Article III
Bill of Rights
REQUISTES OF CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS:
1. The accused has been heard in a court of competent jurisdiction;
2. The accused is proceeded against under the orderly processes of
law;
3. The accused has been given notice and the opportunity to be
heard; AND
4. The judgment rendered was within the authority of a constitutional
law
WAIVABLE
1. Right to counsel (but waiver
must be in writing and in the
presence of counsel)
2. Right to choose counsel
3. Right to enter a plea
4. Right to object to multiple
offenses in Information or
an Information that lacks
material allegations (which
is cured by competent
evidence presented during
trial)
5. Right to cross-examine
witnesses
6. Right to appear during trial
(distinct from duty to appear
when ordered by court for
purposes of identification)
7. Right to seek relief from
court
8. Right to appeal conviction
9. Right against self-
incrimination (provided the
waiver is certain,
unequivocal, and
intelligently made)
NOT INFORMED
Information did not allege that
defendant knew, before or at the
time of the assault, that the victim
was an agent of a person in
authority People v. Regala
Information alleged that the two information is sufficient to charge
NOT WAIVABLE
1. Right to be represented by
counsel during the trial;
2. Right to be informed of
nature and cause of
accusation against him (but
cannot hold court hostage
by refusal)
INFORMED
Information charged defendant with
rebellion with murder and frustrated
murder. Although rebellion may not
be complexed crimes committed in
furtherance of rebellion such as
murder and frustrated murder, the
accused killed the victim by defendant with simple rebellion
stabbing him multiple times. Enrile v. Salazar
However, one of the accused was
only proved to have helped the
other accused in throwing the body
into a well. It was determined by the
medical examiner that the cause of
death was drowning not stabbing.
Thus, the other accused was
acquitted because of the
Information. People v. Ortega
REQUISITIES OF RIGHT TO BE INFORNMED OF NATURE & CAUSE
OF ACCUSATION:
The Information must state:
1. Name of the accused;
2. Designation given to the offense by statute;
3. A statement of the acts or omissions so complained of as
constituting the offense;
4. The name of the offended party;
5. The approximate time and date of the commission of the offense;
6. Place where the offense had been committed
(p.204, Nachura)
REQUISITIES RE: PLEA OF GUILT TO A CAPITAL OFFENSE;
FAILURE TO COMPLY = GADALEJ
1. The trial court must conduct a searching inquiry into the
voluntariness of the plea;
2. The prosecution shall be required to present evidence to prove
the guilt of the accused and the precise degree of his
culpability;
3. The accused must be asked if he desires to present evidence
on his behalf and allow him to do so if he so desires
No right to send written interrogatories abroad Fajardo v. Garcia
Facts of a different case cannot be adopted in another case; such violates
right to confront witnesses People v. Miyake
A portion of direct-examination that was not subject to cross-examination
was excluded People v. Seneris
Requisites for Subpoena duces tecum:
1. The books, documents or other things requested must appear
prima facie relevant to the issue subject of the controversy (test of
relevancy);
2. Such books must be reasonably described by the parties to be
1
 readily identified (test of definiteness)
p.210, Nachura Who may invoke the right:
1) Accused;
2) Any witness to whom a question calling for an incriminating answer
is addressed.
When is presence of the accused mandatory?
1. During arraignment and plea;
2. During trial, for identification;
3. During promulgation of sentence, unless for a light offense
wherein the accused may appear by counsel or a representative Rules:

1) Witness May be invoked only when and as

Section 16. All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition of the questions calling for an
their cases before all judicial, quasi-judicial, or administrative bodies. incriminating answer is asked.
The witness has no way of
Not limited to accused in criminal proceedings, but extends to all knowing in advance the
parties in all cases civil, administrative, and judicial and quasi- nature or effect of the
judicial hearings. question to be asked him
2) Accused May not be compelled to take the
Violated only when proceedings are attended by vexatious, 3) Respondent in an witness stand on the reasonable
capricious, and oppressive delays or when unjustified administrative proceeding presumption that the purpose of
postponements are asked for and secured or when without where he may be subjected interrogation is to incriminate
justifiable motive a long period of time is allowed to elapse without to sanctions of penal him.
the party having his case tried. character.
Ex: Cancellation of
Mere mathematical reckoning would not be sufficient. license.

Factors considered:
1) Length of delay Scope:
2) Reasons for the delay 1) Testimonial compulsion only.
3) Assertion or failure to assert such right by the accused Not object evidence, substance emitted from his body,
4) Prejudice caused by the delay fingerprinting, photographing, paraffin testing, pregnancy
test, ultraviolet ray examination.
Extends to all citizens, including those in the military, and covers 2) Production of documents, papers and chattels.
the period before, during and after trial. Exception: Where State has the right to inspect under
However, individual rights shall not work against and preclude the police or taxing power.
peoples equally important right to public justice and failure to 3) Compel accused to furnish a specimen of his handwriting in a
assert such right seasonably may be interpreted as waiver. falsification case.

Immunity:
Section 17. No person shall be compelled to be a witness against 1) Transactional Immunity
himself. Immunity from criminal prosecution for an offense to which
his compelled testimony relates.
A. Right against self-incrimination That which may be granted by the Commission on Human
Rights.
Availability: 2) Use and fruit immunity
1) Criminal prosecutions;
2) All other government proceedings, including civil actions,
administrative or legislative investigations.
2
 Prohibits use of witnesses compelled testimony and its Substance emitting from body US
fruits in any manner in connection with a criminal v. Tan Teng
prosecution of the witness
When summoned as a resource
Liberal interpretation person to a legislative inquiry, even
o Reason: Those given this privilege paid a high price for it,
if there are pending criminal cases
the surrender of their right to remain silent.
in the courts involving the same
Right against self-incrimination may be waived: subject Standard Chartered
1) Directly; or Bank v. Senate Committee on
2) Indirectly. Banks
Failure to invoke it provided certain and unequivocal and
intelligently made.
Thus, an accused who takes the witnesses stand
voluntarily may be cross examined and asked incriminating
questions Section 18.

(1) No person shall be detained solely by reason of his political

Witness Accused beliefs and aspirations.
Only an option of refusal, not May refuse to answer any and (2) No involuntary servitude in any form shall exist except as a
prohibition of inquiry. all questions. punishment for a crime whereof the party shall have been duly
Can only refuse to convicted.
answer a question but
not refuse to take the
witness stand. Exceptions:
1) Punishment for a crime whereof one has been duly convicted;
2) Service in defense of the State;
3) Naval enlistment;
Accused Witness
4) Posse Comitatus;
May altogether refuse to take May be compelled to take the
the witness stand and refuse witness stand and claim the A body of men, typically armed, summoned to enforce the
to answer any and all privilege as each question law.
questions. requiring an incriminating 5) Return to work order in industries affected with public interest;
answer is shot at him. 6) Patria Potestas.

PROTECTED
The act of writing (cannot be
compelled) Bermudez v. Castillo
(Cannot be compelled) to testify in
a committee created by the
President to investigate the
accuseds unexplained wealth
Cabal v. Kapunan
Urine test if it immaterial to the
offense charged (in this case it was
extortion) Dela Cruz v. People
Section 19.
NOT PROTECTED
Official documents in the custody of
government offices such as the
Economic Intelligence and
Investigation Bureau (EIIB) [may be
subject of subpoena duces tecum]
Almonte v. Vasquez
Malakis wallet, identification card,
residence certificate and keys
[object evidence] People v.
Malimit
(1) Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or
inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall death penalty be
imposed, unless, for compelling reasons involving heinous
crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty
already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua.
(2) The employment of physical, psychological, or degrading
punishment against any prisoner or detainee or the use of
substandard or inadequate penal facilities under subhuman
conditions shall be dealt with by law.
To violate this, the penalty must be flagrantly oppressive and
wholly disproportionate to the nature of the offense as to shock the
moral sense of the community.
3

The death penalty is not a cruel punishment as it is the exercise of
the States power to secure society against the threatened and
actual evil.
The congress can, at any time, reduce the death penalty to life
imprisonment.
Plea of guilt in capital offenses:
1) Trial court must conduct a searching inquiry into the voluntariness
of the plea and the accuseds full comprehension of the
consequences thereof.
2) Require the prosecution to present evidence to prove guilt of
accused and the precise degree of his culpability.
3) Accused must be asked if he desires to present evidence and in the
affirmative, allow him.
A. Cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment; excessive fines
Illegal possession of firearm; imprisonment of 5 to 10 years; Severity does
not ipso facto mean cruel and unusual. It takes more than merely being
harsh, excessive, out of proportion, or severe for a penalty to be
obnoxious to the Constitution - People v. Estoista
Estafa; Amount subject of estafa P98,000; 3 years to 15 years; There
seems to be a perceived injustice brought about by the range of
penalties that the courts continue to impose on crimes against property
committed today, based on the amount of damage measured by the value
of money eighty years ago in 1932. However, this Court cannot modify the
said range of penalties because that would constitute judicial legislation.
All penalties are generally harsh, being punitive in nature. Whether or not
they are excessive or amount to cruel punishment is a matter that should
be left to lawmakers. It is the prerogative of the courts to apply the law,
especially when they are clear and not subject to any other interpretation
than that which is plainly written. Corpuz v. People
B. Effect of abolition on application of penal laws
Section 20. No person shall be imprisoned for debt or non-payment of
a poll tax.
While a debtor cannot be imprisoned for failure to pay his debt, he
can be validly punished in a criminal action if he contracted his
debt through fraud as responsibility arises not from the contract of
loan but from the commission of the crime.
Trust receipts law does not violate this provision as it does not seek
to enforce a loan but to punish dishonesty and abuse of confidence
in the handling of money to the prejudice of another.
A. Imprisonment for debt
Section 21. No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for
the same offense. If an act is punished by a law and an ordinance,
conviction or acquittal under either shall constitute a bar to another
prosecution for the same act.
Requisites:
1) Valid complaint or information;
Not attach in a preliminary investigation.
2) Filed before a competent court;
3) To which the defendant had pleaded;
4) Defendant was previously acquitted or convicted, or the case
dismissed or otherwise terminated without his express consent
Directly given, oral or in writing and cannot be implied or
presumed.
NOT:
a) Plea bargaining must be with the consent of the
fiscal;
b) Dismissal by mistake by the court during a
hearing already cancelled;
c) Re-taking of testimony;
d) Promulgation of only 1 part of the decision (civil)
does not constitute a first jeopardy for the
promulgation of the 2nd part (criminal).
e) Dismissal of action.
1. Permanent dismissal
o Termination of the case on the merits resulting in
either conviction or acquittal, prosecutions failure
to prosecute; unreasonable delay first jeopardy
attaches.
a) When the ground for the motion to dismiss is
insufficiency of evidence.
Equivalent to an acquittal.
b) When the proceedings have been unreasonably
prolonged as to violate the right of the accused to
speedy trial.
2. Provisional dismissal
o Without prejudice to reinstatement thereof before
the order of dismissal becomes final or subsequent
4
 filing of anew information within the periods
allowed by law not being an acquittal no double
jeopardy. A. Attachment of jeopardy

a) Revival of criminal cases provisionally dismissed B. Termination of jeopardy

with express consent of accused and with a priori
notice to offended party: ELEMENTS OF DOUBLE JEOPARDY:
1. Valid complaint or information;
If offense charged is 2 years. 2. Filed before a competent court;
penalized by more than 3. To which the defendant had pleaded;
6 years
4. Defendant was previously acquitted or convicted or the case
If penalty imposable 1 year
dismissed or otherwise terminated without his express consent
does not exceed 6
years
- NACHURA (P223-224)
WAIVER & ESTOPPEL AMENDMENT OF
Purpose: State shall not subject him to embarrassment, expense, and The application of the sister A COMPLAINT OR
ordeal, and compel him to live in a continuing state of anxiety and doctrines of waiver and estoppel INFORMATION
insecurity, as well as enhancing the possibility that even though requires two sine qua The test of whether the
innocent, may be found guilty. non conditions: rights of an accused are
7. The dismissal must be prejudiced by the amendment of a
Rule: Double jeopardy prohibits the State from appealing or filing a petition sought or induced by the complaint or information is:
for review of a judgment of acquittal that was based on the merits of defendant personally or 1. Whether a defense under
the case. through his counsel; and the complaint or information,
Exceptions:
8. Such dismissal must not as it originally stood, would
a) Where there is a finding of mistrial resulting in the denial of
due process; be on the merits and no longer be available after
b) State is deprived of a fair opportunity to prosecute and must not necessarily the amendment is made;
prove its case; amount to an acquittal. and
c) Dismissal of an information is purely capricious or devoid of 2. When any evidence the
reason; - People v. Obsania accused might have would
d) There is lack of proper notice or opportunity to be heard; be inapplicable to the
e) Accused has waived or is estopped from invoking his right complaint or information.
against double jeopardy;
f) Dismissal or acquittal is made with grave abuse of Pacoy v. Cajigal
discretion; TERMINATION
g) Order of dismissal was issued before arraignment.
i. Information for murder was filed;
ii. Accused pleaded guilty;
Double jeopardy provides 3 related protections: iii. He was sentenced to 1 year imprisonment;
1) Against a 2nd prosecution for the same offense after acquittal; iv. He was immediately confined.
2) Against a 2nd prosecution for the same offense after conviction;
3) Against multiple punishments for the same offense = TERMINATION
v. Fiscal filed a motion for modification of penalty
vi. Petitioner filed a motion to withdraw plea of guilty;
Crimes covered vii. The judge set aside the previous judgment;
1) Identical offense; viii. Another trial was held;
2) Any attempt to commit the same or frustration thereof; ix. Judge convicted petitioner and imposed a sentence of 6 to 12
3) Offense which necessarily includes or is necessarily included in the years
offense charged.
5
 x. MR = double jeopardy - Cuison v. Court of Appeals
xi. Judge granted MR; SC Affirmed - Bustamante v. Macaren

A formal modification (changing the penalty to conform with the

DISMISSAL DUE TO RIGHT TO SPEEDY TRIAL
The dismissal of a criminal case predicated on the right of the accused to
speedy trial, amounts to an acquittal on the merits, which bars the
subsequent prosecution of the accused for the same offense. Salcedo
v. Mendoza
indeterminate sentence law and not due to appreciation of other or new
evidence) of a promulgation of judgment does not place the accused in
double jeopardy. On appeal, the CA increased the penalty by not
appreciating any mitigating circumstances that the RTC had. Oriente v.
People

NO TERMINATION
Two informations were filed against the accused (rebellion + subversion); C. Same offense; ordinance and states
The subversion case was still pending; the rebellion case was appealed
from CA to SC; accused alleged that he had been placed in double AN ACT PUNISHED BY LAW +
jeopardy due to the pending subversion case; SC disagreed; no ORDINANCE
termination yet of subversion case Bulaong v. People Batangas City Ordinance for
installing unauthorized electric
wiring and devices = prescribed
AMENDMENT OF INFORMATION RPC = Theft of electricity
1. Information for rape; SC held that there was
2. Judge ordered prosecutor to amend information to include lewd identity between the offenses
designs When the acts of the
3. Prosecution amended Information accused as set out in the two
4. Petitioner filed MTQ, alleging that the case had terminated due to informations are so related to each
the amendment of the information; other in time and space as to be
5. Judge granted MTQ reasonably regarded as having
6. SC reversed and remanded taken place on the same occasion
and where those acts have been
- People v. Obsania moved by one and the same, or a
continuing, intent or voluntary
Amendment of information from Homicide to Murder. Since the facts design or negligence, such acts
alleged in the accusatory portion of the amended Information are identical may be appropriately
with those of the original Information for Homicide, there could not be any characterized as an integral whole
effect on the prosecutions theory of the case; neither would here be any capable of giving rise to penal
possible prejudice to the rights or defense of petitioner. Pacoy v. Cajigal liability simultaneously under
different legal enactments (a
Verbal order of dismissal does not terminate case; in order for a judgment municipal ordinance and a
or an order of dismissal in order to be complete: 1) must be written; 2) national statute).
personally and directly prepared by the judge; and 3) signed by him - People v. Relova
Rivera, Jr. v. People
AN ACT PUNISHED BY 2
STATUTES
RA 3060 = punishment for exhibition
of motion pictures not sanctioned by
Board of Censors for Motion Pictures
(malum prohibitum)
RPC = exhibiting scenes of totally
naked female and males persons
with exposed private parts doing sex
acts in a place open to public view
(malum in se)
SC held that there was NO
identity between the offenses
Considering these
differences in elements and nature,
there is no identity of the offenses
here involved for which legal
jeopardy in one may be invoked in
the other. Evidence required to prove
one offense is not the same
evidence required to prove the other.
- People v. City Court of Manila

Upon finality of the judgment (after appeal to the CA and SC) was D. Rule on "supervening facts"
unsuccessful for the defendant; the RTC promulgated the judgment
against the accused but only as to the civil indemnity. The promulgation Doctrine of Supervening Event
did not include a sentence of imprisonment. The SC held that the RTC
issued a substantially incomplete promulgation. Thus, there was no
6
 The accused may still be prosecuted for another offense if a ELEMENTS OF FIRST JEOPARDY:
subsequent development changes the character of the first 1. Court of competent jurisdiction;
indictment under which he may have been charged or convicted. 2. Valid complaint or information;
Examples: 3. Arraignment;
a) When a graver offense developed due to supervening facts 4. Valid plea;
arising from the same act or omission;
5. The defendant was acquitted or convicted or the case was
b) Facts constituting the graver offense arose or were
discovered only after the filing of the 1st; dismissed or otherwise terminated without the express consent
c) Plea of guilty to a lesser offense was made without the of the accused.- Cudia v. CA
consent of the fiscal or offended party; ATTACHED HAD NOT ATTACHED
(2) Defendant was charged in a (1) Aurelio Balisacan was
Doctrine of Supervening Fact court of competent charged with homicide.
The accused may still be prosecuted for another offense if a subsequent jurisdiction; (2) He entered a plea of guilty.
development changes the character of the first indictment under which he (3) Upon Information for SP (3) He was allowed to present
may have already been charged or convicted. Injuries; evidence to prove mitigating
See S7, Rule 117 Rules of Court: no double jeopardy when: (4) The defendant was arraigned; circumstances.
(a) The graver offense developed due to supervening facts arising (5) Pleaded not guilty (4) During which, the accused
from the same act or omission; (6) The private prosecutor and the testified to the effect that he
(b) The facts constituting the graver offense arose or were discovered deputy provincial fiscal moved stabbed the deceased in self-
only after filing of the former complaint or information; for the dismissal; not objected defense because the latter was
(c) The plea of guilty to a lesser offense was made without the to or consented to by D strangling him.
consent of the fiscal or the offended party (7) Another information was filed (5) The lower court acquitted him
in the same court charging the based on the evidence he
Supervening Fact No Supervening Fact defendant with the same presented. The People
Frustrated to consummated Less serious to serious because offense of serious physical appealed.
because victim died of his wounds first doctor did not do an x-ray on injuries. The plea was invalid and the
Melo v. People the hand; fracture was there all (8) Defendant was arraigned, prosecution was not given the
along, it was not a supervening fact again. opportunity to present evidence.
People v. Buling (9) Defendant pleaded that he had - People v. Balisacan
been placed in double
jeopardy.
ELEMENTS OF DOUBLE (1) A first jeopardy must have (10) The lower court sustained the (1) City prosecutor filed the case
JEOPARDY: attached prior to the second; plea and dismissed the case in Angeles City instead of
1. Valid complaint or (2) The first jeopardy must have - People v. Ylagan Mabalacat;
information; been validly terminated; and (2) The Information stated that
2. Filed before a competent (3) The second jeopardy must be the crime was committed in
court; for the same offense or the Angeles City instead of
3. To which the defendant had second offense includes or is Mabalacat;
pleaded; necessarily included in the - Cudia v. Court of Appeals
4. Defendant was previously offense charged in the first JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL
acquitted or convicted or the information, or is an attempt Vizconde case; Judgment of acquittal; appeal alleged no GADALEJ Lejano v.
case dismissed or otherwise to commit the same or a People
terminated without his express frustration thereof.- Cudia v.
consent - NACHURA (P223- CA The rule against double jeopardy does not apply in these instances because a Rule
224) 65 petition does not involve a review of facts and law on the merits in the manner
done in an appeal.
7
- Ysidoro v. Leonardo-de Castro

Section 22. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted.

A. Ex Post Facto Laws

Kinds:
1) Every law that makes criminal an action done before the passage
of the law and which was innocent when done, and punishes such
action;
2) Every law that aggravates a crime, makes it greater than it was
when committed;
3) Every law that changes the punishment and inflicts a greater
punishment than the law annexed to the crime when committed;
4) Every law that alters the legal rules of evidence, and receives less
or different testimony than the law required at the time of the
commission of the offense in order to convict the offender;
5) Every law, which, assuming to regulate civil rights and remedies
only, in effect imposes a penalty or the deprivation of a right for
something which when done was lawful;
6) Every law which deprives persons accused of a crime of some
lawful protection to which they have been entitled acquittal or
amnesty

Characteristics:

1) Refers to criminal matters;

2) Retroactive in application;
3) Works to the prejudice of the accused

B. Bills of Attainder
Legislative act that inflicts punishment without trial.
Substitutes legislative fiat for a judicial determination of guilt