Home (/) Criminalistics (/criminalistics.html) L.E.A. (/lea.html) Law (/law.

html)

Crime Detection (/crime-detection.html) Criminal Sociology (/criminal-sociology.html) Correction (/correction.html)

Blog (/blog.html) Contact Us (/contact-us.html) privacy policy (/privacy-policy.html) disclaimer (/disclaimer.html)

CRIMINOLOGY BOARD EXAM REVIEWER (/) (http://facebook.com/CriminologyB

(https://twitter.com/mg_viloria
(mailto:mg_viloria@yahoo

Criminal Procedure
Introduction:

Etymology: Krimea [Greek]: meaning, to charge a wrongdoing

Criminal Procedure
The method prescribed by law for the apprehension and prosecution of
persons accused of any criminal offense, and their punishment, in case iPage
of conviction.
Ofcial Site
It 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.

Criminal Jurisdiction Offer Available for

The authority to hear and decide a particular offense and impose a Short Time!
punishment for it. It has three requisites, namely:
iPage Hosting
Subject matter cases of the general class where the proceedings in Starting at $1.99.
question belong as determined by the nature of the offense and by the
penalty imposed by law;
Territory the geographical limits of the territory over which the court
presides and where the offense was committed; and
Person of the accused acquired thru: a) arrest [with warrant or
warrantless] or b) voluntary surrender.

I. Prosecution of Offenses

iPage.com
How instituted?
By filing the: 1) Complaint, or 2) Information.

Complaint
A sworn written statement charging a person with an offense
Executed and Subscribed by the O.P.A.O. [Offended Party, Any peace
officer, or Other public officer charged with the enforcement of the law
violated].
May be filed in the prosecutors office or directly to the court

Information
1.An accusation in writing
2. Subscribed by the Prosecutor
3.Filed with the court

Both are:
1. In writing
2. In the name of the People of the Philippines
3. Directed against all persons who appear to be responsible for the
offense involved.

Elements of a complaint or information:

1. Formal elements, and
2. Substantive elements.

It must be:
1. Sufficient in form, and
2. Sufficient in substance
Thus, under Section 14, of Rule 110, a complaint or information may be
amended, in form and in substance .

A complaint or information is sufficient in form if it states: [N.D.A.N.A.P.]

1. The Name of the accused
2. The Designation of the offense given by the statute
3. The Acts or omissions complained of as constituting the offense
4.The Name of the offended party
5. The Approximate date of the commission of the offense
6. The Place where the offense was committed.

A complaint or information is sufficient in substance if it doesnt contain

any of the defects which is a ground for a motion to quash. (Section 3,
Rule 117)

Note: A motion to quash, once granted, is equivalent to dismissal (but

not acquittal).

Remedy if a complaint or information is defective:

I. If defective in form
a) court may dismiss the complaint or information motu propio or
upon motion, or
b) accused may move for a BILL OF PARTICULARS
II. If defective in substance No obligation is imposed on the judge to
point out the duplicitousness or other defect in the indictment on which
an accused is being arraigned. It is for the accused to move for a motion
to quash on the ground that the complaint or information charges more
than one offense, under sanction of waiver and loss of ground of
objection (Concurring opinion of CJ Narvasa, People v. Bartulay, 192
SCRA 632)

Note: For certain classes of Actions, it is the tribunal having

jurisdiction which automatically determines whether or not the papers
are in order before giving it due course, meaning, it satisfies itself if the
complaint or information is sufficient in form and in substance.

Examples:
Articles of Impeachment in an impeachment proceedings
Presidential Election Protest

This is not so in criminal proceedings. It is incumbent upon the accused

to object on substantive defects (People v. Bartulay, supra).

Query:

JP was charged for indiscriminate firing. He claimed that he has to fire

his gun in self-defense because there was an actual threat on his person
and the firing of warning shots was reasonably necessary in order to
prevent or repel the unlawful aggression directed against him. Despite
this, the fiscal went on to file the information in court. May JP claim that
the information, though sufficient in form, is defective in substance?
Why?

No. JP cannot claim that the information is defective in substance. This

is so because self-defense is not a ground for a motion to quash but a
matter of defense. If proven, self-defense is a basis for acquittal, not
dismissal.

Any explanation or defense which the defendant may want to invoke can
be properly raised during trial (Galvez v. CA, 237 SCRA 685).

Distinction between Acquittal and Dismissal:

1. Acquittal is based on MERITS of the case (substantive) ex: accused A
was found innocent of killing B.
2. Dismissal is based on TECHNICALITY (procedural) ex: the crime has
already prescribed.

Notes:
1. There are certain classes of offenses that cannot be prosecuted de
officio 1private offenses, i.e. adultery, concubinage, etc. and 2private
libels, i.e. defamation imputing private offenses.
2. For some offenses, there are conditions precedents before plaintiff
can repair to the courts for redress [i.e. those requiring mediation at the
lupong tagapamayapa]. However, non-compliance of this rule is not
jurisdictional. The failure of the plaintiff to comply with the conciliation
requirement of Sec. 40 under the Local Government Code of 1991 does
not affect the Courts jurisdiction if no timely objection is made [San
Miguel Village School v. Pundogar, 173 SCRA 704, Bejar v. CA, 169 SCRA
566].
3. All criminal actions, whether commenced by filing of complaint or
information, are under the direct control of the prosecutor.

Queries:

I. A, B, C, D were charged with homicide. Preliminary investigation was

conducted by the fiscal who found sufficient evidence against all, but,
according to his determination, D was the least guilty. So the fiscal filed
the information only against A, B, and C leaving out D whom he would
utilize as state witness. Is the fiscal correct?

Under the Rules of Court, the fiscal cannot exclude D without court
approval. It would be a grave abuse of discretion on the part of the
court in not including D in the information because of the prosecutors
finding that there is sufficient evidence against all. There was no more
necessity to utilize D as a state witness.

Exeption:
Under the Witness Protection Act, the prosecutor has the discretion of
discharging an accused as a state witness and no court approval is
necessary.

II. Is designation of the offense an essential element of the complaint or

information? Why? Give the exception, if any.

No. Because in case of conflict between the designation of the offense

and the allegations, the allegation prevails.

The exception is when the allegation is so ambiguous that it may be

interpreted to mean either one or another offense, then the designation
of the offense is controlling (Case of US v. Dixon, where the designation
is for trespassing but the allegations indicates either trespassing or a
possible attempted rape).

II. Prosecution of Civil Action

Basis:
Art. 100, RPC - Every person criminally liable is also civilly liable

Generally, when a person commits a crime, he offends two entities,

namely:
1) The State [whose laws he violated]; and
2) The individual [whose person, right, honor, chastity, or property was
actually or directly injured or damaged by the same acts or omissions].

Exception:
When the infraction falls under the class of offenses called victimless
crimes like gambling, betting on illegal cock fights, drug addiction,
prostitution, etc. etc. under the theory that the offender himself is his
own victim.

Sec. 1, Rule 111 - When a criminal action is instituted, the civil action
for the recovery of civil liability is deemed instituted with the criminal
action unless the offended party:
Waives the civil action;
Reserves the right to institute it separately; or
Institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action

Principle of proferrence of criminal action over civil action:

After the criminal action has been commenced, the separate civil action
arising therefrom cannot be instituted until final judgment has been
entered in the criminal action.
If the criminal action is filed after the said civil action has already been
instituted, the latter shall be suspended in whatever stage it may be
found before judgments on the merits xxx.

Reason for the rule:

Criminal action is based on an offense committed against the laws of the
State while civil action is based on an injury to individual rights. Public
interest is superior over private one.

Exception to the rule of proferrence of criminal action over civil action

When the independent Civil Action is based on Articles 32, 33, 34 and
2176 of the Civil Code.
When there is a prejudicial question in the civil case that must be
decided first before the criminal action can proceed because the decision
in the civil action is vital to the judgment of the criminal case.

Elements of Prejudicial Question:

The previously instituted civil action involves an issue similar or
intimately related to the issue raised in the subsequent criminal action,
and
The resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal
action may proceed.

Queries:

1. Nobern married Armie on 2005. On 2006, Nobern married X. On

2007, Armie filed a criminal case for bigamy against Nobern. On 2008, X
filed a civil case for annulment against Nobern on the ground that their
marriage was void ab initio for having been contracted during the
subsistence of Noberns prior marriage to Armie without X knowing it.

Is there a prejudicial question? Why?

2. Nobern married Armie on 2005. On 2006, Nobern married X because

X threatened to kill him unless he marries X. On 2007, Nobern filed an
annulment against X on the ground of threat and intimidation. On 2008,
Armie filed a criminal case for bigamy against Nobern upon learning of
Noberns marriage to X.

Is there a prejudicial question? Why?

Note:
Prejudicial question is subject to the principle that he who comes into
court must come with clean hands. The accused cannot be permitted to
use the law in order to frustrate the ends of justice. Good faith or bad
faith is important.

III. Preliminary Investigation

Defined
It is an inquiry or proceeding 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.

When required?
Before the filing of complaint or information for an offense where the
penalty prescribed by law is imprisonment of at least 4 years, 2 months
and 1 day, without regard to fine.

When NOT REQUIRED:

In cases where the penalty imposed by law is NOT at least 4 years, 2
month, & 1 day
In case of a valid warantless arrest [shall proceed in inquest]

Officers authorized to conduct PI

Provincial or City Prosecutors and their assistants;
National and Regional State Prosecutors; and
Other officers as may be authorized by law [COMELEC during Election
Period, Ombudsman, etc.]

Note: Effective 2004, judges of the lower court canno longer conduct
Preliminary Investigations.

Rules:
1. The complaint must be sufficient in form [See notes in Prosecution of
Offenses, supra]
2. Supported by affidavits of the complainant and his witnesses
3. Numbers of copies are proportionate to the number of respondents
plus 2 official copies

1. Within 10 days after the filing, fiscal determines if there is prima facie
case. If no dismiss. If yes issue subpoenas.
2. Within 10 days after receipt of subpoena with the complaint and
supporting affidavits and documents respondent submits counter
affidavits.
3. In case respondent cannot be subpoenaed or does not submit counter
affidavit within 10 days investigating officer resolves the complaint on
the basis of evidence presented by complainant.

Clarificatory hearing if there are facts and issues to be clarified from a

party or witness - within 10 days after submission of counter affidavit.
No direct examinations. Questions must be addressed to the fiscal.

Resolution within 10 days after the investigation.

Forwarding of fiscals resolution to superiors within 5 days
Superiors shall act on the resolution within 10 days

IV. Arrest

Defined:
1. [Based on Rules of Court] The taking of a person in custody in order
that he may be bound to answer for the commission of an offense (Sec.
1, RRC)

2. [Based on Jurisprudence] A restraint on person, depriving one of his

own will and liberty, binding him to become obedient to the will of the
law (Larraaga v. CA, 92 SCAD 605)

How made:

As to the manner of enforcement, by:

1) Actual restraint, or
2) Submission to the custody of the person making arrest

As to the presence or absence of judicial order:

1) By virtue of a warrant, or
2) Warrantless arrest, in cases allowed by the Rules

As to the person arresting:

1) Arrest by peace officer, or
2) Citizens arrest

When warrantless arrests allowed:

1. Inflagrante Delicto arrest when in his presence, the person to be

arrested has:

Committed
Is actually committing an offense
Is attempting to commit

Translation: In flagrante delicto [latin] Literally, caught in the act of

wrong.

2. Hot Pursuit arrest when an offense has Ajust been committed and
Bhe has probable cause to believe based on personal knowledge of facts
or circumstances that the person arrested has committed it.
Tests in determining probable cause based on personal knowledge:

Must be based on the senses, i.e. 1) Sight

2) Hearing
3) Smell

Notes:
A. The arresting officer must have personal knowledge of the
commission of the crime through his senses. He cannot fish for
evidence first and afterward make the arrest.
B. The term personal knowledge excludes hearsay as a basis for
probable cause.
C. There must first be a lawful arrest before any search may be
conducted. The process cannot be reversed (Dissent of Chief Justice A.
Narvasa, People v. Malmstedt). Exception: in case of valid warantless
searches (Majority opinion, People v. Malmstedt, 198 SCRA 401).
D. For purposes of arrest Officer may break into any building or
enclosure where the person to be arrested is or is reasonably believed to
be, if he is refused admittance thereto, after announcing his authority
and purpose (Sec. 11, RRC).
E. For purposes of search and seizure he cannot break into any
building or enclosure without violating the right of privacy. Exceptions:
1) When there is consent (Dissent of Justice I. Cruz, People v. Evaristo,
216 SCRA 431). 2) When there is a warrant.

3. Arrest of fugitives from justice persons who has escaped from a

penal establishment, place of confinement etc. while serving sentence,
temporarily confined, or case is still pending may be arrested under
the theory that he is engaged in the commission of a continuing
offense (Parulan v. Director of Prisons, 22 SCRA 639).

Methods of Arrest:

I. With warrant, by officer:

The officer shall inform the person of: 1) the cause of the arrest
2) fact that warrant exist

Exception: 1) When he flees or forcibly resist before 1 & 2 is

completed
2) When the giving of info will imperil the arrest

II. Without warrant, by an officer and by private persons:

Inform the person of 1) authority and cause of arrest [if person

arresting is police officer] or 2) intent to arrest and cause [if person
arresting is private person]

Unless when the person to be arrested is either:

1) Engaged in the commission of the offense
2) Is pursued immediately after its commission
3) Has escaped, flees or forcibly resist before the officer or the
private person making the arrest has the opportunity to inform him of 1
& 2, or
4) When the giving of info would imperil the arrest

Tests in determining lawfulness of USE OF LETHAL FORCE by the

arresting officer:

1) Test of reasonability conduct of the arresting officer is examined.

Where the precipitate action of the arresting officer resulted in the loss
of a human life and there exists no circumstances whatsoever justifying
the shooting of a person who is asleep, even if he is a notorious criminal
condemnation, and not condonation should be the rule (People v.
Oanis, 74 Phil. 257).

2) Test of necessity conduct of the person arrested is examined.

Where the arrested person attempts to flee, struck a policeman with his
fists, draw a mess knife and attacked another policeman, the arresting
officer is not required to afford him a fair opportunity for equal struggle.
A police officer, in the performance of his duty, must stand his ground
and cannot, like private individual, take refuge in flight. His duty
requires him to overcome the offender (US v. Mojica, 42 Phil 784).

V. Bail

Kinds of bail bonds:

1. cash bond
2. property bond
3. surety bond
4. recognizance

Defined:
The security given for the release of a person in custody of the law,
furnished by him or a bondsman, to guarantee his appearance before
any court as required under the conditions of law.

Generally:
The right to bail only accrues when a person is under custody. Court
must have jurisdiction over the person of the accused either thru: 1)
arrest, with or without warrant, or 2) voluntary surrender.

Exception:
When the person under investigation cannot personally appear because
he is hospitalized but applies for bail through his counsel, he is deemed
to be under the constructive custody of the law (Dinapol v. Baldado, 225
SCRA 110, Paderanga v. CA, 247 SCRA 741).

Where to apply?
In the court where the case is pending (if not yet filed, may be filed
before any court).

Conditions for bail:

See Sec. 2, Rule 114

Bail, a matter of right:

1. Before or after conviction by MTC, MTCC or MCTC
2. Before conviction by RTC of an offense not punishable by death,
reclusion temporal, or life imprisonment

Bail, a matter of discretion:

1. Upon conviction of RTC of an offense not punishable by death,
reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment.
2. Before conviction for capital offenses [punishable by death], or an
offense punishable by reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, when
evidence of guilt is not strong. (Bail is neither a matter of right nor a
matter of discretion only in cases where the evidence of guilt is strong).

Bail granted in capital offenses despite findings that evidence of guilt is

strong (Cited in Cruz, Constitutional Law, 2003 Ed.):
De la Rama v. Peoples Court, 77 Phil. 461 accused was granted bail
due to tuberculosis that requires confinement to the hospital.
People v. Sison, GR 398, September 19, 1946 humanitarian reasons
considered by SC.

Notes:

1. The right to bail flows from the presumption of innocence. This is so

because accusation is not synonymous with guilt.

2. In deportation proceedings, bail is not a matter of right but of

discretion on the part of the Commissioner of Immigration and
Deportation (Harvey v. Defensor-Santiago, 162 SCRA 398).

3. Bail is not available to military facing court martial proceedings

(Commendador v. De Villa, 200 SCRA 80).

4. I extradition proceedings, bail may be granted provided the accused

undertake to submit himself to the jurisdiction of the court and provided
further that he is not a flight risk (Govt. of Hong Kong v. Judge Olalia,
2007)
VI. Rights of the accused

Rights may be waived, unless the waiver is contrary to law, public order,
public policy, morals, or good customs or prejudicial to a third person
with a right recognized by law (Art. 6, NCC).

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be entitled to the following

rights:

Key: [PIPTEC CoSpA]

P resumed innocent
I nformed of the nature of the cause and accusation
P resent in person and by counsel
T estify in his own behalf
E xempt from being compelled to be a witness against himself
C onfront witnesses
C ompulsory process to secure attendance of witnesses and production
of other evidence
S peedy, impartial and public trial
A ppeal

1) To be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved beyond

reasonable doubt.

Hierarchy of proof [according to degree of persuasiveness]:

Absolute certainty ultimate truth [not required in any legal
proceeding]
Moral certainty passed the test of human experience [i.e., guilt beyond
reasonable doubt, conclusive presumptions]
Relative certainty so called because a higher degree of proof exists
[i.e., preponderance of evidence, probable cause, substantial evidence,
disputable or prima facie presumptions]

Notes:
The starting point is the presumption of innocence (See: Section 3, Par.
(a), Rule 131, RRC)
It is incumbent upon the prosecution to demonstrate culpability. The
burden of proof lies in the prosecution. Unless guilt beyond reasonable
doubt is established, the accused need not prove his innocence.
Burden of proof the duty of the affirmative to prove what it alleges.
(Africa, The Art of Argumentation and Debate).
Absolute certainty is not demanded by the law to convict but only moral
certainty.

2) To be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him.

Essential to avoid surprise and to afford him the opportunity to prepare

his defense accordingly.
Arraignment serves this purpose by informing him why the prosecuting
arm of the state is mobilized against him.
An accused cannot be convicted of an offense unless it is clearly charged
in the compliant or information. Basic rule you cannot prove what you
did not allege.

3) To be present and defend in person and by counsel at every stage of

the proceedings, from arraignment to promulgation of judgment.

Express or Implied waiver is renunciation to be present on that

particular date only.
Escape of the accused is waiver by implication to be present on said
date and all subsequent trial dates. [Fact of escape made his failure
unjustified because he has, by escaping, placed himself beyond the pale
and protection of the law (People v. Salas 143 SCRA 163, cited in Cruz,
Constitutional Law, 2003 Ed.)].
Right to counsel is right to effective counsel. It is not enough to simply
appoint a counsel de officio. Counsel must have no conflict of interest.
Thus, a fiscal cannot be appointed as counsel de officio.
When an accused is represented by a fake lawyer who pretended to be a
member of the bar, his right to counsel is violated, unless the accused
voluntarily chose him knowing him to be a non-lawyer.

4) To testify as a witness in his own behalf but subject to cross-

examination on matters covered by direct examination. His silence shall
not in any manner prejudice him.

5) To be exempt from being compelled to be a witness against himself.

Right to testify in his own behalf:

Once exercised, the accused is subject to limited cross-examination.
If not exercised, no inference of guilt can be derived from his silence
alone.

Right against self incrimination:

Intended to shield the guilty & imprudent as well as the innocent &
farsighted.
Based on public policy and humanity, otherwise, the accused will be
placed on the strongest temptation to commit perjury.

Notes:
A. Prohibition covers 1testimonial compulsion and 2the production of the
accused of incriminating documents and articles demanded from him.
B. Does not include compulsion to 1submit fingerprints, 2photograph,
3blood or urine samples, and 4others requiring a mere mechanical act
on the part of the accused [Villaflor v. Summers, 41 Phil. 64, US v. Tan
Teng, 23 Phil. 145, Schemerber v. California, US L.Ed. 2d 908, 89 S CT
No. 658].

6) To confront and cross-examine the witnesses against him at the trial.

Reasons:
To meet the witness face to face (Bill of Rights, 1987 Constitution)
To enable the court to judge the truthfulness, deportment, and the
appearance of the witness while testifying (US v, Javier, 37 Phil 449).

Effect of absence of right to cross examine:

When there is express or implied waiver no effect
In the absence of waiver testimony of the witness cannot be
considered as complete and therefore cannot form part of the evidence
against the accused.

Effect when witness dies:

Before he could take witness stand inadmissible
After giving his direct testimony but before cross examination Gen.
rule: inadmissible. Exception: where the adverse party was given
adequate opportunity but failed to cross examine due to his own fault
After the defense conducted cross examination admissible

7) To have compulsory process issued to secure the attendance of

witnesses and production of other evidence in his behalf.

Compulsory process refers to the issuance of the court of:

Sub-poena for the attendance of witnesses
Sub-poena duces tecum for the production of documents

Notes:
A. If a sub-poena or sub-poena duces tecum is issued and the person
named in the sub-poena refuses to appear or refuses to produce the
required documents without justifiable reasons court has the power to
declare that person in contempt and may order his arrest. [People v.
Montejo, 21 SCRA 722].

B. The coercive powers of the court must be employed in order to give

meaning to this right.

8) To have speedy, impartial and public trial.

Speed:
Justice delayed is justice as denied
Impartiality:
Every party litigant is entitled to nothing less than the cold neutrality of
an impartial court (Macalintal v. Judge Teh, 280 SCRA 623).

Public trial:
So that the public may see that he is fairly dealt with and not unjustly
condemned in case of conviction.
So the public may know of the fact or the basis of his innocence in case
of acquittal.

Note: Public trial and Trial by publicity are two different things. They
are not the same. There should be a public trial, not trial by publicity.

9) To appeal in all cases allowed and in the manner prescribed by law.

The right to appeal is a statutory right but withdrawal of this right, in the
absence of a valid waiver, constitutes a denial of due process guaranteed
by the Constitution (Cruz, Constitutional Law, 2003 Ed.).
It is not a natural right or inherent one. The party who seeks to avail of
the said right must comply with the requirements of the Rules.
Otherwise, the right to appeal is lost (People v. Sabellano, 198 SCRA
196)

VII. Arraignment and Plea

Arraignment: The initial step in a criminal prosecution whereby the
defendant is brought before the court to hear the charges and to enter a
plea (Blacks Law Dictionary).

Venue for Arraignment and Plea:

Before the court where the complaint or information was filed or is
assigned for trial.

Purpose of arraignment [Key: FIG] (14 Am. Jur., p. 939, GV Jacinto,

Crim. Proc.)

1) To fix the identity of the accused

2) To inform him of the charge
3) To give the accused an opportunity to plead

Note:
In order for the Court to acquire complete jurisdiction over the person
of the accused, arraignment is essential. Unless this procedure is
completed, the court cannot commence trial in absentia.

Procedure:
Arraignment must be made in open court by the judge or the clerk
Accused must be furnished with a copy of the complaint or information
Complaint or Information must be read in a language or dialect known
to him
Accused must be present
Accused must personally enter his plea

I. If under preventive detention

Raffle of case and transmittal of records within 3 days
Arraignment within 10 days from the date of raffle
Pre trial conference within 10 days after arraignment

II. If not under preventive detention

General rule within 30 days from the date the court acquires
jurisdiction
Exception a shorter period is provided by special law or SC Circular

Rules in entering a plea:

If accused refuses to plead or makes a conditional plea a plea of not
guilty shall be entered
If accused enters a plea but presents exculpatory evidence plea of
guilty is withdrawn and a plea of not guilty shall be entered for him.
Burden of proof shifts.
If accused enters a plea to a capital offense court shall conduct a
searching inquiry into the voluntariness and full comprehension of the
consequences of his plea and shall require the prosecution to prove his
guilt and the precise degree of culpability.

Pre-trial Conference:
Private offended party shall be required to appear for purposes of:
1) Plea-bargaining
2) Determination of civil liability
3) Other matters requiring his presence

In case of failure of the offended party to appear despite due notice

conformity of prosecutor is sufficient for purposes of pleading guilty to a
lesser offense which is necessarily included in the offense charged.

Bill of particulars:
The accused may, before arraignment, move for a bill of particulars to
enable him properly to plead and prepare for trial. The motion shall
specify the alleged defects of the complaint or information and the
details desired.

Scope of the Bill of Particular:

Bill of Particulars is a remedy for formal defects and not substantive
defects.

The remedy against an indictment that fails to allege the time of the
commission of the offense with sufficient definition is a Motion for Bill of
Particulars and not a Motion to Quash (Rocaberte v. People, 192 SCRA
152).

[See discussion in: Elements of Complaint and Information, remedy in

case complaint or information is defective, supra]

Modes of discovery:
Accused has a right against the suppression of evidence favorable to an
accused which is material as to 1) guilt, or 2) as to punishment (Webb v.
De Leon, 247 SCRA 653).

Suppressed evidence must be of such nature as to affect the outcome of

the trial (US v. Agurs, US v. Bagley)

Notes:

1) Arraignment is important for notifying the accused of the cause he is

required to meet. The accused has the right to be informed of the nature
and cause of the accusation against him (Borja v. Mendoza, 77 SCRA
422).

2) The existence of a plea is an essential requisite to double jeopardy

(People v. Balicas)

Related Readings: Criminal Procedure

1. Criminal Procedure Reviewer 1 (/criminal-procedure-reviewer-
1.html)
2. Criminal Jurisprudence Definition of Terms (/criminal-
jurisprudence-definition-of-terms.html)
CREATE A FREE WEBSITE