1.5 Bibliografía
2.1.2 Trascendencia: de la galvanización a otras ciencias, de la
2.1.2.3 Experimentos con una cabeza
RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED ACCUSED’S RIGHTS
GENERAL RULE: All persons are
(1) Entitled to bail, provided that they give sufficient securities and be made before conviction; or (2) Be released on recognizance as may be provided
by law.
EXCEPTION:Those charged with offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua when evidence of guilt is strong.
NOTE: The right to bail shall not be impaired even when the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is suspended.
Excessive bail shall not be required. (Section 13, Art. 3, CONST)
1. CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
DUE PROCESS REQUIREMENT IN CRIMINAL PROCEDURES
No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law. (Section 14, Art. 3, CONST) OTHER RIGHTS
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be:
(1) Presumed innocent until the contrary is proved, and
(2) Shall enjoy the right to be heard by himself and counsel,
(3) to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him,
(4) to have a speedy, impartial, and public trial, (5) to meet the witnesses face to face, and (6) to have compulsory process to secure the
attendance of witnesses and
(7) the production of evidence in his behalf. (Section 14, Art. 3, CONST)
TRIAL MAY PROCEED EVEN WITHOUT ACCUSED AFTER HE HAS BEEN ARRAIGNED
However, after arraignment, trial may proceed notwithstanding the absence of the accused: Provided, that he has been duly notified and his failure to appear is unjustifiable. (Section 14, Art. 3, CONST)
• Sec. 14(1) is restricted to criminal cases only and purely to their procedural requirements (Cruz, 2007 ed).
• Criminal due process requires that the accused be tried by an impartial and competent c ourt in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law and with the proper observance of all the rights accorded him under the Constitution and the applicable statutes.
• The basic ingredient of criminal due process is a trial conducted in accordance with the rudiments of fair play.
Hence, the accused has a right to complain if the judge has a personal or pecuniary interest in the outcome of the case.
• The rights enumerated in Sec. 14 (2), including the right to impartiality, are protected only during the trial.
Rights of the Accused
Under the Rules of Criminal Procedure. the following are the rights accorded the accused:
(1) To be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved beyond reasonable doubt.
(2) To be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him.
(3) To be present and defend in person and by counsel at every stage of the proceedings, from arraignment to promulgation of the judgment.
(4) To testify as a witness i n his own behalf but subject to cross-examination on matters covered by direct examination. His silence shall not in any manner prejudice him.
(5) To be exempt from being compelled to be a witness against himself.
(6) 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 can not with due diligence be found in the Philippines, unavailable, or otherwise unable to test ify, 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.
(7) To have compulsory process issued to secure the attendance of witnesses and production of other evidence in his behalf.
(8) To have speedy, impartial and public trial.
(9) To appeal in all cases allowed and in the manner prescribed by law. (Sec. 1, Rule 115, Rules of Court)
2. PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE
PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE
• It is the responsibility of the prosecution to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt; otherwise, he is entitled to acquittal. Co nviction will depend not on the weakness of his defense but on the strength of the prosecution.
• The presumption of innocence must be fully adhered to, requiring that there be evidence sufficient to remove every vestige of reasonable doubt (People v. Malilay, 63 SCRA 420).
• The presumption of innocence is overcome only by proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Reasonable doubt
It is that doubt engendered by an investigation of the whole proof and an inability after such investigation to let the mind rest upon the certainty of guilt. Absolute certainty of guilt is not demanded by the law to convict a criminal charge, but moral certainty is required as to every proposition of proof requisite to constitute the offense (Mupas v. People, 172834, 2008).
Equipoise rule
Related to presumption of innocence is what is called the EQUIPOISE RULE which says:
That where the evidence of the parties in a criminal case is evenly balanced, the constitutional presumption of innocence should tilt the scales in favor of the accused.
Clearly, however, there is no equipoise if the evidence is not evenly balanced. The equipoise rule cannot be invoked where the evidence of the prosecution is overwhelming (Malana v.
People, 173612, 2008).
3. BAIL Bail
Security given for the release of a person in custody of law, furnished by him or a bondsman, conditioned upon his appearance before any court as may be required (Rule 114, Sec.
1, ROC).
It is a mode short of confinement which would, with reasonable certainty insure the attendance of the accused (De la Camara v. Enage, 41 SCRA 1, 1971).
General rule:Only persons under detention may petition for bail, for the purpose of such bail is to secure their provisional release.
Exception:Any offenses which under the law existing at the time of its commission and at the time of the application for bail may be punished by reclusion perpetua, even if a lesser penalty may be imposed upon co nviction.
Exception to Exception:However, even if the crime imputed to the accused is punishable by reclusion perpetua, he is still entitled to bail if the evidence o f guilt is not strong (Cruz, 2007 ed).
Form of bail
(1) Corporate surety (2) Property bond (3) Cash deposit (4) Recognizance
Because of the importance of the right to bail both for the accused and for the prosecution, certain duties are imposed upon the Judge. As reiterated in the case of Basco v. Rapatalo:
(1) Notify the prosecutor of the hearing of the application for bail or require him to submit his recommendation (Section 18, Rule 114 of the Rules of Court as amended);
(2) Conduct a hearing of the application for bail regardless of whether or not the prosecution refuses to
present evidence to show that the guilt of the accused is strong for the purpose of enabling the court to exercise its sound discretion (Sections 7 and 8, supra);
(3) Decide whether the evidence of guilt of the accused is strong based on the summary of evidence of the prosecution (Baylon v. Sison);
(4) If the guilt of the accused is not strong, discharge the accused upon the approval of the bailbond. (Section 19, supra). Otherwise, petition should be denied.
Factors which must be considered in determining bail(Bernas) a. Ability to post bail
b. Nature of the offense c. Penalty imposed by law
d. Character and reputation of the accused e. Health of the accused
f. Strength of the evidence
g. Probability of appearing for trial h. Prior forfeiture of bonds
i. Whether the accused was a fugitive from justice when arrested
j. Whether under bond in other cases
(1) Since bail is constitutionally available to all persons, it must be available to one who is detained even before formal charges are filed (Herras Teehanke v. Rovira, 75 Phil. 634 , 1945).
(2) But of course, the person claiming the right must be under actual detention or custody of the law. One is under the custody of the laweither when he has been arrested or has surrendered himself to the jurisdiction of the court.
The following are entitled to bail
(1) Persons charged with offenses punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, when evidence of guilt is not strong
(2) Persons convicted by the trial court pending their appeal
(3) Persons who are members of the AFP facing a court martial
Hearing
(1) The constitutional right to bail necessarily includes the right to a hearing. When bail is denied without a hearing, a fundamental right is violated (Beltran v.
Diaz, 77 Phil. 484, 1946). The hearing need not be separate and distinct from the trial itself. And it need only be summary. The right to a prompt hearing is waived by agreeing to postponements (Munoz v.
Rilloraza, 83 Phil. 609, 1949).
(2) Hearing on the petition for bail is required to satisfy due process, but this may be summary in nature or held in the course of the trial itself. A separate hearing is not indispensable (Gerardo v. CFI, 86 Phil. 504).
Excessive Bail
The right to bail can be rendered useless by a bail bond set at an exorbitant amount. Hence, the Constitution prohibits
“EXCESSIVE BAIL.” (Bernas)
BAIL AS A MATTER OF RIGHT v. BAIL AS A MATTER OF DISCRETION [comparative table]
Bail as a right Bail, when discretionary Bail is a matter of right if a
person is charged with an offense not punishable by reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment or death.
Bail is discretionary when a person is charged with an offense
All persons in custody shall be admitted to bail as a matter of right, with sufficient sureties, or released on recognizance as prescribed by law or this Rule:
(a) before or after conviction by the Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, or Municipal Circuit Trial Court, and (b) before conviction by the Regional Trial court of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment. (Sec.
4. Rule 114, ROC)
Upon conviction by the Regional Trial Court of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment, admission to bail is discretionary. The application for bail may be filed and acted upon by the trial court despite the filing of a notice of appeal, provided it has not transmitted the original record to the appellate court. However, if the decision of the trial court conviction the accused changed the nature of the offense from non-bailable to bailable, the application for bail can only be filed with and resolved by the appellate court.
Should the court grant the application, the accused may be allowed to continue on provisional liberty during the pendency of the appeal under the same bail subject to the consent of the bondsman.
If the penalty imposed by the trial court is imprisonment exceeding six (6) years, the accused shall be denied bail, or his bail shall be cancelled upon a showing by the prosecution, with notice to the accuse, of the follo wing
or other similar aggravated by the
circumstance of
reiteration;
• That he has
previously escaped from legal confinement, evaded sentence, or violated the conditions of his bail without valid justification;
• That he committed the offense while under probation, parole, or conditional pardon;
• That the
circumstances of his case indicate the probability of flight if released on bail; or
• That there is undue risk that he may commit another crime during the pendency of the appeal.
The appellate court may, motu proprio or on motion of any party, review the resolution of the Regional Trial Court after notice to the adverse party in either case.
(Sec. 5, Rule 114, ROC)
4. RIGHT TO BE HEARD
(1) In a very broad sense, it can be understood to mean the totality of the rights embodied in an adequate criminal procedural system (Bernas).
(2) The qualities demanded of the hearer are fairness and impartiality. Lit is demanded that judge may not play the double role od prosecutor and judge in one and the same case. He must maintain an attitude of neutrality in regard to the prosecution and the accused (People v. Castaneda, 63 Phil. 480, 1936).
The more active role of the accused in expressing the right to be heard includes:
(1) The right to present evidence and to be present at the trial a. Includes the right to testify in one’s favor and
b. The right to be given time to call witnesses ( US v.
Chueco, 37 Phil. 53, 1917) (2) The right to be assisted by counsel
a. The right of the accused to counsel in criminal proceedings has never been considered subject to
waiver( Florez v. Ruiz, 90 SCRA 429).
b. The right to be assisted by counsel is deemed so important that it has become a constitutional right and it is so implemented that under our rules of procedure it is not enough for the Court to apprise an accused of his right to have an attorney, it is not enough to ask him whether he desires the aid of an attorney, but it is essential that the court should assign one de oficio if he so desires and he is poor grant him a reasonable time to procure an attorney of his own (People v. Holgado, 86 Phil. 752).
(3) [W]hen a defendant appears without attorney, the court has four important duties to comply with:
a. It must inform the defendant that it is his right to have 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 and is unable to employ attorney, the court must assign counsel de oficio to defend him;
d. If the accused desires to procure an attorney of his own the court must grant him a reasonable time therefor.
Where duly authorized 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.
The right to compulsory process to compel the attendance of witnesses in his behalf.
5. RIGHT TO BE INFORMED Purpose and requirements:
( US v. Karelsen, 3 Phil. 223, 1904)
• to furnish the accused with such a description of the charge against him as will enable him to make his defense;
• to avail himself of his conviction or acquittal for protection against a further prosecution for the same cause; and
• to inform the court of the facts alleged, so that it may decide whether they are sufficient in law to support a conviction if one should be had. (United States vs. Cruikshank, 92 U. S., 542.)
Requisites for properly informing the accused of the nature and cause of accusation
(1) Information must state the name of the accused (2) Designation given to the offense by statute
(3) Statement of the acts or omission so complained of as constituting the offense
(4) Name of the offended party
(5) Approximate time and date of commission of the offense
(6) Place where offense was committed
(7) Every element of the offense must be alleged in the complaint or information
In order that this requirement may be satisfied, facts must be stated; not conclusions of law. Every crime is made up of certain acts and intent; these must be set forth in the complaint with reasonable particularity of time, place, names (plaintiff and defendant), and circumstances. In short, the complaint must contain a specific allegation of every fact and circumstance necessary to constitute the crime charged.
The defendant is entitled to know the nature and cause of the accusation against him so he can adequately prepare for his defense (Cruz, 2007 ed).
The description and not the designation of the offense is controlling.
The defendant is also denied the right to be informed of the charge against him, and to due process as well, where the statute itself is couched in such indefinite language that it
is not possible for men of ordinary intelligence to determine therefrom what acts or omissions are punished and hence, should be avoided. This is the void-for-vagueness rule.
Variance doctrine
In spite of the difference between the crime that was charged and that which was eventually proved, the accused may still be convicted of whatever offense that was proved even if not specifically set out in the information provided it is necessarily included in the crime charged (Teves v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
154182, Dec. 17, 2004).
6. RIGHT TO SPEEDY, IMPARTIAL AND PUBLIC TRIAL
Right to a Speedy Disposition of the Case Sec. 16, Art. III, 1987 Constitution
All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition of their cases before all judicial, quasi-judicial, or administrative bodies.
Scope
The right covers all periods before, during, and after trial.
It applies to civil, criminal, and administrative cases.
Any party to a case may demand expeditious action on all officials.
Section 16 Section 14
Applies to all phases in all judicial, quasi-judicial, administrative proceedings.
Applies only to trial phase in criminal proceedings.
Speedy trial
One free from vexatious, capricious and oppressive delays And is intended to relieve the accused of needless anxieties and inconveniences before sentence is pronounced upon him (Flores v. People, 61 SCRA 331).
Factors may be considered in determining whether the accused has been deprived of his right to speedy trial and disposition of case:( Corpuz v. Sandiganbayan)
Length of delay;
Reason for the delay;
Defendant’s assertion of his right; and
Prejudice to the defendant.
NOTE: The denial of the right to speedy trial is a ground for acquittal.
Remedy for Violation:Dismissal through mandamus.
The right to speedy trial [Sec. 14 (2)] particularly refers to criminal prosecutions which are at the trial stage, while the right to speedy disposition of cases (Sec. 16) applies to all cases before judicial, quasi-judicial or administrative bodies.
Impartial trial
Accused is entitled to cold and neutrality of an impartial judge
Public trial
General rule: A trial is public when anyone interested in observing the manner a judge conducts the proceedings in his courtroom may do so. There is no ban on such attendance. His being a stranger to the litigants is of no moment. No relationship to the parties need be shown (Garcia v. Domingo, L-30104, 1973).
Exception: The general public may be excluded when the evidence to be presented in the proceeding may be characterized as offensive to decency or public morals (Rule 119, Sec. 13, ROC).
The issue was whether the trial held in the judge’s chambers without, however, any evidence of an attempt to exclude the public was violative of the constitutional command.
RIGHT OF CONFRONTATION Two- fold Purpose:
(1) To afford the accused an opportunity to test the testimony of the witness by cross-examination, and (2) To allow the judge to observe the deportment of the
witness (US v. Anastacio, 6 Phil. 413, 1906).
Right of confrontation is recognized during preliminary investigation proper but not during preliminary examination. A preliminary examination is generally a proceeding ex parte in which the person charged has no right to participate or be present (Marinas v. Siochi, 104 SCRA 423, 1981).
COMPULSORY PROCESS
(1) The accused is entitled under the Constitution to the issuance of subpoena and subpoena duces tecum for the purpose of compelling the attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence that he may need for his defense. Failure to obey then subject to contempt of court or may be arrested so needed evidence will be given.
(2) The right to compulsory process must be invoked during the trial. Failure to do so constitutes a waiver that cannot be rectified or undone on appeal (US v.
Garcia, 10 Phil. 384).
AD TESTIFICANDUM DECUS TECUM
A process directed to a person requiring him to attend and to testify at the hearing or trial of an action, or at any investigation conducted by competent authority, or for the taking of his deposition.
The person is also required to bring with him any books, documents, or other things under his control.
NOTE: The subpoena duces tecum shall contain a reasonable
NOTE: The subpoena duces tecum shall contain a reasonable