PURPOSE OF ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA

1.    Double jeopardy to attach
2.    Court can proceed trial in absentia in case accused absconds

WHERE SHOULD THE ACCUSED BE ARRAIGNED?

>     The  accused  must  be  arraigned  before  the  court  where  the complaint was filed or assigned for trial

HOW IS ARRAIGNMENT MADE?

Arraignment is made
1.    In open court
2.    By the judge or clerk
3.    By  furnishing  the  accused  with  a  copy  of  the  complaint  or information
4.    Reading it in the language or dialect known to him
5.    Asking him whether he pleads guilty or not guilty

WHAT IS THE IMPORTANCE AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THE REQUIREMENT UNDER SECTION 1(A)?

>     It  must  be  strictly  complied  with  as  it  is  intended  to  protect  the constitutional  right  of  the  accused  to  be  informed  of  the  nature and cause of the accusation against him
>     The constitutional protection is part of due process
>     Failure to observe the rules necessarily nullifies the arraignment

X   IS   CHARGED   WITH   HOMICIDE.      HE   PLEADS   GUILTY   BUT PRESENTS   EVIDENCE   TO   ESTABLISH   SELF-DEFENSE.      WHAT SHOULD THE COURT DO?

>     The court should withdraw the plea and enter a plea of not guilty

WHEN SHOULD THE ARRAIGNMENT BE HELD?

>     The general rule is that the accused should be arraigned within 30 days from the date the court acquires jurisdiction over the person of the accused.

>     The time of pendency of a motion to quash or a bill of particulars or  other  cause  justifying  suspension  of  the  arraignment  shall  be excluded in computing the period.
>     However  in  the  following  cases,  the  accused  should  be  arranged within a shorter period, as required by law:

1.    Where the complainant is about to depart from the Philippines with  no  definite  date  of  return,  the  accused  should  be arraigned without delay and his trial should commence within 3 days from arraignment
2.    The trial of cases under the Child Abuse Act requires that the trial should be commenced within 3 days from arraignment
3.    When  the  accused  is  under  preventive  detention,  his  case shall  be  raffled  and  its  records  transmitted  to  the  judge  to whom the case is raffled within 3 days from the filing of the information  or  complaint.    The  accused  shall  be  arraigned within 10 days from the date of raffle.

N.B:
1.    Rearraignment needed for substitution
2.    Substantial    amendment    needs    rearraignment    but    formal amendment doesn’t

PRESENCE OF OFFENDED PARTY

1.    Plea bargaining
2.    Civil liability
3.    Identification of accused

WHAT  IF PRIVATE  OFFENDED  PARTY  FAILED  TO ATTEND  DESPITE DUE NOTICE?

>     The accused may be allowed by the court to plea guilty to a lesser offense which is necessarily included in the offense charged with the conformity of the prosecutor alone

CAN THE LAWYER OF THE ACCUSED ENTER THE PLEA FOR HIM?

>     No, the accused must enter the plea himself

WHAT IS THE IMPORTANCE OF ARRAIGNMENT?

>     Arraignment is the means for bringing the accused into court and informing  him  of  the  nature and cause of  the accusation against
him.
>     During  arraignment,  he  is  made  fully  aware  of  possible  loss  of freedom or of life.  He is informed why the prosecuting arm of the State is mobilized against him.  It is necessary in order to fix the identity of the accused, to inform  him of the  charge, and  to him an opportunity to plead.

DURING  THE  ARRAIGNMENT,  IS  THE  JUDGE  DUTY-BOUND  TO POINT OUT THAT AN INFORMATION IS DUPLICITOUS?

>     No, the judge has no obligation to point out that an information is duplicitous  or  to  point  out  any  other  defect  in  an  information during arraignment
>     The obligation to move to quash a defective information belongs to the accused, whose failure to do so constitutes a waiver of the right to object

X WAS  TRIED  FOR MURDER  WITHOUT HAVING  BEEN ARRAIGNED.  AT THE TRIAL, X’S COUNSEL PRESENTED WITNESSES AND CROSS-EXAMINED  THE  PROSECUTION  WITNESSES.    IT  WAS  ONLY  AFTER THE   CASE   WAS   SUBMITTED   FOR   DECISION   THAT   X   WAS ARRAIGNED.  X WAS CONVICTED.  CAN X INVOKE THE FAILURE OF THE  COURT  TO  ARRAIGN  HIM  BEFORE  TRIAL  FOR  QUESTIONING THE CONVICTION?

>     No, the failure of the court to arraign X before trial was conducted didn’t  prejudice  the  rights  of  X  since  he  was  able  to  present evidence and cross-examine the witnesses of the prosecution
>     The error was cured by the subsequent arraignment

IS  THE  ACCUSED  PRESUMED  TO  HAVE  BEEN  ARRAIGNED  IN  THE ABSENCE OF PROOF TO THE CONTRARY?

>     Yes
>     In  view  of  the  presumption  of  regularity  in  the  performance  of official  duties,  it  can  be  presumed  that  a  person  accused  of  a crime was arraigned, in the absence of proof to the contrary
>     However,  the  presumption  of  regularity  is  not  applied  when  the penalty imposed is death
>     When  the  life  of  a  person  is  at  stake,  the  court  cannot  presume that  there  was  an  arraignment,  it  has  to  be sure that there was one

IS THE ACCUSED ENTITLED TO KNOW IN ADVANCE THE NAMES OF ALL PROSECUTION WITNESSES?

>     Under the  same amended rules  on pre-trial, this  would be up to the trial judge’s discretion

X  WAS  CHARGED  WITH  HOMICIDE.    HE  ENTERED  A  PLEA  OF  NOT GUILTY.    HE  WAS  LATER  ALLOWED  TO  TESTIFY  IN  ORDER  TO PROVE  THE  MITIGATING  CIRCUMSTANCE  OF  INCOMPLETE  SELF-DEFENSE.    AT  THE  TRIAL,  HE  PRESENTED  EVIDENCE  TO  PROVE THAT   HE   ACTED   IN   COMPLETE   SELF   DEFENSE.      THE   COURT ACQUITTED HIM.  LATER, X WAS AGAIN CHARGED WITH PHYSICAL INJURIES.  X INVOKED DOUBLE JEOPARDY.  CAN X BE PROSECUTED AGAIN FOR PHYSICAL INJURIES?

>     Yes.  There was no double jeopardy.  In order for double jeopardy to attach, there must have been a valid plea to the first offense.
>     In  this  case,  the  presentation  by  X  of  evidence  to  prove  self-defense had the effect of vacating the plea of guilt
>     When the plea of guilt was vacated, the court should have ordered him  to  plead  again,  or  at  least  should  have  directed  that  a  new plea of not guilty be entered for him
>     Because the court didn’t do this, at the time of the acquittal, there was actually no standing plea for X.
>     Since there was no valid plea, there can be no double jeopardy

CAN A PERSON WHO PLEADED GUILTY STILL BE ACQUITTED?

>     Yes,  when  an  accused  pleads  guilty,  it  doesn’t  necessarily  follow that he is convicted
>     Additional  evidence  independent  of  the  guilty  plea  may  be considered  by  the  judge  to  ensure  that  the  plea  of  guilt  was intelligently made
>     The  totality  of  evidence  should  determine  whether  the  accused should be convicted or acquitted

WHAT HAPPENS IF THE ACCUSED REFUSES TO ENTER ANY PLEA?

>     The court may validly enter a plea of guilty for the accused who refuses to plead