Professional Documents
Culture Documents
*),,
\::,.j]l
C.
D i'i[t'lT 0F JL'STX{]E
triPfiRl
rdfit uln-r'gilllln- H-JsE $irts-v
llevised Man Lral for Prosecutors
,\
\
CONTET.{TS
l9
3l
Need Not be Undcr Oath; Mattcr Which a
Certifu Under Oath in tle Infounation ...............32
on of an Information ........,...............-........... 32
/:!1,
'q:!r JA
Complaint or an Inform'ation.......,...................... 32
.the accused..,.,.......................................................32
of the offenses committed .............................. 33
Conclusious of Law....................................,,...... 33
Avenrrct rts of U lti nrate lracts.................,............. 34
fllrnrgcd
RUI,ES
rfl
,ilL
59
.. ol
02, s. 2008 -.llclcasc Ordcl of
/
rnd Inlbrnration
&
L"'
110
112
It3
140
140
I41
152
A. rrepalallolt oI
B. Order of of Wituosses:....
t0 hc Shte t54
.ll:otccti
ls5
May Avail of tf,f
:rent by the r56
156
156
ofwit
UDENCE
RULES
II. CANCELLAI]ION
i
i
I
OF'
FO
192
192
'-"" "."'-" "" "" " "" """""" "- "':""':"" "" 1'lJ
rrnder thc Civil Code (Articlc 32) ....................234
| .i1n
Llllll Ol l--VIOellCC l(eOUI[CO...,......,....,,.,.,.,........, !J-t
tnvoiving RA9165 (
A-+j
ft Appendix ..1" - Panicipanrs of rhc Validarion Sessions........................ 324
\'
18 Revised Man
my hope
Secrctariat and otltcr adminisuutive work welc effectivcly and efficiently carned
oul by Ms. Eleanor P Singson, N4s. colazon s. Navarrctc. Ms- lurelda A: Ballcsteros ancl
Ms. Evangcliue C. Cluz. l'hey ttrc lhc stirl'f ol'Assistarrt Sccr:ctruy Tercsilu ll. Donrirrgrr
who m-ost willingly comnritrcd thcni lbr this endiavor.
'. r.. . ..r]t .:.t. : : : , .t. , ..,.....
l,,, ..lNPS.oror""utorr.
t{lS.pror""ulors, rr,ptosccution aflorncys, adnrinisuative officers and reprcsentativcs
offlre various aeencies fsini tL::.lT 1-*TlI.rlhern, attacbedare,trre respective rists)
:11""::i::t
irave
have shown tbe"ir lt:Ti::
the-ir !:1T: atrenlion O-,"ii
enthuiiasm,
enthusiasr . ;;;;
ioputs during the consultatious ald validariori "rd Specia)
validariot sessions. Spr menLion'is however giver :
to^undelsecrelar!
to Undelsecrelary Mary'Ann_Lucilie
Mary'Ann Lucilie L. sering_and Alrc c. Durban of the Departinent
Atry. Alion
Sering and Arry.
of Environment and Natural Resources r'DFN (DENR).
R) whonror.,idedfor<necificci';r}i"..."",,-
who nrovit
tion of ,euvironmental i
Lastly, retired Justice Romco J. Calleja, Sr., a grcat lliinkcr who. with his expenise
and smarr thinking, proffered reler ant and disLiuct suggestions during the rouncl rable dis-
cuss ron.
| 9, 2005).
nore surotibs,twith ,
24.,
founded ki catse, "coupled with good Jizith on the part of the peace
fficers the arresl." (Umil, et. al. :us..Rantos,202 SCM 251 []9911).
by Lhe prosecLrrior and tlcl'cnsc to cnablc tlrc ctlilt 1o allivc at a judginent pro-
norrrrcing eiLirer {he gLrilt or inuoccncc oflhe rccused (LlS v. Ra1'tizundu, I4 Phil.
416 [re09]).
III. GENERALRULES ]
n,'lrT l rRT.n
A. COMPLAIh-T
',1 ' :
27
In offenses which camrot be pros ectfied de oficio, only the fl
ing persons may file the complaint:
1.
ISA
t',
d.
Nlil
o ffl ci
tio:rs
offi
6.
crimina1actionsha11beinstituteo.ln.re;pIoper:ooun.ortrsfirst
nrv or. of anv .municioaliw or lerrilorv thiouElt *hich the vessel
uring si.rch voyage subjecr'io .the gencially accbpied principles of
:
onal'law 6ec. tifd ahc t lo. .tu,r o),
nluce whcrc ttrc action is to trc institutetl is subiect ro existing .
such as otfenscs which fall undelthc ixclusivc -irrrisdiction oftbc :
LiganUav'qr City.
wdich is located at Quezon City.
iganbayan which '.. .', trt,: ; .' , ,,' ;. ' ;
"
r:l
*";o*tuu"u .";ra; the Philrpprnes 0", o*rn*iit :
"ni"rf
|,of the Revised Penal Code - ' .
le 2,of ..:.r
. , ,',,
:, ': :
1. , . : ".
I
-.
') '-r. , :
-r,'irrion "ii*",
'
r1 action is firstfiled (Sec' 15'(d), Rute itL, 5.l,ltro ). , r
. . .t.,,: :
supra.).
32
that
ion is void for beirrg vjolativc of the c
Revised l'4anualfor Pr
,is the ti
,l'-,,,.
"Sexiril abuse i ncludes:
"l
''
.:
1,. Llre lltolestauon, or
.
.d.,'l ai1 m
,' 1.. ' owne
.r ,i,r':rlal lcr
:- :t1 , :6[66
;itii,,', rl
e, . 'ase c
' acleo
. , t , ,
jaee
;. ,f i - o
t r,t ,..
fr, fg;nn9r
' ..:
'A cc
'i the
I whel
' Rule 110
.' . 1' , .
rr",
"i'-
,.., in,h.
15 SEI
1,....
of thr
ity lr
elcm
clcscr
ll.
list of
38
to plead anew to the new Informatiorr; and,
r rle penoo
l*/dirtu'.qdi,*
Revised il4a n ua I for P tit o rs 4t
10. The wolds "agglavating/qualifying", "qualiffing'i, "quaiified by'1, .taggravatingil
or "aggravated b;1" lqed not be expressly staled as long as the particUlir altenflalt .
circLrrnstanics arb specified in rhc lnlormatio n. lPeopte v. ,lqiirto, 386 SCR4 39l
,-
t)nn 021 as reiterated in People 1,. Paulino, 386 SCRA 19l [20021 and People v-
/--
::.
Garin,432 SCM" "'": 394 IL:vat/
--- l2AQ4l).
I,, :,'..':,::
\..
':
Il 1l.. Wheir
Wlen
WLcrr conspilacy charfe,l as ai rnode
consniracv is charged ir the
rrro,ie in lhe corrLmission nf
chrrrrniccinr.
thc cbmrnission i.rirrre
of ae crime,
crinie, the,
+ha' ali.gu.
the allega-
"li.;..
tiou in'the Infonnatjon
hrfonnation should allege, rLus: a) by thc use of rhe word "conspiie"
or its derivalives or syuonyrns, sych
such as corifederarc, ccllude,
corifedelatc, connive, corrude,.ete
collude, etc. by
et9. or b) bv-
by-
:llt:
:l:'::::::l'J::"?i
|5.,*iu,":
allcgations
llcgations ofbasic
of ?::r:::.:t.h
91 ?u:nt,nt,
consrrfutingi'-::ltg.":*:,ce4nive,
basic fac{s consrifuting rhe couspilacy
colrsp in a ruarurer,rhit a persori of
colrlmon understauding would know what is intelded, and with sLrct precision as
wouid enable thc accused to cotnpctently entcr a plea tb a subscqucrrt urdictmelt
based on llre sanre facts (Esttadi r. Saictiganbo-ian, GR No. 1i8965, Fuh,tn,y
26,20U)
26, 20(D): .,
'' "fik?Triiil:l
rio'ofthc u""us.d who mayiheleforc bc couviclcd :li'i:i
;1,"J,l:Tii:li?Hl5:,5il:i f.r'i:::*l::.';:
of ;"ri'n";;;r". r"riorJirrrt
tltat nanlcd lr tirc ritle or prcJiminary part if such crimc is covered by the lacrs
43
PART rr. TNQUEST
k 785
45
. a list/inventory of the arlicles ard items
. statcurcnt ofthcir respective values,
,.F,i+,
bf ownership.
47
, I :l
50
of the oarents. iustodians :or
c.
' tlte ProvirciaVCity Proscculor for appropriale abrion.
,,8"
is reason to bc
unlawlul acts (
\TERED
i'i8ra
lid
'i
.thd
ow
'a
:.'.-.
Manualfor Prosecutors ol
NPS INQ tr'orm No. 01,
In cotnection
are hereby drrected to
2.
62
;Revised Manual for Prosecutors 63
NPS INQ Foun No. 02,
65
NPS fNQ Form No.'03,
day of
l)
sus:
';I I I.S No. ,.,
,'l
tl
REQUEST FOR(PRELTMINARYINVESTJGATION
PRELTMI NARY INVESTJGATION .
, . With the,assistance
, investigation. of counsei of my chorce, I wish io avail of my righttOta p:etiminary
and for this purpose, I hcrcby voluntarily waive my lights under tle provisions of
Anicle-125 o_f the Rcvised Penal Code. Pending the complctiol) of tlre prelinriuary irvesrigarion
;, proceedings, tl.Br ys to
yr \r\,sEu.tlrBb) Ir agree LU remain
rgmatn undeir
unoer police
pollce custody.
cuslody,
:'
i Pleccl
(Date)
ti r : '
LS. No.
For':
RELF,ASE ORDER
(Of Recovered Articles)
EVIDtrNCE CUSTOD
Philippines, 20
I.S. No.
For:
R esrrnrtdent.
x------- --------11
for Prosecutors
71
20
',t
,: ,i
, ,'l'i
lrr. .tl .
FLOWCHART OI\{ THE IIEST PROCEEDINGS
tzl
tol
tEl
l(,l
'| F
tBl I
t>t
lzl
t;l
tlcl
t<t
tzl
l=l
til
tHl
t:t
J-
lol
tlrl
tU o:
!4L l'l
liabiiity
i) 130 -
144 -
151 -
155 -
r75 -
76
. PART IV PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION
GENE'RALITULES
It is rlelely inq
who rnay be reascnably
Courplaint or
,.:.
the same withir five (5) days from the time le leans
4. It is a.Substantive Right.
't a. "Probable cause'f has been defined as a reasonablc ground ofpresumption that
amatter is or may be well-founded; such a state bf facts in the mind of the pros-
ecutor as would lead a person of ordinary ca tion and prudence 1o believe, or
eutefiain an honest or strong suspicion, that a thing is so. " l
i
The term does not mean "actual and positive cause" nor does it import abso-
" 1"+- ^-'+.,;-ft. I+;"
lute cerlainry. It is merely ^- opimon
based on
'n-.-1"L-:-'{ ^,";-;^- and -;-."^-41.1- 1.-1;-f
--,1 rersonable Tlirrc -a findrng
belief. Thus, +-'ll--
of probable causi does not raquire ar inquiry into whether ther'e is suffrcient
euibeuce to procure a conviction. IL is enougir thar ir is believed that an act or
ornission conrplained ofconstitutes the olfense charged- Precisely. there is a ttial
for t1.re reception ofevidence ofthe prosecution in suppolt ofthe chatge (Paredes,
Jr., L Sandiganltalan, G R. No.108251, Januaryt.31, 1996).
f,Fr
Ej'
trials .
I, Rule
conduct
full and complete names and exact home, office or posral addrcsses'
re
iiffi
f
-pf ;#;t; il il/il*i; ;ii;;;;'.';
ie fulllpnd complete narne ard exact lome, office,oi noti"i
re respondent/s;
qnse/s charged and the place anil exact date and tirne ofits/tleiri,i
.1
B4
frorn receipt of the cornplaint by thc prcsecutor, ire/she
SUBPOENA
t_,' G AF'FIDAVITS AND OTIIER DOC
days
LllIH. i1l1lu
s- z
a. General Rulc
Manualfor Prosecutors 89
if such'memorandum, manifestation or motion to dismiss , l
li ' I' , r .
rl.{otes
I
liuring the
: ,.
i.
Clarificatory llearing ,
1,,
,',:
,,..,,
,' r-.,;r-r,-'.,r,
.
been ireld that theie is nothins iD the rules which render aprelimi'
;ti gatipn invalid without thb aslsi stanoe of coun Sel. p eo p t e i ttti19i
t6eql , ,",f.
TE: A !:orifession oblained however, during tlre prelirninary investi
on witlrout thc aslistance of counsei is inadmissible (People v. Abaitr
SCRA 55!; People v. Ayson, J 75 SCRA 2I6: People v. Escorid.al,i (
,los., 1J8934-35, Januaty 06, 2002).
,i
y qucstiorring shall bc temriualcd wjthin five (5) ddy.s lroni its
Ihe investigating prosecutor shaU not require or allow the filing or submis-
siol ofreply-affrdavits anrli or rejoinders except:
1. where new issues of fact or questions of law which are rnaterial and sub-
stantial in nature are raised or invoked in the counter-affidavit or subsequent
pleadings; and, :
.l
In such a case, the pe$od fol the subrnission ofreply affidavits or rejoinders
shall in no case exceed five (5) days unless a longer period is authorized by the
Chief State Prosecutor/Relgional State Prosecutor/ Provincial or City Prosccutor
concerned.
I
Neither shall the inv6stigating prosecutor require nor allow the filing or
submission by the partied of memoranda unless the case involves difficult or
cornplicated questions oflaw or offact. In any event, the filing of memoranda by
the parties shall be done sirnultaneously and the per-iod therefor sl.rall not exceed
ten (10) days, unless a lo-rlger period is aulhorized by the Chief State Prbsecutor/
Regional State Prosecutoi/Provincial orCity Prosecutor concerned (please refer
to NPS Sample Fonnat "4", s. 2008 on p. 131 ofthis Manuat).
1.
1. If a
of
be
n1
5'. lhe date of the assignment of lhe case to or receipt of the case record
by the investigating prosecutor; and
b, Namcs of parties
rre comprere namcs of all the courplainatits alld respondents irr tbe
case shall be set out in the caption ofthe resolution. Itis not proper to use
tlre phrase "et. al." ho reler ro olher conrplaiuants and respondents.
Number
five (5) digit number - series lumber for an entire calendar year
t-01-rNV-08A-00001
.l - I{cgion I
'01 - ORSP
' INV - regular PI or sumrnaty investigation case
. 08 - year 2008
,a nronth of J anuary
'0000[ - first legular Pl/summary investigation case for year-
2008
I-05a-IN Q-osA-boo1o
'T - Region I
.05 - OPP La Union
ra - .Agoo Sub-Statiou
.INQ - mquest case
.08 - year 2008
'A rlonth of January
. 000 1Oft inquest case for year 2008
xv-01 rNv-08L-0r.000
"XV - National Capital Region
'01 - OCP Antipolo
.INV - regular PI or sutrtnrary investigation
oXVI-INV
'L
. 03000
d. Dcsignation
nualfor Prosecutors 97
of witnesses and documsntary and physical evidence. The
affidavits shall be numbered in the order of the oresentation of the
tion witnesses as disclosed in the list of witnesses appearing
in the As for the documentary evidence, they shall be
alphabqtically marked as they would be marked during the pre-trial
and nial stages ofthe case.
Part 4
shall
d.
5.
f.
K. TILA.NSMTTTAL
INT'ORMATION
THE CASE
of a Certification
4.. Confidentiality of
1. approvitg tlre resoluti<.rl and dircctiog the transmittal olia copy thereofto the
patlres; or,
.1
2. disapploving the tesolirLion and leLuming the samc to the invcstigating pros-
ecutor for further appr'gpriate action; or
M. REO
ti on the
01'a
and/or
l;+,
I
\:::,, d
or City secutor concerned. The prelirtinary investigaiion shall be
the following conditions;
l
IS
is
3. the
for
No
N. PROI
, The
a copy
1.
OT
'102
R eviied Manual for Prosecutors
FILING OF THE INFORMATION II{ COLTRT; RULES TO FOLLOW
by a prosccirtor shall
;,^
I I Z. ,lur)rd. L
prcof:of service to the opplsing parry. It must state clearly and distinctly the
Oo*O* relied upon in suppdrt of the rnotion.
,,
in court, the Chief State/
to the urotion for reconsid-
led a rirotion with tlre court
has granted such motion to
suspcnd proceedings-
The Office of the Chief Slate/Provincia]City Prosecr.rtor shall resolve the mo-
tion for reconsideration withln the period fixed by the court.
, Ouce the motion for reconsideration has bcen resolved, a motion should be
' filed in court by the Chief State/Provincial/City Prosecutor or his,/her authorized
assistanl, attaching thereto tJre resolulion on the motion for reconsideration, iu-
fonning.the court of the actibn taken thereon and asking it either to proceed with
the case, or withdmw the Information or cause such other mcasures to be donc as
nray be wan-arrted. :
Q, ACTION ONAREDIVESTIGATION
. plgvided that i.r'hen fte case has been appealed to the Secretary ofJustice or the
Reglonal State Prosecutoi, sircir motion may be filed with tlre said offices.
' I
After thc trial courl has acquiled _julisdiction over the casc, ilny rnotio:r for
reinvcstigatiorr shall bc addressed to thc court and not to thc pubtic prosccutor.or
Secqetary ol'.lLrstice. It is lhi: tlial.lLrdgc wlro has solc aLrthor.ity kr grant or deny
the nrotion lbr reitrvcstigario l (Crc.rpo v. Alugul, l5l SCRA 469: l/ela,,;tlucz v.
Tuquero, 182 SCRA 388),
1.
7. If, aft.er prelirninary invejstigation, a case is filed jn the Court of Fir.st Instalce
(now the Regional Trjal lCourr), tlle proscculor cannot file another Jnfonnariolr
charging a different oflbn'sc bascd oir the sanre preliminary investigalion. He must
conduct another preliniinary investigation (Luciano v. Mariano, et. al., 40.SCM
I87)
4. A new preliminaiy i is not called for wlrcn the court orders the filins
ofthe coffect involving a cognate offense, such as unfair competition
to infringernent of (Sy Lint tt. CA. I l3 SC/.i, J34),
It is a fundarlental plc that ulrerr otl its I ce, rhc Infornration is null and
void for lack of o fi1c Llre sanrc, it carruof bc crrlcd rrol rcsurrcctcd by ln
investigation nrust be undertaken and thereaf-
teq based on the evidence adduced, a new Information should be filed, (Cruz, Sr.,
v. Sandiganbayan, 194 SQRA a7l.
t.
Substantial adherence: tolI'the requirements of the law governing the conduct of
preliminary investigatioqs, including substantial compliance wjth the tiure limita-
tion prescribcd by fhe larfv for the resolution ofthe case by the prosscutor, is part
ofthe proccdural due process coustil ulionally guaranteed by the filndarnental law.
A delay ofclose to rlree (3) years cannot be deemed reasonable orjustifiable in
the light of tlre circumstahce obtaining in the case (Tatqd v Sandiganbayan, 159
)LIIA / U/,
The principle is not, howpver, applicable where the delay in tbe terminalion of the
pleliminary investigation]cannot be imputed solcly to the prosecution but because
of incidents wirich are to the accuscd and his counsel (Gonzales y.
107
!
I
o. 01, s.2008
DATE RECEIVED :
I (st amp ed and initialed) : Assigned to:
Time Received: Date Assigted:
Receiving Staf:
To
- COMPL,IINANT/S:
Addtess
LS. No.:
11and1ing Prosecutor:
I.S. No.
For:
Respou
RESOLUTION
Section 3(b),
investigating officer -
investigation or issue a
In tliis
L ] the ged in tbe cornli.laint was commifled oLrtsidc Lhe territorial jurisdic-
tion of ce; (tjn c I cxplanatlon,
(_) at the f thc {iling of the bomplaint, thc oflense chargcd thelein hacl
Bricf cxplanatitrrr)
( I the comp is not autborized under the provisions oipcrtinett laws to file t
com]) ex!lanation)
(place), (date).
INVESTIGATiNG PROSECUTOR
APPROVED;
(Hdad of Office)
Fumished:
I
NPS INV Form No, 03,
I.S. No.
Fot':
ENATO COMPLAINANT
(optioual birt not necessary)
GMETINGS:
Under and by
appear before me at
I.S. No.
-velsus- For:
Resporrdent/
ENATO RESPONDENT/S
You
I
iNVESTIGATING PROSECUTOR
I.S, No.
For:
ENATO RESPONDENT
the conrplaint and othet supporting evidence)
TO:
GREETINGS:
In cornection the
me by law, you are h directed
the cornplaint,
Cr You or your DY
complainant on the
You are
consideled as a waiver
anid otler docurnents,
INVESTIGATING PR
PROSECUTION SERVICE
I. S. No.
For:
:1
I
lainant/s,
-vetsus-
TO: (RespondenVs
TO: (Witness)
GREETINGS:
tI5
I.S. No.
For':
Courplainant,
I.S. No.
- vefsLls For:
1'17
(Date)
REGIONALORD NO.
I
i
l
GN N OF PERSONNEL
I
* _ oI the umce
of tne Office oI the Llty/frovmclal
of tne CitylProvincial
desi gnated as Acting City/Pror.incial.Prosecutor
Copy fliinished:
All Concerned.
- versus - ;I.S.
iior:
No.
RESOLUTION
: This resolves the above-entiiled complaint for violation of Sec. 19(tr), paragraphs (1) and
oi 1(A 8239, otherwise known as the "Philippine PassportAct of 1996", fildd by tlie Departurent
Affair5 against a.k.a. .
: 88846749
ll Januar] lY9 /i Manlla
: VVO166339
30 Apdl,2007,Manila
. In exculpalion,
RA 8239 as she did
HH160901. The fact
thored any kind of falsi
of P8,000.00, who also ned her that she would be able to leave for and wor* in Tairvan for the
secono lllne. lbe sald *orrr* ]"fir"r" who was only known to her as "Manay" might have,
"""'."^t"""
confederated \ /ith some A emplciyees since affcr only five (5) days, she gave her the pa5sport:
bearing the narne a.fr.a.
She was to use thg subject passports in going to Taiwalr out ofsheer necessity.as
she was renderedjobl ter her erjrplolment contract in Taiwa[ had expired. Returning to work'
as a factory worker in T rnwas tht only means for hel to irnprovd her family's living conditions,
she being the sole nnei. Thbn, she, met a Taiwanese boyfrieud who expressed interest to l
many her- Together, vent to thl TECO to secure legal capacity to narry, whereupon she was
tcld to clear with the D the mattel ofher having used the subject passports in the name of a.ka
At the DFA, she vo y suffendered the subject passpofts and prepared a written explanation
on how they were as adviseg by complainant. She did so in all honesff and good faith,
hoping that it would sol, problem. She nbver expected that her having sought the help of the
DFA would result in her charged crininally.
Auached to the record are copies of the application records of Passport No. MMB6045l
narne of a.A-.a, and Passnort No. VV0166339 in the name of respondent
. both
photographs belonging to one and the same person. It is not disputed that the photograph
to both passport applicalions belongs to respondent. By attaching her: photogr aph to the
application, thereby making it appear that she is a.k.a, the persou named in Passport
51, respondent lras assumed the identity of a.k.a in the said passporl application, in
ofSec. 19(b)(1) ofR-A 8239.
Respondent's claim of good faith and lack of crirniral intent is unavailing i the instant
Firstlt,RA 8239 is a special law whicl.r does not requite critninal intenL; thc oflense being
prohibitum and the mere comrnission of the prohibited act is punishable. Moreover, being
prohibitunt, good faith is not a valid defense. Secondly, evidence adduced shou's that
issport No. MM860451 is a rencwal of Passport No, HH160901. Thus, it appeals that respondenl
assunred. the identiw of a.k.a nat only once but tu.ioe. in 2001 ald 2004, which is anathena
any clainr of good faith and/o:: lack of clirrinal intent. Thi.rdl1,, record shows that the respectjve
plications fol Passport Nos. FIHl60901 and MN4860451 wetc persoually filed by lespondelt
Necessarily, respondent r.l'ho posed Lo be a.lt.a pcrsonally appeared and plocessed the
passport applications. She has, therefore, l<rowingly parlicipated in the comnission ofthe
ited act, Even assumilg gralla argltnxenti thal somebody else has instigated the commission
plohibited act, respondent is still criminally liable for her own acts. In fact, she klowingly
to the scheme allegedly proposed by a fixel nanred "Manay", elren paying the latter a
a lount.
I IIowever, considering that the application record ofPassport No. HI1160901 had already
disposed of, respondent could no longer be prosecuted for assumptiou ofidentity in relation
rthe said passport for lack of docmnenlary evidence to prove the violation. As legards Passport
MM860451 which is amply supported by the passpofi applicatior.r record, probable cause
against respondent for violation of Scc. I 9(b)( 1) of RA 823 9.
Evidencr: adduced lilcewise sufficiently shows that after securing Passport No- MM860451
violation of Sec. 19(b)(1) of fuA. 8239, respondent used the said passporl on three (3) separate
to wit: (1) on October 7, 2004 wlren she applied for a visa to Taipei at the TECO; (2)
October 13,2004 q,hen she lefi the Philippines lor Taipei; and (3) ou March 27, 2007 rvherr slre
in and enlered the Philippiires from Taipei. All these acLs fall under the second paragraph
rfSec. 19(b), RA 823 9, which penalizcs any use or altenlpt to usc a passpolt fhat has been sccured
and issued by rneans of any falsc statemeni. Again, inasmuch as RA 8239 is nmlttnt prohibitunt,
While we agree that migrant workers have greatly contributed to our economy, that
abetier future for Filipinos I overseas employment, we cannot bargiain an'ay faithful observance
ofour laws and legal in the name of economic prosperify. Trite as it may sound, ours is a
govemment of laws ancl not For govemment stability and good govemance, our laws must
be fully elforced, especi relating to the issuance and use of Philippine passporls 'a'hich
cany the seal of our Repub
to pass safely and freely.
representation of our gor
be dealt with severely.
WHEREFORE,
approval of this resolution, attached informations for violation of Sec. I 9(b) of RA 8239, one
(1) count under paragraph
City of Manila,
Investigatin g Prosecutor
MMENDINGAPPROVAL:
APPROVED:
Furnished:
AFFAIRS
Secretariat, Inter-Agency
Against Passport Ir (ICPI)
DEPARTMENT OF-FO AFFAIRS
Roxas Blvd., Pasay City
Respondent
(Address)
a.k-a.
-At-Lar.ge-
address),
Accused,
INFORX{ATION
The undersigned state/Assistant Provi'cial/Assistant citv Prosecutor'. herebv accnscs
a.k.a with violation of Sec. 19(b), palagr aph l, of RA
9, otherwise known as "The Philippine Passport Act of 1996", committed as follows:
-_=*-
Thal on April 19,2004 or rlreleabout, at thc Department of Foreign Affairs,
Roxas Blvd., Pasay Cib', Metro Manila, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable
Court, the above-named accused did then and there klowingly. unlawfully and
cnrnilally make a fa.lse statemcnt in the application for Passport No. MM860451,
by stating thereil that she is a.k.a., bom on February 21, 1978 in Marikina, and
attaching her own photograph to the said passpod application, tliereby assuuring
the identity of the said a.k.a.,with the intent to induce or secure the issuance of a
passpofi uncler the autholity of 1l-re Philippine Govermlelt, as she has in fact seclred
the issuance of Passport No. MM860451 for her own use and bcncfit, in violation of
RA 8239 as well as ihe niles and regulations pr.escribed in ::elation thereto.
lnvestigating Plosccutor
December 7, 2007
Investigating Prosecutor
F;.:,
\]i',:1
STIBSCRIBED SWORN to before rrle or this
in tlre City of Manila, Philippines.
2. THERECORDS
(or his duly authorized
Consular Records Di'i'i
Deparlment of Foreign
Roxas Blvd., Pasay. Cify
(To bring application and supporting documents of Passport No. MMB6045 I in the
narne of a.ft.a. and No. W0166339 in the name of )
3. ANDOTHERS
Enclosures:
of the Philippines,
Plaintiff,
CRIM. CASE NO.
- vet'sus - (LS. No.
For: Violation of Sec. 19@)(2)
of RA 8239
a.k.a.
-At-Large-
)
Accused.
x
INFORMATION
Thc undersigned State/Assistant Pr ovinciai,Assistanl Citv Prosecutor. hercbv accuses
a.k.a with violation of Sec. I 9(b), paragraph 2, of RA 8239, olheru,ise known
Philippine PassportAcl of 1996", committed as follows: .
CONTRARY TO LAW.
Investigating Prosecutor
anualfor Prosecutors
CERTIFICATION
City of Manila,
Investigating Prosecirtor
WITNESSES:
t.
c/o Secl'etariat, Inter- Comnr.iftae
Against Passporl J
Departrnent of Foteign
Roxas Blvd., Pasay City
2, THERECORDS
(or his duly authodzed
Consular Records
Departrnent of Foreign
Roxas Blvd., Pai?y Ciry
(Io Dflng appllcatlon re and supporting docutnents of Passport No MM86045l in the
name of a./c.a and Passl VV0166339 in thc name of )
Enclosules:
Approved Resolution
,Complaint-Affi.davit of
Counter-affidavit of dated September 11, 2007
Plaintiff,
CRIM. CASENO,
- versus - (I.S. No
For: Violation of Sec. 19(b)(2)
of RA 8239
-At-Large-
D,
Accuscd,
TNFORMATIOh*
Thal on Malch 27, 2007 or thereabout, in pasay City, MeLro J\4anila, and
within the jurisdiction of this ilolorable cou't, thc above-nametl accused did lhen
and there klowingly, unlawfully and criminally use or attenpt to use, in lrer arival
in, and e'try to, thc Philippi'es from Taipci, passport No. I4Mg6045l in the name
o! a.k.a., born on February 2l,l97B in Mar.ikina, which passport was sccured by
the said acc.sed by means of false staternents in the uppli"uiion for passpor.t, i'
violation of RA 8239 as well as the rules and regulations prescribed in relation
thereto.
CONTR{RY TO LAW,
Investigating Prosecutor
co11lit1lled, neril page >
r-rualfor Prosecutors
127
CERTIFICATION
Investigating Prosecutor
3. AND OTHERS
',
. BAILRT,COMMEND : TIIIRTY TIIOUSAND iP30,000.00) PESOS
.trnclosures:
'.dpproved
Resolution December 7, 2007
ComplainfAffidavit of with attachments
Countsr-affidavit of dated September 11, 2O07
Plaintift
CRIM. CASE NO.
- versus - (I.S. No.
For: \/iolation of Sec. 19(b)(2)
ofRA 8239
a.k.a.
-At-Large-
Accused.
INFORMATION
CONTRARYTO LA\V,
Investigating Pr'osecutor
I HEREBY
swom-staternents and
clirire charged has been
was informed of tlie cc
portunity to submit ,
WITNESSES:
1
2. THERTCORDS
(or his duly authorized
Consular Records Divisi
.,,
*-" Department of Foreign I
Roxas Blvd., Pasay City
(To bling application and suppofiing docunerts of Passporl No. MM860451 hthe
name of a.ka. and P o. \'V0166339 in the nanre of
3. AND OTIIERS
-tlltclosures:
Complainant,
I-S. No.
lrelsus - ljor:
ORDER
This treats ofthe motion to suspend proceedings filed by respondent based on the existence
judicial qucstion.
(Brief discussion)
Considerilg the pendency of a civil case which involves facts intimately related to lhose
which tlre inslant cornpJaint for is based, and that in the resolution ofthe issue
raised in the said civil case, the guilt or innocence of the accuscd would necessarily be
ined, undersigned flnds the existcnce ofa prejudicial question, thus, wananting the suspel-
of this prelirninary investigation.
SO ORDER]ID.
Date.
conti ueal, next page >
CERTIFICATION
I HEREBY CERTIFY that i have personally examined the affrant arid I am fully convinced
that he/she has voluntarily executed his affidavit/swom-statement and undelstood tle contents
Investigating Prosecutor
133
\
tlrEl-----l
t!Jt
tol
tzt
tol
lurl
tltl
Itl
tdl
tuJl
l*l
ffi
/
r-=_l
t. <=
| 3s |
I| Ed
I
"H I
fll +
. *.
>=
<a
Eti
8<
: PREI,IMINARY INVESTIGATION
fsl
ltrt
lol
l-Hl
t{,t ftl
lrct ful
t(r)t
lol lol lol
\"/
f--:t \r-rf
lEg*llEe*l
l=* |
I dF-rc I I dtrcc I
l=*
f\f\
|
Ii b3
oo |
I| zz.
_i-
I
r" r
I
I lo
I
\w
I I
{ b d
trl Fl , tpl rJ
I;
GEEI* hllftlrd
L:]
Ed
Tril IEII
E cl
rE=Er
1u*?l
E:=l
lfg-l
r,-rl'6"1
lfiqld
=HJ
lEi I
G:_l [r-] Lil
lEd I
kl ;1"
lHl
135
FLOWCHART 3: YINVESTIGATION
f:-l
tgl
lFcl
t-l_l
tsl
IrEl
l-l l'l
+ +
T--l
lr-l Irl
tzt
IUJI
l5l
lzl
t(5l
tEl
tzt
tcl1
I<t
lEl
t<l
lEl
IIEI
lol
ll l'l
+ +
{ifi1 r.-l
t<l
l'l
+
t;-__l
l4z. I
l#.El
IB=BI
l(/)l!ol
lqo
lE
I
+ +
rJ
l<l tJ
turl
L:_l
lvl
tt
h, h,
GENERAL ITULES
A. PRINCIPLES
2. Before, during and afler the arraigrunent, the trial prosecutor has well- defined duties to
perfomr.
3. The filiug ofa petition for revietv affects the auaignment ofthe accused in coru1.
B. CONCI,PTS
Arraignrnelt - is the formal rnode and n.rarurer of implementing the coustituiional right
ofthe accused to be infonrred of the nature and cause ofthe accusation against hirn (sec-
I3[2J, 1987 Constitution of the Philippines). Ah anaignnenr is necessary in order to fix
the ideltity ofthe accrsed, to infonl hirn ofthe charge and to give him an opportuniq/ to
plead (14 Ant. Jur, p.939. G.V Jacittto, Ct.ittzinal Procedurel
Plea - is the reply of the accused to the charge. In criminal prosecution, the accused has
to plead to the indictment. which he may do (1) by pleading to the jurisdiction, that is,
alleging that the coun has no jurisdiction to try him; (2) by a demuner.; or (3) by sonre
plea in bar, eitlrer a general plea or a.specific plea (Osborn's Concise Law Dictionary, I5,r
Ed. John Bulrc, p. 254).
PROCEDURE
The t'ial prosecutor shall exarnine the Infor-mation vrs-a-r,is the resolution of tle
investigating prosecutor in ordcr to rrake the necessary corrections or revisions and
to ensul'e that the Infonnation is sufficient in fonn and substance.
He slrall ensure that the private offeuded pafiy appcars at the arraigrment for
purposes ofplea bargaining, determination of civil liability and other nratters r.equir-
ing his presence (Sec I (fl, Rule I I6, Revised Rules on critninal proceclure).
. Republic Act No. 4908, which requires that in criminal cases uihere the com-
plair.rant is about to deparl
finm the Philippines u'ith no definite datc of retum,
During the gnment, the prosecutor seeks to give the accused the oppofiunity
at the fust i to know why a case has been filed against him. It is the solemn
duty of the trial to be present during the an'aignmeut. IIe must be atten-
tive at all times the arraignment so that he can ensure, among others, that tle
requirenrents arraignment are duly observed, the identity of the accused.is
asceriained and Inlormation being read to the accused is the same Information as
fl1ed.
3. After the
The trial shall prepare his witnesses for trial. Govenrment wilnesses,
e.g. medi fficers, chemists, foreusic experts, exatnilers etc. should, as
much as be presented in accordance with the logical and chronoiogical
sequence'of the aspects to be proved.
\Mren an aggri party manifests in coufi that he has a pending petition for review
with the Justice and mbves for a defermenVsuspension ofthe arraignment
peudiog resolution his petition, the 1rial prosecutor may confonn thereto once proofof
said petition has presentcd by the petitioner to his satisfaction.
1. The tr ial 'shall immediately move for the suspension of the proceedings
whenever the manifests his intention in court to plead guilty to a lesser of'
fense, rvhen i. This will euable the trial prosecutor to confer with the private
complafuant the inplications of the offer ofthe plea bargain.
2. The trial may dispense rvith the presentation ofcvidence when the accused
pleads guilty to iser offense which is not a capital offense unless tire court directs
him to do so of determining the penalty to bb imposed.
3. The trial w:ith tlre consent of the offended party, may molu proprio agtee
to the offer of accused to plead guilty to a lesser offense if the penalty impos-
able thelefor is n borreccional (maximul of six [6] years) or less or a fine not
exceeding Php .00.
5. In all cases, the penalty for the resser oflense to whicrr trre accused may be
arlowed to
plead guilty shali not be more than two (2) degrees lower than the
i'rposabre penahy
for the cri're charged, notwithstanding the p'esence of mitigating cir.u.rt*."r.
The Iesser offe'se sliall also be one that is necessar.ily related to the offense
charged
or tlre offeuse must belong to the same classification or title undel the Revised penal
Code or the relevant special laws (DOJ Cir"alar No. 55, dared 3I July 1990).
RELEVAN T JURISPRUDENCE
Manualfor Prosecutors I to
PART VI. P
The
par I, Rule I.
G;
ONOFFACTS;
the criminal and civil aspects ofthe case (Sec. ), Rule 118, supra.).
The tlial prosecutor shall make sure that he appears at the pre-llial confcrcnce to
avoid being sanctioned by the court. (Sec- 3, Rule 118, supra,)
The pr osecutor should lcnow every fact and detait of the case. This can be ac-
complished by inler,;iewing the complainant aud cther witnesses and after a thor-
ough examination of the available documcntaly and other physical evidencc.
The prosecutor should also place importance on the testimony of the expert
u'itness. The knowledge that the prosecutor will gain frorn said witness will help
him delennine the procedures undertakcn in the examination ofa subjcct or thing;
the scientific ol tecbnical tenns applied, and the reason/s in aniving at a certain
cottcltrsiol-
The shali bear in mind that in the course of the triaL. anv
entered into during the pre-trial will help him prove his
beyond le doubt and that every act or incident should be proved by
qualified and competent witnesses.
V. RELEV PRIJDENCE
2.A evidence on the basis ofthe evidence exhibited by the accused dlrr
the pre is not sufRcient. His acquittal on the basis thercofis a nullity foL tl1
ofdue s (People v. Judge Santiago, 174 SCRA I43).
A. PTJRPOSE OF BAIL
The purpose ofbail is to entitre the accused to provisionar riberty pe'ding tria)
(Bravo, Jr t Botja, 134 SCRA 466 ilgBsJ\.
The lght to bail is guaranteed by the Constitution. It is the duty ofthe pros_
ecutor to recommend such amount ofbail to the co.rts ofjustice as, in his opinion,
would ensure the appearqnce ofan accused person when so required by the court.
(DOJ Circular No. 6, series of 1981)
C. BASIS O],'BAIL
I The basis for dete'ni'ing bzril is the penalty prescribed by law for tlrc offense
charged and not the pcnalty actually imposed for the accused in view ofthe
attendant circurrrstances- (Bravo v. Botja, utpra.)
Z. To allow bail on the basis of the penalty actually imposed rvould require a
consrderation not oi1ly ofthe evide|ce ofthe commission ofthe crine but also
evidence of tl.re agglavatiug and mitigating circurnstances. Thete would then
be a need for a complete trial, after rvhich the judge would be just about ready
to render a dccision in the case. SLrch pr.ocedure would clefeat the purpose
ol .bail, which is to entitle rhe accused to provisional ljbeffy pending rrial.
(Ibid.)
2' wlren he confesses tb rhe cornnission of trie offe'se unless trre co,fessior
is
latel repudiated by him in a swom statemellt or in open cour.1 as iraviug been
extracted through force or intimidation;
t'
is found to have previously escaped fiom legal confinement,
or jumped bail;
6036
No shall also be rcquired when the lau' or the Rules issued by lhe I
Court
2. Upon conviction by the Regiolal Trial Courl ofan offense not punishable by
death, reclusion perpetua or lile impr-isonment, adr,nission to bail is discre-
tionary. The Regional Tdal Court rrray grant or deny bail depending ou the
exlstence or non-existcnco of any of the circurnstances below:
c. That lre conlnitted the offense while under probation, parole or condi-
tiolal par don;
e. That there is undue risk tliat he ntay commit another crirle clur.ilg the
pendency of the appeal.
3 ifupon conviclion, the Regional rrial courl i'rposes the penalty ofimprisonme't
in excess of six (6) years, but not exceedi'g twcnty (20) years, the accused shall
be denied bail or his bail shall be cancellcd, upo'a showing by the prosecution,
with notice to the accused, ofany ofthe foregoing circumstancss.
4. If'one ofthe circumstances e.umcrated above exisls, the granl ofbail becomes
a lnatfel ofright. (Sec. 5, Rule 114; supra.)
I-he dufy of the prosecutor 10 recomlLrend bail cntitres bim to a notice every
tirne bail is applied for, even if bail is a matter of ight. (La,,,ides v. CA, GR Ni.
129670, I-eb 1,200())
A laufr.rlly arresled and detained btlt who has not yet been
cbarged court can seek his prorisional release tlrrough the filing of an
tion for or relsase on recognizance.
folfeiture ofother bonds and pendency of othet' cases whcrein the lespondent/
accused under detention is under bond;
7, the fact tlat respondent/accused under detention u,as a fugitive from justice
when apptehended; and
8. other factors affecting ihe probabiliLy of the accused appearing at the trial.
(Sec. 6, Rule Il4, Reyised Rules on Criminal Procedure; DOJ Circular No. 4,
series of 1996).
2. \\'here bail is a matter of right and the imposable penahy is itnprisonment aud'i
or fine, the Lail sba)l be computed on the basis ofthe penalty of imprisomnenl
applying the following rules:
e.F ion of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22, bail shall be fifty per cent
(\ of the amount of checks but shouid not be less than Php2,000.00
than Php30,000,00.
The prosecutor shall ensure that a hearing on the petitiol forbaiI is conducted
by lhejudge as it is absolutely indispensable for the latter to properly detenline
whetber the prosecution's evidence is weak or strong on the issue of whetirer or
not to grant bail to an accused chargsd with a heinous cri re wherc the imposable
penalty is deaLh, reclusion perpetua ot life imprisonment- (Thbao y. Espina, 257
SCP-A 298 p9961). He must therefore be prepared for such a hearir.rg.
Whether the rrotion for bail of a def-endant who is in custody fol'an offense
punislrable by reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment or death be resolved in a
sunxnary proceeding or in the course of a regulal trial, tbe prosecution must be
given a opportunity to present, within a reasonable time, all the evidcnce that.
it may desire to intrcduce before tbe court should resolve the motion for baii
(Peoplev. SanDiego,26 SCM 522 [1968]).
Shouid the pr osecution be denied offlre opportunity to present all the evirlence
it may desire to introduce, there rvould be a violation ofprocedural due plocess
and the ordcr ofthe court granting bail should be considered void.
In case a petition for bail is iled by the accused and 1.lre coufi orders a con-
tinuous t
al of the case, the public prosecutor sirall be prepar-ed Lo presenl his
pducipal witnesses. Whcre tlrere ar-e several accused and one cr tno filed a
petition to bail, the tial prosecutor shall, beforc the presentatio.n ofhis first wif
ness, nanifest in open court that the evidenoe to be pi'esented in the hearing of
filed with the court and after due notice to the prosecuto!
may:be canceled upon surrender of the accused or presentation of
:rallowed pursuant to law or the Rules of Court, the court may release
in cuslody on his own recognizance or that of a responsible person.
on the pelition for the custody ofthe accused for purposes of hisi
her on recognizance is mandatory (Lqtola v. Gabo, Jr, AM No. RTJ-
00- 1 4, Jan. 26, 2000)
a. such person under whose custody the accused is placed, shall execute his
own affidavit stating his willingress to accept custody of the accused;
and
b, the accused shall also include in his own alfrdavit nrentjoned above, a
statement that he binds himself to accept the responsibility of tlie
citizen so appointed by the court as his custodian.
RELIVANT JURISPRUDENCE
The Court should not ev.en allow a motion for bail to be sct for hearing unless it
l.ras acquired jurisdiction over the person ofthe accused and thc case by its filing
in Cour1, (Dinapol v. Baldonado, 225 SCRA j10)
ln orde: that a person can ilvoke his right tc bail, it is not necessary that he
should wait until an hrformation is filed against him. From the moment that he
is placed under anest, detention or rtsLrainr by the officers of the larv, he can
claim this guarantce ofthe Bill ofRighrs, ald tiris riglrt he retains unless and until
he is charged with a capital offcnse and evidence ofhis guilt is strong. ( ilerras
Teehanlcee v. Rovira, 75 Phil. 634)
Whcre tlre accused was charged for:murder u'ithout the benefit of a preliminarl'
invesiigation ar.rd trial had already began over his objections, the acbused retnains
entitied to be released on bail as a nrattcl.ofright pending tlre preliminary investi-
gation. Should the evidence already cfrecor.d concclxing the guilL of the accused
be, in the reasonable beliefofthe prosecutor; sfi.ong, the prosecutor may lrrove in
the tnal court for canceilation oftheball. (Itide Tblentino tt. Caano, Jr., j22 SCRA
559)
Ifa of affest has been issued, the prosecutor may request the wana
officer that fumished with tbe officer's retum relative thereto. The proser
tor shall, as as practicable, coordinate with the witncsses from time to ttme
ej!.il
\,:,til ascertain of the accused pending tltc latter's arest.
J.A of arrest does not becotne stale or.functus oficlo unlike a search
which i onLy for ten days. A warant of arrest remains valid until
eff the warrant liff.ed. (Managan v. CFI, I 89 SCRA 2 17)
GENERdL RULES
A. COI\CT]PT
The object of a ldal is to mete out justice, and to convict the guil\' and
protect the innocent. Thus, the trial should be a search for the truth aud not
a contest over technicalities ard must i:e conducted under srich rules as $'ill
protect the innocent (23 C. J. S. 274).
B, CO\'ER{CE
All crirlinal cases brought for trial belore the Regional Trial Courts,
N{eiropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Circuit 'liia1 Cor.rfl:s, and Municipal Trial
Courts except those cases tlrat are subject to the Rules on Suurrna,ry Procedure.
..TRIAL PREI'ARATION
Tlte prosecutor assigned to prosccute the case shall prepare the trial
guide. The trial guidc, as accomplished, shall be made a permanent parl of the
prosecution's records ofthc case. Its preparation sbail be in accordance with
DOJ Circular No. 47, s. 20O0 (please refer to Appendix "F" on p. 3II of tltis
Mattuo l).
hibits,
specific
Ctr
'frorn
reliable sources the whereabouts of tllese witnesses,
!r, background, reasons for testiSring and relationship
arnolrg other things, to enable him to have a cleal view of
of the'accused.
wh
offense,
of one
fbr the
5. Said accused has not, at any time been convicted of any offense involving
' moral turpitude.
he or any nerrber of his family within the second civil degree of con-
sanguinity or alfinity is sutrjected to threats to his life or bodily injury or
there is a likelihood that he will be killed, forced, intimidated, harassed
or corrupted to prevent him from tcstifiiing. or to testif,/ falsely or eva-
sively, becausc or otl accounl ofhis tesrimoul,l and
OF PROCEEDINGS
OF EVIDENCE
Upon receipt of the notice of trial, the prosecutor shall review the record
of the case for trial and complete his pleparation therefot' beat'ing in mind that
trial, once cornmenced, may continue fi'om day to day until tenninated. I{e may.
however, move for postponement for a reasouable pct'iod of tirne for good cairse
(Sec.2, par. 1, Rule ll9, sypra.).
.
Speedy Trial ofChiidAbuse cases The trial of child abuse cases shall take
precedence over all other cases before the courts, except electiou and habeas
cor?us cases- The trial in said cases shall comrnence within threc (3) days
fi"om the date the accused is arraigned and no postponement of the initial
hearing sirall be granted except on account of the illuess of the accused or
otlrer gronnds beyond his control (Sec, 21, Rules and Regulations on the
Reporting and hntestigation of Child Abrce Cases i.sstted pursuant to Sec.
i2 o.f R. A. No. 7610, othenuise latov,n as "the Child Abttse Act").
Under Administrative Code No. 104-96 of the Suprerne Court, the cases
of liidnapping and/or kidnapping for ransom, robbery in band, robbery
commifted agaiust a banking or financial institution, violation of the Anti-
Camapping Act of 1972 as amended, aurd Other Heinous Crimes (R,\ 7659)
committed within the respective territorial jurisdiclion of the courts shall
ON OFWITNESSES
rnay at have a view of the ieal evidence (either the prohibited or regu
drug :t of the case) and so that such evidence rnay be immediately iden
fied by other witnesses thus avoiding tire rccall of witnesses later on.
The trial prosecutor shall move for the conditional examination of a pros-
ecution witness who is too sick or infinr.r to appear at the trial or bas to leave the
Philippines with no definite date.of retuming. Such examination shall be done
in the presence ofthe accused or in his absence after reasoDable Dotice to attend
the examination has been served on him, shall be colducted ir.r the same maru1er
as an examination at the trial. Failure or refusal on the part of tire accused to
attend the examination after notice herein before provided shall be considered
awaiver $ec. J5. Rute ll9, Sttpra.).
Tlle prosecutor shall endeavor to secure well in advance alL available rn-
fonnation about a defens'e witness in order to prepare for an effective c::oss-
examination. Whele the testimony of a defense witness bears no effect on the
evidence of the prosecution, a cross-cxamination need not be cotrducted.
F. RIBUTTALI,VIDENC-E
The prcsentation and nalure of rebuttal evidence will depend on the cffect
which the defense evidence may have caused on tbe prosccution's cvidence-in-
chiel The recall ofa witness who aheady testified during the evidence-in-chicf
presentation merely to rcfutc what a defense witness may'. have stated during his
defense testimony is not generally rebuttal evidence. \Vhere there is nothing to
lefule. rcbultal evidence is u:rnecessarv.
In all cases requiring the appearance in court of a witness for the purpose
of testifying upon a rcpofi (e.g. nedrcc-Jegal, autopsy, cherr.ristry ballistjcs,
statelnent ofaccounts, ctc.) prepared by him or by his office, the trial prosecutor'
shall indicate the reference number of the report in tbe request for subpoena.
Iu keeping with the professional responsibility of tlre trial prosecutor, all the
physical and real evidelce shall rerlain in custody with the poJice authorities
or other law enforcen-rent officels. ln those instances when the evidence is of
a perisirable nature, the trial pl'osecutor shall ensru'e that mcasures ale taken to
plovide for secondary evidence consisting of photographs, or pictures of thc
physical and real evidence, rvhich evidence shall be attached to thc rccords of
the case.
3. The fiial accessoly can proceed without awaiting the result of the
charge a1 t tJre principal. The coresponding responsibilities of the pj
rd accessory are distinct from each pther. As long as the c
sion of ffense can be duly established in evidence, the determination
liability accon-rplice oi accessory can proceed independently of that
prircipal. v. People, 178 SCRA 626.);
flrere is noflring il the mle frorn which it can be infened that beforc a perso[
cau be presented as a govonn-rent witness, hat he be first included as a co-
accused in the Inforrnation, for lhe prosecutor is fi.ee to produce as a witness
anyone whom he believes can testify to the truth of the crime charged (U.S u
Lnriquez, 40 Phil. 603);
the failule to follow tiie requirements of the rule rclative to ilie use of a per-
son, himseifparticeps crininis, as a governnlent witness does not r.iolate the
due process clause of the constifution, trot render his testimony ineffectual if
otlrerwise conlpetent and adrnjssible. (People v. Ilinsol, 100 Phil.7l3.);
The disclrargc contempl;ted by the mle is one effbctcd or r.r,hich can be effected
at any stage of the proceedilgs, fron, t}e filing of the Infonnation to tbe time the
def'etrse starts to offer any evidence. (People v. Aninon, 158 SCM 701);
The nrere fact that the witless sought to be discharged had plcadcd guilry to the
ciinre chargcd does not violate the rule that the disclrarged dcfcndant must llot
"appear to be the most guilty". And even if the witness should lack sorne of the
qualilications clurueraled by Sec. 17, Rule 119, his testimony will not, for tbat
teason aione, be discarded or disregarded. (People v. De Leon, et. ol. J08 Phil.
800 [re60J.
The gror.rnd underlying the mle is hot to let a crime that has been comrnitterl go
unprurished; so an accused who is not the most guihy is allowed to testi$, againsl
tlte most guiity, in order to achic\re the 91eatel.pulpose of secur:ing tlie conviction
of the more or mosi guilf and the greatest nutrbcr amolg the accused perltittcd
to be convicted for the offense committed. (People v.Bq,ona, et. al., I0S phil.
104 [] 9601) AJl the perpetrators of the offense bound in conspir.acy ar.e equally
gurlty. (People v. Botja. I47 SCRA I 69 [ 1987]) ; .
l
10. Meaning of "not tbe most guilty" is .hot the least guilty', (people v. Cottrt of I
I
Aplteals, I 3I SCM I07 [] 9841. The mle does not re quire that hc bc 1he ..least {
i
guilty" but only that he not be "the most gtnlry',. (people tt. Fulrtdo, g4 phil. 3
1
Be). J
I
?
,i
j
ManuaJ for Prosecutors 161 x
I
'n {
I't
;1
PART X. APP / PETITION FOR REVIE\V
GENERAL
A. WIIAT BEAPPEAIED
D. FORMAND CONTI'NTS
5. a clcar alcl ooucise statemcnt ofthe facts, the assignmont of errors, and the
legal basis of the appeal/petltion for: review;
E. DOCU]\{IINTARY AT'TACIIMENTS