#A bill of particulars trial#
#A bill of particulars series#

Mendoza to immediately proceed with his motion for reconsideration.Ītty. Mendoza asked for time to file a motion for reconsideration, stating that he would orally move to reconsider the Sandiganbayanï¿½s denial if he would not be given time to seek a reconsideration. The details sought are evidentiary in nature and are best ventilated during trial.Ītty. When the court session resumed, PJ Cabotaje-Tang announced the Courtï¿½s denial of Enrileï¿½s motion for bill of particulars essentially on the following grounds:ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ Thereafter, Sandiganbayan Presiding Justice ( PJ) Amparo Cabotaje-Tang ( Cabotaje-Tang), declared a ï¿❑0-minute recessï¿½ to deliberate on the motion. Mendoza), Enrileï¿½s counsel, argued the motion orally. On July 11, 2014, Enrile was brought to the Sandiganbayan pursuant to the Sandiganbayanï¿½s order and his motion for bill of particulars was called for hearing. On the same date, he filed a motion for deferment of arraignment 9 since he was to undergo medical examination at the Philippine General Hospital (PGH).

On July 10, 2014, Enrile filed a motion for bill of particulars 8 before the Sandiganbayan. On July 8, 2014, Enrile received a notice of hearing 7 informing him that his arraignment would be held before the Sandiganbayanï¿½s Third Division on July 11, 2014. On July 3, 2014, the Sandiganbayan denied Enrileï¿½s motions and ordered the issuance of warrants of arrest on the plunder case against the accused. On June 24, 2014, the prosecution filed a consolidated opposition to both motions. The Sandiganbayan heard both motions on June 20, 2014.

#A bill of particulars series#

REYES, then Chief of Staff of Senator Enrileï¿½s Office, both public officers, committing the offense in relation to their respective offices, conspiring with one another and with JANET LIM NAPOLES, RONALD JOHN LIM, and JOHN RAYMUND DE ASIS, did then and there willfully, unlawfully, and criminally amass, accumulate, and/or acquire ill-gotten wealth amounting to at least ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY TWO MILLION EIGHT HUNDRED THIRTY FOUR THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED PESOS (Php172,834,500.00) through a combination or series of overt criminal acts, as follows: LawlibraryofCRAlawīy taking undue advantage, on several occasions, of their official positions, authority, relationships, connections, and influence to unjustly enrich themselves at the expense and to the damage and prejudice, of the Filipino people and the Republic of the Philippines.Įnrile responded by filing before the Sandiganbayan (1) an urgent omnibus motion ( motion to dismiss for lack of evidence on record to establish probable cause and ad cautelam motion for bail), 4 and (2) a supplemental opposition to issuance of warrant of arrest and for dismissal of Information, 5 on June 10, 2014, and June 16, 2014, respectively. In 2004 to 2010 or thereabout, in the Philippines, and within this Honorable Courtï¿½s jurisdiction, above-named accused JUAN PONCE ENRILE, then a Philippine Senator, JESSICA LUCILA G. The Information reads: LawlibraryofCRAlaw On June 5, 2014, the Office of the Ombudsman filed an Information 3 for plunder against Enrile, Jessica Lucila Reyes, Janet Lim Napoles, Ronald John Lim, and John Raymund de Asis before the Sandiganbayan. SB-1ï¿½ 1 filed by petitioner Juan Ponce Enrile (Enrile) challenging the Jresolutions 2 of the Sandiganbayan. 115748.We resolve the ï¿½petition for certiorari with prayers (a) for the Court En Banc to act on the petition (b) to expedite the proceedings and to set the case for oral arguments and (c) to issue a temporary restraining order to the respondents from holding a pre-trial and further proceedings in Criminal Case No. A general function or purpose of a bill of particulars is to prevent injustice or do justice in the case when that cannot be accomplished without the aid of such a bill.

It has also been stated that it is the function or purpose of a bill of particulars to define, clarify, particularize, and limit or circumscribe the issues in the case, to expedite the trial, and assist the court.

#A bill of particulars trial#

It is the office or function, as well as the object or purpose, of a bill of particulars to amplify or limit a pleading, specify more minutely and particularly a claim or defense set up and pleaded in general terms, give information, not contained in the pleading, to the opposite party and the court as to the precise nature, character, scope, and extent of the cause of action or defense relied on by the pleader, and apprise the opposite party of the case which he has to meet, to the end that the proof at the trial may be limited to the matter specified, and in order that surprise at, and needless preparations for, the trial may be avoided, and that the opposite party may be aided in framing his answering pleading and preparing for trial.