110

I. Discuss
a. Fresh Period Rule – Fresh Period Rule or Neypes Rule Doctrine
provides the accused fair opportunity and a more uniformed time to
apply the commencement of the 15-day period to apply for appeal.
Neypes Rule mandates that the commencement of the 15-day period
should start upon denial of motion for reconsideration or motion for
new trial.
b. Terry Search – Terry Search, as indicated in Terry v Ohio, or most
known as the Stop and Frisk Rule provides law enforcers the right to
conduct stop and frisk procedure within their bounds of duty if there is
probable cause to conduct such procedure.
c. Fruit of the Poisonous Tree – Fruit of the Poisonous Tree doctrine
delves into the validity and admissibility of evidence submitted to the
court. If the said evidence is attained through illegal or invalid means,
the evidence should not be considered nor included.

II. Distinguish
a. Warrant of Arrest from Search Warrants – Warrant of Arrest and
Search Warrants can be distinguished as to the following:
a. As to its validity, warrant of arrest does not expire as provided in
Rule 113 meanwhile search warrant does expire within 10 days
from its issuance as provided in Rule 126.
b. As to its implementation, Warrant of Arrest (Rule 113) are
imposed to the specific persons summoned by the court while
Search Warrants (Rule 126) are imposed to search the place
where there is probable cause that an evidence material to the
case is existing.
b. Motion for Reconsideration from Motion for New Trial – The
grounds for Motion for Reconsideration and Motion for New Trial are
elucidated in the provisions of Sections 2 and 3 of Rule 121 of Rules in
Criminal Procedure.

Motion for New Trial is conducted if there are errors in the case that are
prejudicial and substantial to the judgement of the case or if there are
evidence that are newly found without the reasonable diligence of the
accused that is outright substantial to the adjudication of the case.

Motion for Reconsideration, on the other hand, deals with errors in the
case that need no further proceedings.

III. Enumeration
a. What are the matters discussed during Pre Trial of a Criminal
Case?
In the Rules of Criminal Procedure Rule 118 Section 1, the matters
discussed during Pre-Trial of a Criminal Case involves the following:
 Plea bargaining
 Stipulation of Facts
110

 Marking for identification of evidence of the parties

 Waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence
 Modification of the order of the trial if the accused admits the
charges but interposes a lawful defense; and
 Such other matters as well promote a fair and expeditious trial
of the criminal and civil aspects of the case.
b. What are the requirements before an accused can be
discharged as State Witness?
In the Rules in Criminal Procedure Rule 119 Sec 17, the
requirements before an accused can be discharged as State Witness
are the following:
 There is an absolute necessity of the testimony of the accused.
 There is no any other direct evidence from the prosecution but
only the testimony of the accused to be discharged.
 The statement of the accused to be discharged is corroborative
to the material points of the case.
 The accused to be discharged should not be the most guilty of
the crime.
 He/she should not be involved in crimes involving moral
turpitude.

c. What are the contents of a Judgement of Conviction?

Judgement of Conviction as provided in Rule 120 of ROC should
contain the details of decision with supporting law, evidence and
justification as to how the decision came up as it is. Moreover, it should
include the character of the accused whether it be as principal,
accessory or accomplice and should indicate the circumstances
relevant and existing in the adjudication of the case. Lastly, it should
also contain the imposed penalty and a clear statement of the action
to be taken relating to the criminal and civil aspects (such as civil
liability, if such damage exist) of the case.

d. What are the contents of Appellants Brief?

The Appellants Brief as provided in Rule 122 should contain the
details of the appeal with supporting evidence and law as basis to
counter the decision of the Court.
e. What are the types of Cyber Warrants?
The types of Cyber Warrants as enumerated in the Rules on Cyber
Warrants are the following:
 Warrant to Disclose Computer Data (WDCD)
 Warrant to Intercept Computer Data (WICD)
 Warrant to Search, Seize and Examine Computer Data (WSSECD)
 Warrant to Examine Computer Data (WECD)

IV. Essay
110

a. Question 1
i. Yes, the court is correct in taking cognizance of the Joint Motion
for Reconsideration. However, the Motion for Reconsideration
that was filed by Balatong of Labong should have not been
recognized due to their unjustified absence. According to Rule
120, the accused waives his/her rights to seek for remedy if
he/she is not present during the promulgation of judgement to
conviction provided that the absence is of unreasonable excuse.
ii. No, Balatong and Labong cannot file an appeal in their
conviction of the case. As provided in Rule 120, the presence of
the accused is required for judgement to conviction. Failure to
appear tantamount to waive of the right of the accused to file an
appeal unless a justified and reasonable excuse is provided. In
the case at bar, Balatong and Labong are duly notified in regards
the promulgation of judgement and when the court queried the
whereabouts of the Balatong and Labong, the lawyers were
unable to provide a justifiable reason for their absence. Hence,
Balatong and Labong can no longer file an appeal due to their
unjustified non-appearance.
b. As provided, the detained young domestic helper has been brought to
court five times already in the last six months due to the absence of
the employer-complainant who is working overseas. As defense
counsel, I will invoke the right of my client to speedy disposition of the
case as provided in the 1987 Constitution Article 16. Also, I will request
to the humble court for strict imposition of bail to the witness as
provided in Rule 119 Section 14. This will oblige the employer-
complainant to appear in the trial court to ensure speedy trial.
c. Question 3
i. Yes, the objection of Ass-asin is valid. According to Plain View
Doctrine, evidence can only be admissible if it was attained in
plain view. In the case at bar, the kilo of Marijuana was wrapped
in a newspaper which makes it impossible to identify such
evidence through plain view. Hence, Ass-asin was correct in
objecting that the evidence claimed was illegally seized.
ii. No, the prohibited drugs would still not be admissible as
evidence. According to Rule 126 Section 4, the requisites of a
search warrant include the specific offense and particular place
and thing to be seized. In this case, the search warrant was
issued for the purpose of looking for unlicensed firearms. Thus,
the discovered Marijuana should not be admissible as evidence
as it would go beyond the specifics indicated in the search
warrant.
d. Yes, the court was correct in preventing Carlos from presenting his
evidence and rendering judgement based on the evidence of the
prosecution. As provided in Section 23 of Rule 119, a demurrer to
evidence that was filed without leave of court waives the right of the
accused to present its evidence. In the case at bar, Carlos filed the
110

demurrer to evidence without leave of court and has already waived

his right to present his evidence. Thus, the Court is correct.