Contract

A. What is a Contract? 
         It is a meeting of the mind between two parties whereby one binds himself, with respect to the other, to give something or to render some service.


B. What are the basic principles or characteristics of a Contract?
         1. Autonomy. Freedom(or liberty) to Stipulate(provided not contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order, or public policy). Art 1306
           No law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be passed. (Art III Sec 10 of 1987 Philippine Constitution)
         2. Obligatory Force and Compliance in Good Faith.
                     a.  Obligations arising from contracts have the force of law between the contracting parties and should be complied with in good faith.(Art 1159)
                     b. Contract are perfected by mere consent, and from that moment the parties are bound not only to the fulfillment of what has been expressly stipulated but also to all the consequences which, according to their nature, may be in keeping with good faith, usage and law.(Art 1315)
       3. Mutuality. The contract must bind both contracting parties; its validity or compliance cannot be left to the will of one of them.(Art 1308)
          Non-binding as to Third Parties. The determination of the performance may be left to a third person, whose decision SHALL NOT BE BINDING until it has made known to both contracting parties(Art 1309) 
                                                         The determination shall not be obligatory if it is evidently inequitable. In such case, the courts shall decide what is equitable under the circumstances. (Art 1310)
     
         Enforceability. No one may contract into the name of another without being authorized by the latter, or unless he has by law a right to represent him. Art 1317.(Authorized and unathorized representation)
                               A contract entered into in the name of another by one who has no authority or legal representation, or who has acted beyond his powers, shall be unenforceable, unless is is ratified expressly or impliedly, by the person on whose behalf it has been executed, before it is revoked by the other contracting party.Art 1317. (when enforceable or not)
      4. Relativity(Generally, it is binding only between the parties, their assigns, and heirs)
                      Privity:Exceptions. Contracts take effect only between the parties, their assigns and heirs, except in case where the rights and obligations arising from the contract are not transmissible by their nature, or by stipulation or by provision of law. The heir is not liable beyond the value of the property he received from the decedent.(Art 1311,1) 
                    Stipulation Pour Autrui. If a contract should contain some stipulation in favor of a third person, he may demand its fulfillment provided he communicated his acceptance to the obligor before its revocation. A mere incidental benefit or interest of a person is not sufficient. The contracting parties must have a clearly and deliberately conferred a favor upon a third person.(Art 1311, 2)
                    Contracts creating real right.  In contracts creating real rights, third persons who come into possession of the object of the contract are bound thereby, subject to the provisions of the Mortage Law and the Land Registration Laws. (Art 1312)
                   Contracts in Fraud of Creditors. Creditor are protected are protected in case of contracts intended to defraud them(Art 1313), and those contracts undertaken in fraud of creditors when the latter cannot in any manner collect the claims due them are considered rescissible contracts(Art 1381,3)
Note: Rescission is a remedy granted by law to the contracting parties both to secure reparation of damages caused by them by a contract, even if the contract be valid, by means of the restoration of things to their condition prior to the celebration of said contract. 
                   Tortious Interference. Any person who induces another to violate his contract shall be liable for damages to the other contracting party.(Art 1314)
                  Collective Contract. 

C. What are the stages in the execution of a Contract?
                1. Preparation(or Conception of Generacion)- Here the parties are progressing with their negotiations; they have not yet arrived arrived at any definite agreement, although there may have been a preliminary offer and bargaining.
               2. Perfection(of birth)- Here the parties have at long last came to a definite agreement, the elements of subject matter and valid cause have been accepted by mutual consent. 
              3. Consummation(or death or termination)-Here the terms of the contract are performed, and the contract may be said to have been fully executed.


D. What are the elements of  contract?
              1. Essential elements- ex: consent, subject matter, cause or consideration
                                             - without them a contract cannot exist
              2. Natural elements- ex: warranty against eviction, hidden defects in the contract of sale.
                                            - those found in certain contracts, and presumed to exist, unless the contrary has been stipulated.
             3. Accidental elemenst- ex: stipulation to pay credit, interest; the designation of the particular place for delivery of payment
                                            - these are the various particular stipulations that may be agreed upon by the contracting parties. They may be present or absent, depending upon whether or not the parties have agreed upon them.

E. How are contracts perfected?
          1. By mere consent in consensual contract
          2. By delivery in real contracts
          3. By putting in writing in formal or solemn contracts


Note: To be a written contract, all its terms must be in writing, so that a contract partly in writing and partly oral is, in legal effect, an oral contract.




                

Trust(Obligations and Contracts)

A. What is Trust?
            It is the legal relationship between one person having an equitable ownership in property and another person owning the legal title to such property, the equitable ownership of the former entitling him to the performance of certain duties and exercise of certain powers by the latter.

What are the characteristics of Trust?
            1. It is a fiduciary relationship.
            2. Created by law or by agreement.
            3. Where the legal title is held by one, and the equitable title or beneficial title is held by another.

B. Who are the parties to a Trust?
           1. Trustor or settler- he establishes the trust
           2. Trustee- holds the property in trust for the benefit of another
           3. Beneficiary or cestui que trust- the person whose benefit the trust has been created


May the trustor be at the same time the beneficiary? 
           Yes! 

What are the elements of a Trust?
         The (1)parties to the trust and the (2)trust property/trust estate/subject matter of the trust

C. What are the kinds of Trust?
         There are two kinds: 1. Express- It is created by the parties, or by the intention of the trustor
                                         2. Implied-  It is created by operation of law.


D-1. How is express trust established?   
          Clear intention to create trust. (No particular words are required for the creation of an express trust, it being sufficient that a trust is clearly intended. Art 1444)

D-2. In the absence of a trustee or if trustee declines the designation, who shall appoint for a new one?
        The trust ordinarily continues even if the trustee declines. In the absence of a trustee(where a trustee dies, resigns, suffers any legal incapacity), the trust does not fail but a new trustee will be appointed by the proper court, unless by the terms of the trust other provision is made for the appointment of successor trustee.(Art 1445)

D-3. Is the acceptance of the beneficiary necessary?
        Yes, it is necessary that the beneficiary accept the trust for the trust to be effective. If the trust imposes no onerous(meaning: no interchange of equivalent valuable consideration) conditions, his acceptance shall be presumed, if there is no proof to the contrary(Art 1446)


D-4. How is an express trust proven?
        The requirement that the express trust must be written is only for enforceability, not for validity between parties. No express trust concerning an immovable or any interest therein may be proved by parol(oral) evidence(Art 1443)
       An oral agreement is valid for a trust over personal property. But one which affects third party, the trust must be in public document, registered in the Registry of Property(if it concerns real property)

D-5. In what way may an express trust be repudiated or ended?
      1. By mutual agreements by ALL the parties.
      2. Upon expiration of the term.
      3. Upon fulfillment of the resolutory condition
      4. Through rescission or annulment
      5.If the subject matter of trust is lost(physical loss or legal impossibility)
      6. By order of the court
      7. Through merger
      8. Upon accomplishment of the purpose of the trust

D-6. Does prescription and laches apply to express trust?
      No. In view of the creation of the express trust, it is clear that no period of prescription is involved.


E. What are the kinds of Implied Trust?
      There are two(2) kinds: 1. Resulting trust(RT)- where there is an intent to create a trust but it is not effective as an express trust. Presumed to have been contemplated by the parties, but not so expressed in the instrument of conveyance. Imprescriptible except if repudiated expressly by the trustee.
                                           2. Constructive trust(CT)- where there is no intention to create a trust but a trust is nevertheless created by law to prevent unjust enrichment or oppression. Justified merely by equity to satisfy the demands of justice, and therefore are not really trust in the technical sense.


E-1. How is an implied trust established?
        Implied trust is created by operation of law("trust by operation of law")


E-2. What are the examples of Implied Trust?
       1. When property is sold, and the legal estate is granted to one party but the price is paid by another for the purpose of having the beneficial interest of the property.The former is the trustee and the latter is the beneficiary(Art 1448)-> resulting trust
       Note: If the title is conveyed to a child, it is not an implied trust as it its presumed a gift in favor of the child(Art 1448)
      2.  When a donation is made to a person but it appears that although the legal estate is transmitted to the donee, he nevertheless is either to have no beneficial interest or only a part thereof.(Art 1449) --> resulting trust
     3. If the price of a sale of property is loaned or paid by one person(say A) for the benefit of another(say B) and the conveyance is made to the lender or payor(A) to secure the payment of the debt(of B), a trust arises in favor of the lender(A). B may redeem the property and compel a conveyance thereof to him(Art 1450) --> constructive trust 
    4. When land passes by succession to any person and he causes the legal title to be put in the name of another, a trust is established for the benefit of the true owner(Art 1451) --> resulting trust
    5. If two or more persons agree to purchase a property and by common consent the legal title is taken in the name of one of them for the benefit of all, a trust is created in favor of the others in proportion to the interest of each(Art 1452)--> resulting trust
    6. When property is conveyed to a person in reliance upon his declarationof intention to hold it for, or to transfer it to another or the grantor, a trust is created in favor of the beneficiary(Art 1453) --> resulting trust
   7. If an absolute conveyance of property is made in order to secure the performance of an obligation of the grantor toward the grantee, a trust is established. If the fulfillment of the obligation is offered by the grantor when it becomes due, he may demand the reconveyance of the property to him(Art 1454) --> constructive trust
   8. If any trustee, guardian or other person holding a fiduciary relationship uses the Trust fund and causes the cinveyance to be made to him or to a third person, a trust is established in favor of the person to whom the funds belong.(Art 1455) --> constructive trust
   9. If the property is acquired through mistake or fraud, the person obtaining it is considered a trustee for the benefit of the person from whom the property comes. (Art 1456) --> constructive trust  

Note: Resulting and Constructive trusts, if enforced,  may be barred by LACHES
Laches is unreasonable delay in the bringing of a cause of action before the courts of justice.


E-3. How is an Implied Trust proven?
        An implied trust may be proven by oral evidence(Art 1457) 
       While an implied trust may be proved by oral evidence, still, said evidence must be a trustworthy oral evidence, for oral evidence may easily be fabricated.(Salao v Salao)


E-4. Since implied constructive trust and repudiated resulting trust prescribe, what are the prescriptive periods of action to enforce it?
       1. In annullable/voidable contracts( those contracts entered into by minors or other incapacitated persons), within 4 years from the time the guardianship ceases.(Art 1391,4)
       2. In case of fraud in registration, within 10 years upon an obligation created by law(Art 1144, 2) 
       3. In void contracts(Art 1410), imprescriptible.
       4. in Actions to Quiet Title: Art. 478. There may also be an action to quiet title or remove a cloud therefrom when the contract, instrument or other obligation has been extinguished or has terminated, or has been barred by extinctive prescription.

Right to Bail

What is a bail?

         It is a security required by the court and given by the accused to secure his appearance before the proper court at a designated time and place to face the charges brought against him.

        It is a security for the provisional release of an accused.

What are the forms of bail bond?

        A bail bond shall be in a form of cash/money or real property. No other.

Is the right to bail absolute?

       It depends. If the offense committed is not a capital offense, in which case the penalty imposable is lower than reclusion perpetua, then the right to bail is absolute to that extent. But if the offense is punishable by reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment or death, then the right to bail is a matter of judicial discretion. If the evidence of guilt of the accused is strong, bail shall not be granted. 

May the court grant bail to an accused in the absence of a hearing?

    No. This is a gross violation of the rules of court. It also amounts to denial of due process to the prosecution. A formal hearing is not only necessary but indispensable. The prosecution must be given an opportunity to present, within a reasonable time, all the evidence it may desire to introduce before the court should resolve the motion to bail. 

What if an accused is granted bail without hearing?What is its effect?

       It will render the order void for having denied the prosecution the procedural due process. The judge who renders such order shall face administrative charges.

Who fixes the amount of bail bond?

      It is the prosecutor who recommends the amount of bail bond. However, the judge may fix it by increasing or decreasing it in reasonable amount depending upon the circumstances of the accused.

What are the circumstances that must be considered in fixing the amount of bail bond?

        The following circumstances should be considered, primarily but not exclusively, to avoid excessive bail.

           1. the financial ability of the accused to give bail;

           2. the nature and circumstances of the offense;

           3. the penalty for the offense charged;

           4. the character and reputation of the accused;

           5. his age and health;

           6. the weight of the evidence against him;

           7. the probability of his appearance at trial;

           8. the forfeiture of other bonds by him;

           9. the fact that he was a fugitive from justice when arrested; and

           10. the pendency of other cases in which he is under bond

May a person admitted to bail be allowed to travel abroad?

    No. The right to travel abroad is curtailed. It must be noted that his appearance at the court is expected at all times. This is the necessary consequence and function of the bail. Therefor, the court must prohibit a person admitted to bail to travel abroad.

May bail be granted during the pendency of appeal?

     No. When a person is already convicted, it means the the court found him guilty beyond reasonable doubt. The purpose of the hearing for petition for bail is useless because the guilt is already established therein. Therefore, a petition for bail on appeal is not allowed.

May a member of the military invoke the right to bail?

     No. It is not available in the military. This is an exception to the general rule embodied in the Bill of Rights. The right to a speedy trial is given more emphasis where the right to bail does not exist. This is so because the military is a unique structure of organization.

May the prosecution present evidence for the denial of bail?

    As pointed out earlier, the prosecution may do so if it is discretionary upon the court. But if it is a matter of right, offense is not a capital one, the prosecution does not have to present evidence.

May the court fix a bail equivalent to the civil liability of the accused?

     No. Bail is not intended as a punishment nor as in satisfaction of civil liability which should necessarily await the judgement of the court. 

The Writ of Habeas Corpus

What is a Writ of Habeas Corpus?
     1. It is a prerogative writ of liberty employed to test the validity of a person's detention.
    2. It is directed to the person detaining another
            -commanding him to produce the body of the prisoner
            -at a designated time and place
            -with the day and the cause of his caption and detention
            - to do, to submit to and receive
                 -whatever the court or judge awarding the writ
                 -shall consider in his behalf
When is it available?
       It is available in the following cases:


            1. If there is physical restraint.
               ex. arbitrary detention
            2. If there is moral restraint
               ex. a household helper prevented from leaving her employ
            3. If there are jurisdictional issues
               ex. a. If a person has been convicted by a court without jurisdiction, or where his sentence becomes               invalid
                    b. If a person is sentenced to a longer penalty than that subsequently meted out to another person convicted of the same offense
                    c. If there is denial of the accused's right to a speedy trial.
           4.  If there is unlawful denial of bail.
When is WHC not available?
       It is not available where the decision is tainted with only errors of law.
What is the remedy available to an accused if there is only errors of law?
     The proper remedy is an ordinary appeal.
What is the procedure in applying for a WHC?
    1. If applicable to the person, file petition for WHC in court.
    2. The court will issue the writ as a matter of course, if it is in proper form(refer to no. 1)
    3. In the writ the court orders respondent to produce the body of the person allegedly detained.
    4. If respondent can justify the detention, the court will dismiss the petition.
    5. If respondent cannot justify, the court will continue with the proceedings to determine the validity of the applicant's detention.
Note: It is the privilege of the writ that may be suspended, not the writ itself.
When is the privilege of the writ suspended?
   1. In cases of invasion or rebellion.
   2. When the public safety requires it.
Who may suspend the privilege of the writ?
  Only the President has the power to suspend the privilege of the writ.
What is the duration of the suspension?
    The period shall not exceed sixty (60) days, following which it shall automatically be lifted.
Can the suspension of the privilege be revoked?
   Yes.  It may be revoked by the Congress (by a majority vote) and the Supreme Court in proper cases.
If it can be revoked, can it also be extended?
  Yes, it can be extended by the Congress(by a majority vote) in accordance with its rules without a need of a call.
Who determines the period of extension?
  Congress.
What is the basis for extending the suspension of the privilege of the writ?
 If invasion or rebellion are determined to be persisting, or if the public safety still requires it.
Note: a state of martial law does not automatically suspend the writ.
To whom does the suspension of the privilege of the writ applies?
    It applies only to person judicially charged for rebellion or of offenses inherent in or directly connected with invasion.
In how many days shall a person arrested or detained be judicially charged during the suspension of the privilege of the writ?
    The person thus arrested shall be charged within three (3) days. Otherwise, he shall be released.
What is the power of the Supreme Court in relation to the suspension of the privilege of the writ?
    It has the power to annul the suspension.
On what grounds can the SC annul it?
   If it not based on either of the following: invasion/rebellion and when public safety requires it.
Note: In Lansang Case, the SC declared that it had the power to inquire into the factual basis of the suspension of the privilege of the writ and to annul the same if no legal ground can be established.
In what instance may the SC review such suspension of privilege?
    If the challenge to such suspension is filed by any citizen.




Related Cases: MUNCOPA VS ENRILE 141 SCRA 233(223)
                           DIZON VS EDUARDO    158 SCRA 480
                           REYES VS CA                 DEC 3 2009
                           RAZON VS TAGITIS    DEC 3 2009
                           BARREDO VS VINARAO   AUG 2 2007

Rights of the Accused: IMPARTIAL AND PUBLIC TRIAL

1. Garcia vs Domingo   

G.R. No. L-30104 July 25, 1973

   

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1973/jul1973/gr_30104_1973.html
2. Flores vs People    

G.R. No. L-25769 December 10, 1974

   

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1974/dec1974/gr_l_25769_1974.html
3. People vs Valeriano  

G.R. Nos. 103604-05 September 23, 1993

  

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1993/sep1993/gr_103604_05_1993.html
4. People vs Tee  G.R. Nos. 140546-47.  January 20, 2003
  http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/jan2003/140546_47.htm

Rules 119 TRIAL

RULE 119
TRIAL

SECTION 1. Time to prepare for trial.�After a plea of not guilty is entered, the accused shall have at least fifteen (15) days to prepare for trial. The trial shall commence within thirty (30) days from receipt of the pre-trial order, (sec. 6, cir. 38-98)

SEC. 2. Continuous trial until terminated; postponements.�Trial once commenced shall continue from day to day as far as practicable until terminated. It may be postponed for a reasonable period of time for good cause. (2a)

The court, shall, after consultation with the prosecutor and defense counsel, set the case for continuous trial on a weekly or other short-term trial calendar at the earliest possible time so as to ensure speedy trial. In no case shall the entire trial period exceed one hundred eighty (180) days from the first day of trial, except as otherwise authorized by the Supreme Court, (sec. 8, cir. 38-98).

The time limitations provided under this section and the preceding section shall not apply where special laws or circulars of the Supreme Court provide for a shorter period of trial, (n)

SEC. 3. Exclusions.�The following periods of delay shall be excluded in computing the time within which trial must commence:

(a) Any period of delay resulting from other proceedings concerning the accused, including but not limited to the following:

(1) Delay resulting from an examination of the physical and mental condition of the accused;

(2) Delay resulting from proceedings with respect to other criminal charges against the accused;

(3) Delay resulting from extraordinary remedies against interlocutory orders;

(4) Delay resulting from pre-trial proceedings; provided, that the delay does not exceed thirty (30) days;

(5) Delay resulting from orders of inhibition, or proceedings relating to change of venue of cases or transfer from other courts;

(6) Delay resulting from a finding of the existence of a prejudicial question; and

(7) Delay reasonably attributable to any period, not to exceed thirty (30) days, during which any proceeding concerning the accused is actually under advisement.

(b) Any period of delay resulting from the absence or unavailability of an essential witness.

For purposes of this subparagraph, an essential witness shall be considered absent when his whereabouts are unknown or his whereabouts cannot be determined by due diligence. He shall be considered unavailable whenever his whereabouts are known but his presence for trial cannot be obtained by due diligence.

(c) Any period of delay resulting from the mental incom�petence or physical inability of the accused to stand trial.

(d) If the information is dismissed upon motion of the prosecution and thereafter a charge is filed against the accused for the same offense, any period of delay from the date the charge was dismissed to the date the time limitation would commence to run as to the subsequent charge had there been no previous charge.

(e) A reasonable period of delay when the accused is joined for trial with a co-accused over whom the court has not acquired jurisdiction, or, as to whom the time for trial has not run and no motion for separate trial has been granted.

(f) Any period of delay resulting from a continuance granted by any court motu proprio, or on motion of either the accused or his counsel, or the prosecution, if the court granted the continuance on the basis of its findings set forth in the order that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the best interest of the public and the accused in a speedy trial. (sec. 9, cir. 38-98)

SEC. 4. Factors for granting continuance.�The following factors, among others, shall be considered by a court in determining whether to grant a continuance under section 3(f) of this Rule.

(a) Whether or not the failure to grant a continuance in the proceeding would likely make a continuation of such proceeding impossible or result in a miscarriage of justice; and

(b) Whether or not the case taken as a whole is so novel, unusual and complex, due to the number of accused or the nature of the prosecution, or that it is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation within the periods of time established therein.

In addition, no continuance under section 3(f) of this Rule shall be granted because of congestion of the court's calendar or lack of diligent preparation or failure to obtain available witnesses on the part of the prosecutor, (sec. 10, cir. 38-98)

SEC. 5. Time limit following an order for new trial.�If the accused is to be tried again pursuant to an order for a new trial, the trial shall commence within thirty (30) days from notice of the order, provided that if the period becomes impractical due to unavailability of witnesses and other factors, the court may extend it but not to exceed one hundred eighty (180) days from notice of said order for a new trial, (sec. 11, cir. 38-98)

SEC. 6. Extended time limit.�Notwithstanding the provisions of section 1(g), Rule 116 and the preceding section 1, for the first twelve-calendar-month period following its effectivity on September 15, 1998, the time limit with respect to the period from arraignment to trial imposed by said provision shall be one hundred eighty (180) days. For the second twelve-month period, the time limit shall be one hundred twenty (120) days, and for the third twelve-month period, the time limit shall be eighty (80) days, (sec. 7, cir. 38-98)

SEC. 7. Public attorney's duties where accused is imprisoned.�If the public attorney assigned to defend a person charged with a crime knows that the latter is preventively detained, either because he is charged with a bailable crime but has no means to post bail, or, is charged with a non-bailable crime, or, is serving a term of imprisonment in any penal institution, it shall be his duty to do the following:

(a) Shall promptly undertake to obtain the presence of the prisoner for trial or cause a notice to be served on the person having custody of the prisoner requiring such person to so advise the prisoner of his right to demand trial.

(b) Upon receipt of that notice, the custodian of the prisoner shall promptly advise the prisoner of the charge and of his right to demand trial. If at anytime thereafter the, prisoner informs his custodian that he demands such trial, the latter shall cause notice to that effect to be sent promptly to the public attorney.

(c) Upon receipt of such notice, the public attorney shall promptly seek to obtain the presence of the prisoner for trial.

(d) When the custodian of the prisoner receives from the public attorney a properly supported request for the availability of the prisoner for purposes of trial, the prisoner shall be made available accordingly, (sec. 12, cir. 38-98)

SEC. 8. Sanctions.�In any case in which private counsel for the accused, the public attorney, or the prosecutor:

(a) Knowingly allows the case to be set for trial without disclosing that a necessary witness would be unavailable for trial;

(b) Files a motion solely for delay which he knows is totally frivolous and without merit;

(c) Makes a statement for the purpose of obtaining continuance which he knows to be false and which is material to the granting of a continuance; or

(d) Willfully fails to proceed to trial without justification consistent with the provisions hereof, the court may punish such counsel, attorney, or prosecutor, as follows:

(1) By imposing on a counsel privately retained in connection with the defense of an accused, a fine not exceed�ing twenty thousand pesos (P20,000.00);

(2) By imposing on any appointed counsel de oficio, public attorney, or prosecutor a fine not exceeding five thousand pesos (P5.000.00); and

(3) By denying any defense counsel or prosecutor the right to practice before the court trying the case for a period not exceeding thirty (30) days. The punishment provided for by this section shall be without prejudice to any appropriate criminal action or other sanction authorized under these rules. (sec. 13, cir. 38-98)

SEC. 9. Remedy where accused is not brought to trial within the time limit.�If the accused is not brought to trial within the time limit required by Section 1(g), Rule 116 and Section 1, as extended by Section 6 of this rule, the information may be dismissed on motion of the accused on the ground of denial of his right to speedy trial. The accused shall have the burden of proving the motion but the prosecution shall have the burden of going forward with the evidence to establish the exclusion of time under section 3 of this Rule. The dismissal shall be subject to the rules on double jeopardy.

Failure of the accused to move for dismissal prior to trial shall constitute a waiver of the right to dismiss under this section, (sec. 14, cir. 38-98)

SEC. 10. Law on speedy trial not a bar to provision on speedy trial in the Constitution.�No provision of law on speedy trial and no rule implementing the same shall be interpreted as a bar to any charge of denial of the right to speedy trial guaranteed by section 14(2), article III, of the 1987 Constitution, (sec. 15, cir. 38-98)

SEC. 11. Order of trial.�The trial shall proceed in the following order:

(a) The prosecution shall present evidence to prove the charge and, in the proper case, the civil liability.

(b) The accused may present evidence to prove his defense and damages, if any, arising from the issuance of a provisional remedy in the case.

(c) The prosecution and the defense may, in that order, present rebuttal and sur-rebuttal evidence unless the court, in furtherance of justice, permits them to present additional evidence bearing upon the main issue.

(d) Upon admission of the evidence of the parties, the case shall be deemed submitted for decision unless the court directs them to argue orally or to submit written memoranda.

(e) When the accused admits the act or omission charged in the complaint or information but interposes a lawful defense, the order of trial may be modified. (3a)

SEC. 12. Application for examination of witness for accused before trial.�When the accused has been held to answer for an offense, he may, upon motion with notice to the other parties, have witnesses conditionally examined in his behalf. The motion shall state: (a) the name and residence of the witness; (b) the substance of his testimony; and (c) that the witness is sick or infirm as to afford reasonable ground for believing that he will not be able to attend the trial, or resides more than one hundred (100) kilometers from the place of trial and has no means to attend the same, or that other similar circumstances exist that would make him unavailable or prevent him from attending the trial. The motion shall be supported by an affidavit of the accused and such other evidence as the court may require. (4a)

SEC. 13. Examination of defense witness; how made.�If the court is satisfied that the examination of a witness for the accused is necessary, an order shall be made directing that the witness be examined at a specific date, time and place and that a copy of the order be served on the prosecutor at least three (3) days before the scheduled examination. The examination shall be taken before a judge, or, if not practicable, a member of the Bar in good standing so designated by the judge in the order, or if the order be made by a court of superior jurisdiction, before an inferior court to be designated therein. The examination shall proceed notwithstand�ing the absence of the prosecutor provided he was duly notified of the hearing. A written record of the testimony shall be taken. (5a)

SEC. 14. Bail to secure appearance of material witness.�When the court is satisfied, upon proof or oath, that a material witness will not testify when required, it may, upon motion of either party, order the witness to post bail in such sum as may be deemed proper. Upon refusal to post bail, the court shall commit him to prison until he complies, or is legally discharged after his testimony has been taken. (6a)

SEC. 15. Examination of witness for the prosecution.�When it satisfactorily appears that a witness for the prosecution is too sick or infirm to appear at the trial as directed by the court, or has to leave the Philippines with no definite date of returning, he may forthwith be conditionally examined before the court where the case is pending. Such examination, in the presence of the accused, or in his absence after reasonable notice to attend the examination has been served on him, shall be conducted in the same manner as an examination of the trial. Failure or refusal of the accused to attend the examination after notice shall be considered a waiver. The statement taken may be admitted in behalf of or against the accused. (7a)

SEC. 16. Trial of several accused.�When two or more accused are jointly charged with an offense, they shall be tried jointly unless the court, in its discretion and upon motion of the prosecutor or any accused, orders separate trial for one or more accused. (8a)

SEC. 17. Discharge of accused to be state witness.�When two or more persons are jointly charged with the commission of any offense, upon motion of the prosecution before resting its case, the court may direct one or more of the accused to be discharged with their consent so that they may be witnesses for the state when, after requiring the prosecution to present evidence and the sworn statement of each proposed state witness at a hearing in support of the discharge, the court is satisfied that:

(a) There is absolute necessity for the testimony of the accused whose discharge is requested;

(b) There is no other direct evidence available for the proper prosecution of the offense committed, except the testimony of said accused;

(c) The testimony of said accused can be substantially corroborated in its material points;

(d) Said accused does not appear to be the most guilty; and

(e) Said accused has not at any time been convicted of any offense involving moral turpitude.

Evidence adduced in support of the discharge shall automatically form part of the trial. If the court denies the motion for discharge of the accused as state witness, his sworn statement shall be inadmissible in evidence. (9a)

SEC. 18. Discharge of accused operates as acquittal.�The order indicated in the preceding section shall amount to an acquittal of the discharged accused and shall be a bar to future prosecution for the same offense, unless the accused fails or refuses to testify against his co-accused in accordance with his sworn statement constituting the basis for his discharge. (10a)

SEC. 19. When mistake has been made in charging the proper offense.�When it becomes manifest at any time before judgment that a mistake has been made in charging the proper offense and the accused cannot be convicted of the offense charged or any other offense necessarily included therein, the accused shall not be discharged if there appears good cause to detain him. In such case, the court shall commit the accused to answer for the proper offense and dismiss the original case upon the filing of the proper information. (11a)

SEC. 20. Appointment of acting prosecutor.�When a prosecutor, his assistant or deputy is disqualified to act due to any of the grounds stated in section 1 of Rule 137 or for any other reason, the judge or the prosecutor shall communicate with the Secretary of Justice in order that the latter may appoint an acting prosecutor. (12a)

SEC. 21. Exclusion of the public.�The judge may, motu proprio, exclude the public from the courtroom if the evidence to be produced during the trial is offensive to decency or public morals. He may also, on motion of the accused, exclude the public from the trial except court personnel and the counsel of the parties. (13a)

SEC. 22. Consolidation of trials of related offenses.�Charges for offenses founded on the same facts or forming part of a series of offenses of similar character may be tried jointly at the discretion of the court. (14a)

SEC. 23. Demurrer to evidence.�After the prosecution rests its case, the court may dismiss the action on the ground of insufficiency of evidence (1) on its own initiative after giving the prosecution the opportunity to be heard or (2) upon demurrer to evidence filed by the accused with or without leave of court

If the court denies the demurrer to evidence filed with leave of court, the accused may adduce evidence in his defense. When the demurrer to evidence is filed without leave of court, the accused waives the right to present evidence and submits the case for judgment on the basis of the evidence for the prosecution. (15a)

The motion for leave of court to file demurrer to evidence shall specifically state its grounds and shall be filed within a non-extendible period of five (5) days after the prosecution rests its case. The prosecution may oppose the motion within a non-extendible period of five (5) days from its receipt.

If leave of court is granted, the accused shall file the demurrer to evidence within a non-extendible period of ten (10) days from notice. The prosecution may oppose the demurrer to evidence within a similar period from its receipt.

The order denying the motion for leave of court to file demurrer to evidence or the demurrer itself shall not be reviewable by appeal or by certiorari before judgment. (n)

SEC. 24. Reopening.�At any time before finality of the judgment of conviction, the judge may, motu proprio or upon motion, with hearing in either case, reopen the proceedings to avoid a miscarriage of justice. The proceedings shall be terminated within thirty (30) days from the order granting it. (n) 

Rights of the Accused: BE INFORMED OF NATURE & CAUSE OF ACCUSATION

1. Borja vs Mendoza  

G.R. No. L-45667 June 20, 1977

    

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1977/jun1977/gr_45667_1977.html
2. Soriano vs Sandiganbayan  

G.R. No. L-65952 July 31, 1984

   

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1984/jul1984/gr_65952_1984.html
3. Pecho vs People   G.R. No. 111399.  September 27, 1996
  http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/sept1996/111399.htm

Rights of the Accused: RIGHT TO BE HEARD

1. People vs Holgado  G.R. No. L-2809             March 22, 1950
    http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1950/mar1950/gr_l-2809_1950.html
2 People vs Agbayani  G.R. No. 122770.  January 16, 1998
    http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jan1998/122770.htm
3. Amion vs Judge Chiongson 

A.M. No. RTJ-97-1371 January 22, 1999

    

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1999/jan1999/am_rtj_97_1371_1999.html

Rights of the Accused: PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE

1. People vs Dramayo   

G.R. No. L-21325 October 29, 1971

  http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1971/oct1971/gr_21325_1971.html
2. Dumlao vs COMELEC   

G.R. No. L-52245 January 22, 1980

    http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1980/jan1980/gr_52245_1980.html
3. Corpuz vs People   GR No 74259 February 14, 1991
  http://philippinelaw.info/jurisprudence/gr74259-corpuz-v-people.html
4. Marquez vs COMELEC   

G.R. No. 112889 April 18, 1995

  

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1995/apr1995/gr_112889_1995.html

Rights of the Accused: RIGHT TO BAIL

1. Basco vs Rapatalo               A.M. No. RTJ-96-1335.  March 5, 1997
    http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1997/mar1997/am_rtj_96_1335.htm
2. People vs Fortes                  

G.R. No. 90643 June 25, 1993

    

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1993/jun1993/gr_90643_1993.html
3. Commendador vs De Villa   

G.R. No. 93177 August 2, 1991

   

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1991/aug1991/gr_93177_1991.html
4. Manotoc vs CA                   

G.R. No. L-62100 May 30, 1986

    http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1986/may1986/gr_62100_1986.html


Other cases not listed:

5. Dela Camara vs Enage         

G.R. Nos. L-32951-2 September 17, 1971

   

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1971/sep1971/gr_32951_2_1971.html
6. Enrile vs Salazar                   

G.R. No. 92163 June 5, 1990

   

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1990/jun1990/gr_92163_1990.html
7. Paderanga vs CA                  

G.R. No. 115407 August 28, 1995

   http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1995/aug1995/gr_115407_1995.html
8. People vs Donato                  

G.R. No. 79269 June 5, 1991

    

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1991/jun1991/gr_79269_1991.html
9. Govt of the US vs Purganan   G.R. No. 148571.  September 24, 2002
   http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/sep2002/148571.htm
10. Maguddatu vs CA              G.R. No. 139599. February 23, 2000
  http://www.chanrobles.com/scdecisions/jurisprudence2000/feb2000/139599.php
11. Tucay vs Domagas              

A.M. No. RTJ-95-1286 March 2, 1995

  

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1995/mar1995/am_rtj_95_1286_1995.html