Flashcards Studio

On March 3, 2026, in the Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 12, accused Carlo Dizon is charged with robbery with intimidation. He was arraigned and pleaded not guilty. On the date set for trial, Dizon is absent despite valid summons; his counsel is present in court. After warning the parties that the trial would proceed in Dizon’s absence, the court receives testimony from three prosecution witnesses and later convicts Dizon. Dizon later appears and moves for relief, contending that his trial in absentia violated due process. (a) Identify the controlling doctrine on trial in absentia and the conditions under which it is permissible. (b) Evaluate whether the trial in absentia was properly conducted under these facts, distinguishing permissible circumstances from violations. (c) If the proceeding is defective or the conviction may be challenged, describe the remedies available to Dizon and any limitations.