Brondial Notes - Crimpro
Brondial Notes - Crimpro
Brondial Notes - Crimpro
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
4) And the last requirement is that the act committed by the public officer must be in relation to
his public office. That can be found in the cases I assigned to you, one of them is the leading
case of Sanchez vs Demetriou.
JURISDICTION
To begin with Criminal Procedure, lets start with jurisdiction. There is not much difficulty in
criminal procedure as to jurisdiction because what you only have to remember is the imposable
penalty. If the imposable penalty attached to the offense or crime is six years or less, then that is
cognizable by the inferior courts, otherwise it is cognizable by the Regional Trial Courts. So no
problem about that, very easy.
Q: But how about the imposable penalty is only a fine?
A: If it is only a fine, the cut off is P4,000.00. If it is above P4,000.00 RTC, if it is P4,000.00 or
less MTC. But if the imposable penalty is imprisonment and fine, the latter is no longer
determinative, only the imposable penalty of imprisonment.
Q: Under the Rules, the MTC or the Inferior Courts are governed by the regular rules of
procedure or summary procedure, so when is it governed by summary procedure and when is it
governed by regular procedure in criminal cases?
A: Remember that the cut off for imprisonment is one (1) year. If the imposable penalty of
imprisonment is more that one year, that is governed by the regular rules of procedure otherwise
it is governed by the rules on summary procedure. There are specific crimes provided in the
rules that are governed by the summary procedure like violation of traffic rules.
We have to discuss further what we have already discuss in the first semester, and that is the
constitutionally constituted court which is the Sandiganbayan because before the
Sandiganbayan all cases there are criminal in nature, wala naman don civil. If ever there is, it is
only because the civil aspect is deemed instituted with the criminal aspect.
SANDIGANBAYAN
Q: So what are the crimes or offenses cognizable by the Sandiganbayan?
A: It is only those which complies with the following requirements:
1) The accused must be a public officer;
2) That public officer must have a salary grade of atleast 27.
So that even one is a public officer but his salary grade is less than 27 then it is cognizable by
the MTC or the RTC as the case may be, subject to an appeal to the Sandiganbayan in the
exercise of its appellate jurisdiction, that is the peculiarity of appeal to the Sandiganbayan. It
must always be in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction, unlike in the Court of Appeals,
whether or not in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction, the Court of Appeals has jurisdiction
but in the Sandiganbayan it must always be in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction. Example
of that is if a clerk of court, with a salary grade less than 27, he violated the Anti Graft and
Corrupt Practices Act, therefore such act is cognizable by the Sandiganbayan. But suppose his
salary grade is only 18 or 20, you file it before the Regional Trial Court. If the RTC convicts him,
the appeal is not with the CA but rather with the Sandiganbayan because it is in the exercise of
its appellate jurisdiction. So an appeal to the Court of Appeals will be wrong. That is the first
thing you have to remember about the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan. So the penalty
imposable becomes irrelevant and immaterial as to the crimes and offenses cognizable by the
Sandiganbayan, it is rather the salary grade of the public employee;
3) Another requirement, it must be in violation of a law which is specifically within the jurisdiction
of the Sandiganbayan, and what are this law? Basic of them all is the Anti Graft and Corrupt
Practices Act, then violation of certain provision in the RPC, more particularly on Bribery and
Corrupt practices of public official, and then the third is the new jurisdiction or subject matter
cognizable by the Sandiganbayan, that is the unexplained wealth. Those crimes prosecuted by
the PCGG. They are cognizable by the Sandiganbayan. That is under Executive Order 14 of 148;
NOTE: Another thing you have to remember in criminal procedure is that venue is jurisdictional.
So if a criminal complaint is filed in a place other than where the crime was committed, that is
dismissable not on the ground of venue but on the ground of lack of jurisdiction because venue
in criminal procedure is jurisdictional.
RULE 110
INSTITUTION OF CRIMINAL ACTION
Q: Where do you institute criminal action? Who is the proper officer?
A: Remember that under the Supreme Court Circular issued in October 2005, Municipal Trial
Court judges are no longer allowed to conduct preliminary investigation. They can no longer
conduct preliminary investigation, the Municipal Court Trial judges. So that leaves only the state
prosecutor of the DOJ and the provincial, city or municipal prosecutor.
Q: So when is preliminary investigation required? Mr. A was caught cara y cruz in Quezon city,
how do you charge him of city ordinance? Where do you file the complaint?
A: In Metro Manila and other chartered cities, whether the offense or crime committed needs a
preliminary investigation or not, there is no direct filing. Exception is when the charter of the city
provides otherwise. So if a crime is committed in Los Baos Laguna that is outside Metro Manila
of cara y cruz, you file it directly with the Municipal Trial Court of Los Baos that does not require
preliminary investigation.
Q: Suppose what A committed in Los Baos Laguna is murder. How do you institute the case?
A: You file it with the public prosecutor because murder is punishable more than 4 years two
months and one day.
So dapat alam nyo ang penalty. Ano ang highest Penalty? Life Imprisonment. Reclusion
perpetua is only 20 years while life imprisonment is 40 years. So four (4) years two (2) months
and one (1) day, tatandaan nyo yon, that is prison correctional. Prison correctional ranges from 4
years, 2 months and 1 day to 6 years. Then we have reclusion temporal, then prison mayor and
then prison correctional, then aresto mayor and lastly aresto menor. But as far as we are
concerned, what we have to remember is prison correctional and the maximum is 4 years, 2
months and 1 day kasi may medium and may minimum.
NOTE: When youre confronted with a problem in criminal procedure, titignan nyo where was
the crime committed, venue is important because that is jurisdictional for purposes of instituting
the crime. So if it is committed in Quezon City, meaning in Metro Manila, complaint mo is filed
directly, it must be filed directly with the fiscal or the prosecutor. Latest from the DOJ, if the crime
or offense committed is covered by the rule on summary procedure, the fiscal may not conduct
preliminary investigation and directly file with the city court, the Metropolitan Trial Court. Pag
summary procedure, the fiscal does not have to conduct preliminary investigation; it is
discretionary on the part of the fiscal.
EXAMPLE: So a person is caught for illegal cock fighting. Nahuli sila, e ang penalty nito is
imprisonment of 1 to 30 days, but usually fine yan. So if a complaint is filed, which can be file de
officio, if the prosecutor files a complaint or somebody files a complaint with the prosecutor, the
prosecutor would just say file na eto.. without asking preliminary investigation because under
Rule 112, you know the procedure. After complaint affidavit you have counter affidavit then reply
affidavit and rejoinder affidavit and so on. So this is institution of criminal action.
Amendments can be done with or without leave of court. In the former it is limited only
to formal amendments while in the latter it may be formal or substantial, Substitution
can never be without leave of court, in such it is in the instance or by motion by the
prosecution with the consent of the private complainant;
Amendments generally does not change the nature of the crime, but in substitution it
does change the nature of the crime. In Amendments, it is the same in a sense that it
is necessarily included or necessarily includes the other, so if you want to change
murder to rape, hindi pwede yon, that would be substitution. But if you want to change
homicide to murder, or by downgrading from murder to homicide, pwede yon because
one includes the other or one is included in the other.
In amendments, there is no need for another preliminary investigation while in
substitution, another preliminary investigation is necessary;
I would add the requirement of arraignment. Arraignment in Substitution because it is
a matter of right but may not require anymore in amendments, particularly formal
amendments, you do not need anymore re arraignment of the accused.
could that be? Alin ba dito, alin ba dun? Sino sila? Di mo malaman. So he is not sufficiently
inform to be able to prepare a good defense, yun ang rationale dyan.
So this is Buhat vs Court of Appeals, which is about the name of the accused and that which
constitutes the crime, including the qualifying circumstances constituting the crime.
The civil aspect of a crime is deemed instituted upon the filing of the criminal action unless the
party waives the civil action, reserved the right to institute it or files the civil action prior to the
criminal action.
3.
4.
5.
Q: How about the other requirement for sufficiency of information, are the facts and
circumstances surrounding the crime, including the qualifying or aggravating circumstances
which should be state in the information. For example, People vs Bayya, pwede rin yung People
vs Magbanua.
A: Bayya was convicted of simple rape and not with qualified rape because the qualifying
circumstance of minority was not alleged in the information. What was only alleged was
relationship and the requirement of the law in order to be meted out with the penalty of death is
not only to establish sexual contact, not only to establish force/ intimidation but also to establish
relationship and minority. Here, the information only talks of relationship, it says her daughter
without stating the age. That is fatal on the part of the prosecution by omitting the age of the
victim of the private complaint of the victim. So this is one of the requirements. Although this
wont apply anymore in our present situation because we have already abolished the imposition
of death penalty but it will be good to state that if there are qualifying and aggravating
circumstances, they must be stated in the information otherwise the information will not suffice
for which it is intended. Like here, it was for death penalty which is expected to be meted out but
upon automatic appeal, it was modified into reclusion perpetua.
Q: Another requirement for sufficiency is Time and Date and Place. What kind of date is required
to make it sufficient?
A: It does not have to be an exact date because that is next to impossible. In the act of rape for
example, you do not bother if it is midnight or in the morning, whether it is in a motel room or in a
classroom. It is only material if place for example or time is an ingredient necessary to the crime
or an essential ingredient for the crime.
Q: Can you give me an example where place is an ingredient of the crime?
A: Theft in the national library, it is an ingredient in the crime. Ordinary theft is different from theft
of goods in the national library or museum. Crime committed inside the church, you qualified the
crime there. Nighttime is an aggravating circumstance, so time there is important, if you want a
higher penalty to qualify the crime, so you have to alleged nighttime otherwise aggravating
circumstance cannot be appreciated even if it is proven during trial because the purpose of
sufficiency of information is to comply with the constitutional requirement that an accused must
be informed of the nature and accusations against him. It is not only in the bill of rights but also
in the statutory rights of Rule 115, Rights of the Accused. If it is not an ingredient in the crime, as
long as proper information has been delivered, thats ok. Like in the case of People vs
Magbanua, the allegation for example that the crime was committed on or before July 1995,
what date of July? Over and above July, thereafter or thereabove, that is sufficient. But if you do
not give the proper information so that the accused cannot prepare a good defense like for
example in one case where it is stated the crime was committed between 1995 to 1998. How
Section 14 Amendments, weve discussed that already. We have 15 sections in Rule 110. We
can now go on to Rule 111.
RULE 111
INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ACTION
The old rule prior to Rule 111, when a criminal action is filed, the civil aspect is impliedly
instituted. But under the second formulation, it is deemed instituted.
Q: Ano ba difference dun? May difference ba yon, Impliedly instituted sa deemed instituted?
A: Burden of Proof is the difference. If it is impliedly instituted, you have to establish that it was
instituted. If it is deemed instituted, the one who claims otherwise has the burden of proof.
Q: Reservation, ano ibig sabihin non? How is it availed of?Yung Waiver, paano yun? When do
you do it, how do you do it? Prior institution, ano ibig sabihin non?
If the civil action is filed first and then the criminal action follows, what happens now?
A: The civil action is suspended in whatever stage it is until the termination of the criminal
action.
Q: Diba makakaroon ng problema yun? Suppose the civil case was filed first after the criminal
action is filed. The civil case is suspended. The criminal case ended in acquittal, what happens
in the suspended civil case? Ididismiss ba nila, na acquit na kasi eh?
A: Diba sa mga cases nababasa nyo, titignan nyo kung ano yung cause ng dismissal. If the
dismissal was anchored on the fact that the act did not exist, then the civil aspect will also be
dismissed. But if the acquittal is based only on reasonable doubt, the civil case will still continue.
So we are after prior institution, we are after reservation and we are after waiver. Waiver must
always be express, it can never be implied. Reservation must also be express, it must be
express just like waiver before the prosecution starts presenting evidence. Thereafter, you can
no longer waived because it is already deemed instituted. Another effect that you should
remember if you avail of prior institution, reservation and waiver is that the criminal case can
never be prosecuted by the private prosecutor because your presence of the private prosecutor
in a criminal case is only as to the civil aspect of the case, never the criminal aspect. So even
during trial, if be leave or one reason to another, you said that your honor, let me inform you that
we have reserved already the prosecution of the civil aspect of the case right then and there
that judge will say get out, get out, you are no longer entitled to be here, because you are only
here to prosecute the civil aspect of the case because the case is People of the Philippines, you
are not people, it is the fiscal who is people. The counsel of the prosecution is the fiscal, you are
only here to protect the civil liability connected to the criminal case. So that is another effect of
reservation, waiver or prior institution.
Q: How about prior institution?
A: In the same manner, but upon suspension, ganito ang nangyayari, the better remedy there is
not to wait until the criminal case is completed, NO! What you have to do if there is prior
institution of the civil case is to consolidate the criminal case to the civil case that is how you do
it. Consolidate the civil case.
Q: Does it mean you cannot file for collection of sum of money based on bounced check?
A: No, you can do that but you waive the criminal aspect of it. Remember the prescriptive period
for BP 22, two years. And after two year, you can no longer file it because the crime has
prescribed, therefore you only have a remedy of civil for sum of money based on bounced
check. But before the prescriptive period lapse, you file BP 22, the civil aspect is deemed
instituted within.
Q: How much is the docket fee here?
A: Based on the amount of the check. So di ka makakaligtas dito when it comes to BP 22 kasi
andun na yung amount of check but if you claim other damages, kasi eto actual, what is the rule
ba? Dib a you cannot claim actual damages in criminal cases but exception to the rule is BP 22
because that is the very gravamen of the offense, and that is actual. But if you claim other
damages such as exemplary, again you will apply the first lien on the judgment. So that is BP
22.
NOTE: Again, let me remind you that in BP 22, irrespective of the amount, is governed by the
rules on Summary Procedure. So irrespective of the amount it is governed by the Rules on
Summary Procedure, parang forcible entry even if the unpaid rentals amounted to One Million,
always governed by the Rules on Summary Procedure. BP 22, irrespective of the amount stated
in the check, always Summary Procedure.
Q: So you cannot file really a criminal case and civil case at the same time. So it appears now
that you cannot file two cases against the same person, one civil and one criminal because one
will affect the other. So might as well file a case of criminal and prosecute therein the civil aspect
and more so on BP 22, but there are exceptions, ano yun?
A: Independent Civil Actions. For example Oral Defamation, oral defamation is a crime. You can
file a criminal case and a civil case at the same time and it will move on simultaneously. They
are like two parallel lines that will never meet, they will never cross, they are independent of the
other. But there is a limitation. The only limitation is that you cannot recover double indemnity.
Independent Civil Actions are Articles 31 to 35 and 2176, they are the exceptions.
Q: What is the effect of death of the accused?
A: Do not confuse this with contractual money claim ha under Rule 3, section 20. You make a
proper distinction. Para ma distinguish nyo yan, tell us the case of People vs Bayotas. Bayotas
was convicted and the penalty imposed is death so it goes up to automatic appeal, but during
the pendency of the appeal he died. Therefore the criminal liability is extinguished, you cannot
imprison a dead person. Wala ng criminal liability yan, so if you do not want to be criminally
responsible for anything, kill yourself. But notwithstanding the extinction if his criminal liability,
the issue that was raised was whether the civil liability continues, so the Office of the Solicitor
General was asked to comment on this. The Office of the Solicitor General said yes but the
Supreme Court said that there must be a distinction, the criminal liability no problem about that,
it is extinguished by death. But the civil liability arising from the crime, in order words ex delicto,
is extinguished. But any other liability arising other sources of obligation is not extinguish, so it is
still demandable. And you know from your Obligations and Contracts, that obligations can arise
not just from a crime, it can also arise from law, contracts, delict, quasi delict and quasi contract.
So it is possible therefore that the estate of a deceased convict can still be held liable for civil
liability if for example if the liability arises from a contract so that if Bayotas for example rape a
relative within the 4th civil degree who is under his care and there maybe a liability arising from
law for support. So his estate is still liable for support which is not arising from a crime but
arising from law and you cannot disassociate or compromise Bayotas to be rapist in one side
and a contracting or an adopter or a father or a relative of the other side. So that is the doctrine
laid down in Bayotas. Abandoning now the old ruling in People vs Sendaydiego.
IMPORTANT: Regarding this ruling, in the case of People vs Ulit, one of the doctrines laid down
there under the Rules of Evidence is that a Barangay Captain is not considered a law
enforcement officer so that if confession is given to a Barangay Captain, that confession is
admissible in evidence even if the confession was done without the aid of counsel. That is the
doctrine laid down in People vs Ulit. The Barangay Captain is not a law enforcement officer. In a
recently decided case however, which is People vs Malgnan 503 SCRA 294, bago to,
overturning that ruling. Tandaan nyo to, this might be given in the bar. According to Malgnan
case, a barangay captain is considered a law enforcement agency when a person brought to
him is considered already under custodial interrogation and he must be assisted with counsel.
So if he confesses to barangay captain and without the assistance of counsel and he was not
inform of his right to counsel, then the confession is inadmissible in evidence, and that includes
the lighter found in her possession, babae kasi to. Also in the case of People vs Abapo, this is
with regard to Arrest, Rule 113. The doctrine laid down in People vs Abapo is that if you post
bail, you have waived your right to question illegal arrest. That is no longer applicable because
of the strict provision in the rule. In the rules under arrest and under bail, Rule 113 in relation to
114, it says there that even if you have already posted bail that is not a waiver of your right to
question lack of preliminary investigation and unlawful arrest.
The last lesson there is about prejudicial question. Under the Rules, prejudicial question
requires already another ingredient, which is prior institution. In the old rules of criminal
procedure, there is prejudicial question if the issue raised in the civil case is similar issue raised
in the criminal case and the resolution of the civil issue is determinative of the guilt or innocence
of the accused in the criminal case. Yun ang dati, with that you can already ask for suspension
of the criminal case on the ground of prejudicial question. Now, there is an additional
requirement, the civil case must be filed before the criminal case. So that filing the civil case
after the criminal case even if the issue in the civil case is determinative of the guilt or innocence
of the accused in the criminal case is no longer prejudicial. I hope that is understood, yan ang
bago sa prejudicial question, prior institution.
preliminary investigation is conducted by the judge, municipal trial court judge, he is acting as an
executive officer and he does not have the final say, so it goes up to the provincial prosecutor. If
the provincial prosecutor says tama ho yan judge, so the information is filed sa judge mismong
yon, ano kaya gagawin nya? Diba mag issue sya kaagad ng warrant of arrest without
conducting preliminary examination. Why? because he has already conducted preliminary
investigation under the same quantum of evidence, probable cause. Kaya mabuti nalang, with
that Supreme Court Circular tinanggal na yung right of Municipal Judges to conduct preliminary
investigation effective October 5, 2005. So all in the prosecutor and other authorized officer.
Q: Who are these authorized officers to conduct preliminary investigation?
A: The Ombudsman is authorized to conduct preliminary investigation.
March 8, 2007
RULE 116 ARRAIGNMENT
NOTE: According to the SC: The plea of guilt to a capital offense is improvident if the accused
was smiling the entire time during the arraignment, because no person in his right mind, would
be smiling the entire time when he knows that he is now in the threshold of death. The accused
clearly did not understand what it was all about. The case should be remanded for further
proceedings.
In case of arraignment, the accused who pleads guilty must be fully aware of what he is entering
into because the Rules now speak of two kinds of plea of guilty. A plea of guilty to a capital
offense; and a plea of guilty to a lesser offense. Perhaps the former would only be academic as
far as we are concerned due to the abolition of the imposition of the death penalty. But even
then, you know the requirement that when the accused pleads guilty to a capital offense, the
court is required to do the following:
1. Undertake searching questions to establish that the accused fully knew what he has
entered into and he consented without any vice of consent ( force, intimidation,
mistake, violence, undue influence) in answering a plea of guilty to a capital offense;
2. Order the prosecution to present evidence to establish the guilt of the accused beyond
reasonable doubt; and
3. That the accused may be asked whether he would like to present evidence but this is
discretionary on the part of the accused, not on the part of the court.
Because of the abolition of the imposition of the imposition of the death penalty, what is
applicable now is the plea of guilty to a lesser offense. But let me point out to you class that the
lesser offense there already includes reclusion perpetua and life imprisonment because plea of
guilty to a capital offense refers only to that crime punishable by death penalty. So, if it is only a
crime punishable by reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, then you know the distinction
between the two: reclusion perpetua: 30 years; life imprisonment: 40 years; then the
requirement is different. A plea of guilty to a lesser offense, the court is still required to
determine from the pleader whether he fully understood his plea of guilty to a lesser offense;
whether there was no employment of any vice of consent, but not as stringent as in a plea of
guilty to a capital offense as before. But still, the court must inquire as to the comprehension
and consent of the accused to the plea of guilty. Then , the accused must direct the prosecution
to present evidence (not for the purpose of establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt this time)
for the purpose of knowing what penalty is to be imposed upon the accused and again
discretionary on the part of the accused to present additional evidence. This right to present
further evidence is still available to the accused because should he present exculpatory
evidence, the court is required to order a change of plea from guilty to not guilty. That is the
reason for the third requisite.
Arraignment does not only include reading the information but also furnishing a copy thereof to
the accused.
Rolito Go case
That the officer who filed the information had no authority to do so:
There are certain cases that cannot be prosecuted de oficio. It must be prosecuted by the
offended person himself (like concubinage, adultery, seduction, abduction, acts of
lasciviousness). So, if it is filed by the fiscal without the authority of the private complainant,
then you can file a motion to quash the complaint or information on that ground.
The authority to conduct preliminary investigations is now removed from the RTCs. So that
remedy is also directly available.
If the ground for a motion to quash is that the criminal action or liability has been
extinguished (extinction of criminal liability), you cannot refile that anymore. There is
nothing to refile.
Q: If the motion to quash is denied, is that censurable? In other words, can you file certiorari
(Rule 65) against the order of denial?
A: Yes, if there is grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction. You can file
certiorari without going to trial. But if there is no grave abuse of discretion, you cannot file
certiorari; neither can you file an appeal, because this is an interlocutory order. In civil cases,
granting a motion to dismiss is a final order from which you can appeal, but the denial is
Q: What is the order of trial? How would you differentiate this from order of presentation of
evidence?
A: Order of trial in civil cases will start with plaintiff; then defendant; then 3 rd party; 4th party; 5th
party; then the last is intervenor. In criminal cases, you start with prosecution; then defense.
Order in the Presentation of evidence: start with direct testimony; cross examination; re direst;
re cross.
State witness
In arraignment, there can be plea bargaining. That is your first chance to a plea bargain. Still
that right to plea bargain is repeated under Rule 118. During the pre trial, you can still plea
bargain.
Q: What happens to your plea of guilty?
A: That plea of guilty is withdrawn and you enter a plea of guilty to a lesser offense. But in this
plea bargaining, you cannot enter a plea to a charge not included in the offense charged or is
not necessarily included in the offense charged.
If you are charged with rape, you cannot plead guilty to physical injuries because it is not
included in rape. You can plead to acts of lasciviousness which is necessarily included.
Charged for murder, you can plead to homicide.
During pre trial, you can instead, enter into a stipulation of facts even in criminal cases. Marking
of evidence; identification of evidence; you can even compromise the civil aspect of the case,
but never the criminal aspect. The criminal case may never be compromised. These are all
included in Pre- Trial. Compromise is not really acquittal, but dismissal of the case.
A pre trial order is mandatory.. Lack of it can be an irregularity prejudicial to the rights of the
accused. Tie it up with Motion for New Trial under Rule 121 because that may be an irregularity.
What guides the court in trial is the Pre-trial order.
Mediation and conciliation proceedings are mandatory in both civil and criminal cases. Rule 18
that applies to Rule 118. You go to the mediation office, if there is no settlement there,
(settlement of the civil aspect) you go to the clerk of court for preliminary conference and there
you can settle the civil aspect and if there is no settlement, you proceed now to Pre-trial order.
Under the mediation rule, the records of the prosecution on the preliminary investigation forms
part of the record of the case. According to me (Atty Brondial), this might violate the rights of the
accused because it may be considered as admission if it forms part of the records of the case.
Provisional dismissal is always with the consent of the accused. When a provisional dismissal
becomes final, it amounts to a dismissal. Is the provisional dismissal ipso jure or should you still
file a motion for that? My opinion on the matter is that it is ipso jure, by operation of law, after
the lapse of either one or two years, as the case may be, the dismissal becomes permanent with
or without motion on the part of either party. That is my opinion. There is no jurisprudence on
the matter. The rule is very clear. Can the court, after the lapse of the respective periods revive
it ipso facto? I dont think so.
RULE 119 TRIAL
Q: How long should trial be?
A: Trial must be completed within a period of 80 days from arraignment to judgment. Excluded
from this 80 day period are other periods brought about by delay.
Q: What is this delay?
A: Delay caused by the accused; by the prosecution; or by the court.
Q: Suppose A, B, and C are all principals accused of highway robbery, can you get one of them
as a state witness?
A: No. They are all principals. In order for one of them to qualify as a sate witness, the Rule
requires that it must be the least guilty party.