Sec. 17.

Discharge of Accused to be State Witness

CAN THE COURT GRANT THE DISCHARGE BEFORE THE
PROSECUTION HAS FINISHED PRESENTING ALL ITS
EVIDENCE?

No. As a general rule, the court should resolve any

motion to discharge only AFTER the prosecution has presented
all of its evidence since it is at this time when the court shall
determine the
presence of the requisites above

In some cases, HOWEVER, the SC held that the prosecution is

not required to present all of its other evidence before an accused
is discharged. The accused may be discharged at any time
before
the defendants have entered upon their defense.
IS A HEARING OF THE MOTION TO DISCHARGE MANDATORY?

So long as the motion is able to receive evidence for and

against the discharge of an accused to become a state
witness, its subsequent order granting or denying the motion for
discharge is in order notwithstanding the lack of actual hearing on
the motion
WHAT IS THE MEANING WHEN THE TESTIMONY OF THE
ACCUSED CAN BE SUBSTANTIALLY CORROBORATED IN
ITS MATERIAL POINTS?

There is presence of indirect testimony or evidence that

could corroborate with the truthfulness of the testimony of the
accused
WHAT HAPPENS IF THERE IS LACK OF REQUISITES
PRESENT IN THE MOTION FOR THE DISCHARGE OF THE
ACCUSED?

There is no need to allege all the requisites in the motion.

What is required is that the court is satisfied that the requisites
are present for the discharge.

The evidence for the discharge may be presented during

the hearing on the motion
WHAT IS THE MEANING OF ABSOLUTE NECESSITY OF THE
TESTIMONY OF THE PROPOSED STATE WITNESS?

It means that there is no other evidence to establish the

offense other than the testimony of the accused

For example, where an offense is committed in

conspiracy and clandestinely, the discharge of one of the
conspirators is necessary in order to provide direct evidence of
the commission of the crime

No one else other than one of the conspirators can testify on

what happened among them

DOES ABSOLUTE NECESSITY MEAN THAT TESTIMONY

WOULD RESULT IN ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY OF CONVICTION?

No
CAN THERE BE MORE
CAN BE DISCHARGED?

Yes

THAN

ONE

ACCUSED

WHO

WHAT IS THE REMEDY OF THE PROSECUTION IF THE

COURT DENIES THE MOTION OF THE PROSECUTION?

The State can file a petition for certiorari

THE ACCUSED PLEADED GUILTY TO THE CRIME CHARGED
AND/OR ALREADY TESTIFIED AS AN ACCUSED, CAN
HE STILL BE DISCHARGED?

Yes
CAN A CO-CONSPIRATOR BE DISCHARGED AS A STATE
WITNESS?

RULEa co-conspirator cannot be discharged as a state

witness
against a co-conspirator

EXCEPTIONif the crime was committed clandestinely and

there
is no way to prove the crime
WHAT IS AN IRREGULAR DISCHARGE?

Irregular discharge is a discharge where one or all of the

conditions required for discharge didnt really exist
IF THE STATE WITNESS REFUSES TO TESTIFY, WILL HIS
SWORN STATEMENT BE ADMISSIBLE AGAINST HIM?

No, his sworn statement will not be admissible against him

Otherwise, it violates his right against self-incrimination

WHAT ARE THE EFFECTS OF THE DISCHARGE?

1. Evidence in support of the discharge forms part of the trial.
But if the court denies the motion to discharge, his sworn
statement shall be inadmissible as evidence
2. Discharge of the accused operates as an ACQUITTAL and
bar to further prosecution for the same offense, except if he
fails or refuses to testify against his co-accused in accordance
with his
sworn statement constituting the basis of the discharge. In this
case, he can be prosecuted again and his admission can be used
against him.

WHAT DOES IT MEAN WHEN HE FAILS OR REFUSES TO TESTIFY IN

ACCORDANCE WITH HIS SWORN STATEMENT?

It means that the accused makes substantial changes in

his testimony that would naturally affect the proceedings and
would be prejudicial to the prosecution of the offense charged

WHAT IF IN THE SWORN STATEMENT OF X, HE MENTIONED ONLY

THAT 3 OF HIS COMPANIONS WERE IN CONSPIRACY WITH
EACH OTHER. DURING HIS TESTIMONY, HE TESTIFIED THAT ALL
10 OF HIS COMPANIONS WERE IN CONSPIRACY. IS THIS PROPER?

Yes

This doesnt fall within the ambits of refusing to testify

in accordance with his sworn statement

It will be proper as long as it will help further the prosecution in

prosecuting the offense charged against the accused

WHAT HAPPENS IF THE COURT IMPROPERLY OR ERRONEOUSLY

DISCHARGES AN ACCUSED AS STATE WITNESS, AS WHEN FOR
EXAMPLE, THE ACCUSED HAS BEEN CONVICTED OF A CRIME
INVOLVING MORAL TURPITUDE?

The improper discharge will not render inadmissible his

testimony nor detract from his competency as a witness

Neither will it invalidate his acquittal because the

acquittal becomes ineffective only if he fails or refuses to testify

WHAT IF AFTER AN ACCUSED HAS BEEN DISCHARGED TO BECOME

A STATE WITNESS, IT WAS FOUND OUT DURING THE TRIAL THAT
THE FACTS HE ATTESTED TO IN HIS SWORN STATEMENT WERE ALL
LIES? DOES THE COURT HAVE ANY RECOURSE IF THERE WAS
A WRONGFUL DISCHARGE?

The discharge of the accused wouldnt be affected. His

discharge would still amount to an acquittal and is a bar for
further prosecution for the same offense. First, the grounds
mentioned in
the rule as exceptions to the general rule are exclusive in
character. The discharge will not be a bar to further prosecution
and not amount to acquittal is when the accused refuses or fails to
testify in accordance with his sworn statement. Second, what the
rules require is ABSOLUTE NECESSITY and not ABSOLUTE
CERTAINTY. Third, what transpired was an error of judgment on the
part of the court.

If the court has a recourse, it would be to detain the

discharged accused, following Section 19 of this Rule, and file a
case against him but not for the same offense but for perjury

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE ORIGINAL INFORMATION UNDER

WHICH AN ACCUSED WAS DISCHARGED IS LATER AMENDED?

A discharge under the original information is just as binding

upon the subsequent amended information, since the
amended information is just a continuation of the original

MUST THE ACCUSED TO BE DISCHARGED FIRST BE CHARGED

IN THE COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION?


No.

Note: the filing of the motion in court gives the court

jurisdiction over the persons

WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF CONSOLIDATION?

It is to avoid multiplicity of suits, guard against

oppression or abuse, prevent delay, clear congested dockets,
simplify the work of the trial court, save unnecessary costs and
expenses

CAN THE OTHER CONSPIRATORS BE SOLELY CONVICTED ON

THE BASIS OF THE DISCHARGED STATE WITNESS?

WHAT IS THE REMEDY IF THE MOTION FOR

CONSOLIDATION IS DENIED?

No, there must be other evidence to support his testimony

The testimony of a state witness comes from a polluted

source and must be received with caution

It should be substantially corroborated in its material points

As an exception however, the testimony of a co-conspirator,

even if uncorroborated, will be considered sufficient if given in
a straightforward manner and it contains details which couldnt
have
been a result of deliberate afterthought.

Sec. 18. Discharge of the Accused Operates as

Acquittal
Sec. 19. When Mistake Has Been Made in Charging the
Proper Offense
Sec. 20. Appointment of Acting Prosecutor
Sec. 21. Exclusion of the Public
Sec. 22. Consolidation of Trials of Related Offenses
WHEN CAN DIFFERENT OFFENSES BE TRIED JOINTLY?

When the offenses are founded on the same facts or from part
of a series of offenses of similar character, the court has the
discretion to consolidate and try them jointly

CAN THOSE RELATED TO CIVIL LIABILITY ARISING FROM A

CRIME BE CONSOLIDATED?

Yes. As a general rule, every person criminally liable is

also civilly liable. Any criminal action generally is consolidated
with the civil action unless there is a positive action coming from
the offended party or the accused.
CAN THOSE RELATED TO CIVIL LIABILITY NOT ARISING
FROM A CRIME BE CONSOLIDATED?

As a general rule, independent civil actions are not

constituted with the criminal action. They proceed
independently from the criminal action.
X MADE A RESERVATION TO FILE AN INDEPENDENT CIVIL
ACTION BASED ON QUASI-DELICT. DURING THE TRIAL OF
THE CRIMINAL ACTION, X CHANGES HIS MIND AND
DECIDES TO HAVE HIS INDEPENDENT CIVIL ACTION
CONSOLIDATED? IS THIS PROPER?

It will not be proper if it will cause any prejudice to

either the offended party or the accused.
Sec. 23. Demurrer to Evidence
WHAT ARE THE WAYS BY WHICH A CASE MAY BE
DISMISSED ON THE BASIS OF INSUFFICIENCY OF
EVIDENCE OF THE PROSECUTION?
1. The court may dismiss the case on its own initiative after
giving the prosecution the right to be heard
2. Upon demurrer to evidence filed by the accused with or
without leave of court
THE PROSECUTION RESTS ITS CASE. THE COURT
THINKS THAT THERE IS INSUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE
PRESENTED. WHAT DOES IT NEED TO DO IN CASE IT WISHES
TO DISMISS THE CASE?

The court may dismiss the case on its own initiative after
giving the prosecution the right to be heard

WHAT DOES IT MEAN WHEN THE PROSECUTION WOULD BE

GIVEN THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD BEFORE THE COURT
DISMISSES THE CASE?

The prosecution is given the chance to explain itself

of circumstances that may have lead to its failure to adduce
enough evidence to support its case
HOW DO YOU FILE A DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE?

Within 5 days after the prosecution rests, the accused should

file a motion for leave of court to file a demurrer to evidence,
stating in such motion his grounds for such

The prosecution shall have 5 days within which to

oppose the motion

If the motion is granted, the accused shall file the

demurrer to evidence within 10 days from notice of grant of leave
of court

The prosecution may oppose the demurrer to evidence within

10 days from its receipt of the demurrer
WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF FILING THE DEMURRER TO
EVIDENCE WITH LEAVE OF COURT?

The effect of its filing is that if the court grants the demurrer,
the case will be dismissed

If the court denies the demurrer to evidence filed with

leave of court, the accused may still adduce evidence on his behalf
WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF FILING THE DEMURRER TO
EVIDENCE WITHOUT LEAVE OF COURT?

If the court denies the demurrer to evidence which was

filed without leave of court, the accused is deemed to have waived
his right to present evidence and submits the case for
judgment on basis of the evidence of the prosecution

This is because demurrer to evidence is not a matter of right

but is discretionary on the court

Permission of the court has to be obtained before it is

filed, otherwise the accused loses certain rights

THE ACCUSED FILED A DEMURRER OF EVIDENCE

WITHOUT LEAVE OF COURT. THE DEMURRER OF
EVIDENCE IS DENIED. IS THERE ABSOLUTE WAIVER OF
PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE BY THE COURT?

No

The general rule is that filing of a demurrer of evidence

without leave of court, which is subsequently denied, is a
waiver of presentation of evidence

Nonetheless, if the demurrer of evidence is filed before

the prosecution rests its case, there would be no waiver to
present evidence. As the prosecution hasnt finished
presenting its
evidence, there is still insufficiency of evidence.
WHAT IS THE EFFECT IF THE DEMURRER IS GRANTED AND
THE ACCUSED IS ACQUITTED?

The accused has the right to adduce evidence on the civil

aspect of the case unless the court declares that the act or
omission from which the civil liability may arise did not exist.

If the trial court issues an order or renders judgment not

only granting the demurrer to evidence of the accused and
acquitting him but also on the civil liability of the accused to
the private offended party, said judgment on its civil case would be
a nullity for violation of the rights of the accused to due process.
WHAT IS THE REMEDY OF THE ACCUSED IF THE
DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE IS DENIED?

As a general rule, there can be no appeal or certiorari

on the denial of the demurrer to evidence, since it is an
interlocutory order which doesnt pass judgment on the merits of
the case

In such instance, the accused has the right to adduce

evidence on his behalf not only on the criminal aspect but
also on the civil aspect of the case