BAIL
The suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus
Bail is based on the constitutional presumption of innocence
therefore a constitutional right.
BUT: Bail may be waived. People v Donato
GENERAL RULE: BAIL IS A MATTER OF RIGHT
All persons charged before their conviction shall be entitled to
bail.
 This applies to applications for bail in first level courts because
these courts have no subject matter jurisdiction to try capital
offenses because obviously the penalties they can impose to
criminal cases are up to 6 years.
 Applications in the RTC if it’s greater than 6 years but less
than RP or life imprisonment.
 If it is punishable by RP/ life imprisonment but evidence of guilt
is not strong.
May the prosecution present evidence when bail is a matter of right?
No. The prosecutor cannot present evidence to deny bail where bail is
a matter of right. If at all, the only intervention of the prosecution there
is to help determine the proper amount of the bail. Donato
EXCEPTION: BAIL IS DISCRETIONARY
There are bail negating circumstances like if the accused is
charged with a capital offense and the evidence of guilt is strong.
Rule 114 Section 5
Note: these two must concur.
 if the offense is charged by Reclusion Perpetua, bail becomes
a matter of discretion therefore it will be denied if evidence of
the guilt is strong. Leviste
Charged with a capital offense, he may still be entitled to bail, if the
evidence of guilt is not strong.
Evidence of guilt is strong: the word strong is not the same as proof
beyond reasonable doubt.
- the standard of bail as seen in the Cabral case is proof evident and
presumption great.
IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS/PRINCIPLES OF BAIL:
1.
does not impair the right to bail
2. Bail should never be used as payment for civil liability.
3. Bail is not applicable in military proceedings
4. Excessive bail should not be required or imposed
Test of proper amount of bail:
It should be high enough to ensure the presence of the accused but
no higher than is reasonably calculated to fulfill this purpose.
WHO FURNISHES THE BAIL?
 The accused as the applicant himself
 bondsman: these are surety bonds
What is the obligation of a bondsman under section 2(b)?
main obligation: to surrender the accused to the court for execution
of final judgement.
how can he do that under section 23?
He can arrest the accused or caused him to be arrested by a
police officer or any other person of suitable age and discretion.
What is the rationale?
The rationale for giving the power to the bondsman to arrest Commented [JC1]: Proper case name please
the accused or caused the accused to be arrested by someone else
is because when the obligation of bail is assumed by the bondsman,
the bondsman becomes the jailer of the accused.
Normally, if the accused is not out on jail he is under custody
of the jail warden but since he is out of jail, the person responsible for
ensuring that the accused is present at trial is given to the bondsman.
The bondsman becomes the jailer and is subrogated to the
rights and means which the government possesses to make his
control over the accused effective.
APPLICATION FOR BAIL
The mere application for bail is tantamount to a waiver of the
defense of lack of jurisdiction over the person because when you apply
for bail you are already seeking affirmative relief from the court.
Why must the applicant for bail be in custody?
To prevent the practice of sending somebody else to post bail
without recognizing the jurisdiction of the court.
Note: Jurisdiction over the person of the accused and custody are two A person may apply for bail as soon as he is deprived of liberty even
different concepts. Defensor-Santiago if a complaint or information has not yet been filed. Rule 114 Section Commented [JC2]: What’s the proper case title
17(c).
Custody of Law Jurisdiction
Physical restraint over Does not require Summary: Who are entitled to bail?
the body of the custody of law. May 1. The accused
accused is required grant reliefs except for
bail. 2. The witnesses
Custody of law is When there’s a 3. entitled
Who are Those towho are not yet charged
bail?
already present even complaint filed.
when there’s no Where do you file an application for bail? Rule 114 Section 5 in relation
complaint filed to Rule 120 Section 6
Becomes a specific If the accused is confined or detained in another province or city
requirement for the If the accused is confined or detained in another province or
application for bail city, the judgment may be promulgated by the executive judge of the
Regional Trial Court having jurisdiction over the place of confinement
When a warrant of arrest has not yet been issued, that means that in or detention upon request of the court which rendered the judgment.
all likelihood the person is not yet under custody of the law in which The court promulgating the judgment shall have authority to accept
case, no bond should still be posted it becomes a different story the notice of appeal and to approve the bail bond pending appeal;
altogether if a person is already arrested or detained by virtue of a provided, that if the decision of the trial court convicting the accused
warrantless arrest in which case bail may be allowed. Redono v Judge changed the nature of the offense from non-bailable to bailable, the
Dimaano application for bail can only be filed and resolved by the appellate
court.
Are witnesses entitled to bail?
 Material Witness Rule 119, Section 14. When Trial Court rules upon the application
If the court is satisfied that a material witness will not testify If the original record has not yet been transmitted to the
when required, the court may impose bail. appellate court, The trial court even if a notice of appeal has already
been filed. Where do you file the notice of appeal btw with the trial
The difference is that material witnesses do not necessarily have court or with the appellate court? Trial court. So even if a notice of
to be under custody of law. That requirement only holds for the appeal has already been filed but the records had not yet been
accused. transmitted, because the records will still be collected by the clerk of
court before transmission. The petition for bail may be acted upon by
 Witnesses in substituted information Rule 110, Section 14 the trial court.
In the interim, to ensure that they will still appear when the hearing
starts for the substituted information, the court may require that they When the Appellate court rules upon the application
give or they post bail. If the record has already been transmitted to the appellate court then
it is appellate court who should rule on the application for bail. nd then
Can those not yet charged in court still apply for bail? if the decision of the RTC convicting the accused changed the nature
of the offense from nonbailable to bailable, appellate court.
FAILURE TO APPEAR AT TRIAL Once you are already arraigned and you enter your plea, the
 Trial may proceed in absentia. Rule 114 Section 2(c). right to question these things or these matters is now waived.
 Bondsman given the authority to arrest the accused. Rule 114
Section 23 Defensor Santiago
 bondsman will be asked to explain why they failed to bring you Problem: Here the court gave her due consideration by allowing that
and why the bail should not be forfeited. she post bail even not in person, the Sandigabayan agreed na nga but
then binaliktad niya sinabi niya no I did not post bail so nagalit yung
Supreme Court sabi wag naman ganun pinagbigyan na nga eh Commented [JC4]: Please fix the mini digest haha
WHAT IS THE DURATION OF BAIL? Rule 114 Section 2(a)
Effective until promulgation. Manalo
Problem: Manalo filed for bail which the court granted however he was
Rule 114 Section 3 – clear charged with rape (nonbailable) which is punishable by RP to death
What is a capital offense? RA 9346 now prohibits the imposition of but then the court did not conduct a hearing for the petition for bail so
death penalty. Those punishable by RP or life imprisonment. the court made an error when the judge granted the bail without a Commented [JC3]: Di ko gets tong part na to help
hearing.
Commented [JC5]: Pls fix mini digest also hehe
REMEDIES IF THE APPLICATION FOR BAIL IS DENIED STANDARD OF PROCEDURE OF THE TRIAL COURT WHEN AN
GADALEJ BAIL IS A MATTER APPLICATION FOR BAIL IS FILED
OF RIGHT In all cases: matter of right and discretionary
(No bail negating  Notify the prosecutor of the hearing of the application for bail
circumstance is or require him to submit his recommendations.
applicable) Bail is discretionary
a petition for certiorari Mandamus under  Judge must conduct a hearing for the application for bail
under rule 65 Rule 65 regardless of whether or not the prosecution wants to present
evidence
TAKE NOTE VERY IMPORTANT PROVISION: Rule 114 Section 26  Judge must decide based on the summary evidence and if the
Bail is not a bar from guilt is not strong, the judge must discharge the accused upon
approval of the bail and if not, he must deny the petition.
BARRING EFFECT OF BAIL  Within 48 hours after hearing, the court shall issue an order
Bail is not a bar from questioning the illegality of your arrest containing a brief summary of the evidence and the
or the conduct of an irregular preliminary investigation. Rule 114 conclusion which shall not be regarded as a pre-judgement of
Section 26 the case.
 Arrest
You are not barred from questioning the validity of the arrest Rule 114, Section 8
and you are not barred from questioning the legality of the Note: If a hearing is conducted, it should be summary in nature but the
warrant of arrest. evidence presented will be part of the evidence in chief or will be
 Preliminary investigation adduced during the trial proper.
You are not barred from questioning the regularity or the In other words, you don’t need to call again those witnesses
absence of the preliminary investigation and present the same evidence during the course of the presentation
BUT: When will these be waived? of the evidence in chief.
 But just remember under Section 8 that the witnesses during
the bail hearing may be recalled for further questioning during trial
proper.
SUMMARY NATURE OF A HEARING
 Even a one-liner resolution that the evidence of guilt is not
strong has been held to be satisfactory because the
mandatory hearing is only summary in nature. Judge Hao
Cahs bond – entire 50k, surety- you will apply to a surety and just pay
the premium (around 3k). the diffrence is this, the 50k if you are
acquitted, the entire 50k goes back to you but if the surety bond, you
cannot recover it anymore it’s for the premium na.
Kun Wei Chun: The imposable penalty here is RP. The Court denied
bail although there was a recommended bail f 40k the court said hindi
RP eh denied. Was the court in error here? No, the court is correct in
rejecting the recommended amount at 40k.
Enrile: landmark case. The Sandiganbayan denied Enrile’s motion for
bail. Plunder NONBAILABLE. How did the SC look at bail here? The
SC went back to the first principle of bail: the purpose of bail; to secure
the attendance of the accused at trial. The court said that based from
that prism, it does not appear that enrile will be a flight risk, it does not
appear that Enrile would not appear during the trial based on the fact
that he immediately surrendered, and his political and social standing
as well as health reasons. This case has opened the floodgates of bail
appliactions for plunder and there are many persons who have been
set free on bail because of the Enrile case. The majority said and this
is my problem here, there was really no determination whether or not
the evidence of guilt was strong. The Sandiganbayan has not even
determined it yet at that point and yet the Supreme Court said na hindi
pagbigyan na natin ilabas na natin out of humanitarian considerations.
Justice Leonen made a very strong dissent and said that we are
carving out another exception insofar as bail is concerned here. In this
case, the SC specified when bail is a matter of right and when bail is
a matter of discretion.
WHEN BAIL IS NOT ALLOWED
 Bail will not be allowed after a judgement of conviction has
become final (Section 24) and finally
 after the accused has commence to serve sentence (Section
24). Once you were brought into bilibid, you can no longer
apply for bail because you’re already convicted.
 A person who has already been convicted of death, li or rp
should be denied bail because the conviction already
indicates strong evidence of guilt. He has already been
convicted beyond reasonable doubt which is stronger or
greater or heavier than presumption great or proof evident. Commented [JC6]: Proper case name please
Automatically denied.
o Once already convicted then obviously, the evidence
of guilt is strong and the presumption of innocence
has been overcome and the constitutional right to bail
ends. Uy case Commented [JC7]: Not clear for me paki clear up if you
have notes, di kasi ako nakikinig sa class.
General rule after conviction:
you may be allowed bail if you are penalized with a sentence
of greater than 6 years but less than life imprisonment or
reclusion perpetua.
Exception:
But even if you are convicted with a sentence of greater than
6 years but less than life imprisonment or reclusion perpetua,
you may still not be granted bail if any of the conditions under
section 5 is present. Also, you will not be granted bail if the
penalty imposed is life imprisonment, reclusion perpetua or
death.
Some special issues:
Is an arraignment pre-requisite to bail?
No, Lavides case.
Lavides case: Lavides filed 2 things, a petition for bail and a motion to
quash. And this is what differentiates it from Serapio. Was it proper for
the trial court to require him to be arraigned first? What happened was
when the court required him to be arraigned first, it forced the accused
to choose between these 2 remedies. Remember, he filed a motion to
quash and a petition for bail. It forced the accused to choose lang one
between these 2 remedies which was so unfair for the accused Commented [JC8]: Fix case digest Cassandra hayup ka
because if he chose to do an MTQ, the problem is, it will delay his talaga napaka tamad mong demonyita ka
release until after his motion to quash is resolved. Because prior to its
resolution, he cannot be arraigned. Because when he is arraigned, the
grounds for the motion to quash are waived already. On the other
hand, if he choose bail, the problem naman is although he is released,
he will be deprived of his right to question the information through an
mtq. Actually may point yung court. You are forcing the hand of the
accused which is so unfair. Why would you deprive him of all the
remedies available to him under the law?
What are the 3 situations specifically stated in Serapio which allow bail
before an arraignment?
1. when bail is a matter of right because the accused may apply for a
grant of bail prior to arraignment.
2. when a motion to quash and an application for bail is filed, an
application for bail in a case involving an offense punishable by
Reclusion Perpetua may also be heard even before the accused is
arraigned.
3. if there is a finding that the evidence of guilt is not strong, he may
be provisionally released prior to arraignment.
There is really no inconsistency between the remedies of a
motion to quash and a petition for bail. They are two different things,
they seek two different remedies. One is to secure provisional liberty
and one is to question the information. Serapio
Can the accused charged with a nonbailable offense not be detained
in jail?
Yes, like in the case of Judge Maceda.
Case of Judge Maceda: Since 1990, Judge Maceda was under the
custody of the clerk of court. In 2000, the Supreme Court found out
that he was actually not under custody, the whole time he was
practicing law. So what did the Supreme Court do? He was committed
to jail, he was ordered detained.
Can an accused charged with a nonbailable offense be released
without the requisite bail hearing?
Yes, Ocampo case.
Ocampo case: Technically, dapat hindi but that was the SC said. Here,
it appears that there was no conduct of bail hearings altogether but
let’s take this more as the exception.
Can the accused post bail even if he has not yet been charged in
court?
Yes.
Case of Ruiz: Santos was detained in Camp Crame. Pending the filing
of formal charges in court, he waived his right to Article 125 and a Commented [JC9]: Please put a very mini digest
hearing for PI was set so later the judge ordered a release and granted
her bail. The Court said here that bail is available to a person if the
offense is bailable as long as he was already lawfully arrested or
detained even if there was no filing of formal charges yet. Commented [JC13]: Fix doctrine lang
EFFECT OF HEARING FOR DETERMINATION OF PROBABLE
CAUSE
The hearing for the determination of probable cause serves a
different purpose than the hearing for the determination of whether or
not the guilt of the accused is strong or whether or not bail should be
granted. Jorda v Judge Vitas
Note: that a hearing must be conducted to determine whether the
evidence of guilt is strong or not strong. Enrile v Sandiganbayan.
Likewise, a finding that the prosecution’s evidence was weak
does put the court on estoppel from rendering a contrary ruling after
trial because such is only intended for the purpose of granting bail and Commented [JC10]: Proper case name
it is not a trial on the merits. Whatever findings of the court in a petition
for bail, they’re different from the final determination of the court. They
may be reversed by the trial court eventually come judgement time.
Tupas
What is the quantum of evidence required to determine whether or not
the guilt is strong
Proof evident or presumption great. This the quantum required to Commented [JC11]: Fix mini digest
determine w/n evidence of guilt is strong. People v Cabral
 Even if there is reasonable doubt as to his guilt, if on the
examination of the entire record, the presumption is great,
then the bail should be refused. People v Cabral
What is presumption great or proof evident?
Proof evident Commented [JC12]: Fix doctrine
Clear and strong evidence which leads to a well-guarded
dispassionate judgement to the conclusion that the offense has been
committed and the accused is guilty thereof.
presumption great
The presumption great is the inference of guilt natural to be brought in
a strong, clear and convincing to an unbiased judgement that excludes
all other probability of any other conclusion.
NOTE: Presumption great and proof evident again is not the same as
proof beyond reasonable doubt. Just because there is a finding that
evidence of guilt is strong, in other words there is proof evident or
presumption great, doesn’t necessarily mean that you can already
convict the accused.
JUDGE CARINGAL’S ADVICE:
Although, naturally you already found in your bail hearings that
evidence of guilt is strong, ask the judge to inhibit already you can say
that the judge has already concluded that the accused is guilty.
HEARING FOR BAIL WHEN IT IS DISCRETIONARY
The judge is mandated to conduct a hearing even in cases
where the prosecution chooses to just file a comment or leave the bail
application to the discretion of the court and even if the prosecution
refuses to present evidence it is still mandatory. An order ganting bail
also must contain a summary evidence of the prosecution otherwise it
may be invalidated. Cortez
The Court is required to conduct a hearing even if the
prosecution refuses to adduce evidence.
If the prosecution refuses to adduce evidence, what will the court do?
Base the hearing on:
 on the records
 based on the evidence thus far presented to determine
whether the evidence of guilt is strong.
Who has the burden of showing that the evidence is strong during
mandatory hearing?
Prosecution. Rule 114, Section 8.
The summary of the evidence presented by the prosecution is
required and lack of such means that the order granting the bail is
formally defective. The prosecution must be given an opportunity to
present within a reasonable time all evidence it desires to produce
when a hearing is mandatory or in other words, when bail is not a
matter of right. People v. Sandiego
But: If you read the rules, there is nothing that says that the accused
can present evidence countervailing or rebuttal evidence. In fact, in a
lot of the petitions for bail, the judges really don’t allow the accused to
present rebuttal evidence but according to the case of Judge Hao, the
accused may introduce rebuttal evidence. Judge Hao Commented [JC14]: Judge Hao
EFFECT OF GRANT OF APPLICATION FOR BAIL
After conviction pending appeal
The accused will continue to be free and his provisional liberty will
continue.
But: if it is by surety, what is required?
It will be subject to the consent of the bondsman because the
obligations of the bondsman are only until the promulgation of the
judgement of the RTC. So now that it is beyond the promulgation
period and on appeal you have to ask the bondsman or the company
whether he/it consents to continuing the life of the surety bond.
DIFFERENT TYPES OF BAIL THAT CAN BE POSTED
 surety
 cash deposit,
 property bond and
 recognizance.
Surety bonds
Furnished by surety companies they are basically insurance
companies.
Property bond .
Instead of cash bond, the accused is allowed to give his
property as security or as a bond.
What happens is they will annotate as a lien the bond but this
is quite rare.
 The accused has 10 days from approval to cause the
annotation of the bond in the title of the property.
Cash deposit Under Rule 114 Section 14
This is the most common type of bond.
To whom should a cash deposit or bond be given?
It must be given to the nearest collector or the city or municipal
treasurer or the clerk of court of that particular.
Recognizance Section 15
It is akin to a promise of the accused himself or a responsible
person that the court designates. It is a promise that they will appear
whenever required by the court. Recognizance is only allowed in
certain instances.
What are these instances when recognizance is allowed?
 When the person has been in custody for a period equal to or
more than the minimum of the imposable principal penalty.
Rule 114 Section 16.
 When the offense charged is just for violation of an ordinance,
a life penalty or a criminal offense the imposable penalty of
which is not greater than 6 months and/or a 2000 peso fine.
Under RA 1636
 When the accused has applied for probation pending the
finality of the judgement but no bail must file when the
accused is incapable of filing one. Rule 114 Section 24.
 In case of a youthful offender under PD 603 and in cases of
summary procedure in which case under the Section 16 of the
Rules on Summary Procedure, recognizance is made or if the
publishes by a responsible citizen and not the accused
himself.
GUIDELINES TO FIXING THE AMOUNT OF BAIL
Excessive bail is not required. 1987 Constitution
In order to implement that provision, the Rules of Court and
the AM provide for certain guidelines to consider in the imposition of
bail and what are these? AM 12-11-02-SC.
 Penalty for the offense charged,
 character and reputation of the accused,
 the age and health of the accused,
 the weight of the evidence against the accused,
 probability of the accused appearing at trial, forfeiture of other
bail and the fact that the accused was a fugitive when arrested
and the pendency of cases where accused is on bail.
Can the accused ask or move for a reduction on the amount of bail
initially imposed by the court? Yes, the accused may. A hearing must
be had on this or at the very least the prosecution must be given the
opportunity to comment on that motion to reduce.
May the order fixing the amount of bail appealable?
No, because it is not a final order. Section 4 of AM 12-11-02.
Case of dela Camara: The amount imposed was 1.9 M pesos for
multiple murder. So here the SC said that imposing the amount of 1.9
M will render the constitutional right to bail nugatory.
Case of Sendion: The rule in qualified theft is it imposes an amount,
for every amount there is a corresponding penalty and then for every
additional 10k, an additional number of years is added to the total
imposable penalty. So here considering that the amounts were large,
15M and 91M, lumabas na yung imposable penalty is RP which is a
capital offense supposedly. What did the court say? So you look at the
amount prescribed for that particular offense in determining the
amount of bail plus the DOJ recommended also the amount of bail
based on the circular, how much? 60k. so the Court should have
considered that in imposing the amount of bail. That has even
decreased all the more now with the passage of RA 10951 which
reduced the penalties for estafa, qualified theft, theft etc. (lalabas sa
bar lol). Commented [JC15]: Please fix the doctrines sis
WHEN BAIL IS NOT REQUIRED
 When a person has been in custody for a period equal to or
more than the possible maximum imprisonment prescribe for
the offense charged, he shall be released immediately,
without prejudice to the continuation of the trial or the
proceedings on appeal. If the maximum penalty to which the
accused may be sentenced is destierro, he shall be released
after thirty (30) days of preventive imprisonment. Section 16
Rule 114
  A person in custody for a period equal to or more than the
minimum of the principal penalty prescribed for the offense
charged, without application of the Indeterminate Sentence
Law or any modifying circumstance, shall be released on a
reduced bail or on his own recognizance, at the discretion of
the court.
 In cases filed in the first level courts, for an offense punishable
by less than 4 yrs, 2 mos, 1 day and the judge is satisfied that
there is no necessity of placing the accused under custody etc
etc. Rule 112 Section 8(b)
NOTE: Even after the accused is admitted to bail, the amount may be
increased or reduced for good cause. If it is increased, the accused
must be given a period of time within which to pay the balance
otherwise he will be taken into custody. Rule 112 Section 8(b)
What is the rule with respect to bail for the accused who is originally
released without bail?
If upon the filing of the complaint or the information, the accused is
released without bail, he may later be required to give bail at any stage
of the proceedings when there is a strong showing of guilt, otherwise
the accused will be committed into custody. Section 20
Sandigan case: Here, the charge was illegal sale. Bailable. In fact, the
bail was a matter of right. The SC said that the judge in denying the
bail committed GAD because if there is a matter of right, you are not
allowed to deny bail what you can only do is if there are circumstances
that would warrant like here there is a possibility that he would
abscond, to increase the bail amount.
BAIL IS MATTER OF RIGHT BUT WITH THE PRESENCE OF
NEGATIVE CIRCUMSTANCE
So again if bail is a matter of right, the judge must grant bail. If there
are other negative circumstances, like the likelihood to abscond the
judge cannot not grant bail, the remedy is just to increase the amount
of the bail.
FORFEITURE OF BAIL
You must remember based on Section 2(b) of Rule 114 that One of
the requirements or one of the conditions for the grant of bail is that
the accused must appear before the court when required.
If there is a surety bond given
Bondsmen of the accused will also be notified to produce the accused
on the said date. Under Section 21, what are the effects if the accused
fails to appear in person at the day required by the court:
1. The bail will be declared forfeited
2. The bondsmen will be given 30 days to produce their principal/
Specifically, what does this require? The bondsmen therefore are
required to:
a. produce the body of the accused
b. or give reasons for his nonproduction
c. but not only that, they must be able to explain to the court
why in the first place the accused was absent at the first time
the court required him to appear.
If they are unable to do that, what are the consequences?
A judgement shall be rendered against the bondsmen jointly and
severally for the amount of the bail. Now the bondsmen according to
the provision, may also ask the court for a mitigation of their liability
but the rules specifically says that the court is not required to do that
unless the accused has been surrendered or has been acquitted by
the court.
NOTE: A judgement against the bondsmen cannot be entered unless
what? What are the formal requirements?
1. The judgement must first be preceded by an order of
forfeiture. This order of forfeiture is interlocutory because it is
just a show-cause order. It orders the bondsmen to show
cause why judgement should not be rendered against the
bond.
This show-cause order or order of forfeiture is different from the
judgement on the bond per se. These are two different matters.
The judgement on the bond
Is the one that is rendered by the court when the accused is not
produced within the 30 day period required by the court.
2. The other requirement before a judgement against the
bondsmen can be rendered is an opportunity is given to the
bondmen to produce the accused or to give a satisfactory
reason for his inability to do so.

Bench warrant Rule 71 Section 9
The court may issue a bench warrant. A bench warrant is a writ issued
by the judge to any officer of law to arrest a person who has been held
in contempt, disobeyed a subpoena or failed to appear at hearing.
In JC’s case, automatically if the accused does not appear when judge
asked him to, forfeiture of the bail if it was cash but if it is a surety
bond, he asks the surety to explain plus he issues a bench warrant
immediately to order the arrest of the accused.
Cancellation of bail
What are the ways in which a bail can be cancelled? Section 22.
1. By application of the bondsmen.
The bondsmen apply or moved to the court for the cancellation of
bail and this is with due notice to the prosecutor for what particular
instances?
a. when there is surrender of the accused or
b. when the accused has died
2. when the accused is acquitted,
3. when the case against the accused is dismissed or
4. when the judgement of conviction is already executed in
other words the accused begins to serve his sentence in the
penal facility.
5. By order of the court
Where the penalty imposed by the trial court is imprisonment
of more than 6 years if any of the grounds under section 15 is
present. Habitual delinquent blah blah blah, etc etc, by order
of the court the bail or the bond will be cancelled. Leviste
Any RTC of said place, or if no judge is available, with any MeTC or
MTC.
If it is filed in another court, what is the duty of the judge therefore?
Note that under Section 19, even if the bail is applied for in another
court, the court where the case is pending, may require a different bail
to be filed. Section 19
Another exception under Section 17(b) Commented [JC16]: Fix the doctrine
2. if the grant of bail is a matter of discretion or if the accused
seeks to be released on recognizance?
You may only apply for bail where the case is pending, on trial
or on appeal. Under (c) when a person is in custody but not
yet charged, he may apply for bail in the place where he is
being held. Section 17(b)
Judge Tamang: Judge was in San Juan then she approved application
bails for accused who were in different places. Commented [JC19]: Fix doctrine pls
Rule on bail pending appeal
The appellate court can only exercise discretion if none of the
enumerated circumstances is present. If at least one is present then
there is no discretion. Bail pending appeal must be denied. Leviste in
relation to Rule 114, Section 4
Commented [JC17]: Fix case citation

Bail filed with other

General rule: is bail must be filed where the case is pending.
Exceptions:
1. When the judge in the court where the case is pending is
absent or unavailable, it will be filed in the RTC or MTC in the
province, city or municipality where the case is pending. It
must be very clear that the judge is unavailable. section 17(a) Commented [JC18]: Nu daw? What rule?

When the accused is arrested in another place other than the place
where case is pending, where will the bail be applied?
MOTION TO QUASH
Procedural tool or your procedural remedy to question whatever
defects you have in the information.

TYPES OF DEFECTIVE INFORMATION

 when information are duplicitous,
 if there is no signature of the fiscal, etc. etc.
 if the information fails to state or allege the particular elements
of the crime.

CHARACTERISTICS OF A MOTION TO QUASH

1. It is the prescribed mode by which the accused assails the validity
of a complaint or information, FOR WHAT?
a. if it is insufficient in its face and
b. if there are defects which are apparent in the face of the complaint
or information

2. In the same way as a motion to dismiss, it hypothetically admits the

facts alleged in the complaint or information.
NOTE: the test to determine the sufficiency of a compliant or an
information is whether or not the facts alleged which are hypothetically
admitted would establish the essential elements of the crime. If it does
not, then it is quashable.

3. motion to quash is only limited to defects which are evident on the

face of the complaint or information.
NOTE: Therefore, you should not look at extraneous evidence or
factors in order to rule on a mtq. All you have to look at is the complaint
or information and determine whether or not it is defective.

4. It is an omnibus motion. The omnibus motion is found in the rules

of civil procedure specifically says that all the grounds for a motion to
quash should already be raised in your mtq otherwise it will be waived.
There are exceptions, we’ll get to that later such as lack of jurisdiction,
double jeopardy, extinction etc etc. Rule 117 Section 9

FORM OF THE MTQ Section 2

  It should be in writing and
 signed by the accused or his counsel and
 shall specify the factual and legal grounds.
 constitute motion to quash:
NOTE: you must specify in your mtq why the complaint or
information is defective. You must point out the defects and the
basis for you pointing out the defects.
Therefore, the court shall only consider those grounds stated in
the motion to quash the exception being: lack of jurisdiction over
the offense charged based on Section 2
GROUNDS FOR A MOTION TO QUASH
(a) That the facts charged do not constitute an offense;
(b) That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the
offense charged;
(c) That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the
person of the accused;
(d) That the officer who filed the information had no authority to
do so;
(e) That it does not conform substantially to the prescribed form;
(f) That more than one offense is charged except when a single
punishment for various offenses is prescribed by law;
(g) That the criminal action or liability has been extinguished;
(h) That it contains averments which, if true, would constitute a
legal excuse or justification; and
(i) That the accused has been previously convicted or acquitted
of the offense charged, or the case against him was dismissed or
otherwise terminated without his express consent.
NOTE: This list is exclusive! Absence of probable cause, preliminary
investigation nor affidavit of desistance is not a ground.
How about your matters of self-defense?
Matters of defense are technically not grounds. If the accused pleads
self-defense then trial should continue. But there are defenses which
 double jeopardy,
 extinguishment of the criminal liability.
What are the grounds that are not waived even if they are not raised
in a motion to quash?
The failure of the accused to assert any ground of a motion to quash
before he pleads to the complaint or information, either because he
did not file a motion to quash or failed to allege the same in said
motion, shall not be deemed a waiver of any objections based on the
grounds provided for in paragraphs (a), (b), (g), and (i) of section 3 of
this Rule. In other words, what does that mean? Can you file a second
mtq based on these grounds? Well the rules don’t specifically prohibit
it, technically you can still file a second motion to quash but for the
most part, they are just raised as defenses of the accused. Section 9
REMEDY FROM DENIAL OF A MOTION TO QUASH
APPEAL.
NOTE: Therefore you cannot file a 65 because one of the
requirements for a 65 is that there must be no other remedy and in this
case, you have the remedy of an ordinary appeal.
Penekito: Information was filed against Penekito for falsification of a
public document and he filed a motion to dismiss based on abasence
of probable cause and the Metc dismissed the case but the rtc set
aside the metc order and ca said that teh rtc decision is interlocutory
and this not, appealable. Issue is w/n CA erred in dismissing the
appeal? SC held no because the remedy of appeal for the rtc decision
is improper because the decision is intelocutory. The denial of the
petitioner’s mtq is interlocutory so it still leaves something for the rtc to
do something which is to continue the criminal proceedings.
Adrade: Problem 1-They filed the motion to dismiss after arraignment.
Problem 2- The court granted the motion to dismiss on the ground of
lack of probable cause. Was the trial court correct in dismissing it on
a ground different from what was alleged in the motion to dismiss
which is actually a mtq? First of all, they only raised insufficiency of
the allegations and what should a judge do when the judge gets a
mtq? The judge can only consider what is alleged there because
everything else is waived. The judge here was in error in dismissing it
for a ground that was not actually raised because supposedly that
ground if it was indeed a ground for a mtq was never raised. But even
then what did the SC say in addition? Why did not the Court have
dismissed on the ground of lack of probable cause. The judge already
determined probable cause when he issued the warrant of arrest. It is
inconsistent for a judge after he has already determined probable
cause and issued a warrant of arrest to dismiss the case for lack of
probable cause.
What is the main difference between a motion to quash and a demurer
to evidence? For a mtq, you generally have to file it before
arraignment. For a demurer naman, after the prosecution rest because
in a demurer to evidence what you are actually saying is the evidence
of the prosecution is not sufficient to overcome the presumption of
innocence among other things.
If a motion to quash is granted, what is the principal effect? If the
complaint or information is quashed, invalidated, the court may order
the party to file another information.
Let’s go to the grounds: No offense charged. The facts do not
constitute an offense. The test here is whether the facts alleged in the
information, if hypothetically admitted, would establish the elements of
the offense as defined by law without considering evidence alliunde.
What are the options available of the court when this is the ground?
The court must first give the prosecution an opportunity to correct the
defect. If after amendment the information still suffers from the same
defect, the court will grant the mtq under Section 4. The SOP of the
court is that it should not dismiss kaagad.
People v. Asuncion: Padilla was charged with a violation of PD 1866.
Judge dismissed the information on the ground that the facts alleged
do not sufficiently establish the offense. The Court ruled the dismissal
was incorrect because the possession of firearms and ammunition so
long as they are not used for a purpose other than self defense or if
they’re not licensed then there’s already a crime that’s been
committed.
No jurisdiction over the offense: Lopez, Uy cases we all saw the
application of the territorial jurisdiction of the courts here. When can a
court have a jurisdiction over an offense? In the place where the crime
or any of its essential ingredients occured.
In the case of Uy:
When it comes to lack of jurisdiction or no jurisdiction on the person of
the accused. When you raised this in a mtq can you also raise other
grounds on a mtq? No. Why? What is the effect if you include other
grounds other than the lack of jurisdiction over the person of the
accused. You are asking fro affirmative relief already, because if that
is the only ground then you are saying that I do not accept the
jurisdiction of the court, you have no jurisdiction over me but if you
already include other grounds, you are already asking for affirmative
relief, in other words you are already recognizing the jurisdiction of the
court over you. You are already recognizing that the court can
adjudicate something which you want the court to adjudicate therefore
you are recognizing the jurisdiction of the court over you whereas if it
is only based on that single ground (LOJ over the person of the
accused), you can actually say that no I do not recognize your
jurisdiction over me.
No authority to file the information. Rule 110 Section 3 to 5. An
information must subscribed and sworn by the prosecutor and without
that, it is invalid. Rule 110 Section 3 and 4. It must be subscribed by
the prosecutor and Section 5 also.
How about does not conform to the prescribed form? Rule 110 Section
6 to 8. You have to designate the offense, the approximate date, the
place, you have to designate the name and surname of the accused,
you must specify the qualifying or aggravating circumstances and etc
etc. Commented [JC20]: FIX CASE DOCTRINES MY DUDES
REMEDY AGAINST FORMAL DEFECTS
The remedy is to amend the information.
REMEDY WHEN THERE’S MORE THAN ONE OFFENSE
CHARGED
Section 13, remember this? Duplicity of the offense. Commented [JC21]: PLEASE CITE THE LAW
Is this waivable?
Yes, Rule 120 Section 3. So you cannot say multiple homicide or
multiple estafa.
NOTE: Extinction of criminal action or liability. Article 89 of the RPC,
specifically sets forth or specifies how criminal liability is extinguished.
How? 8 ways. So all of these may be raised in conjunction with Rule
117 Section 3(g) in your motion to quash.
WHEN A NEW COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION CANNOT BE
FILED
1. Extinction of criminal liability
2. Double jeopardy under section 7 (usually referred to as res judicata
in prison grey) – once the accused has already been acquitted or the
case has been dismissed already as against the accused without his
consent, double jeopardy sets in
REQUISITES FOR DOUBLE JEOPARDY
1. there must be a first jeopardy
a. if there is a valid indictment or in other words, valid
complaint or information or formal charge sufficient in form and
substance to sustain a conviction.
QUESTION: If the allegations in the information do not constitute an
offense and a new information is ordered filed, is there double
jeopardy?
None, because there was no valid information in the first place. The
remedy is a motion to quash. Just remember what we discussed under
rule 110 regarding the sufficiency of the complaint or information.
b. it was made before a court of competent jurisdiction.
Therefore, what this means is that the court must be the
proper venue because venue in criminal case sis jurisdictional.
NOTE: A court of competent jurisdiction means that it must have
subject matter jurisdiction.
c. it must be made after arraignment in other words the
accused must be arraigned. And then there must have been an
arraignment and a valid plea has been entered by the accused.
2. that the first jeopardy was terminated because the accused
was either:
a. convicted
NOTE: The accused may appeal his conviction.
QUESTION: Does the appeal result to a waiver of his right against
double jeopardy?
Yes, it does. When an accused appeals, he is waiving his right to raise
the ground of double jeopardy. when there is an appeal, the appellate
court can in fact impose a harsher penalty because the appeal in fact
throws the entire case open for review.
b. acquitted
NOTE: Doctrine of finality of acquittal
the verdict of acquittal is immediately final. Therefore, a re-
examination of the merits either through an mr or through an appeal
of such acquittal will put the accused in double jeopardy. What are the
exceptions to this?
1.when the proceedings are a complete sham done through fraud etc
2. when the judge acted with GAD in which case a 65 may be filed to
assail the judgement
The SC said that a 65 will be proper if it is based on 2
exceptional grounds: Isidro v Leonardo de Castro
1. that the judgement of acquittal was rendered with
grave abuse of discretion
The Court held that a judgement of acquittal in a criminal case
may be assailed under 65 upon mere showing that the trial
court acted with GADAALEJ and deprived the prosecution of
due process. They were not entitled anymore to file an motion
for reconsideration because they lost their remedies because
they were not present during the promulgation. DE GRANO
2. where the prosecution has been deprived of due
process
3. There was a finding of mistrial
mistrial you may add as one of the grounds or one of the
exceptions but when you say mistrial it can possibly fall under
GAD or the denial of due process on the part of the
prosecution. Velasco
NOTE: Rule 119 Section 18
The discharge of an accused to be a state witness is tantamount to an
acquittal:
The order indicated in the preceding section shall amount to an
acquittal of the discharged accused and shall be a bar to future
prosecution for the same offense, unless the accused fails or refuses
to testify against his co-accused in accordance with his sworn
statement constituting the basis for the discharge.
When it comes to the discharge of the accused to be a state
witness, here it is with the consent of the accused to be a state
witness. You just compare it with the situation when the dismissal
without the consent of the accused amounts to an acquittal. In this
case, it has to be with the consent of the accused: his discharge to be
a state witness, and the rule specifically says that it amounts to an
acquittal.
c. or the case was dismissed or terminated without his express
consent
QUESTION:if the accused himself asks for the dismissal of the case,
will double jeopardy attach?
No.
When the case is dismissed with the express consent of the accused,
the dismissal will not be a bar to another prosecution. Salito
EXPRESS CONSENT
it means a positive, direct and unequivocal consent.
 Provisional dismissal under Rule 117 Section 8 is not
equivalent to an acquittal. A provisional dismissal is always
with the express consent of the accused.if a case is dismissed
with consent the no double jeopardy attaches.
 There will be double jeopardy even if the dismissal is with
consent if:
1. If there’s insufficiency of evidence in other words, it was a
dismissal due to a demurer to evidence
2. there is a denial of the right to speedy trial
GENERAL RULE:
Double jeopardy precludes another prosecution for the same offense
charged. There will be no double jeopardy if it arises from different
offenses arising from the same act. There is only double jeopardy if it
is for the same offense but not only the same offense it may include:
the attempt and frustration and an offense which is necessarily
included or necessarily includes the offense charged.
EXCEPTION:
section 7: if the graver offense develops due to supervening facts, the
facts constituting the graver charge charged became known only after
a plea was entered and the plea of guilty to a lesser offense was made
without the consent of the prosecutor and the offended party.
Why could there be no double jeopardy in those exceptions?
Because the offense did not exist yet at the time the original complaint
or information was filed.
Does double jeopardy attach for findings in a preliminary
investigation?
No. Neither does it attach in administrative cases.
Does double jeopardy have an effect on the civil aspect of a case?
No because the civil aspect of a case can be brought on appeal by
any party. Also remember the case of Ivler. Double jeopardy in
reckless imprudence cases or quasi offenses. It is just one case for
reckless imprudence no matter if it is homicide or damage to property
etc etc.
If there is an acquittal or dismissal of the criminal action, it does not a
bar a subsequent appeal or a rule 65 on the basis of the civil action.
People v AAA:
Period of filing a motion to quash. Effects of failure to file a motion and
effects of sustaining a mtq.
PERIOD OF FILING A MOTION TO QUASH
-at any time before the accused enters a plea. Section 1.
NOTE: A motion to quash is generally not allowed in a summary
procedure except for lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter.
EFFECTS OF SUSTAINING A MOTION TO QUASH
GENERAL RULE: The order sustaining a motion to quash is not a bar
to another prosecution because the prosecution may be allowed to file
another complaint or information.
EXCEPTION:
Extinction of criminal liability or double jeopardy.
Under Section 5, if the court orders another complaint or information
to be filed, what happens to the accused if he is in custody?
The accused shall not be released unless he is granted bail.
And if no order is made?
The accused shall be discharged unless he is in custody for another
charge. We already know that the court may order the amendment of
the complaint or information.
GROUNDS THAT ARE NOT WAIVED EVEN IF NOT RAISED IN A
MOTION TO QUASH: Section 9
GENERAL RULE: The failure of the accused to assert any ground of
a motion to quash before he pleads to the complaint or information,
either because he did not file a motion to quash or failed to allege the
same in said motion, shall be deemed a waiver of any objections
based on the grounds provided for in paragraphs (a), (b), (g), and (i)
of section 3 of this Rule.
(a) That the facts charged do not constitute an offense;
(b) That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the
offense charged;
(g) That the criminal action or liability has been extinguished; and
(i) That the accused has been previously convicted or acquitted
of the offense charged, or the case against him was dismissed or
otherwise terminated without his express consent.
EXCEPTION: THOSE NOT INCLUDED
PROVISIONAL DISMISSAL
It’s when the state and the accused consent to dismiss the
case temporarily subject to reinstatement.
The rule contemplates that a criminal action which was
provisionally dismissed may be revived within the period prescribed.
There are two elements to the rule of provisional
dismissal.
NOTE: both elements have to be complied with otherwise there will be
no valid provisional dismissal. What are these two elements?
1. the dismissal must be with the express consent of the accused
and
NOTE: Express consent is important because if there was no express
consent, the accused can raise double jeopardy.
2. more importantly there was notice to the offended party
TIME BAR RULE
The provisional dismissal of offenses punishable by imprisonment
not exceeding six (6) years or a fine of any amount, or both, shall
become permanent one (1) year after issuance of the order without
the case having been revived.
With respect to offenses punishable by imprisonment of more
than six (6) years, their provisional dismissal shall become
permanent two (2) years after issuance of the order without the case
having been revived.
NOTE: A provisional dismissal does not amount to an acquittal
because there was express consent of the accused.
AM 12-11-02-SC
This issuance of the SC further specified the rule on provisional
dismissal. Specifically it stated that The one or two year period shall
be reckoned from the date of the issuance of the order of dismissal.
If there is no revival, then it becomes automatically permanent
although in practice, usually, after the 2 year period, the accused will
move for the full dismissal of the case and not merely the provisional
dismissal of the case. After the period has lapsed, it becomes an
adjudication of the merits.
Take note also that the rule (AM) specifically also allows a provisional
dismissal due to the absence of essential witnesses such that if the
whereabouts of those witnesses are unknown and cannot be
determined and cause the trial to exceed 6 months pwedeng
magprovisional dismissal. If their whereabouts naman are known but
their presence cannot be obtained by due diligence, they can do
provisional dismissal if hearing were postponed 2 times and with a
warning that if the witness does not appear on the 3rd time the case
will be dismissed. There must also of course be proof of service of
notices and subpoenas at the last known coastal or email addresses
or phone nos of the essential witnesses.
May the case be revived beyond the one or two-year period?
GENERAL RULE no.
Exception:
Case of Lacson: If you are going to reckon it from that time the new
rule took effect, it would shorten the time of the prosecution to revive
the case so the SC said well di papwede because this rule is meant to
benefit both the accused and the state not only the accused.
Condrada:
People v Torres: Difference between motion to withdraw information
and provisional dismissal. Just take note of the difference.

Arraignment, Plea and Trial.
ARRAIGNMENT
It is a component of the Constitutional right to be informed of the nature
and the cause of the accusation and also a component of procedural
due process.
 you cannot arraign an accused in absentia. And because of
this,
 if there is no arraignment, you cannot try the accused in
absentia because if there is no arraignment, the proceedings
become void.
Can arraignment be waived by the accused?
GENERAL RULE: no.
EXCEPTION: But look at the continuous trial guidelines. In multiple
cases the court upon personal examination of the accused may allow
the waiver of a reading of the information upon the full understanding
and express consent of the accused.
When is a re-arraignment allowed?
 When the information was substantially amended, then re-
arraignment on the amended information is mandatory.
But: if the amendment is only as to form (for example nilagyan lang ng
middle initial yung name ng accused), then a re-arraignment is not
necessary anymore.
 when the information has been substituted, there must be a
re-arraignment or a new arraignment in fact because this is a
new case, this is a new offense. In fact, because of
substitution, another preliminary investigation has to be
conducted.
Where is an arraignment made?
In the court where the information is filed or assigned for trial.
How must it be made?
Rule 116 Section 1:
The arraignment shall be made in open court by the judge or clerk by
furnishing the accused with a copy of the complaint or information,
reading the same in the language or dialect known to him, and asking
him whether he pleads guilty or not guilty. The prosecution may call at
the trial witnesses other than those named in the complaint or
information.
What is the effect of an invalid arraignment?
If there is a conviction, it is void.
Estomaca: The information was read in Hiligaynon but his dialect is
Hinilayta.
When is an arraignment made?
 Under Section 1(g):
Unless a shorter period is provided by special law or Supreme Court
circular, the arraignment shall be held within thirty (30) days from the
date the court acquires jurisdiction over the person of the accused.
 Continuous trial guidelines:
1) the arraignment and pretrial are now held on the same day.
2) once the court has acquired jurisdiction over the accused, the
arraignment and pre-trial must be within 10 days from the court’s
receipt of the case In case the accused is detained and within 30
days in case of a non-detained accused.
 Section 1(g) of Rule 116
In computing the period of time for which an arraignment should be
held, you will exclude the time of the pendency of a motion to quash
or for a bill of particulars or other causes justifying suspension of the
arraignment.
What is the rule when the accused is under preventive suspension.
Under rule 1(e):
When the accused is under preventive detention, his case shall be
raffled and its records transmitted to the judge to whom the case was
raffled within three (3) days from the filing of the information or
complaint.
The accused shall be arraigned within ten (10) days from the date of
the raffle. The pre-trial conference of his case shall be held within ten
(10) days after arraignment.
Can an arraignment still be made after a case is submitted for
decision, in other words after the parties have already presented their
evidence?
GENERAL RULE: no.
EXCEPTION:
As long as the court has acquired jurisdiction over the accused either
by arrest or voluntary submission and the accused did not object to
this procedural defect during trial then an arraignment can be made
even after the case has been submitted for decision. People v
Pangilinan
NOTE: An arraignment and plea shall be made of record, but failure
to do so shall not affect the validity of the proceedings. (Section 1b)
Is the presence of the accused required during arraignment?
Under Section 1(b):
The accused must be present at the arraignment and must personally
enter his plea.
How about the offended party?
Under 1(f):
The private offended party shall be required to appear at the
arraignment for purposes of plea bargaining, determination of civil
liability, and other matters requiring his presence.
In case of failure of the offended party to appear despite due notice,
the court may allow the accused to enter a plea of guilty to a lesser
offense which is necessarily included in the offense charged with the
conformity of the trial prosecutor alone.
Alicando: The SC was particularly strict here because of the death
penalty the accused here plead guilty to the death penalty so dapat
very very clear that the accused knew what he was getting himself
into. Commented [JC22]: FIX DOCTRINE AND DIGEST
What is the duty of the court before arraignment?
Before arraignment,
The court shall inform the accused of his right to counsel and ask him
if he desires to have one. Unless the accused is allowed to defend
himself in person or has employed a counsel of his choice, the court
must assign a counsel de officio to defend him.
Who’s a counsel de officio?
Members of the bar in good standing. The duty to appoint a counsel
de officio is mandatory but the court can arraign if the accused waives
his right and the court finds the accused capable of representing
himself.
Under Section 8:
Whenever a counsel de officio is appointed by the court to defend the
accused at the arraignment, he shall be given a reasonable time to
consult with the accused as to his plea before proceeding with the
arraignment.
Pre-arraignment procedures and remedies. What are some of the
options of the accused before he enters his arraignment?
1. Bill of particulars-
It is filed before arraignment wherein the accused will ask the
prosecution to supply missing details or unclear details in order for the
accused to properly plead and prepare for trial.
The motion for bill of particulars will specify the alleged defects in the
complaint or information or the details desired.
NOTE: that if you don’t file a motion for bill of particulars, it is waived.
In other words, if the accused fails to file a motion it is as if the accused
is saying I accept the complaint or information including all its
deficiencies or the complaint or information is clear to me.
3. A suspension of arraignment
An arraignment may be suspended by way of motions therefore the
accused will file a motion to suspend on 3 grounds:
a. the accused appears to be suffering from an unsound
mental condition which effectively renders him unable to
 understand the charge and plead intelligently thereto. The
duty of the court in this case is to order his mental examination
and if necessary, to order the accused’s confinement.
b. prejudicial question
c. if there is a petition for review with the SOJ or OP.
NOTE: The period of suspension shall not exceed 60 days so
whether or not there is already a decision from the SOJ within
that 60 day period, the court can already proceed with the
arraignment. Crespo v Mogul
4. A motion to quash
at any time before entering plea

5. Challenge the validity of the arrest Rule 143 , the legality

of the warrant issued, lack of preliminary investigation
NOTE: otherwise it is waived.

6. Motion for production and inspection of material

evidence. Rule 116 Section 10 allows for a Mode of discovery
aside from those found in Rule 25 onwards, therefore what
does this rule mandate, under this rule:
The trial court is authorized to issue an order to the prosecution to
produce and permit the inspection and copying or photographing of
any written statement given by the complainant and other which
constitute or contain evidence material to the case and which are
within their possession.
In terms of witnesses to be presented the rule lang is in pre-trial you
are already mandated to list down who your witnesses will be although
in practice, lawyers reserve the right to present additional witnesses
along the way because in truth and in fact there are instances where
new matters breeze in the course of the trial that will require another
witness to be back so it is really possible that new witnesses will be
brought to the witness stand without having been identified during the
start of trial.