiable cause at the trial of which he
had notice shall be considered a waiver of his
right to be present thereat. When an accused
under custody escapes he shall be deemed to
have waived his right to be present on all
subsequent trail dates until custody over him is
regained. Upon motion, the accused may be
allowed to defend himself in person when it
sufficiently appears to the court that he can
properly protect his rights without the
assistance of counsel.
(d) To testify as a witness in his own behalf but
subject to cross- examination on matters
covered by direct examinations. His silence
shall not in any manner prejudice him.
(e) To be exempt from being compelled to be a
witness against himself.
(f) To confront and cross- examine the witnesses
against him at the trial. Either party may utilize
as part of its evidence the testimony of a
witness who is deceased out of or cannot with
due diligence be found in the Philippines,
unavailable or otherwise unable to testify,
given in another case or proceeding, judicial or
administrative, involving the same parties and
subject matter, the adverse party having the
opportunity to cross- examine him.
(g) To have compulsory process issued to secure
the attendance of witnesses and production of
other evidence in his behalf.
(h) To have speedy, impartial and public trial.
(i) To appeal in all cases allowed and in the manner
prescribed by law.
Notes:
▪ Available only during the trial of his criminal case.
a. To be presumed innocent.
b. To be informed of the nature and the cause of the
accusation.
o It was emphasized that this constitutional right
requires that the indictment must fully state the
elements of the specific offense charged,
c. To be present and defend in person or by counsel.
o The presence of the accused is not only a right bur
also a duty.
o It is not required, however, that counsel for the
accused be present at the promulgation of
judgement of conviction in order that such
o Such trial in absentia maybe validly conducted only if
the accused has been arraigned.
o The trial court does not lose jurisdiction over the
person of the accused who escapes during the trial,
since jurisdiction once acquired is not lost upon the
instance of the parties but continues until the case is
terminated.
o The court need not wait for the time until the
escapee finally decides to appear in court to present
his evidence. On the contrary, such escapee who has
been duly tried in absentia waives his right to present
evidence in his behalf and to confront and cross-
examine the witnesses who testified against him.
o The accused may waive his presence at any other
stage of the trial, even if for a capital offense, except
when he is to be identified.
o RULE OF QUALIFIED WAIVER- an accused may waive
his right to be present during the trial but his
presence may nonetheless be compelled for
identification by the prosecution witnesses unless he
unqualifiedly admits in open court after his
arraignment that he is the person named as the
accused in the case on trial.
o Such a waiver of the accused does not result in his
release from his obligation under the bond to appear
in court when so required.
o The presence of the accused is required only:
a. At the arraignment and is indispensable at
said stage;
b. At the promulgation of judgement
Xpn: When the conviction id for a light
offense, in which case the judgement may be
pronounced in the presence of his counsel
or representative BUT is not indispensable
therein, as promulgation may be made in
absentia.
c. When ordered by the court for purposes of
identification.
o Where the judgement is one of acquittal, the
presence of the accused may be dispensed with.
o When the accused appears before it without
counsel, the court has the following duties:
a. It must inform the defendant that is his right to have
an attorney before being arraigned;
b. After giving him such information, the court must ask
him if he desires the aid of an attorney;
c. If he desires but is unable to employ one, the court
must assign an attorney de oficio to defend him; and
d. If the accused desires to procure an attorney of his
won, the court must grant him reasonable time
therefor.
However, the accused is now permitted to
defend himself in person where it sufficiently
appears to the court that he can properly protect
his rights by himself.
o It is a denial of due process for the court to appoint
a counsel de oficio and compel the accused to go to
trail despite his manifestation of his desire to have a
counsel de parte.
o Failure to provide counsel for the accused who
desires the same results in loss of jurisdiction.
o When an accused was represented by a person who
was later discovered not to be a member of the Bar,
the proceedings are a nullity.
o It was stressed that the right to counsel means
effective counsel. The proper measure of the
attorney’s performance is simply reasonableness
under prevailing professional norms.
o Spontaneous withdrawal of plea of not guilty is a
waiver of the right to be assisted by counsel.
o The right to be assisted by counsel attaches only
during custodial investigation and cannot be claimed
by the accused during identification in a police line-
up because it is not part of the custodial investigation
process. The process has not yet shifted from the
investigatory to the accusatory stage.
d. To testify as a witness in his behalf.
o If he testifies, he may be cross- examined but only on
matters covered by his direct examination, unlike an
ordinary witness who can be cross- examined as to
any matter stated in the direct examination or
connected therewith.
o Failure to produce evidence in his behalf is
considered against him.
o The failure of the accused to take the witness stand
despite the prima facie evidence against him, and
which he left unrebutted and uncontradicted, gives
rise to a presumption of guilt on his part.
e. Right against self- incrimination
o An exception to this right is when there is an
immunity statute. E.g Sec. 8, RA 1379 (forfeiture of
illegally obtained wealth) and PD 749 (bribery and
graft cases)
o May be waived by the failure of the accused to
invoke the privilege at the proper time, that is, after
the incriminating question is asked and before his
answer. The accused may also invoke the privilege by
refusing altogether to take the witness stand EXCEPT
where a separate civil case is filed in which case he
has to take the stand therein but can object to
incriminating questions, where, as in this case, he
was called an adverse party witness.
o An ordinary witness can be compelled to take the
stand and can object only when the incriminating
question is asked.
o The accused can refuse to either take the stand or
answer the question.
o The accused is protected under this Rule from
questions which tend to incriminate him, that is,
which may subject him to the penal liability.
o Questions which tend to subject him to civil liability
or directly degrade his character are regulated by
Sec. 3, Rule 132, i.e., he can refuse to answer
degrading questions unless it be to the fact in issue
or the fact from which the fact in issue would be
presumed; but he must answer to the fact of
previous conviction,
o Granted only in favor of individuals and cannot be
invoked in favor of a corporation which is a party to
the case
o The essence of the privilege is testimonial
compulsion, that is, the giving of evidence against
himself through a testimonial act.
o It embraces not only oral testimony but the
furnishing of evidence by any other means of any
fact which the accused has the right to keep secret.
o However, if the accused takes the witness stand and
specifically denies that a certain writing is his, is
deemed to have waived the privilege and ha can be
compelled to give specimens of his handwriting.
o Purely mechanical acts are not included.
- An accused may be compelled to submit to physical
examination and have substance taken from his
body fro medical determination as to whether he
was suffering from gonorrhea which was contracted
by his victim;
- To expel morphine from his mouth;
- To have the outline of his foot traced to determine
its identity with bloody footprints;
- To be photographed or measured, or his garments
or shoes removed or replaced, or to move his body
to enable the foregoing things to be done.
o Forced reenactments of the crime, like uncounseled
and coerced confessions, come within the ban
against self- incrimination.
o It has been held that requiring the accused to take
part in a police line- up certain cases merely involves
a mechanical act on his part and is not covered by
the privilege.
f.Right of confrontation
o Main purpose is to secure the opportunity to cross-
examination and the Secondary purpose is to enable
the judge to observe the demeanor of witnesses.
o XPN: where the prosecution witness is dead, unable
to testify or cannot be found in the Philippines.
o The right of confrontation is not available during the
preliminary investigation conducted by the
municipal judge.
o Where, at the trial, the testimony of the prosecution
witnesses taken in question and answer form during
the P.I and who were cross- examined by the defense
counsel, were admitted in evidence and reproduced,
subject to the right of defense counsel to further
cross- examine them, the accused was not thereby
denied the constitutional right of confrontation.
o The right of confrontation and cross- examination
may be waived expressly or impliedly.
g.Right to compulsory process
o Must be invoked during the trial and the refusal of
the court to grant said right is reversible error.
h.Right to speedy, impartial and public trial.
o The right to speedy trial is a relative one. It means
one that is conducted according to the law of
criminal procedure and the rules and regulations
without capricious, vexatious or oppressive delays.
o Balancing test- conduct of the prosecution and the
accused should be weighed.
- Length of the delay;
- The reason of the delay;
- The accused’s assertion or non- assertion of his
right;
- The prejudice to the accused resulting from the
delay.
o He can not exercise such right in a negative way by o However, where the death penalty is imposed, such
delaying trial. It does not preclude the rights of right cannot be waived as the review of the
public justice, judgement by the SC is automatic and mandatory.
o Where the prosecution, through repeated motions o Rights of the accused enjoys and may invoke during
for postponement, causes delay to supervene over the trial stage.
the objections of the accused, the court can dismiss o Having been made aware that the rights of the
the case on motion of the accused and such suspect are likewise highly vulnerable during those
dismissal amounts to an acquittal. stages at the hands of unscrupulous persons,
o Should the court refuse to dismiss the case, the Congress passed RA 7438 which defines certain
accused can compel dismissal by mandamus or rights of persons arrested, detained or under
secure his liberty by habeas corpus. custodial investigation, as well as the duties of the
o If the accused is detained habeas corpus is the arresting, detaining and investigating officers, and
remedy for non- observance of the right to a speedy provides penalties for violations thereof.
trial; Otherwise, certiorari, prohibition or o RA 8493- Speedy Trial Act of 1998
mandamus may be resorted to for the final o Circular No. 38-98
dismissal of the case.
o No such violation of a constitutional right is involved
where the delay is due to the failure of the
stenographer to complete and submit the transcript
of the notes taken at the trial, despite several orders
of the Court of Appeals, and under these
circumstances the accused cannot invoke the right
to speedy dispositions of one’s case.
o The test of the violation of the right to speedy trial
is to begin counting from the time the information
is filed, excluding the period involved before its
filing.
o The right to speedy trial is deemed waived or
abandoned where the accused agreed to several
postponements and eventually gave their consent
to the dismissal of the case without prejudice.
o RA 7438- defining certain rights of persons arrested
detained or under custodial investigation.
o RA 8493- ensuring speedy trial in criminal cases.
o The long delay in the termination of the preliminary
investigation and the filing of the information is
violative of the constitutional right of the accused
to procedural due process.

THE RIGHT TO A SPEEDY DISPOSITION

o Deemed violated only where the proceeding is

attended by vexatious, capricious and oppressive
delays, or when unjustified postponements of the
trial are asked for and secured, or when without
cause or justifiable motive a long period of time is
allowed to elapse without the party having his case
tried.
o It appearing in this case that the delay is equally
chargeable to the accused, he cannot now seek the
protection of the law to cover up for his own
actuations or benefit from what he now considers
the adverse effects of his own conduct in the case.

THE RIGHT TO A PUBLIC TRIAL

o May be denied by the court on considerations of

decency and public morals, or may be waived by the
accused as where he requests the exclusion of the
public.

i.Right to appeal

o The right to appeal is for the benefit of the accused

and he may waive it expressly or by implication.
RULE 116 - ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
Section 1. Arraignment and plea; how made. - (a) The
accused must be arraigned before the court where the
complaint or information was filed or assigned for trial.
The arraignment shall be made in open court by the
judge or clerk by furnishing the accused with a copy of
the complaint or information, reading the same in the
language or dialect known to him, and asking him
whether he pleads guilty or not guilty. The prosecution
may call at the trial witnesses other than those named
in the complaint or information.
(b) The accused must be present at the arraignment and
must personally enter his plea. Both arraignment and
plea shall be made of record, but failure to do so shall
not affect the validity of the proceedings.
(c) When the accused refuses to plead or makes a
conditional plea, a plea of not guilty shall be entered for
him.
(d) When the accused pleads guilty but presents
exculpatory evidence, his plea shall be deemed
withdrawn and a plea of not guilty shall be entered for
him.
(e) When the accused is under preventive detention, his
case shall be raffled and its records transmitted to the
judge to whom the case was raffled within three (3)
days from the filing of the information or complaint.
The accused shall be arraigned within ten (10) days
from the date of the raffle. The pre-trial conference of
his case shall be held within ten (10) days after
arraignment.
(f) The private offended party shall be required to
appear at the arraignment for purposes of plea
bargaining, determination of civil liability, and other
matters requiring his presence. In case of failure of the
offended party to appear despite due notice, the court
may allow the accused to enter a plea of guilty to a
lesser offense which is necessarily included in the
offense charged with the conformity of the trial
prosecutor alone.
(g) Unless a shorter period is provided by special law or
Supreme Court circular, the arraignment shall be held
within thirty (30) days from the date the court acquires
jurisdiction over the person of the accused. The time of
the pendency of a motion to quash or for a bill or
particulars or other causes justifying suspension of the
arraignment shall be excluded in computing the period.
Notes:
▪ It is the duty of both the court and counsel assisting
the accused to see to it that the accused
comprehends the charges and realizes the gravity
and consequences of his plea thereto.
▪ A failure to observe the rules on arraignment is
reversible error and a judgement of conviction
cannot stand upon an invalid arraignment. However,
errors in procedure can be waived by the accused.
▪ Where the accused was arraigned on the original and
not on the substantially amended, information
although such defect was pointed out to the trial
court by the defense counsel, the same constitutes
reversible error.
▪ Where such mistake has been committed and the
court discovered this before its judgement had been
reduced to writing, it may set aside such proceedings
and set the case for rearraignment on the amended
information, and such action cannot give rise to
double jeopardy.
▪ The defendant was duly arraigned on the original
information and an amended information was filed
merely to include another defendant, but without
substantial amendments, the fact that said original
defendant was not arraigned on the amended
information is not a reversible error.
▪ The failure to present prosecution witnesses listed in
the information does not warrant an inference of
suppression of their testimonial evidence by the
prosecution
▪ A plea of “not guilty” should be entered:
a. Where the accused so pleaded;
b. When he refuses to plead;
c. Where in admitting the act charged, he sets up
matters of defense or with a lawful justification;
d. When he enters a conditional plea of guilt;
e. Where, after a plea of guilty, he introduces
evidence of self- defense or other exculpatory
circumstances; and
f. When the plea is indefinite or ambiguous.
▪ Where, after a plea of guilty, the accused thereafter
asserts self- defense in his testimony, the original
plea is deemed vacated and the court should take
the defendant’s plea anew and proceed with the trial
of the case,
XPN: this doctrine, however, will not apply where the
accused thereafter retracted his denial and admitted
his guilt.
▪ Unconditional plea of guilty admits the crime and all
the attendant circumstances alleged in the
information including the allegations of conspiracy
and warrants a judgement of conviction without
need of further evidence/
XPN:
- Where the plea of guilty was compelled by violence
or intimidation.
- When the accused did not fully understand the
meaning and consequences of his plea.
- Where the information is insufficient to sustain
conviction of the offense charged.
- Where the information does not charge an offense,
any conviction thereunder being void.
- Where the court has no jurisdiction.
▪ Only facts, and not conclusions of law alleged in the
information, are admitted by a plea of guilty.
▪ Plea of guilty to an information alleging aggravating
circumstances will not be considered an admission of
said circumstances if the evidence subsequently
presented by the prosecution fails to prove the
same.
The same doctrine applies to qualifying
circumstances alleged but not proved.
▪ A plea of guilty to the information admits only facts
alleged therein but it is not an admission that the
acts charged are unlawful nor does it cure the defect
in the court’s jurisdiction.
Sec. 2. Plea of guilty to a lesser offense. – At
arraignment, the accused, with the consent of the
offended party and prosecutor, may be allowed by the
trial court to plead guilty to a lesser offense which is
necessarily included in the offense charged. After
arraignment but before trial, the accused may still be
allowed to plead guilty to said lesser offense after
withdrawing his plea of not guilty. No amendment of
the complaint or information is necessary.
Notes:
▪ This is justified by the fact that, as hereinbefore
observed, it is the offense charged in the information
which determines, in the first instance, the
jurisdiction of the court; and such jurisdiction is not
lost if a lesser offense is subsequently proved or, as
herein contemplated, is the offense to which a plea
of guilty is allowed.
▪ Fro expediency, this section goes further by
providing that for purposes of such a plea of guilty to
a lesser offense, the accused may withdraw his plea
of not guilty after arraignment but before trial.
▪ There is no need to amend the complaint or
information or to again arraign the accused thereon,
under the same rationale that where the offense
proved is lesser than that originally charged, and to
which the accused had pleaded not guilty, he can
nevertheless be convicted of such lesser offense
without the need of amending the complaint or
information,
▪ Plea bargaining is made during the pre-trial stage of
the criminal proceedings.
▪ The law still permits the accused sufficient
opportunity to change his plea thereafter but under
the conditions stated in this section, as now
amended.
▪ The offer to plead guilty to a lower offense is not
demandable by the accused as a matter of right but
is addressed entirely to the sound discretion of the
trial court.
▪ Plea may properly be allowed is when the
prosecution does not have sufficient evidence to
establish the guilt of the accused for the crime
charged,.
▪ The consent of the prosecutor as well as the
offended party, and the approval of the court must
be obtained.
▪ Where these requirements were not observed, the
accused cannot claim double jeopardy if he should
be charged anew with the graver offense subject of
the original information or complaint.
▪ However, where the offended party failed to appear
despite due notice, the consent of the trial
prosecutor alone will suffice.
Sec. 3. Plea of guilty to capital offense; reception of
evidence. – When the accused pleads guilty to a capital
offense, the court shall conduct a searching inquiry into
the voluntariness and full comprehension of the
consequences of his plea and shall require the
prosecution to prove his guilt and the precise degree of
culpability. The accused may present evidence in his
behalf.
Sec. 4. Plea of guilty to non-capital offense; reception of
evidence, discretionary. – When the accused pleads
guilty to a non-capital offense, the court may receive
evidence from the parties to determine the penalty to
be imposed.
Notes:
▪ Courts must be careful to avoid improvident pleas of
guilt and, where grave crimes are involved, the
proper course is to take down evidence to
determine guilt and above doubts.
▪ Courts must be extra solicitous to see to it that the
accused fully understands the meaning and
importance of his plea, especially in capital offenses
and the prudent course to follow is to take testimony
to aid SC in determining whether the accused
understood the significance ands consequences of
his plea.
▪ When the death penalty is involved, the
presumption of regularity in the performance of
official duty does not apply.
▪ The provisions of Sec. 3 must be duly observed at the
arraignment.
▪ Searching inquiry- is to be conducted to establish
that the plea of guilty was done voluntarily with full
awareness of its consequences.
▪ Where the accused pleads guilty to a capital offense
it is now mandatory for the court to require the
prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused and the
precise degree of his culpability, with the accused
being likewise entitled to present evidence to prove,
inter alia, mitigating circumstances.
▪ The reception of additional evidence is discretionary
with the court only when the accused pleads guilty
to a non-capital offense, wherein the court has
discretion as to the punishment, as where the
imposable penalty is divided into periods, or is an
indeterminate sentence, or is in the alternative.
▪ Evidence may be that of the prosecution for the
purpose of proving aggravating circumstances, or of
the defense for the purpose of [proving mitigating
circumstances.
▪ The exercise of such discretion may take into account
the gravity of the offense and the probability that the
accused did not fully understand his plea. But must
not be used to prevent the disclosure of mitigating
circumstances,
▪ Procedural guidelines to be observed specifically in
capital offenses where the accused or his counsel
waived his right to present evidence and be heard
(laid down in People vs. Bodoso GR Nos. 1493832-83
Mar. 5, 2003).
Sec. 5. Withdrawal of improvident plea of guilty.– At
any time before the judgment of conviction becomes
final, the court may permit an improvident plea of guilty
to be withdrawn and be substituted by a plea of not
guilty.
Notes:
▪ The withdrawal of an improvident plea of guilty, to
be substituted by a plea of not guilty, is permitted
even after judgement has been promulgated but
before the same becomes final.
▪ A plea of not guilty can likewise be withdrawn so that
the accused may instead plead guilty to the same
offense but, for obvious reasons, this must be done
before promulgation of judgement.
▪ However, if the prosecution had already presented
its witnesses, the accused will generally not be
entitled to the mitigating circumstances based on a
plea of guilty.
▪ The substitution of a plea of guilty by one of not
guilty is subject to the discretion of the court and
may be granted if, for instance, the prosecution does
not have sufficient evidence to establish the guilt of
the accused. Not a matter of right of the accused.
Sec. 6. Duty of court to inform accused of his right to
counsel. – Before arraignment, the court shall inform
the accused of his right to counsel and ask him if he
desires to have one. Unless the accused is allowed to
defend himself in person or has employed counsel of his
choice, the court must assign a counsel de officio to
defend him.
Sec. 7. Appointment of counsel de officio. – The court,
considering the gravity of the offense and the difficulty
of the questions that may arise, shall appoint as counsel
de officio such members of the bar in good standing
who, by reason of their experience and ability, can
competently defend the accused. But in localities where
such members of the bar are not available, the court
may appoint any person, resident of the province and
of good repute for probity and ability, to defend the
accused.
Sec. 8. Time for counsel de officio to prepare for
arraignment. – Whenever a counsel de office is
appointed by the court to defend the accused at the
arraignment, he shall be given a reasonable time to
consult with the accused as to his plea before
proceeding with the arraignment.
Notes:
▪ The duties of the court under Sec. 6 and 7 must be
affirmatively performed. However, the right to
counsel, both at the arraignment and the trial , may
be waived by the accused.
▪ He can also waive the right to counsel at the
promulgation of judgement.
Sec. 9. Bill of particulars. – The accused may, before
arraignment, move for a bill of particulars to enable him
properly to plead and prepare for trial. The motion shall
specify the alleged defects of the complaint or
information and the details desired.
Notes:
▪ This section further implements the right of the
accused to be informed of the charges and provides
fro the remedy from vague and indefinite allegations
in the complaint or information.
▪ The bill of particulars here should be considered as
an integral part of the complaint or information
which it supplements.
Sec. 10. Production or inspection of material evidence in
possession of prosecution. – Upon motion of the accused
showing good cause and with notice to the parties, the
court, in order to prevent surprise, suppression, or
alteration, may order the prosecution to produce and
permit the inspection and copying or photographing of
any written statement given by the complainant and
other witnesses in any investigation of the offense
conducted by the prosecution or other investigating
officers, as well as any designated documents, papers,
books, accounts, letters, photographs, object, or tangible
things not otherwise privileged, which constitute or
contain evidence material to any matter involved in the
case and which are in the possession or under the control
of the prosecution, police, or other law investigating
agencies.
Notes:
▪ It now appears that this mode of discovery may
plausibly be availed of even during the P.I as it would
thereby enable the respondent to obtain evidence
which he could incorporate in the counter- affidavits
or to substantiate his allegations therein.
▪ The scope of discovery has been broadened and it
now extends to evidence in the possession of under
the control of “police, or any other law investigating
agencies”
Sec. 11. Suspension of arraignment. – Upon motion by
the proper party, the arraignment shall be suspended in
the following cases:
(a) The accused appears to be suffering from an unsound
mental condition which effectively renders him unable to
fully understand the charge against him and to plead
intelligently thereto. In such case, the court shall order
his mental examination and, if necessary, his
confinement for such purpose;
(b) There exists a prejudicial question; and
(c) A petition for review of the resolution of the
prosecutor is pending at either the Department of
Justice, or the Office of the President; provided, that the
period of suspension shall not exceed sixty (60) days
counted from the filing of the petition with the reviewing
office.
Notes:
▪ Par. A- regarding the duty of the trial court to order
the commitment of an accused who is mentally
unsound at the time of the trial, by providing further
that his arraignment shall also be suspended.
▪ Par. B- provides for the suspension of the P.I of a
criminal case due to the pendency of a pre-judicial
question in a civil action.
▪ Par. C- it was reiterated that when an accused pleads
to the charged, he is deemed to have waived the
right to P.I or to question any irregularity therein.
Also applicable in cases of reinvestigation or review
of such reinvestigation.