June 18, 2002 Vol. 1 Issue 42<span style='mso-spacerun:yes'> </span>Pages 5-6

nal corporate and labor. There are other fields like: patent, taxation, maritime, etc. but not very many go into this highly specialized fields. I was given the classification of Criminal Law Practice when I joined RCSFLU. At that time, there was another active legal practitioner who was also member of the Club, the late Atty. Florante de la Cruz, who held the classification of Civil Law Practice. It does not mean, however, that our practice is limited only to Criminal Law Practice. In actual practice, we handle Civil, Commercial, Corporate and Labor cases with civil cases forming the major bulk. Among the several fields of legal practice, the more interesting and dramatic and glamorous sometimes is Criminal Law Practice especially when the party accused is a prominent personality. Example is the high profile plunder case of former Pres. Estrada where the defense lawyers bask in the glare of media publicity. Criminal cases are usually prosecuted by a government lawyer referred to as government prosecutor, however, when the offended persons require that private lawyers participate in the prosecution, private lawyers can participate in the prosecution, assisting the government prosecutor. These private lawyers are referred to as Private Prosecutors and are paid by the offended parties. Of course, the accused, if he can afford, can also engage the services of private lawyers, who are referred to as Defense Counsel or Counsel for the Accused. Where the accused is penurious, a de oficio counsel is usually appointed by the Court or the Court ap

points a lawyer from the Public Assistance Attorney to defend the accused usually for free.

The amount of evidence needed to convict an accused in a criminal case is proof beyond reasonable doubt, which is actually evidence sustaining a judicial conclusion that the accused is clearly, without any doubt at all, guilty. In civil cases, the degree of evidence required in order that a party can prevail is preponderance; of evidence in other cases, only substantial evidence is required. Which makes this writer recall a criminal case he handled many years ago when he was still a young lawyer. A man was shot to death in Santol, La Union. The accused was an unschooled plain-looking farmer. The charge was murder. This writer was appointed by the Court as a de oficio counsel to represent the accused murderer . In a private meeting with the accused before trial of the case commenced, this writer grilled the accused-farmer if he really shot the victim. The accused vigorously insisted on his innocence, beating his breast in the process and invoking God as his witness and even putting at stake the honor of his mother, wife and children, to proclaim his innocence. I was convinced of the accused innocence so I poured my heart and soul in the defense of the accused. Trial was conducted by the Court continuously for several months and when judgment was rendered, the accused farmer was acquitted and ordered freed from detention. I thought I had helped served the ends of justice with the free legal assistance I rendered to the accused resulting in his acquittal. However, when former co-detainees of the accused farmer with whom the latter shared his jail cell, visited me at our office, while congratulating me for acquitting the accused farmer, they relayed to me in confidence that the accused categorically admitted to them (co-detainees) that he really shot the victim. The