________________________________

PRACTICE COURT 1
Judge Gina Bibat-Palamos

________________________________

Section: 4/A
Members:
Baguilat, Genelyn L.
Ignacio, Angelo A.
Laguio, Ysrael Joseph Jr. P.
Pareja, Mark Genesis C.
Punzalan, Chezca S.
Zapatos, Zarin Charisamor V.
I. INTRODUCTION

This paper aims to discuss the different stages of a criminal proceeding

that we witnessed during our court visit at the Metropolitan Trial Court, Branch
79, of Las Piñas City presided by the Hon. Judge Teodoro S. Carbonera. The
criminal proceeding that was conducted on August 15, 2016, Monday,
focuses itself on the Arraignment; Pre-Trial / Preliminary Conference; Trial;
and Judgment of criminal cases.

And to have a better glimpse of this criminal proceeding, discussion of

the above-mentioned stages, accompanied by criminal cases, will be
explained throughly but concise.

II. WHAT IS A CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

According to the Black’s Law Dictionary, Criminal procedure is

concerned with the procedural steps through which a criminal case passes,
commencing with the initial investigation of a crime and concluding with the
unconditional release of the offender. It is a generic term used to describe the
network of laws and rules which govern the procedural administration of
criminal justice.

In other words, Criminal Procedure is the method prescribed by law for

the apprehension and prosecution of persons accused of any criminal
offense, and for their punishment, in case of conviction. (Herrera, 2007)

III. IMPORTANCE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

In the case of Romualdez v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 143618-41,

Criminal procedure must always embody the essence of due process “where
it requires that the accused must be proceeded against under the orderly
processes of law. In all cases, the judge should follow the step-by-step
procedure required by the rules. The reason for this is to assure that the State
makes no mistake in taking the life or liberty except that of the guilty.”

IV. COURT VISIT

IV. A. ARRAIGNMENT

In the case of Borja v. Mendoza, 77 SCRA 422, “Arraignment is

the stage where in the mode and manner required by the Rules of Court, an
accused, for the first time, is granted the opportunity to know the precise
charge that confronts him. It is imperative that he is thus made full aware of
possible loss of freedom, even of his life, depending on the nature of the
crime imputed to him. At the very least, he must be fully informed of why the
prosecuting arm of the state is mobilized against him. An arraignment serves
that purpose.”
_____________________________________________________________
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. ANDY BOY Y MENDOZA
(Detained) Criminal Case No. 70907
For Acts of Lasciviousness under Article 336 of the Revised
Penal Code
____________________________________________________________________

The accused, Andy Boyo y Mendoza, did not plead guilty. The criminal
case was set for an arraignment and the accused was detained. When clerk
of court called the case entitled 'People of the Philippines vs. Andy Boyo y
Mendoza, the accused stood up from seat and faced the judge and the clerk
of court. the clerk of court used the 'Tagalog' language, a language that is
known to the accused, in reading to the accused the copy of the complaint
or information filed against him. The information contained the following: the
date when the crime was committed, the place where the crime was
committed, the manner by which the accused, Andy Boyo y Mendoza,
committed the crime, and to whom the crime was committed. then clerk of
court asked the accused whether he pleads guilty or not guilty. The accused
said, he did not plead guilty. The lawyer of Public Attorney's office was there
to assist the accused in this arraignment.
Arraignment is the formal mode and manner of the implementing the
constitutional right of an accused to be informed of the nature and cause of
the accusation against him. Plea is the formal answer of the defendant in
common law pleading. The answer of 'guilty' or 'not guilty' in an arraignment
for the criminal charge.
And in order for an arraignment to be valid, the following must be
present: 1.) the arraignment must be made in an open court where the
complaint or information has been filed or assigned for trial. However, there
can be a closed door trial in cases of Rape or Child Abuse. 2.) the
arraignment must be before the judge or the clerk of court. 3.) Furnishing the
accused with a copy of the complaint or information. 4.) By reading the
complaint or information in a language or dialect known to the accused. 5.)
By asking the accused whether he pleads guilty or not guilty. 6.) The
accused must personally appear during arraignment and enter his plea
(counsel cannot enter plea for accused). 7.) Both arraignment and plea shall
be made of record but failure to enter of record shall not affect the validity of
the proceedings. In the case at bar, all the following circumstances where
present in the arraignment of the accused Andy Boyo y Mendoza for the
crime of Acts of Lasciviousness of Article 336 of the Revised Penal Code in
the Metropolitan Trial Court, Branch 79 under Hon. Teodoro S. Carbonera.
Thus, valid arraignment.

IV. B. PRE-TRIAL / PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE

The entire rule on pre-trial in criminal proceedings was first

introduced in 1985. The demonstrable benefits of the pre-trial system in civil
procedure led to the adoption of this helpful device in criminal proceedings.
Under Rule 118, Section 1, of the Rules of Court, such matters as plea
bargaining, stipulations of facts, pre-marking of exhibits, and similar matters,
are now to be taken up during the pre-trial conference. With the new
procedure freeing the trial court from the consideration of matters not directly
or immediately related to the questions of guilt, trial would be more
expeditious and orderly. (Pamaran, 2010)

In the case of Irving Trust Co. v. U.S., 221 F. 2d 303, “In general, it
is the purpose of the pre-trial conference to simplify the issues, shape up the
testimonial and documentary evidence, and generally to clear the desks for
trial.” Furthermore, in the case of U.S. vs. Onori, 535 F. 2d 938, “During the
conference then, the parties may stipulate or admit certain facts such as the
qualifications of expert witnesses, the existence and due execution of offcial
documents, the official statues of the offender or of the offended party, and so
forth. The pre-trial conference may also be the preferred manner of handling
problems of obtaining stipulations as to the accuracy of transcript of recorded
conversations.
_____________________________________________________________

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. MIKE FRANCIS CENTRA Y

SANCHEZ, ET AL. CRIMINAL CASE NO. 70284

____________________________________________________________________
In this case, private complainants Ryan Lazaro y Bautista, Kim N.
Rivera, and Juliet L. Averas filed an affidavit of desistance for the alleged
slight physical injuries committed by the accused.
An Affidavit of Desistance is one executed by a complainant when he
no longer wishes to pursue a case against an accused or court case.
The Revised Penal Code of the Philippines provides:
Art. 266. Slight physical injuries and maltreatment. —
The crime of slight physical injuries shall be punished:
1. By arresto menor when the offender has inflicted
physical injuries which shall incapacitate the offended
 party for labor from one to nine days, or shall require
medical attendance during the same period.
2. By arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 20 pesos
and censure when the offender has caused physical
injuries which do not prevent the offended party from
engaging in his habitual work nor require medical
assistance.
3. By arresto menor in its minimum period or a fine not
exceeding 50 pesos when the offender shall ill-treat
another by deed without causing any injury.

IV. C. TRIAL

In the case of U.S. v. Raymundo, 14 Phil. 439, “Trial is the

examination before a competent tribunal, according to the laws of the land, of
facts put in issue in a case, for the purpose of determining such issue.”
Furthermore, the case of Velasquez v. Director of Prisons, 77 Phil. 988, had
expounded the meaning of trial - “the word trial as used in the Constitution
includes hearing, reception of evidence and other processes, such as
decision in the first instance, appeal, and final and executory decision in the
last instance.”

According to Section 1 of Rule 119 of the Rules of Court, trial shall

commence within thirty (30) days from receipt of the pre-trial order. Also,
Section 5 of Rule 119 of the Rules of Court provides that if the accused it to
be tried again pursuant to an order for an new trial, the trial shall commence
within thirty (30) days from notice of the order granting a new trial. This period
may be extended o one not exceeding one hundred eighty (180) days from
notice of the order if the period becomes impractical due to unavailability of
witnesses and other factors.

Fundamentally, trial starts by the prosecution presenting its

evidence first to prove the charge and to prove the civil liability in the proper
case. Then the accused will then present his evidence to prove his defense
and the damages he sustained, if any, arising from the issuance of a
provisional remedy in the case. After the accused presented his evidence, the
prosecution may present its rebuttal evidence unless the court allows it to
present additional evidence bearing on the main issue. Then the accused
may present sur-rebuttal evdence, unless the court allows him to present
additional evidence bearing on the main issue.

Finally, upon submission of the evidence of the parties, the case

shall be deemed submitted for decision unless the court directs them to argue
orally or to submit written memoranda as stated in Section 11 of Rule 119 of
the Rules of Court. There exists however a reverse trial where the order of
trial may be modified when the accused admits the act or omission charged in
the complaint or information but interposes a lawful defense as stated in
Section 11(e) of Rule 119 of the Rules of Court.
_____________________________________________________________
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. TEOFILA DE VERA
Criminal Case No. 70907
For Slight Physical Injuries under Article 226 of the Revised
Penal Code
____________________________________________________________________

Milagros Cruz Mendoza y Liwanag, the complainant in this case, took

the witness stand and positively identified the presence of Teofila De Vera,
the accused in this case. The prosecutor asked her to narrate the incident
which resulted in the commission of the said crime. According to the
complainant, an altercation happened between her and the accused
regarding some issues concerning them which led the accused to push her
away and where the former fell on pile of rocks which resulted to some
injuries. The only highlight in this case was the fact that the complainant took
the witness stand to narrate and attest all the facts and allegations that was
already stated in her judicial affidavit.

The Revised Penal Code of the Philippines provides:

Art. 266. Slight physical injuries and maltreatment. —
The crime of slight physical injuries shall be punished:
1. By arresto menor when the offender has inflicted
physical injuries which shall incapacitate the offended
party for labor from one to nine days, or shall require
medical attendance during the same period.
2. By arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 20 pesos
and censure when the offender has caused physical
injuries which do not prevent the offended party from
engaging in his habitual work nor require medical
assistance.
3. By arresto menor in its minimum period or a fine not
exceeding 50 pesos when the offender shall ill-treat
another by deed without causing any injury.

IV. D. JUDGMENT

In the case of Gotamco v. Chan Seng, 46 Phil. 550, “Judgment is

the law’s last word in a judicial controversy. It is the final consideration and
determination of a court of competent jurisdiction upon the matters submitted
to it, in an action or proceeding. It may also mean the conclusion of the law
upon the matters submitted to it, in an action or proceeding. It may also mean
the conclusion of the law upon the matters contained in the records, or the
application of the law to the pleadings and to the facts, as found by the court
or admitted by the parties, or deemed to exist upon their default in the course
of a judicial proceeding.”

Furthermore, according to Section 1 of Rule 120 of the Rules of

Court, judgment is the adjudication by the court that the accused is guilty or
not guilty of the offense charged and the imposition on him of the proper
penalty and civil liability, if any. In order that a judgment be valid, it must first
be written in the official language, must be personally and directly prepared
by the judge and it must contain clearly and distinctly a statement of the facts
and the law upon which it is based as stated in the same section of Rule 120.
Section 2 of Rule 120 of the Rules of Court further provides that if the
judgment is of conviction, it shall state the legal qualification of the offense
constituted by the acts committed by the accused, the aggravating and
mitigating circumstances which attended the commission of the offense, the
participation of the accused in the offense whether as principal, accomplice or
accessory after the fact, the penalty imposed upon the accused and the civil
liability or damages caused by his wrongful act or omission to be recovered
from the accused by the offended party, if there is any, unless the
enforcement of the civil liability by a separate civil action has been reserved
or waved. On the other hand, if the judgment is of acquittal, it shall state
whether or not the evidence of the prosecution absolutely failed to prove the
guilt of the accused or merely failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable
doubt and determine if the act or omission from which the civil liability might
arise did not exist. As held in Valerio vs. Court of Appeals, a verdict of
acquittal is immediately final.

As for the promulgation, Section 6 of Rule 120 of the Rules of Court

provides that, judgment is promulgated by reading it in the presence of the
accused and in any judge of the court it which it was rendered. However, if
the conviction is merely for a light offense, the judgment may be pronounced
in the presence of his counsel or representative and may be promulgated by
the clerk of court if the judge is absent or outside the province or city. If the
accused is detained in another province or city, the judgment may be
promulgated by the executive judge of the Regional Trial Court having
jurisdiction over the place of confinement or detention upon request of the
court which rendered the judgment. The court promulgating the judgment
shall have authority to accept the notice of appeal and to approve the bail
bond pending appeal. If the decision of the trial court convicting the accused
changed the nature of the offense from non-bailable to bailable, the
application for bail can only be filed at his last known address.
_____________________________________________________________

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. RUSSEL GERVACIO Y

MANZANO. CRIMINAL CASE NO. 6648

____________________________________________________________
In criminal case, respondent Russel Gervacio Y Manzano charged for
violation of Section 1, Presidential Decree 1866, otherwise known as the
Unlawful Possession of Firearms and Ammunition. The information in
Criminal Case No. 66648 read as follows:

That on or about, December 27, 2015 in the City of Manila, Philippines,

the said accused did then and there willfully, unlawfully, knowingly have in
possession and under his custody and control, One (1) .38 cal. Rev. without
serial no. with four (4) live bullets. Without first having secured from the
proper authorities the necessary license therefor.

However, Section 1 of RA 8294 expressly provides that a person may

not be convicted for illegal possession of firearm if another crime was
committed:


SECTION 1. Section 1 of Presidential Decree No. 1866, as amended, is

hereby further amended to read as follows:

SECTION 1. Unlawful Manufacture, Sale, Acquisition, Disposition or

Possession of Firearms or Ammunition or Instruments Used or Intended to be
Used in the Manufacture of Firearms or Ammunition. The penalty of prision
correccional in its maximum period and a fine of not less than Fifteen
thousand pesos (P15,000) shall be imposed upon any person who shall
unlawfully manufacture, deal in, acquire, dispose, or possess any low
powered firearm, such as rimfire handgun, .380 or .32 and other firearm of
similar firepower, part of firearm, ammunition, or machinery, tool or instrument
used or intended to be used in the manufacture of any firearm or ammunition:
Provided, That no other crime was committed.

The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period and a fine of Thirty
thousand pesos (P30,000) shall be imposed if the firearm is classified as high
powered firearm which includes those with bores bigger in diameter than .38
caliber and 9 millimeter such as caliber .40, .41, .44, .45 and also lesser
calibered firearms but considered powerful such as caliber .357 and caliber .
22 center-fire magnum and other firearms with firing capability of full
automatic and by burst of two or three: Provided, however, That no other
crime was committed by the person arrested.
 The decision rendered the respondent not guilty of illegal possession of
firearm. WHEREFORE, Criminal Case No. 66648 for illegal possession of
firearms is hereby DISMISSED and respondent is hereby ACQUITTED
therein.

V. CONCLUSION

In all these discussion, it must be noted that all trial courts, the
Sandiganbayan included, are reminded that they should take all necessary
measures guaranteeing procedural due process from the inception of
custodial investigation up to rendition of judgment. They are not to turn a blind
eye to procedural irregularities which transpired before the criminal case
reached the court. The validity and sufficiency of the information are
important. xxx (Romualdez v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 143618-41)

VI. ATTACHMENTS


Attached in this paper are the following:

1. Letter of Intent addressed to the Metropolitan Trial Court,
Branch 79, of Las Piñas City;
2. Certification duly signed by the Clerk of Court; and
3. Group Picture