SOTTO, PIA C.

JD II, Criminal Procedure

I. Introduction

In the case of People vs Webb, G.R. No. 176864, one of the most controversial

cases decided by the Supreme Court and one of the cases assigned to us by our

Criminal Procedure teacher, the Court declared a statement, one that would be

considered as quotable for it strikes through what the Court is duty bound to

do. The Supreme Court in the aforementioned case stated that, In our criminal

justice system, what is important is, not whether the court entertains doubts

about the innocence of the accused since an open mind is willing to explore all

possibilities, but whether it entertains a reasonable, lingering doubt as to his guilt.

For, it would be a serious mistake to send an innocent man to jail where such

kind of doubt hangs on to ones inner being, like a piece of meat lodged

immovable between teeth. 1 This statement really struck me upon reading

because in my opinion, I believe it captured the essence of criminal procedure;

how the Court is duty bound to follow certain processes to determine the guilt or

innocence of an accused, so that the magistrate will be able to render a

decision based on the arguments and pieces of evidence presented by the

complainant and defendant. I believe this statement also serves as a reminder

to the Court that in criminal actions, proof beyond reasonable doubt is required

before the accused may be convicted of a crime. Absent of this satisfaction, the

accused must be acquitted or released. Thus, as law students, it is very important

1
People vs Webb, G.R. No. 176864, December 14, 2010 and January 18, 2011

1|Page
 that we learn proper procedure not only in criminal actions but as well as

administrative and civil actions, more so in criminal actions because in so far as

criminal actions are concerned, not only the liberty or property is at stake, but

the possibility of spending the life of an accused behind bars. Otherwise,

improper procedure would lead to injustice.

II. Court Observations

1. ARRAIGNMENT Under Rule 116 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, it is

mandatory that the accused must be arraigned before the court where the

complaint or information was assigned for trial. The accused must be present at

the arraignment and must personally enter his plea.2 Arraignment is one of the

proceedings in criminal actions wherein the accused is presented for identity, is

informed of his charged and is given an opportunity to plead guilty or not guilty;

it is in this stage that the accused exercises his right to be informed of the nature

and cause of the accusation against him as mandated by Article III, Section

14(2) of the 1987 Constitution.

On July 26, my group mates and I went to Dumaguete Citys Hall of Justice to

observe several court hearings. Luckily, we were able to attend different sets of cases to

be arraigned. These are the following case we attended and observed:

a. Theft - People vs Ricky Asena Zamora and John Doe for Theft Prosecutor

Ryan Buenavista for the Government Presiding Judge: Hon Dinah B. Tabada-

Chiu July 26, 2017

2
Rule 116, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure

2|Page
 In this case, the accuseds name on the information filed was originally Ricky

Zamora. However, during the arraignment, the name written on the information was

changed from Ricky Zamora to Ricky Oliveros, which is apparently the real family

name of the said accused. According to Ricky (accused), Zamora was only his middle

name; it was Public Prosecutor Ryan Buenavista who cost the amendment of the

information. As to the crime charged against him, the crime of Theft was filed against

the accused, Ricky Zamora. Accordingly, he was caught of stealing several things from

a store; allegedly, he stole a component, watch and USB. The total worth of these items

was more or less Four Thousand Pesos only (4,000.00). During the arraignment, the

accused was represented by the Public Attorneys Office. However, it was the Court

which asked assistance from the Public Attorneys Office because during the

arraignment, the accused has not availed the services of a lawyer yet. Accused

pleaded not guilty.

Insight:

b. Falsification of Document - People vs Ma. Corazon C.Delfino, Et. Al for

Falsification of Public Document Prosecutor Ryan Buenavista for the

Government Judge: Hon. Dinah B. Tabada-Chu July 26, 2017

Basing from the facts I have heard on the second case we observed, I am assuming

that the rival parties are related with each other. One material fact that we also

learned was that, one of the accused already left for Canada even before the case

was filed against him. Hence, the Court failed to acquire the jurisdiction over the person

accused. The remaining accused namely, Ma. Corazon C. Delfino and others were

accused of falsifying an instrument pertaining to the last will and testament of the

3|Page
deceased husband of Ma. Corazon C. Delfino. The four accused (one was already in

Canada), stated and sworn under oath that they were the only remaining heirs of the

deceased; deliberately and intentionally wanting to remove the complainant, which

was the illegitimate son of the deceased and who was acknowledged by the said

decease, from claiming the right which was entitled to the illegitimate son. Again, after

being informed of the nature and causes of the accusation made against the

accused, all three of them pleaded not guilty.

Insights:

c. Reckless Imprudence Resulting to Homicide People vs Jomar Ponce Mapili

Prosecutor Ryan Buenavista for the Government Judge: Hon. Dinah B. Tabada-

Chu July 26, 2017

The third case we observed was about a case of reckless imprudence resulting to

homicide. From the facts stated during the proceeding, we learned that at the time of

the incident, the accused was only 17 years old, which means under the law, he was

still a minor when he committed the said crime but at the time of the arraignment, the

accused was already 18 years old; that when the incident happened, the accused

was driving a motorcycle without a drivers license. In the said case proceeding, the

accused was being represented by a lawyer from Public Attorneys Office. However,

the lawyer that was supposed to represent the accused was absent and failed to

inform the accused. The sitting judge then requested for an assistance from the Public

Attorneys Office to temporarily represent the accused until the original lawyer comes

back. The accused pleaded guilty in the charges filed against him. The judge granted

him bail.

4|Page
 2. PRE-CONFERENCE- Under Rule 118 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure,

pre-conference or pre-trial, is a criminal proceeding conducted anytime after

the filing of the information wherein both parties meet before the trial to narrow

down the issues to be tried, to secure the stipulations as to matters and evidence

to be heard, and to take all other steps necessary to aid in the disposition of the

case. This proceeding has a three-fold purpose: 1. To promote amicable

settlement; 2. To simplify the trial, for the purpose exercising the right to speedy

disposition of trials; and 3. To prevent last minute continuances.3

a. Robbery with Violence or Intimidation People of the Philippines vs John Rey

Alapap Cogonon Pros. Leonardo E. Mandajoyan, Public Prosecutor, Atty

Charmaine B. Mascardo counsel for the accused, September 27, 2017

In this case, the complainant and his counsel were absent during the pre-

conference. Only the accused, his counsel, public prosecutor and the clerk of court

and stenographer were present. The parties present conducted marking of evidence,

headed by the Public prosecutor; they also reserved the marking of some evidence on

the day of pre-trial. Aside from the marking of evidence, they also listed the witnesses

name, some of which are also to be reserved on the day of pre-trial. Public prosecutor

Leonardo E. Mandajoyan also requested the clerk of court to present the cellular

phone of the victim/complainant on the pre-trial to be marked as evidence. Later on,

after the marking of evidence and listing of witnesses, it was found out that the reason

why the complainant was not able to come to the scheduled pre-trial was because the

notice to the complainant as not served. The counsel for the accused then asked the

3
Rule 118, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure

5|Page
clerk of court to serve the notice for schedule pre-trial personally to ensure the receipt

of parties involved.

3. PRE-TRIAL

a. Reckless Imprudence Resulting in Homicide People vs Fatimarie Austria and

Jason Bero Pros. Marites Macarubbo for the Government, Atty. Rommel Jan

Mirasol for the accused Judge: Hon. Arlene Catherine A. Dato, July 19, 2017

Observation: In this case, the charge against the accused was dismissed because the

parties involved entered into a compromise agreement. The family of the victim

allowed settlement.

b. Estafa People vs Atty. Obdulio Guy D. Villahermosa Pros. Andre Stephen G.

Jacobo for the government, Atty. Marvic Z. Pintor private prosecutor, Atty.

Alfredo M. Hermosa III for the accused Judge: Hon. Marie Rose G. Inocando

Paras July 21, 2017

Prior to the pre-trial, both parties seemed to have come into an agreement with

regard the payment of money by the defendant to the aggrieved party. However on

the day of the pre-trial for this case, the judge decided to schedule it to another date

because during the proceeding, when the defendants counsel declared the amount

to be paid to the complainant, the complainant was not amenable to the compromise

agreement; even her counsel was surprised by her clients decision. Seeing that there

was no meeting of the minds between parties, the judge decided to postpone the pre-

trial and conduct it on some other day instead.

6|Page
 c. Illegal Possession of Firearms; Violation of Sec. 28 (a) of R.A. 10591 People vs

Roque Bayotiang y Rosal Pros. Jo Ann Marie A. Munoz-Abada for the

Governmentt, Atty. Elton Dick J. Abrea for the accused

During the pre-trial, only additional stipulations were made and list of witnesses were

given to the judge. The complainant in this case was the accuseds minor daughter

4. TRIAL

a. Violation of R.A. 9165 Sec. 5 and 11. People vs Pachico Rendoque y Sivellano

aka Chico Prosecutor Angela Charina M. Cortes-Garces for the Government,

Atty. Floyd Barry C. Amahit for the accused July 21, 2017

During the trial, the policeman who was part of the buy bust operation, was one

being presented as a witness at the witness stand. He relayed to the Court what

happened during the said operation. In his narration, he said that his memory of the

said event were already a bit hazy to him given the fact that he already encountered

numerous buy bust operations.

b. Libel People vs Agnes Pinili Pros. Manolito Tiuseco for the Government, Atty.

Arturo Dupio for the Accused Judge: Honn. Arlene Catherie A. Dato, July 18,

2017

One doctor named Dr. Tan filed a case of libel against Agnes Pinili. The case has

been going on for several years already and yet it still has a long process to go through.

During the trial, the complainant was not present. The judge also made a remark saying

that the complainant also has a pending case in the family court.

7|Page
 c. Qualified Theft People vs Lourdes Olac Pros. Don Dupio for the Government,

Atty. Gloria Futalan private prosecutor, Atty. Alfredo Hermosa III private

prosecutor, Atty.Coleta A. Campanale for the accused.

In this case, the accused is a former employee of Caf Filomena is the accused. She

was charged with the crime of Qualified Theft because accordingly, she was changing

the amount in the receipt. She allegedly deliberately changes the amount on the bill

and the amount on the original receipt. During the trial, the defense was supposed to

conduct a surrebuttal, a process of providing response to an opposite partys answer. In

other words, it is a rebuttal to a rebuttal.4 However, the complainants counsel, together

with the sitting Judge told the defense that they were not conducting a surrebuttal

because the defense counsel was raising new grounds that are not supposed to be a

part of the surrebuttal. While observing the case, it was clear that the counsel for the

defense were not prepared for the hearing. Even her client showed dismay with how

her counsel represented her. The counsel for the complainant also exchanged a

somehow mocking smirk because it was clear that the defense counsel was a bit lost

with what she was doing. Overall, I can say that the defense counsel did not perform

well.

d. Perjury - People vs Yolanda I. Diapana Pros. Ryan Buenavista for the

government, Atty. Cyrus Riconalla for the accused Judge: Hon. Dinah Tabada-

Chu, July 26, 2017

Not much has been discussed about this case, except that the case aroused from

an R.A. 7610 case filed beforehand.

4
Surrebuttal. http://definitions.uslegal.com/s/surrebuttal/ retrieved on October 25, 2017.

8|Page
 5. PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION Under Rule 112, Section 2, preliminary

investigation is defined as inquiry to determine whether there is sufficient ground

to engender a well-founded belief that a crime has been committed and the

respondent is probably guilty thereof, and should be held for trial.5

a. Violation of R.A. 7610

This case was supposed to be an inquest proceeding but accused waived his right

to be detained, he instead asked for a preliminary investigation. His waiver is

mandatory because absent of this, the arresting officers may be held liable of violating

Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code. The preliminary investigation was conducted by

the investigating prosecutor, Ms. Wengel Lou Dimalig who asked clarificatory questions.

What happened in this case was, the police officers conducted a buy bust operation

somewhere between the boundaries of Dumaguete City and Bacolod City. The police

officers present during the preliminary investigation informed that before they

conducted a buy bust operation, there was already a prior surveillance to the subject

suspect. The police officers at 1 oclock in the afternoon of July 19, 2017 received the

information that there was a person selling and in possession of illegal drugs. They

narrated that from one oclock to four-thirty in the afternoon of the same day, they

conducted surveillance but the buy bust operation happened at around 5 oclock in

the afternoon. At 4:30 in the afternoon, they had a briefing with the informant. At 5:30,

they received a text from the informant that subject suspect was near the waiting shed

of a particular school. During the buy bust operation, police claimed that they seized

the sachet of shabu from the right pocket of the accused and thereafter recovered the

5
Rule 112(2), Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure.

9|Page
marked money that was used in the buy bust operation; they also used a pre-arranged

hand signal with their asset and informant. During the preliminary investigation,

Prosecutor Dimalig asked questions pertaining to respective affidavits of accused,

witnesses of the accused and police officers. The police officers also admitted that the

marking of evidence was done in the area where the suspect was arrested but the

inventory was done at the police station.

6. MEDIATION- Formally known as Court-Annexed Mediation, it is a voluntary

process conducted under the auspices of the court by referring the parties to

the Philippine Mediation Center Unit for settlement of their dispute, assisted by a

Mediator accredited by the Supreme Court.6

a. Estafa

The complainant in this case is Samson Elopre Banua while the defendant is

Rosemarie Tadeo. The charged filed against the accused is Estafa regarding the failure

of the accused to transfer the title of ownership of the pumpboat to the complainants

after the complainants asked for her help in franchising. Before the mediation, the

mediator gave us some insights about the importance of conducting a mediation

between the parties before formally going to trial. According to him, mediation is an

alternative mode of dispute resolution and its purpose is for the benefit of both parties

because if they decided to settle instead of filing charges, they are able to save not

only their money but as well as their energy and time. The Mediator also said that

mediators are prevented to look for records because mediation is not about legal

6
Philippine Judicial Academy. philj.judiciary.gov.ph/pfaq.html retrieved on October 26, 2017.

10 | P a g e
position but rather of interest, where versions of truth of both sides are heard. During the

mediation, complainant went first to tell his side of story, then came the side of the

defendant. Both parties were tense and defensive, it was clear that no agreement

would arrive that is why the mediator decided to reschedule the involved parties for

another mediation.

b. Theft

In this case, only the accused, Ricky Zamora, who was accused of stealing a

component, USB, and watch was present for the scheduled mediation. The

complainant did not arrive that is why the mediator did not conduct mediation. The

mediator informed us that what happens usually if complainant does not appear is

that, the accused may be liable for a sanction and the judge may move for dismissal

because it may be inferred that the complainant is already uninterested in pursuing the

case.

III. ANALYSIS

After having the opportunity observe several hearings, I have realized that the

justice system here in the Philippines is far from perfect. Although I also believe that

there is no justice system in the world that is a hundred percent perfect yet; each has

their own flaws. However, using my experience from the court visits we had, I learned

that many still do not follow the criminal procedure set out by our Judiciary and

Legislative bodies. In fact, even our procedure itself still needs to be amended in some

its parts.

11 | P a g e
 Basing from the court hearings I have attended, I can say that there are a lot of

gaps in the procedure. But I will have to mention, in my own opinion, the three greatest

gaps I have observed. First, the right of the accused to have speedy disposition of cases

is violated because even though the Court has mandated a specific time to conduct

the trial of an accused, it is still not being followed due to the many postponements and

rescheduling of hearings because of the absences of the parties involved or not being

able to present evidence nor the witnesses on time. Setting as example is the supposed

mediation we attended, as also aforementioned, the accused is detained in jail while

awaiting the scheduled mediation and on the said day, he was present. However

because the complainant was absent, the mediation proceeding did not pursue that is

why the Mediator had to schedule another mediation for the parties. Although the

complainant may be sanctioned, the effect is greater for the accused, who will have to

be detained again while waiting for the next schedule. If only the complainant was

present, they could have reached an agreement and would have resulted to the

release of the accused from jail. Second, some accused are also not afforded the right

to have an effective counsel. Although an accused has the right to choose his counsel

but with the limitations set by the Court, it is also the duty of the counsel who represents

the accused to assist his client and to be an effective counsel for the benefit of the

accused. As also mention beforehand, we observed a case of Qualified Theft, the

counsel of the defense was clearly not effective because she failed to assist her client

during the surrebuttal. Because of that, the case of the accused could be placed on

jeopardy. Her chances of winning the case may be affected negatively because of

the carelessness of the counsel to assist and brief her client effectively. And third, it is

clear that the most common and if I may say the worst possible violation of rights of the

12 | P a g e
accused is to violate his right to due process. In the preliminary investigation we

observed, it was clear from the statements made by the police officers who were

involved in the buy bust operation that there were discrepancies as regards on how

they conducted the said operation. Their demeanour during the preliminary

investigation shows a hint of self-doubt, it was as if they were afraid that they may say

something that would jeopardize them. Also basing from the testimony of the accused,

the arresting officers also failed to inform the accused of the cause and nature of

accusation against him and just immediately arrested him. It was clear that the right of

the accused to have due process was violated.

To end this, I know for a fact that creating possible solutions is never an easy task

because it will take energy, money, and time to improve our justice system. It will be a

series of trial and error. And as a sophomore law student, I still have a lot to learn about

the justice system here in the Philippines. However, if I were to recommend a solution, I

would have to say that the Judicial and Legislative bodies must go hand in hand in

creating a stricter sanction for those who violate or fail to follow the proper procedure

not only in criminal actions, but in administrative and civil actions as well. We need

sharper teeth and a stronger bite to achieve a more successful practice of court

proceedings.

13 | P a g e