Flashcards Studio

Elena Navarro is charged with murder in the Regional Trial Court of Manila. She was arraigned and pleaded not guilty. On the date set for trial, Navarro is absent despite valid summons; her counsel is present in court. After warning the parties that the trial would proceed in Navarro’s absence, the court receives evidence from two witnesses and convicts Navarro of murder. Navarro later appears and moves for relief, contending that her 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 Navarro and any limitations.