Rights during trial 1. Right to due process

a. Impartial Tribunal

2. Presumption of innocence - the requirement of proof beyond reasonable doubt is a necessary corollary of the constitutional right to be presumed innocent.

3. Right to be heard personally or by counsel

 Adequate legal assistance shall not be denied to any person by reason of poverty (Art. III, Sec. 11.)

 Elements of the right to Counsel:

(1) the court is duty bound to inform the defendant that he has a right to an attorney before he is arraigned;

(2) the court must ask him if he desires the services of counsel;

(3) if he does, and is unable to get one, the Court must give him to obtain one

(4) or, if the accused wishes to procure private counsel, the Court must give him time to obtain one.

(5) 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.

4. Filing of demurrer to evidence

Rule 119, 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 an 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.

5. Right to be informed of nature and cause of accusation 6. Right to speedy, impartial and public trial

a. Speedy - Dismissal based on the denial of the right to speedy trial amounts to an acquittal.

b. Public - does not require that the entire public can witness the trial. It is enough if it is conducted at a place where one's relatives and friends can be accommodated and the public may know what is going on.

 The right is not absolute. The court can order the public out of the trial room in the interest of morality and order.

c. Impartial trial

7. Right to personal confrontation - to enable the accused to test the credibility of the witness. The best means of confrontation is the process of cross-examination.

8. Right to secure attendance of witnesses and the production of documents and things - subpoena and subpoena duces tecum: depositions and other modes of discovery; perpetuation of testimonies.

9. Trial in absentia

 Although the right to be present is not explicit in the provision, it is inferrable from the phrase "trial may proceed notwithstanding the absence of the accused". This right to be present may, however, be waived by the accused.

 3 ways that the waiver may take place:

(a) express waiver pursuant to the stipulations set forth in his bail bond, unless his presence is specifically ordered by the court for purposes of identification;

(b) implied waiver when the accused without any justifiable cause is absent at the trial on a particular date of which he had notice; and (c) implied waiver when the accused under custody who had been notified of the date of trial escapes.

 The requisites of a valid trial in absentia are: (ANU) (i) the accused has been arraigned;

(ii) he was duly notified of the hearing; and (iii) his failure to attend the trial is unjustified.

 In trial in absentia accused waives the right to present evidence and confront witnesses

When presence of accused a duty

1. Generally, the accused has the right to be present at all stages the trial (from arraignment to rendition of judgment).

2. If the accused is in the custody of the law, his presence during the trial is a duty only if the court orders his presence to enable the prosecution witnesses to identify him.

3. Although the accused is not in the custody of the law (and more so if he is in the custody of the law), his presence is required in the following cases: (APP)

a) Arraignment, regardless of the offense;

b) Entering a plea, regardless of whether the plea is guilty or not guilty.

c) Promulgation of judgment, except that when the judgment is for a light offense, he may be represented by his counsel or a personal emissary.

10. Privilege against self-incrimination AFTER THE CASE IS FILED IN COURT

 to refuse to be a witness;

 not to have any prejudice whatsoever result

to him by such refusal;

 to testify in his own behalf, subject to cross-examination by the prosecution;

 WHILE TESTIFYING, to refuse to answer a specific question which tends to incriminate him for some crime other than that for which he is then prosecuted.

a. Scope: compulsory testimonial self-incrimination

 It refers to the use of the mental process and the communicative faculties, and not to a merely physical activity. If the act is physical or mechanical, the accused can be compelled to allow or perform the act, and the result can be used in evidence against him.

 Thus the accused can be required to allow a sample of a substance taken from his body (U.S. v. Tan The), to expel the morphine from his mouth (U.S.

v. Ong Sio Hong), to take off her garments and shoes and be photographed (People v. Otadura). The taking of footprint sample to see if it matches the ones found in the scene of the crime is allowed (People v. Salas and People v. Sara). However, making the accused take dictation to get a specimen of

her handwriting is not allowed, for this involves the use of the mental process. [Bermudez v. Castillo] Also requiring the accused to reenact the crime is not allowed, for this also involves the mental process.

b. Proceeding where available

 The privilege is available in any proceedings, even outside the court, for they may eventually lead to a criminal prosecution.

 In Pascual v. Board of Medical Examiners, the SC held that the privilege against self-incrimination extends to administrative proceedings which possess a criminal or penal aspect.

c. Use immunity v. transactional immunity

Use and fruit immunity prohibits use of a witness' compelled testimony and its fruits (the leads) in any manner in connection with the criminal prosecution of the witness. The immunity in this case is from the testimony given. Thus, if the state can procure evidence, independent of the testimony and its fruits, it can prosecute the person testifying nevertheless.

Transactional immunity grants immunity to the witness from prosecution for an offense to which his compelled testimony relates. The immunity is from the prosecution, not merely from the use of the testimony. Thus, even if the guilt of the person testifying can be proven by independent means, he can not be prosecuted anymore.

d. Exclusionary rule: Any confession or admission obtained in violation of this or Section 17 hereof shall be inadmissible in evidence against him. (Article 3, Section 12 (3))

e. Effect of denial of privilege by court

 When the privilege against self-incrimination is violated outside of court, say, by the police, then the testimony is not admissible under the exclusionary rule.

 Chavez v. Court of Appeals : When the privilege is violated by the court itself, that is, by the judge, the court is ousted of its jurisdiction, all its proceedings are null and void, and it is as if no judgment has been rendered.

11. Right to speedy disposition of cases

 complements the right to a speedy trial. After the case has been submitted for decision, so that technically the trial stage is terminated, the Constitution mandates that the judicial, quasi-judicial or administrative body or tribunal must decide the case consistent with the right of the accused to a speedy disposition of his case.

12. Unreasonable punishments

 Echegaray v. Secretary of Justice : Punishments are cruel when they involve torture or a lingering death; but the punishment of death is not cruel, within the meaning of that word as used in the constitution. Cruel implies something inhuman and barbarous, something more than the mere extinguishment of life.

a. Excessive fines and cruel punishments

b. Involuntary servitude

 Exceptions to the rule on involuntary servitude: (PMR) (1) as punishment for crime

(2) personal military service or civil service in the interest of national defense

(3) return to work order issued by the Department of Labor c. Imprisonment for debt

 However, a person may be imprisoned as a penalty for a crime arising from a contractual debt and imposed in a proper criminal proceedings.

d. Secret detention places, solitary, incommunicado and other forms of detention and the use of substandard or inadequate penal facilities

e. Indefinite imprisonment

13. Ex Post facto laws and bills of attainder Ex-post facto law

 Makes an action done before the passing of the law and which was innocent when done criminal, and punishes such action; or

 Aggravates a crime or makes it greater than when it was committed;

 Changes the punishment and inflicts a greater punishment than the law annexed to the crime when it was committed

 Alters the legal rules of evidence and receives less or different testimony than the law required at the time of the commission of the offense in order to convict the defendant

 Assuming to regulate civil rights and remedies only. In effect imposes penalty or deprivation of a right for something which when done was lawful

 Deprives a person accused of a crime of some lawful protection to which he has become entitled, such as the protection of a former conviction or acquittal, or a proclamation of amnesty.

Bill of Attainder

 A "bill of attainder" is a law which substitutes the legislative determination of guilt for a judicial determination. Through a statute, the legislature finds individuals or groups guilty, without the benefit of being proven so in court.

 A bill of attainder is of two kinds:

(i) bill of attainder proper (legislative imposition of the death penalty) and (ii) bill of pains and penalties (imposition of a lesser penalty).

14.Double jeopardy

 Elements of double jeopardy (JCAC)

(1) Court of competent jurisdiction;

(2) A Complaint or Information sufficient in form and substance to sustain a conviction;

(3) Arraignment and plea by the Accused;

(4) Conviction, acquittal, or dismissal of the case without the express consent, of the accused.

 Subsequent prosecution is barred for the following: (SAFII) (1) Same offense

(2) Attempt of the same offense (3) Frustration of the same offense

(4) Offense necessarily included in the 1st offense (All the elements of the 2nd constitute some of the elements of the 1st offense)

(5) Offense that necessarily includes the 1st offense (All the elements of the 1st constitute some of the elements of the 2nd offense)

Exceptions to no. 5:

(1) The graver offense developed due to "supervening facts" arising from the same act or omission constituting the former charged (ex.

Prosecution for supervening death even after earlier conviction for physical injuries)

(2) The facts constituting the graver charge became known or were discovered only after the filing of the former complaint or information.

(3) The plea of guilty to the lesser offense was made without the consent of the fiscal and the offended party.

 When defense of double jeopardy available.-- (1) Dismissal based on insufficiency of evidence;

(2) dismissal bec. of denial of accused's right to speedy trial;

(4) accused is discharged to be a state witness.

 When defense of double jeopardy not available.-- When the case is dismissed other than on the merits upon motion of the accused personally, or through counsel, such dismissal is regarded as w/ express consent of the accused, who is therefore deemed to have waived the right to plead double jeopardy

C. Post Trial