Section 19. When mistake has been made in charging the proper offense
When, at any time before judgment, it becomes manifest that a mistake
has been made in charging the proper offense and the accused cannot
be convicted of the offense charged or any other offense necessarily
included therein, the said accused shall not be discharged if there
appears to be good cause to detain him.
If there appears to be good cause to detain the accused, the court
shall commit the accused and dismiss the original case upon the
filing of the proper information.
When the offense proved is neither included in, nor does it include,
the offense charged and is different therefrom, the court should
dismiss the action and order the filing of a new information charging
the proper offense.
US v. Campo, 23 Phil. 369 (1912)
- This rule is predicated on the fact that an accused person has
the right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation
against him, and to convict him of an offense different from that
charged in the complaint or information would be an unauthorized
denial of that right.
Section 20. Appointment of acting prosecutor
When a prosecutor, his assistant or deputy is disqualified to act,
the judge or the prosecutor shall communicate with the Secretary of
Justice in order that the latter may appoint an acting prosecutor.
Section 21. Exclusion of the public
- The accused has the right to public trial and under ordinary
circumstances, the court may not close the door of the courtroom
to the general public.
EXCEPTION: The public may be excluded from the courtroom when
evidence to be produced is offensive to decency or public morals.
The court may also, on motion of the accused, exclude the public
from the trial except court personnel and the counsel of the parties.
Section 22. Consolidation of trials of related offenses
This Contemplates A Situation Where Separate Motions Are Filed:
1. for offenses founded on the same facts;
2. for offenses which form part of a series of offenses of similar
The purpose of consolidation is to avoid multiplicity of suits, guard
against oppression or abuse, prevent delay, clear congested dockets,
simplify the work of the trial court, and save unnecessary cost or
expense; in short, the attainment of justice with the least expense
and vexation to the party litigants.
While consolidation of cases and joint trial of related offenses and
the rendition of a consolidated decision are allowed, the court cannot
convict an accused of a complex crime constitutive of the various
crimes alleged in the consolidated cases.