This document summarizes the rights of the accused at trial according to Philippine law. It outlines 9 key rights: (1) the right to be presumed innocent; (2) the right to be informed of charges; (3) the right to be present at trial and be assisted by counsel; (4) the right to testify or not testify without prejudice; (5) the right against self-incrimination; (6) the right to confront witnesses; (7) the right to compel witness testimony; (8) the right to a speedy, impartial, and public trial; and (9) the right to appeal. For each right, important cases and constitutional provisions supporting the right are cited.
This document summarizes the rights of the accused at trial according to Philippine law. It outlines 9 key rights: (1) the right to be presumed innocent; (2) the right to be informed of charges; (3) the right to be present at trial and be assisted by counsel; (4) the right to testify or not testify without prejudice; (5) the right against self-incrimination; (6) the right to confront witnesses; (7) the right to compel witness testimony; (8) the right to a speedy, impartial, and public trial; and (9) the right to appeal. For each right, important cases and constitutional provisions supporting the right are cited.
This document summarizes the rights of the accused at trial according to Philippine law. It outlines 9 key rights: (1) the right to be presumed innocent; (2) the right to be informed of charges; (3) the right to be present at trial and be assisted by counsel; (4) the right to testify or not testify without prejudice; (5) the right against self-incrimination; (6) the right to confront witnesses; (7) the right to compel witness testimony; (8) the right to a speedy, impartial, and public trial; and (9) the right to appeal. For each right, important cases and constitutional provisions supporting the right are cited.
This document summarizes the rights of the accused at trial according to Philippine law. It outlines 9 key rights: (1) the right to be presumed innocent; (2) the right to be informed of charges; (3) the right to be present at trial and be assisted by counsel; (4) the right to testify or not testify without prejudice; (5) the right against self-incrimination; (6) the right to confront witnesses; (7) the right to compel witness testimony; (8) the right to a speedy, impartial, and public trial; and (9) the right to appeal. For each right, important cases and constitutional provisions supporting the right are cited.
I. ARTICLE III, The Bill of Rights, Philippine Constitution
II. Rights of Accused At Trial
Section 1. Rig h ts o f ac c u s e d at th e trial. — In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be entitled to the following rights:
A. (a) To b e p re s u m e d in n o c e n t u n til th e c o n trary is p ro v e d b e y o n d
re as o n ab le d o u b t. 1. Sec. 14, Art. III, Bill of Rights 2. History & judicial affirmation of the right: Coffin v. United States, 156 U.S. 432 (1895) 3. Presumption of Innocence & Reasonable Doubt: People v. Macaraeg, G.R. No. L-32806. October 23, 1973 (E.B) 4. Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt, Meaning: People v. Reyes, G.R. No. 1374. December 3, 1903, 3 Phil. 3-6 People v. Bacus, G.R. No. 60388, November 21, 1991
B. (b ) To b e in fo rm e d o f th e n atu re an d c au s e o f th e ac c u s atio n ag ain s t h im .
1. Sec. 14, Art. III, Bill of Rights
2. Right to be Informed and Its Objectives: Enrile v. People, G.R. No. 213455, [August 11, 2015])** People v. Flores, G.R. No. 128823-24. December 27, 2002 3. Trial in absentia only if arraigned: Borja v. Mendoza, G.R. No. L-45667 June 20, 1977
C. (c ) Rig h t to b e p re s e n t an d d e fe n d in p e rs o n an d b y c o u n s e l at e v e ry s tag e o f th e p ro c e e d in g s , fro m arraig n m e n t to p ro m u lg atio n o f th e ju d g m e n t. ( Se c . 1 (c ), Ru le 115) 1. 1987 Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 14(2) 2. Sec. 6 & 7, Rule 116 - Arraignment & Plea 3. Sec. 7 & 8, Rule 119, Trial 4. Section 34 of Rule 138 5. Due process in criminal cases primarily means right to counsel! a) Due Process and Right to Counsel: ". . . the right of the accused to be assisted by counsel is immutable."
1 Updated July 2018.
-1- Callangan v. People, G.R. No. 153414, June 27, 2006 No deprivation of right to counsel: Ibañez v. People, G.R. No. 190798, [January 27, 2016]) b) History of the Right in the Philippines: People v. Bermas, G.R. No. 120420, 21 April 1999 c) Right to be assisted by "effective" and not necessarily "intelligent" counsel: People v. Liwanag, G.R. No. 120468, August 15, 2001T d) Accused choice of counsel not a plenary one: People v. Larrañaga, G.R. Nos. 138874-75, [February 3, 2004] e) Absolute and Invoked at Any Time: Spouses Telan v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 95026, [October 4, 1991]
Other cases: Right to counsel cannot be waived: People v. Holgado, G.R. No. L-2809, March 22, 1950 [EB] Instance when waived?: Sayson v. People, G.R. No. 51745, [October 28, 1988], 248 PHIL 909-921) People v. Tulin, G.R. No. 111709, August 30, 2001 Right to counsel de parte not absolute and may be waived: People v. Serzo, Jr., G.R. No. 118435, [June 20,1997], 274 SCRA 553 Non-lawyer may litigate his case personally (Sec. 34, Rule 138): Cruz v. Mijares, G.R. No. 154464, September 11, 2008 Cruz v. Cabrera, ADM. CASE NO. 5737, October 25, 2004 f) Ineffective counsel, gross negligence of counsel and right to counsel: Callangan v. People, G.R. No. 153414, [June 27, 2006] g) Duty of Counsel for the accused: People v. Bermas, G.R. No. 120420, [April 21, 1999] h) Power of court to appoint counsel de officio during absence of counsel de parte: People v. Larrañaga, G.R. Nos. 138874-75, [February 3, 2004]
D. (d ) To te s tify as a w itn e s s in h is o w n b e h alf b u t s u b je c t to
c ro s s -e xam in atio n o n m atte rs c o v e re d b y d ire c t e xam in atio n . His s ile n c e s h all n o t in an y m an n e r p re ju d ic e h im .
E. (e ) To b e e xe m p t fro m b e in g c o m p e lle d to b e a w itn e s s ag ain s t h im s e lf.
1. Privilege Against Self-incrimination at Trial: Chavez v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-29169, [August 19, 1968]** 2. Distinguished from before trial: a) Privilege covers only testimonial compulsion: Villaflor v. Summers, 41 Phil. 62 b) Forced re-enactments is “communicative in nature”: People v. Olvis, G.R. No. 71092, Sept. 30, 1987
-2- c) Not testimonial compulsion, examples: (i) Forcing morphine out of mouth: U.S. v. Ong Sui Hong, 36 Phil. 735 (ii) Examination of body for gonorrhea: U.S. v. Tan Teng, 23 Phil. 145 (iii) Taking of paraffin test without counsel: People v. Gamboa, 194 SCRA 372
F. (f) To c o n fro n t an d c ro s s -e xam in e th e w itn e s s e s ag ain s t h im at th e trial.
Eith e r p arty m ay u tilize as p art o f its e v id e n c e th e te s tim o n y o f a w itn e s s w h o is d e c e as e d , o u t o f o r c an n o t w ith d u e d ilig e n c e b e f o u n d in th e Ph ilip p in e s , u n av ailab le o r o th e rw is e u n ab le to te s tify , g iv e n in an o th e r c as e o r p ro c e e d in g , ju d ic ial o r ad m in is trativ e , in v o lv in g th e s am e p artie s an d s u b je c t m atte r, th e ad v e rs e p arty h av in g th e o p p o rtu n ity to c ro s s -e xam in e h im .
1. Testimony or deposition at a former proceeding:
Sec. 47. Rule 130, Rules of Court 2. Application for examination of witness for accused before trial: Sec. 12 & 13, Rule 119 (See Rule 119 outline.) 3. Perpetuation of Testimony (Formerly Ru;e 134) 4. Right to confront and cross-examine witnesses: Sections 12, 13 and 15, Rule 119 Rule on Examination of a Child Witness (Sec. 25, Republic Act No. 7610) Dowdell v. United States, 221 U. S. 325, 221 U. S. 330 (1911) People v. Abatayo, G.R. No. 139456, [July 7, 2004] Kim Liong v. People, G.R. No. 200630, June 4, 2018 Go v. People, G.R. No. 185527, [July 18, 2012] Maryland v. Craig, 497 U.S. 836 (1990) See J. Scalia, Dissent. 5. Right of court to control length of cross-examination & protect witnesses from needless and prolonged cross-examination: People v. Larrañaga, G.R. Nos. 138874-75, [February 3, 2004]
G. (g ) To h av e c o m p u ls o ry p ro c e s s is s u e d to s e c u re th e atte n d an c e o f w itn e s s e s an d p ro d u c tio n o f o th e r e v id e n c e in h is b e h alf. Sec. 14 (2), Art. III Bill of Rights 1. Subpoena: - Rule 21, Rules of Court 2. Bail to secure attendance of material witness: - Sec. 14, Rule 119 3. Sec., 10, Rule 21 applies only to civil cases: People v. Montejo, G.R. No. L-24154, [October 31, 1967]**T Geñorga v. Quitain, A.M. No. 981-CFI (Resolution), [July 29, 1977] 4. Conditional Examination of a Prosecution Witness Cannot Defeat the Rights of the Accused to Public Trial and Confrontation of Witnesses; Sec. 15, Rule
-3- 119: Go v. C.A., G.R. No. 185527. July 18, 2012. 5. Production and inspection of material evidence in possession of prosecution: - Sec. 10, Rule 116
H. (h ) To h av e s p e e d y , im p artial an d p u b lic trial.
1. Speedy Trial and Speedy Disposition of Cases Distinguished Cagang v. Sandiganbayan, Nos. 206438 and 206458, July 31, 2018 (EB) - Sec. 16, Art. III, Bill of Rights - Rule 119, Sec. 2-10 - Revised Guidelines for Continuous Trial of Criminal Cases (A.M. No. 15-06-10-SC) 25 April 2017 - See the Flowcharts a) Meaning of and Standards: Perez v. People, G.R. No. 164763. February 12, 2008 Almeda v. Office of the Ombudsman (Mindanao), G.R. No. 204267, [July 25, 2016] b) Double Jeopardy Attaches: Esmeña v. Pogoy, G.R. No. L-54110 February 20, 1981 Bonsubre, Jr. v. Yerro, G.R. No. 205952, [February 11, 2015]) 2. Impartial Trial Lai y Bilbao v. People, G.R. No. 175999, [July 1, 2015] People v. Larrañaga, G.R. Nos. 138874-75, [February 3, 2004] 3. Public Trial Meaning of: Garcia v. Domingo, G.R. No. L-30104 (Resolution), [July 25, 1973] Exception: Sec. 21, Rule 119
I. (i) To ap p e al in all c as e s allo w e d an d in th e m an n e r p re s c rib e d b y law .
Tan y Chua v. People, G.R. No. 148194, [April 12, 2002] Fake lawyer on appeal is denial of due process; effect: Spouses Telan v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 95026, [October 4, 1991] Statutory not Natural Right; Deny with Caution: De Guzman v. People, G.R. No. 167492, [March 22, 2007]
