CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

What is criminal procedure?

Criminal procedure is the method prescribed by law for the apprehension and prosecution of
persons accused of any criminal offense and for their punishment, in case of conviction.

 What is criminal procedure concerned with?

Criminal procedure is concerned with the procedural steps through which the criminal case passes,
commencing with the initial investigation of a crime and concluding with the unconditional release of
the offender. It is a generic term used to describe the network of laws and rules which govern the
procedural administration of criminal justice.

What are the three systems of criminal procedure?

1. Inquisitorial – the detection and prosecution of offenders are not left to the initiative of private
parties but to the officials and agents of the law. Resort is made to secret inquiry to discover
the culprit, and violence and torture are often employed to extract confessions. The judge is
not limited to the evidence brought before him but could proceed with his own inquiry which
was not confrontative.
2. Accusatorial – The accusation is exercised by every citizen or by a member of the group to
which the injured party belongs. As the action is a combat between the parties, the
supposed offender has the right to be confronted by his accuser. The battle in the form of a
public trial is judged by a magistrate who renders a verdict. The essence of the
accusatorial system is the right to be presumed innocent. To defeat this presumption,
the prosecution must establish proof of guilt beyond reasonable doubt (moral certainty).
3. Mixed – This is a combination of the inquisitorial and accusatorial systems. The examination
of defendants and other persons before the filing of the complaint or information is
inquisitorial.

The judicial set-up in the Philippines is accusatorial or adversary in nature. It contemplates

two contending parties before the court, which hears them impartially and renders judgment only
after trial.

Due process; mandatory

Due process in criminal proceedings is mandatory and indispensable and cannot be met without the
proverbial "law which hears before it condemns and proceeds upon inquiry and renders judgment
only after trial."

The requirements of due process in a criminal proceeding, to wit:

(a) that the court or tribunal trying the case is properly clothed with judicial power to hear and
determine the matter before it;
(b) that jurisdiction is lawfully acquired by it over the person of the accused;
(c) that the accused is given opportunity to be heard; and
(d) that judgment is rendered only upon lawful hearing.

Requisites For The Exercise of Criminal Jurisdiction

1
A reading of jurisprudence and treatises on the matter discloses the following basic requisites before
a court can acquire jurisdiction over criminal cases (Cruz v. Court of Appeals, 388 SCRA 72):
(a) Jurisdiction over the subject matter;
(b) Jurisdiction over the territory; and
(c) Jurisdiction over the person of the accused.

Jurisdiction over the subject matter versus jurisdiction over the person of the accused
1. Jurisdiction over the subject matter refers to the authority of the court to hear and determine a
particular criminal case. It mandates that the offense is one which the court is by law authorized to
take cognizance of.

2. Jurisdiction over the person of the accused refers to the authority of the court, not over the subject
matter of the criminal litigation, but over the person charged. This kind of jurisdiction requires that
"the person charged with the offense must have been brought in to its forum for trial, forcibly by
warrant of arrest or upon his voluntary submission to the court"

Jurisdiction over the territory; venue in criminal cases

1. This element requires that the offense must have been committed within the court's territorial
jurisdiction. This fact is to be determined by the facts alleged in the complaint or information as
regards the place where the offense charged was committed.
2. Territorial jurisdiction in criminal cases is the territory where the court has jurisdiction to take
cognizance or to try the offense allegedly committed therein by the accused. Thus, it cannot take
jurisdiction over a person charged with an offense allegedly committed outside of that limited territory
and if the evidence adduced during the trial shows that the offense was committed somewhere else,
the court should dismiss the action for want of jurisdiction

3. It is doctrinal that in criminal cases, venue is an essential element of jurisdiction, and that the
jurisdiction of a court over a criminal case is determined by the allegations of the complaint or the
information.

When a court has jurisdiction to try offenses not committed within its territorial jurisdiction

The rule that the offense must be prosecuted and tried in the place where the same was committed
admits of certain exceptions.

1. Where the offense was committed under the circumstances enumerated in Art. 2 of the Revised
Penal Code, the offense is cognizable before Philippine courts even if committed outside of the
territory of the Philippines. In this case, the offense shall be cognizable by the court where the
criminal action is first filed.

Under Article 2 of the Revised Penal Code, the provisions of the Revised Penal Code shall be
enforced not only within the Philippine Archipelago but also outside of its jurisdiction against
offenders who:
1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship;
2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippine Islands or obligations
and securities issued by the Government of the Philippine Islands;
3. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into these Islands of the obligations
and securities mentioned above;
4. While being public officers and employees, should commit an offense in the exercise of their
functions; or
5. Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of nations.

2
 2. Where the Supreme Court, pursuant to its constitutional powers orders a change of venue
or place of trial to avoid a miscarriage of justice (Section 5[4J, Article VIII, 1987 Constitution of the
Philippines).

3. Where an offense is committed in a train, aircraft, or other public or private vehicle in the
course of its trip, the criminal action need not be instituted in the actual place where the offense was
committed. It may be instituted and tried in the court of any municipality or territory where said train,
aircraft, or vehicle passed during its trip. The crime
may also be instituted and tried in the place of departure and arrival (Section 15[b], Rule 110, Rules
of Court).

4. Where an offense is committed on board a vessel in the course of its voyage, the criminal
action shall be instituted and tried not necessarily in the place of the commission of the crime. It may
be brought and tried in the court of the first port of entry, or in the municipality or territory where the
vessel passed during the voyage (Section 15[c], Rule 110, Rules of Court).

5. Where the case is cognizable by the Sandiganbayan, the jurisdiction of which depends
upon the nature of the offense and the position of the accused (Subido v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
122641, January 20, 1997), the offense need not be tried in the place where the act was committed
but where the court actually sits in Quezon City.

Under Sec. 2 of R.A. No. 8249 (An Act Further Defining the Jurisdiction of the
Sandiganbayan), when the greater convenience of the accused and of the witnesses, or other
compelling considerations so require, a case originating from one geographical region may be heard
in another geographical region.

6. Where the offense is written defamation, the criminal action need not necessarily be filed
in the RTC of the province or city where the alleged libelous article was printed and first published. It
may be filed in the province or city where the offended party held office at the time of the
commission of the offense if he is a public officer, or in the province or city where he actually resided
at the time of the commission of the offense in case the offended party is a private individual

How jurisdiction over the subject matter is conferred

1. Jurisdiction over the subject matter is conferred by law). It is the law that confers jurisdiction and
not the rules.

2. While jurisdiction of courts is conferred by law, jurisdiction over a criminal case is determined by
the allegations in the complaint or information. Hence, "(I)n order to determine the jurisdiction of the
court in criminal cases, the complaint or information must be examined for the purpose of
ascertaining whether or not the facts set out therein and the punishment provided for by law for such
acts fall within the jurisdiction of the court in which the criminal action is filed.

4. In cases cognizable by the Sandiganbayan, both the nature of the offense and the position
occupied by the accused are conditions sine qua non before the Sandiganbayan can validly take
cognizance of the case

5. In complex crimes, jurisdiction is with the court having jurisdiction to impose the maximum and
most serious penalty imposable on the offense forming part of the complex crime

Statute applicable to a criminal action

1. It is a hornbook doctrine that jurisdiction to try a criminal action is determined by the law in force at
the time of the institution of the action and not during the arraignment of the accused.

3
C. Criminal Jurisdiction Over The Person of the Accused
1. It was held that jurisdiction over the person of the accused is acquired upon his arrest or
apprehension, with or without a warrant, or his voluntary appearance or submission to the
jurisdiction of the court .

CRIMINAL JURISDICTION OF COURTS

A. Criminal Jurisdiction of the Municipal

Trial Court, Municipal Circuit Trial Court, and Metropolitan Trial Court (MTC)
Except in cases falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court and of the
Sandiganbayan, the MTC shall exercise the following criminal jurisdiction:
1. Exclusive original jurisdiction over all violations of city or municipal ordinances committed
within their respective territorial jurisdiction (Batas Pambansa Big. 129, Section 3211); Republic Act
No. 7691);
2. Exclusive original jurisdiction over all offenses punishable with imprisonment not
exceeding six (6) years irrespective of the amount of fine, and regardless of other im- posable or
accessory penalties, including the civil liability arising from such offenses irrespective of kind, nature,
value or amount (B.P. 129, Sec. 32[2]; R.A. 7691);

3. Where the only penalty provided for by law is a fine, the amount thereof shall determine the
jurisdiction of the court under the original provisions of B.P. 129 (Sec. 32[2]) which provided that the
MTC shall have exclusive original jurisdiction over offenses punishable with a fine of not more than
Four Thousand (P4,000.00) Pesos;
4. Exclusive original jurisdiction over offenses involving damage to property through criminal
negligence (B.P. 129, Sec. 32[2]; RA. 7691);
5. Violations of B.P. 22 (Bouncing Checks Law)

6. Summary procedure in the following cases: a. Violations of traffic laws, rules and regulations,
violations of the rental law; and violations of municipal or city ordinances;
b. All other criminal cases where the penalty pre- scribed by law for the offense charged is
imprisonment not exceeding six months, or a fine not exceeding one thousand pesos (PI,000.00), or
both, irrespective of other imposable penalties, accessory or otherwise, or of the civil liability arising
therefrom;
c. Offenses involving damage to property through criminal negligence where the imposable fine does
not exceed ten thousand pesos P10,000.00 (The 1991 Rule on Summary Procedure [Sec. IB]).

7. Special jurisdiction to decide on applications for bail in criminal cases in the absence of all RTC
judges in a province or city (B.P. 129 [Sec. 35]).

B. Criminal Jurisdiction of Regional Trial Court (RTC)

1. Exclusive original jurisdiction in all criminal cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court,
tribunal or body, except those now falling under the exclusive and concur- rent jurisdiction of the
Sandiganbayan (B.P. 129 [Sec. 20]);
2. Appellate jurisdiction over all cases decided by the MTC within its territorial jurisdiction (B.P. 129
[Sec. 22]);
3. Special jurisdiction to handle exclusively criminal cases as designated by the Supreme Court
(B.P. 129 [Sec. 23]);
4. Jurisdiction over criminal cases under specific laws such as: (a) Written defamation (Art. 360,
Revised Penal Code);

4
(b) Jurisdiction of designated courts over cases in violation of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs
Act of 2002 {RA. No. 9165) as provided under Sec. 90 thereof;
(c) Violations of intellectual property rights [A.M. No. 03-03-03-SC 2003-06-17, Effective July 1,
2003 implementing the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines [R A. 8293]).

5. Jurisdiction in Money Laundering Cases. — The Regional Trial Courts shall have jurisdiction to try
all cases on money laundering. Those committed by public officers and private persons who are in
conspiracy with such public officers shall be under the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan (Sec. 5,
RA. 9160, Anti-Money Laundering Act of2001).

C. Criminal Jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan (PJ). 1606, RA. 7975 and RA. 8249)
1. The jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan is set by P.D. 1606 as amended and not by R.A. 3019 or
the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act as amended (Serana v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 162059,
January 22,2008).
2. The applicable law provides:

uSection 4. Jurisdiction — The Sandiganbayan shall exercise original jurisdiction in all cases
involving:

a. Violations of Republic Act No. 3019, as amended, otherwise known as the Anti-Graft and
Corruption Practices Act, and Republic Act No. 1379, and Chapter II, Section 2, Title VII, Book II of
the Revised Penal Code, where one or more of the accused are officials occupying the following
positions in the government, whether in a permanent, acting or interim capacity, at the time of the
commission of the offense:

(1) Officials of the executive branch occupying the positions of regional director and higher,
otherwise classified as Grade "27" and higher of the Compensation and Position Classification Act of
1989 (Republic Act No. 6758), specifically including:
(a) Provincial governors, vice-governors, members of the sangguniang panlalawigan, and
provincial treasurers, assessors, engineers, and other provincial department heads;
(b) City mayors, vice-mayors, members of the sangguniang panlungsod, and city treasurer,
assessors, engineers, and other city department heads;
(c) Officials of the diplomatic service occupying the position of consul and higher;
(d) Philippine army and air force colonels, naval captains, and all officers of higher rank;
(e) Officers of the Philippine National Police while occupying the position of provincial
director and those holding the rank of senior superintendent or higher;
(f) City and provincial prosecutors and their assistants, and officials and prosecutors in the
Office of the Ombudsman and special prosecutor;
(g) Presidents, directors or trustees, or managers of government-owned or controlled
corporations, state universities or educational institutions or foundations

(2) Members of Congress and officials thereof classified as Grade "27" and up under the
Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989;

(3) Members of the judiciary without prejudice to the provisions of the Constitution;
(4) Chairmen and members of Constitutional Commissions, without prejudice to the provisions of the
Constitution; and
(5) All other national and local officials classified as Grade "27" and higher under the Compensation
and Position Classification Act of 1989.

5
RULE 110 - PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES

1.  General Rule:  MTC and RTC courts gain jurisdiction over the offense upon the filing of complaint
by a complainant or an information by the prosecuting officer

[] Court gains jurisdiction over the person of the accused upon arrest or surrender; such
jurisdiction once gained cannot be lost even if accused escapes (Gimenez vs. Nazareno)
[] Jurisdiction of the court over the offense is determined at the time of the institution of the
action and is retained even if the penalty for the offense is later lowered or raised (People vs. Lagon)

2.  Complaint – sworn written statement charging a person with an offense, subscribed by the
offended party, any peace officer or other public official charged with the enforcement of the law
violated

Information – accusation in writing charging a person with an offense, subscribed by the fiscal and
filed with the court

3.    Complaint and Information distinguished:

Complaint Information

A sworn statement Need not be sworn to

Subscribed by the offended party, any

peace officer or other officer charged with
the enforcement of the law violated Subscribed to by the fiscal

May be filed either with the court or in the

fiscal’s office generally to commence the
preliminary investigation of the charges
made Filed with the court

4.    Cases where courts of equal rank are vested with concurrent jurisdiction:

a. Features stated in Art. 2, RPC

 Cognizable by proper court in which charge is first filed

b. Continuing crimes committed in different judicial regions

c. Offenses wherein any of the essential elements were committed in different territorial
jurisdictions
d. Offenses committed aboard a train, vehicle, aircraft or vessel  (see R110, §15)

 Railroad, train, aircraft

(1)  Territory or municipality where vehicle passed

(2)  Place of departure

(3)  Place of arrival

6
 e. Vessel

(1) First port of entry

(2) Thru which it passed during voyage

f.  Libel and written defamation

5.   Remedies of offended party when fiscal unreasonably refuses to file an information or include a
person therein as an accused

1. In case of grave abuse of discretion, action for mandamus

2. Lodge a new complaint against the offenders
3. Take up matter with the Secretary of Justice
4. Institute administrative charges against the erring fiscal
5. File criminal charges under Art. 208, RPC (prosecution of offenses)
6. File civil action under Art. 27, NCC for damages (PO refuses or neglects to perform official
duty)
7. Secure appointment of another fiscal
8. Institute another criminal action if no double jeopardy is involved

6.  Writs of injunction or prohibition to restrain a criminal prosecution are not available, EXCEPT

1. To afford adequate protection to constitutional rights of accused

2. Necessary for the orderly administration of justice or to avoid oppression or multiplicity of
actions
3. Pre-judicial question which is sub judice
4. Acts of the officer are without or in excess of authority
5. Prosecution is under an invalid law, ordinance or regulation
6. Double jeopardy is clearly apparent
7. Court has no jurisdiction over the case
8. Case of persecution rather than prosecution
9. Charges are manifestly false and motivated by lust for vengeance
10. Clearly no prima facie case against the accused and MTQ on that ground had been denied

7.    Institution of Criminal Actions:

a.    In RTC:

 By filing a complaint with the appropriate officer for the purpose of conducting requisite
preliminary investigation therein.

b. In Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts:

 By filing the complaint or information directly with said courts, or a complaint with the
fiscal’s office

c.   In Metropolitan Trial Courts

 By filing the complaint ONLY with the office of the fiscal

7
 In all 3 above cases, such institution shall interrupt the period of prescription of the offense
charged (Rule 110, §1)

d. Offenses subject to summary procedure

[i.e. (1) violation of traffic laws; (2) violation of rental laws; (3) violation of municipal or city
ordinances; and (4) criminal cases where the penalty does not exceed 6 months or fine of P1000 or
both, irrespective of other imposable penalties and civil liabilities]

 The complaint or information shall be filed directly in court without need of a prior preliminary
examination or preliminary investigation.
  Zaldivia vs. Reyes – since a criminal case covered by the Rules of Summary Procedure
shall be deemed commenced only when it is filed in court, then the running of the
prescriptive period shall be halted on the date the case is actually filed in court and not on
any date before that.

8.  Contents of information

a.  Name of the accused

 Information may be amended as to the name of the accused, but such amendment cannot be
questioned for the first time on appeal (People vs. Guevarra)
 Error of name of the offended party: if material to the case, it necessarily affects the identification
of the act charged.  Conviction for robbery cannot be sustained if there is a variance between the
allegation and the proof as to the ownership of the property stolen.

b.  Designation of offense by statute (or of section/subsection of statute violated)

 Only one offense charged, EXCEPT where law prescribes a single punishment for various
offenses.
 If facts do not completely allege all the elements of the crime charged, the info may be
quashed; however, the prosecution is allowed to amend the info to include the necessary
facts (People vs. Purisima)

c.   Acts or omissions complained of constituting the offense

 Information need only allege facts, not include all the evidence which may be used to prove
such facts (Balitaan vs. CFI)

d.   Name of offended party

e.  Approximate time of commission

 Approximation of time is sufficient; amendment as to time is only a formal amendment; no

need to dismiss case (People vs. Molero)
 A significant discrepancy in the time alleged cannot be sustained since such would allow the
prosecution to prove an offense distantly removed from the alleged date, thus substantially
impairing the rights of the accused to be informed of the charges against him (People vs.
Reyes)

8
f.    Place of commission

 Conviction may be had even if it appears that the crime was committed not at the place
alleged, provided that the place of actual commission was within the court’s jurisdiction and
accused was not surprised by the variance between the proof and the information
 Qualifying and inherent aggravating circumstances need to be alleged as they are integral
parts of the crime.  If proved, but not alleged, become only generic aggravating
circumstances.

9.  Amendment of information and Substitution of information, distinguished

Amendment Substitution

Involves either formal or substantial

changes Necessarily involves a substantial change

Needs leave of court as original information

Without leave of court if before plea has to be dismissed

Where only as to form, there is no need for

another preliminary investigation and Another preliminary investigation is
retaking of plea of accused entailed and accused has to plead anew

Refers to the same offense charged or

which necessarily includes or is necessarily
included in original charges, hence, Requires or presupposes that new info
substantial amendments to info after plea involves a different offense which does not
taken cannot be made over objections of include or is not included in the original
accused for if original info is withdrawn, charge, hence, accused cannot claim
accused could invoke double jeopardy double jeopardy

10. After plea, amendment only as to matters of form, provided

 Leave of court is obtained; and

 Amendment is not prejudicial to rights of accused

11. When amendment is only as to form

 Neither affects or alters nature of offense charged

 Charge does not deprive accused of a fair opportunity to present his defense
 Does not involve a change in basic theory of prosecution

12. Exceptions to rule on venue

 Felonies in Art. 2, RPC (cognizable by proper court in which charge is first filed)
 Continuing offenses
 Piracy which is triable anywhere
 Libel (residence; or where first published)
 In exceptional cases, to ensure fair trial and impartial inquiry

9
13.  Special cases (who may prosecute)

a. Adultery and concubinage

 Only offended spouse can be complainant

 Both guilty parties must be included in complaint

b.   Crimes against chastity

 With consent of the offended party, offended spouse, grandparents, guardian, or state
as parens patriae, in that order
 Offended party, even if minor, has right to initiate the prosecution of the case independently
of parents, grandparents or guardian, unless she is incompetent/incapable on grounds other
than minority.
 If offended party who is a minor fails to file the complaint, her parents, grandparents or
guardian may do so.
 In crimes against chastity, the consent of the victim is a jurisdictional requirement–retraction
renders the information void (People vs. Ocapan)
 If complexed with a public crime, the provincial fiscal may sign the complaint on his own.

c.   Defamation (consisting of imputation of offenses in [a] or [b])

 Complainant must be offended party

 The offended party may intervene in the prosecution of the criminal case because of her
interest in it (Banal vs. Tadeo)

14. Procedure

A. Complaint filed in MTC or info filed in RTC where an essential ingredient of the crime took
place (territorial jurisdiction)
1. Amendment as a matter of right before plea
2. Amendment upon discretion of the court after plea
 Inclusion of other accused is only a formal amendment which would not be prejudicial to the
accused and should be allowed (People vs. CA)

2.   After plea and before judgment, if it appears there was a mistake in charging proper offense,
court shall dismiss original info upon the filing of a corrected one, provided that the accused will not
be placed in double jeopardy (substitution)

3.  Fiscal determines direction of prosecution; complainant must ask fiscal if he wants to dismiss
the case; the motion to dismiss must be addressed to the court which has discretion over the
disposition of the case (Republic vs. Sunga)

4. Objection to the amendment of an information or complaint must be raised at the time the
amendment is made; otherwise, deemed to have consented thereto.

15. Remedies

a.   Motion to quash

10
  May be filed after arraignment but before plea on the grounds provided by the rules
 If duplicity of offense charged is not raised in trial through a motion to quash info, the right to
question it is waived (People vs. Ocapan)

b.   Motion to dismiss

 May be filed after plea but before judgment on most of  grounds for motion to quash

16.  Duplicity of Offense (in information or complaint)

 Defined as the joinder of separate and distinct offenses in one and the same
information/complaint
 Remedy:  file a motion to quash; failure is equivalent to a waiver
 Exception: when existing laws prescribe a single punishment (complex crimes)

RULE 111 - PROSECUTION OF CIVIL ACTION

1.   General Rule: The injured party may file a civil action independent of the criminal proceeding to
recover damages from the offender.

 Article 32 is a valid cause of a civil action for damages against public officers who impair the
Constitutional rights of citizens (Aberca vs. Ver)
 Even if the private prosecutor participates in the prosecution, if he is not given the chance to
prove damages, the offended party is not barred from filing a separate civil action

2.   Civil action for recovery of civil liability impliedly instituted, EXCEPT

1. Waiver
2. Reservation of right to institute separate action
3. Institution of civil action prior to criminal action

 NOTE: Under SC Circular 57-97, all criminal actions for violations of BP Blg. 22 shall be
deemed to necessarily include the corresponding civil action, and no reservation to file such
civil action separately shall be allowed or recognized.

3.   Civil action suspended when criminal action is filed, EXCEPT

1. Independent civil action (Arts. 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of NCC)

2. Prejudicial civil action
3. Civil case consolidated with criminal action
4. Civil action not one intended to enforce civil liability arising from the offense (e.g., action for
legal separation against a spouse who committed concubinage)

4.  Prejudicial question arises when:

1. The civil action involves an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the
criminal action
2. The resolution of such issue will determine whether the criminal action will proceed or not

A. Requisites for a prejudicial question:

11
  The civil action involves an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the
criminal action: and
 The resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action may proceed

B. Petition for suspension of criminal action is to be filed at any time before prosecution rests.

5.  Remedies

a.   Reservation of right to institute separate civil proceedings to recover civil liability arising from
crime

 Must be made before prosecution presents evidence

 Action instituted only after final judgment in criminal action

b.   Petition to suspend the criminal action

 May be filed upon existence of a prejudicial question in a pending civil action

 Filed at any time before the prosecution rests

6.   Extinction of penal action does not carry with it extinction of the civil unless the extinction
proceeds from a declaration in a final judgment that the fact from which the civil might arise did not
exist.

 Final judgment in civil absolving defendant from civil liability is not a bar to criminal action.

7.    Filing fees:

1. Actual or compensatory damages – filing fees not required

2. Moral, temperate and exemplary – filing fees required
 If alleged, fees must be paid by offended party upon filing of complaint or information
 If not alleged, filing fees are considered a first lien on the judgment.

RULE 112  PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION

1.   Preliminary investigation – inquiry or proceeding to determine if there is sufficient ground to

engender a well-founded belief that a crime cognizable by the RTC has been committed, and that
the respondent is probably guilty thereof, and should be held for trial

 A preliminary investigation is only necessary for an information to be filed with the RTC;
complaints may be filed with the MTC without need of an information, which is merely
recommendatory (Tandoc vs. Resultan)

 Absence of a preliminary investigation is NOT a ground for a motion to quash the

information; an information filed without a preliminary investigation is defective but not fatal;
in its absence, the accused may ask for one; it is the fiscal’s refusal to conduct a preliminary
investigation when the accused demands one which is a violation of the rights of the
accused (Doromal vs. Sandiganbayan).  Court should not dismiss the info, but hold the case
in abeyance and either: (1) conduct its own investigation; or (2) require the fiscal to hold a
reinvestigation.

12
2.   GENERAL RULE:  The fiscal conducts the preliminary investigation before filing an information
with the RTC, EXCEPT where the accused is lawfully arrested without a warrant and an inquest is
conducted.

3.  Right to Preliminary Investigation

 A personal right and may be waived

 Waived by failure to invoke the right prior to or at least at the time of the plea

4.    Who conducts Preliminary Investigation

1. Provincial or city fiscals and their assistants

2. National and regional state prosecutors
3. Such other officers as may be authorized by law
4. Duly authorized legal officers of COMELEC
1. The Ombudsman
2. The PCGG, in cases of ill-gotten wealth

5.  Procedure

A.   If conducted prior to arrest

i.    Complainant files complaint with

(a)  Provincial or city fiscal

(b)  Regional or state prosecutor

(c)  MTC or MCTC judge, excluding MTC judge of Metro Manila or chartered cities

(d)  Other offices authorized by law

 Investigating officer either dismisses complaint or asks by subpoena complainant and

respondent to submit affidavits and counter-affidavits
1. If the investigating officer finds prima facie evidence, he prepares an
information and a resolution

 i.e., if fiscal finds reasonable ground to believe that a crime has been committed and
accused is probably guilty thereof

 Prima facie evidence is that evidence which, standing alone, unexplained and

uncontradicted, would be enough to merit a conviction of the accused

2. .  Otherwise, he recommends the dismissal of the complaint

 If the investigating officer is an MTC judge, and he finds that probable cause exists
and that there is a need to place the accused under custody, then he may issue a
warrant of arrest.

ii. Investigating officer forwards records to the city fiscal or chief state prosecutor

13
  City fiscal or state prosecutor either dismisses the complaint or files the information
in court

iii. Records will not form records of the case proper.

 Court on its own or on motion may order production of record

B.   If conducted after warrantless arrest

1. If accused waives Art. 125, RPC and asks for a preliminary investigation, with the assistance
of counsel, then the procedure for one prior to arrest is followed
1. Inquest conducted as follows

(a)  Fiscal determines the validity of the arrest

(b)  Fiscal determines existence of prima facie evidence based on the statements of the
complainant, arresting officer and witnesses

(c)  Fiscal either dismisses the complaint and orders the immediate release of the accused,
OR prepares and files an information

 While fiscal has quasi-judicial discretion whether or not to file an information, once it is filed
with the court, the court acquires jurisdiction giving it discretion over the disposition of the
case and the Sec. of Justice should refrain from entertaining petitions for review or appeals
from the decision of fiscal (Crespo vs. Mogul; Velasquez vs. Undersecretary of Justice)

NOTE: Information may be filed by offended party, peace officer or fiscal without preliminary
investigation.

6.  Remedies

a.   Motion for preliminary investigation

 Filed when accused is arrested without warrant

 Must be with assistance of counsel and after waiving Art. 125, RPC
 Filed within 5 days after accused learns an information against him has been filed without a
preliminary investigation

b.   Motion for re-investigation

d.  Appeal to DOJ

 Filed upon denial of his motion for a preliminary investigation, on the ground that his rights to
due process of law were violated, ousting the court of jurisdiction

e.  Petition for prohibition

 Filed with appellate court to stop the criminal proceedings

 Ordinarily, injunction will not lie but may be granted in certain cases

14
Rule 113  Arrest
1.  Arrest – taking a person into custody in order that he may be bound to answer for the commission
of some offense, made by an actual restraint of the person or by his submission to custody

2.    General Rule: No person may be arrested without a warrant.

 Not all persons detained are arrested; only those detained to answer for an offense.
 “Invitations” are not arrests and are usually not unconstitutional, but in some cases may be
taken as commands (Babst vs. NBI); however, the practice of issuing an “invitation” to a
person who is investigated in connection with an offense he is suspected to have committed
is considered as placing him under “custodial investigation.”  (RA 7438)
 Warrants of arrest remain valid until arrest is effected, or the warrant is lifted
 Arrest may be made at any time of the day or night

3.  Warrantless arrests by a peace officer or a private person.

a.   When person to be arrested is committing, attempting or has committed an offense.

b.  When an offense has just been committed and the person making the arrest has personal
knowledge that the person to be arrested committed it.

 Warrantless arrest anytime for a continuing offense like rebellion, subversion (Umil vs.
Ramos)
 The continuing crime, not the crime finally charged, needs only be the cause of the arrest
(Umil vs. Ramos)

c.   When person to be arrested is an escaped detainee (either serving sentence or with case
pending)

1. When a person lawfully arrested escapes

2. Bondsman, for purpose of surrendering the accused
3. Accused attempts to leave country without court permission

4.  Procedure

a.   With warrant

1. Complainant files application with affidavits attached

2. Judge conducts ex parte preliminary examination to determine probable cause

 In determining probable cause, judge must:

(1)  Personally examine witness

(2)  Witness must be under oath

(3)  Examination must be reduced to writing (Luna vs. Plaza)

 In determining probable cause, the judge may rely on findings by responsible officer (Lim
vs. Felix)

15
iii.   Judge issues warrant of arrest

 If without preliminary examination, considered irregular (Bagcal vs. Villaraza)

iv. If peace officer is unable to serve warrant 10 days after issuance, he must file a report and
explanation with judge within 10 days.

v.  If warrant served.

 Person must be informed that he is being arrested

 Must be informed of cause of his arrest

(3)  Officer may break door or window if admission to building is refused

(4) Person may be physically restrained

For private citizens making an arrest

 May not do so except to do some service to humanity or justice.

(5)  No violence or unnecessary force may be used

(6)  Officer may summon assistance.

(7)  Person who escapes after arrest may be immediately pursued.

vi.        Person arrested is brought to nearest police station or jail.

b.   Without warrant:

1. Person is arrested
1. Person arrested may waive right to Art. 125, RPC and ask for preliminary
investigation or inquest.
 Fiscal is not judicial authority contemplated under Art. 125 (Sayo vs. Chief of Police)
2. Fiscal files information.

5.    Requisites for a warrant of arrest:

1. Probable cause
2. Signed by judge
3. Specifically naming or particularly and sufficiently describing person to be arrested

 Generally, John Doe warrants are void because they violate the constitutional provision that
requires that warrants of arrest should particularly describe the person or persons to be
arrested. But if there is sufficient description to identify the person to be arrested, then the
warrant is valid.

6.  Remedies
a.   Petition for writ of habeas corpus

16
  Filed with any court, to effect immediate release of the person detained.
 Filed when a person is being illegally detained (without judicial process), or was illegally
arrested (void warrant or unlawful warrantless arrest, or warrantless arrest beyond period
with no information filed)
 Habeas corpus is not allowed when:
a. The person is in custody of an officer under process of law, and
b. The court had jurisdiction to issue the process (Luna vs. Plaza)

 If an arrest is improper, the remedy is a motion for quashal of the warrant of arrest and/or a
motion to quash the information, not habeas corpus (Ilagan vs. Enrile)
 Habeas corpus is no longer available after an information has been filed, the information
being the judicial process required by law (Ilagan vs. Enrile)
 Habeas corpus is proper when a person is being restrained illegally, e.g., imprisoned past
maximum penalty allowed by law (Gumabon vs. Director of Prisons)

b.   Quashal of warrant of arrest

 Filed with court which issued the warrant of arrest when the warrant of arrest is fatally
flawed

c.  Motion to quash information

 Filed with court when information against the person arrested has been filed.
 Must be made in a “special appearance” before the court questioning only its lack of
jurisdiction over the person of the accused.
 Otherwise, the voluntary appearance of the person arrested by filing a motion before the
court would be deemed a submission to the authority of the court, thus granting it whatever
jurisdiction it lacked over the person

7. Note that any irregularity in the arrest is cured when the petitioner submits himself to the
jurisdiction of the court, e.g., by filing for bail (Bagcal vs. Villaraza)

a.   Evolution of rights of the accused under custodial investigation

1. All involuntary confession were inadmissible; accused had to prove involuntariness

1. Involuntary confessions were inadmissible only if they were false
2. Revert to exclusionary rule:  any involuntary confession is inadmissible
1. Miranda rule:  the accused must be informed of his rights
1. To remain silent
2. Against self-incrimination
3. To counsel
3. Definition of custodial investigation questioned
1. It begins only after arrest
2. Police investigations prior to arrest are not covered
3. The rights may be waived, but the rights to be informed of these rights, i.e., to
warning, may not be waived
4. Warning must not only be said, officer must make sure the person arrested
understands them specifically
5. Present rules
6. Voluntary confessions are admissible

17
 7. Test of voluntariness determined on a case-to-case basis
8. Waiver of rights must not only be with counsel but must be in writing

2. Confessions made without assistance of counsel are inadmissible as evidence to incriminate the
accused, but they may be used to impeach the credibility of the accused, or they may be treated as
verbal admission of the accused through the testimony of the witnesses (People vs. Molas)

RULE 114 - BAIL

1.  Bail – security given for the release of a person in custody of law, furnished by him or a
bondsman, conditioned upon his appearance before any court as required under the following
conditions:
1. Undertaking effective upon approval and remains in force at all stages until promulgation of
judgment, unless sooner cancelled
2. Accused shall appear before court when required
3. Failure to appear despite notice to him or the bondsman will waive his right to be present
and trial shall proceed in absentia
4. Bondsman shall surrender accused for execution of judgment

 Bail applies to all persons detained, not just to those charged with the offense (Herras vs.
Teehankee)
 Court has power to prohibit person out on bail from leaving the country (Manotoc, Jr. vs. CA)

 à  Bail implies delivery of the accused to the sureties who, though not holding him prisoner,
may seize him and imprison him until they can deliver him to court (US vs. Bonoan)

2.  General Rule: All persons are entitled to bail as a matter of right, except those charged with
capital offenses, when the evidence of guilt is strong.

 Right to bail traditionally unavailable to military personnel facing court martial, who are not in
the same class as civilians (Comendador vs. de Villa)
 Bail should be available regardless of other circumstances or the merits of the case, if the
health or the life of the detainee is in danger (Dela Rama vs. People’s Court)
 Excessive bail is tantamount to denial of bail, which is unconstitutional (Dela Camara vs.
Enage)

3.  When bail is a matter of right

 Before or after conviction by MTC, MCTC, MJC

 Before conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or
life imprisonment

4.    When bail is discretionary (application filed with court where case is pending)

1. Upon conviction by RTC of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life

imprisonment
2. Provisional liberty under same circs. but during period to appeal subject to consent of
bondsman
3. In case he has applied for probation after final judgment, he may be allowed temporary
liberty under his bail or recognizance

18
5.  Procedure

a.    Offense charged is not capital:

i.    Accused applies for bail

(1)  Where information against him was filed or where case is pending

(2)  Absent (1), in another branch of the same court within the province or city where he is held

(3)  If arrested in another province, city or municipality, file with the RTC.

(4)  Absent RTC Judge, with the MTC

1. Judge sets bail

1. Accused may move to reduce bail, and hearing will be set
2. Accused posts bail and deposits the same with the Municipal/City/Provincial
Treasurer or, if cash, with the Collector of Internal Revenue
3. Accused is released

b.   Offense charged is capital:

1. Accused petitions for bail

2. Judge sets hearing to determine whether evidence of guilt is strong
a.  Ex-parte hearing on bail is arbitrary and unacceptable (Herras vs. Teehankee)
1. Prosecution presents evidence
1. Court may not force fiscal to produce evidence (Herras vs. Teehankee)
2. If evidence is strong, bail is denied
1. Otherwise, judge sets bail and procedure for non-capital offense is followed

 In capital offenses, judge’s discretion is limited to determining strength of evidence and does
not cover determining whether bail should be allowed (Herras vs. Teehankee)

6.    Bail bond –   an obligation under seal given by accused with one or more sureties and made
payable to proper officer with the condition to be void upon performance by the accused of such acts
as he may legally be required to perform

7.  Recognizance

1. Obligation of record entered into before some court of magistrate duly authorized to take it,
with the condition to do some particular act, the most usual condition in criminal cases being
the appearance of the accused for trial

8.  Prosecution witnesses may be required to post bail to ensure their appearance at the
trial, except:
1. Substitution of information (see R110, §14)
2. Court believes that material witness may not appear at the trial

9.  When bail required under RA 6036  (violation of ordinance, light felony, criminal offense – not
higher that 6 month imprisonment and/or P2000 fine, or both)

19
 a. Caught in flagrante
b. Confessed to commission of offense unless repudiated (force and intimidation)
c. Previously escaped, evaded sentence or jumped bail
d. Violation of Sec. 2 (fails to report to clerk of court periodically under his recognizance)
e. Recidivist, habitual delinquent previously convicted for an offense to which the law or
ordinance attaches an equal or greater penalty or for 2 or more offenses to which it attaches a
lighter penalty
f. Committed offense while on parole or under conditional pardon
g. Previously pardoned by municipal or city mayor for violation of ordinance for at least 2 times

10.  Instances when accused may be released on recognizance:

a. Offense charged is a violation of an ordinance, a light felony or criminal offense the

imposable penalty to which does not exceed 6 months and or P2000 fine
b. Person has been in custody for a period equal to or more than the minimum of the imposable
principal penalty, without application of the Indeterminate Sentence Law or any modifying
circumstance
c. Accused has applied for probation and before the same has been resolved, but NO BAIL
was filed or accused is incapable of filing one
d. Youthful offender held for physical and mental examination, trial or appeal, if unable to
furnish bail

11. Cancellation of bail

a.   Upon application with the court and due notice to the fiscal

1. Accused surrenders back to custody

2. Accused dies

b.   Automatic cancellation

1. Case is dismissed
2. Accused is acquitted
3. Accused is convicted and surrenders for execution of judgment

12. When bail cancelled or denied: after RTC imposes imprisonment exceeding 6 years, but not
more than 20 years, and:

1. Accused is a recidivist, quasi-recidivist, habitual delinquent or guilty of the aggravating

circumstance of reiteration;
2. Provisionally escaped, evaded sentence, violated provisions of bail;
3. Committed offense while on probation, parole, or conditional pardon;
4. Probability of flight; or
5. Undue risk that during appeal, he may commit another crime

13. When bail is forfeited

a.   Accused fails to appear before court when required

 30 days for bondsman to show cause why judgment should not be rendered against
him

20
 b.  Bondsman fails to produce him within 30 days

c.  Bondsman fails to satisfactorily explain to the court why accused did not appear when first
required to do so

 Sureties guarantee only appearance of the accused, not his conduct (US vs. Bonoan)
 Sureties exonerated if appearance made impossible by an act of God, the obligee or the law
(US vs. Bonoan)

14. Provisional forfeiture

a. Within 30 days, produce the body or give reason for non-production AND
b. Explain satisfactorily the absence of the accused when first required to appear

15. Remedies

a. Application for bail, when bail can be availed of as a matter of right

b. Petition for bail, when the offense charged is a capital offense

 For judge to set hearing for the determination of strength of evidence of guilt

16.  Circumstances to be considered in fixing amount of bail:

a. Financial ability of accused to give bail;

b. Nature and circumstances of offense;
c. Penalty of offense charged;
d. Character and reputation of accused;
e. Age and health of accused
f. Weight of evidence against accused
g. Probability of accused appearing for trial;
h. Forfeiture of other bonds;
i. Fact that accused was a fugitive from justice when arrested; and
j. Pendency of other cases in which the accused is under bond

17.  Notes:

a. Posting bail waives the right to question any irregularity attending the arrest of a person
(Callanta vs. Villanueva).  However, this does not result in waiver of the inadmissibility of the
articles seized incidentally to such illegal arrest.
b. Accused waived the right to question any irregularity in the conduct of the preliminary
investigation when he failed to do so before entering his plea (People vs. Dela Cerna)
c. Accused out on bail may be re-arrested if he attempts to depart from the Philippines without
prior court permission (warrantless arrest allowed).

RULE 115 - RIGHTS OF ACCUSED

1.  Right of the accused under the Rules

a.  To be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt

21
  In an appeal from a conviction, the accused shall again be presumed innocent until and
unless his conviction is affirmed (Castillo vs. Felix)

b.   To be informed of the nature and cause of charges

 The right must be substantially complied with; arraignment and later proceedings must be in
a language the accused understands (People vs. Crisologo)

c.   To be present at every stage of proceedings, subject to waiver by bail

 If an accused escapes, he waives this right and merits a trial in absentia;  the accused
forfeits his rights to be notified of proceedings in the future and to adduce evidence in his
behalf (People vs. Salas)
To testify as witness on his own behalf, subject to cross-examination on matters covered by
direct examination; not to be prejudiced by his silence
d. Not to be compelled to be a witness against himself
e. To confront and examine the witnesses against him, including the right to use in evidence
testimony of a witness
1. Who is deceased, out of or cannot with due diligence be found in the RP
1. Given in another proceeding
2. With the same parties
3. Same subject matter
4. Opportunity to cross-examine
 Prosecution has no privilege to withhold the identity of informers when such informer was
crucial in the operation itself; failure to present the informer is a denial of the right to confront
the witness which merits the reversal of the conviction (People vs. Bagano)

f.   To have compulsory process to secure witnesses and evidence in his behalf

g.   To have a speedy, impartial and public trial

 Unreasonable postponements of trial amounts to a denial of the right to a speedy trial,

entitling the accused to mandamus to compel dismissal of the case, or to habeas corpus if
he is detained

h.    To have the right of appeal.

Double jeopardy

1. First jeopardy must have attached prior to the first

2. First jeopardy attached and terminated
3. Valid complaint or information
1. Competent court with jurisdiction
2. Accused had pleaded
3. Action ended in conviction, acquittal or termination without the consent of the
accused

4.       Offense charged in later case is:

a. Same as that in previous case

22
 b. Necessarily includes or is included in the previous case
c. An attempt or frustration of the offense in previous case

Note that an offense lesser than that charged to which the accused pleaded guilty must be with
the consent of the fiscal and the offended party.

4.  Exceptions to double jeopardy

a. The offense was made graver by supervening events

b. The facts constituting the graver offense were only discovered after the filing of the earlier
information.

 No double jeopardy if the new fact which justified the new charge arose only after
arraignment and conviction (People vs. City Court)
 No double jeopardy where the trial was a sham since there was no competent court (Galman
vs. Sandiganbayan)
 No double jeopardy if first case was dismissed with consent of the accused (Caes vs. IAC)
 There is double jeopardy if a person is charged twice under different penal statutes for the
same acts (People vs. Relova)

c.   Plea of guilty to a lesser offense without the consent of the fiscal and the offended party

5.  Remedies

1. Motion to quash
2. Motion to dismiss

 Both filed on the ground of violation of accused’s rights, thereby ousting the court of
jurisdiction

RULE 116 - ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA

1.  Procedure

1. Court informs accused of his right to counsel and asks him if he wants one
2. Court appoints counsel de oficio if accused has none

 If no such member of the available, any person who is a resident of the province, of good
repute for probity and ability to defend accused.

3. Court gives counsel time to confer with accused at least an hour before arraignment

 Period allowed for counsel de oficio to confer with accused must be substantially complied
with; if not, case may be remanded for re-arraignment (People vs. Gonzaga)
1. Accused given a copy of the information, which is read to him in a language he understands
2. Accused is asked whether he pleads guilty or not guilty
3. Accused files a motion to quash or makes plea
4. Accused personally makes his plea
5. Plea is entered into record

23
Under SC Circular 38-98 (implementing “Speedy Trial Act of 1997”), accused must be given at least
15 days to prepare for trial, which shall commence within 30 days from receipt of Pre-Trial Order.

4.    Case proceeds to pre-trial, trial or hearing, depending on the plea.

5.  Kinds of plea

a. No plea – a plea of not guilty shall be entered

b. Conditional plea of guilt – a plea of not guilty shall be entered
c. Not guilty – case proceeds to trial or pre-trial
d. Guilty to a lesser offense – if fiscal and offended party consents, conviction under offense
charged for purposes of double jeopardy
e. Information may be amended
1. Case goes to trial
2. Even if info is not amended, and even if lesser offense is not included in offense
charged, court may still find the accused guilty of that lesser offense

f. .   Guilty to a capital offense

 Court conducts searching inquiry to determine if accused was aware of the charges, of his
plea, and its consequences.
 Court requires prosecution to present evidence to prove guilt of accused and determine his
degree of culpability, and accused may still establish presence of mitigating circumstances in
his favor.

g. Guilty to a non-capital offense

 Court receives evidence from the parties to determine penalty to impose

 Plea of guilty not necessarily followed by conviction.  Upon receipt of exculpatory evidence (if
accused pleaded guilty), trial court should consider the plea withdrawn and in its place, order
the plea of not guilty
 Plea of guilty waives only defects which may be taken advantage of by motion to quash or by
plea in abatement; cannot cure jurisdictional defects.

6.  Effects

a.   Entry of plea will waive

1. Right to question illegality of the arrest

2. Right to question any irregularity in the preliminary investigation
3. Right to file a motion to quash

b.   Improvident plea of guilty may be changed to not guilty any time before judgment is rendered

c.   A plea of not guilty may not be changed to guilty, as doing so would only spare the prosecution
of presenting evidence and still result in the conviction of the accused.

4.  Remedies

a.   Motion for specification

24
  May be filed any time before plea, even after a MTQ
 Filed when the information is insufficient in form or is generally worded, that a Bill of
Particulars is necessary to clarify the acts for which the accused is being charged

b. Motion to quash

 May be filed at anytime before plea is entered

 Based on grounds provided by the rules

c.   Motion to suspend arraignment

 Filed when the accused seems mentally unsound or if there is a prejudicial question in a
pending civil case

d.   Motion to withdraw an improvident plea of guilt

 May be filed at any time before judgment of conviction becomes final, when it can be shown
that the accused was not aware of the significance of pleading guilty to the charges

RULE 117 - MOTION TO QUASH

1.     Motion to quash –   a hypothetical admission that even if all the facts alleged were true, the
accused still cannot be convicted due to other reasons

2.  When to file Motion to Quash

General Rule:  Before entering plea; all grounds not raised deemed waived

Exception:  The following grounds may be used in MTQ even after plea
a. No offense charged
b. Lack of jurisdiction over the offense charged
c. Extinction of the offense or of the penalty
d. Double jeopardy

3.  Grounds

a.   Information does not conform to prescribed form

 For the information to charge a complex crime, it is not necessary that it be defined by law,
only that it alleges that one offense was necessary to commit the other (People vs. Alagao)

b.   Court has no jurisdiction

1. No territorial jurisdiction
2. No jurisdiction  over  offense  charged  may  be  raised  at  any  time; no waiver considered
even upon failure to move to quash on such ground
3. No jurisdiction over person of the accused
 The court gained jurisdiction over the person of the accused when he voluntarily appeared
for the pre-suspension hearing (Layosa vs. Rodriguez)

c.   Accused would be put in double jeopardy

25
  Bars another prosecution
 No waiver
 No double jeopardy if first case was dismissed with the consent of the accused (Que vs.
Cosico), unless ground for dismissal is: (a) denial of right to speedy trial; or (b) insufficiency
of evidence.
 If the first case was dismissed due to a deficient information, then there was no valid
information and there could be no double jeopardy (Caniza vs. People)

d.   More than one offense was charged, EXCEPT where law prescribes single punishment for
various offenses

e.   Facts alleged do not constitute an offense.

 May be raised at any time

 No waiver

f.    Criminal action or liability has been extinguished.

g.   Information contains allegations which, if true, would be a legal excuse or justification

h.   Officer who filed the information had no authority

 Presentation of evidence cannot cure an invalid information (People vs. Asuncion)

NOTE:  Court will consider no other grounds other than those raised, EXCEPT lack of jurisdiction
over offense charged.

5.  Procedure

1. MTQ is filed
2. If based on defect in info which can be cured, court shall order its amendment
3. Quashing the info shall NOT be a bar to subsequent prosecution (accused has not pleaded
yet), EXCEPT when the ground is:
1. Double jeopardy OR
2. Extinction of criminal liability.

6.  Remedies

1. Motion to dismiss – if certain grounds were not raised or denied in a MTQ

2. Trial

 If there was really no basis for the info, then such could be proved in the trial
 Upon denial of a MTQ, the proper remedy is to go on trial and later to appeal, if necessary;
mandamus or certiorari will only be granted if there is not other plain, simple and adequate
remedy

7.  Failure to move to quash or to allege any ground therefor deemed a waiver of such
grounds, except:
1. Failure to charge an offense
2. Lack of jurisdiction over the offense charged

26
 3. Extinction of the offense or of the penalty
4. Double jeopardy

RULE 118  - PRE-TRIAL

1.  Plea bargaining –   process whereby the accused and the prosecution in a criminal case work out
a mutually satisfactory disposition of the case subject to court approval.  It usually involves the
defendant’s pleading guilty to a lesser offense or to only some of the counts of a multi-count
indictment in return for a lighter sentence than that for the greater charge.

 Under “Speedy Trial Act of 1997”, in all criminal cases cognizable by the MTC, MCTC,
MeTC, RTC and Sandiganbayan, pretrial is mandatory.
 Under SC Circular 38-98, implementing the “Speedy Trial Act of 1997”, an accused may plea
guilty to a lesser offense only if said offense is necessarily included in the offense charged.

2.  Stipulation of facts

 Facts which both parties and respective counsels agree on as evidenced by their signatures;
these facts need not be proved by evidence in trial
 Stipulation is inadmissible if unsigned by either accused or counsel; a later memo of
confirmation, signed only by counsel, cannot cure defect (Fule vs. CA)

3.  Pre-trial order – binds the parties, limits the trial to matters not yet disposed of, and controls the
course of action during the trial

4.  Procedure

1. Judge must calendar pre-trial

2. Either party may waive the pre-trial
3. If court appoints counsel de oficio, counsel has at least 2 days to prepare
4. In the pre-trial conference
5. Plea bargaining
6. Stipulation of facts
7. Marking of evidence (does not imply conceding to its admissibility or credibility)
8. Waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence
9. Other matters which will promote a fair and expeditious trial

e.   Judge issues pre-trial order

RULE 119  - TRIAL

1.  In trial, the defense tries

1. To assail the admissibility of evidence which prove the elements of the offense charged
2. To assail the credibility of such evidence
3. To prove another version, possibly admitting certain evidence of the prosecution and adding
other evidence to cast reasonable doubt

 Even in summary procedure, the judge cannot base his decision simply on affidavits; he
must give the defendant the chance to cross-examine (Combate vs. San Jose)

27
2.  Procedure

a.   Parties notified of date of trial 2 days before trial date (R119, §1)

HOWEVER, under SC Circular 38-98, accused must be given at least 15 days to prepare for trial,
which shall commence within 30 days from receipt of Pre-Trial Order.

1. Accused may move that his witnesses be examined

2. Defense witnesses examined by any judge or lawyer
3. Prosecution witnesses, if they would be unable to attend trial, may be examined by the judge
handling the case
4. Trial continues from day to day, unless postponed for a just cause
5. Prosecution presents evidence

A. Presentation

Testimonies:

a. Direct examination

b. Cross-examination

c. Redirect

d. Re-cross

B. Offer

1. Accused may move for discharge

2. Prosecution rests
3. Defense may, with or without leave of court, file a demurrer to evidence
4. Defense presents evidence
5. Defense rests
6. Prosecution presents rebuttal evidence
7. Defense presents rebuttal evidence
8. Trial is closed; case is submitted for judgment

3.  When mistake made in charging proper offense

a. If accused cannot be convicted of offense charged or offense necessarily included therein

b. Accused detained, not discharged
c. Original case dismissed upon filing of proper information
 Example: Charged with theft.  At trial, appears that offense is estafa.  The prosecution can
ask for the dismissal of the info in order to file a new one for estafa.  No Double Jeopardy
because no valid info in the first case.

4.  Application for examination of witnesses for accused before trial

a. Sick or infirm; unable to attend trial

b. Resides more than 100 km. from means of trial; no means to attend

28
5.    Application (prosecution)

a. Sick or infirm
b. Has to leave the RP with indefinite date of returning

6.  Requisites for postponement due to absence of a witness

a. Witness is really material and appears to the court to be so

b. Party who applies for postponement has not been guilty of neglect
c. Witness can be had at the time to which the trial has been deferred
d. No similar evidence could be obtained

7.  Requisites to discharge of an accused as State Witness

a. Testimony of accused absolutely needed

b. No other direct evidence available EXCEPT his testimony
c. Testimony can be corroborated on material points
d. Accused does not appear to be most guilty
e. Accused has never been convicted of offense involving moral turpitude

 Discharge of accused, when not all the requisites were met, cannot be revoked as long as
he testified according to what was expected of him (People vs. Aninon)

8.  Remedies

a. Motion for separate trials

 Filed by the fiscal to try several accused separately

 Granted at the court’s discretion
 May also be ordered by the court motu proprio

b.   Motion to consolidate

 Upon the court’s discretion, separate charges may be tried in one single case if the
offenses charged arise form the same facts or form part of a series of similar
offenses
 Court allowed consolidation of rape cases substantially committed in the same
manner (People vs. David)

c.   Motion for continuance – filed to postpone trial for just cause

d.   Motion to exclude public

 Excluding parties, counsels and court personnel

 May also be ordered by court motu proprio

e.  Motion for discharge

 Filed before the prosecution rests

 Hearing to determine existence of requisites for discharge

29
  Prosecution will present evidence and the sworn statement of the proposed state
witness
 Evidence adduced in this said hearing automatically form part of trial; however, if
court denies motion for discharge, his sworn statement shall be inadmissible in
evidence.
 Discharge of the accused has the effect of acquittal, unless accused fails or refuses
to testify against his co-accused in accordance with his statement (which formed the
basis for his discharge)

f.    Demurrer to evidence

 May be made after the prosecution rests its case

 If the court finds the prosecution’s evidence insufficient, the case will be dismissed
 Otherwise, if demurrer denied

 If the demurrer was made with leave of court, defense gets to present evidence
 If the demurrer was made without leave of court, defense is deemed to have waived the right
to present evidence and the case is submitted for judgment
 Case may also be dismissed motu proprio

g.   Motion to reopen

 Filed after the case is submitted for judgment but before judgment is actually rendered
 To allow either side to present additional evidence, if such could not be found before
 Granted on discretion of the judge
 The accused cannot move to reopen the case to allow him to adduce evidence in his behalf
when his failure to adduce them during the trial was his own fault (People vs. Cruz)

RULE 120  - JUDGMENT

1.  Judgment – adjudication by the court that the accused is guilty or not guilty of the offense
charged, and the imposition of the proper penalty and civil liability provided by law on the accused

2.  General Rule:  If the accused is found not guilty, he will be acquitted and the acquittal
immediately becomes final and executory.  If the accused is found guilty, penalty and civil liability will
be imposed on him.

3.  Accused may be convicted of

a. The offense charged

b. A lesser offense necessarily included in the offense charged
 Accused cannot be convicted for an offense graver than that charged (People vs.
Guevarra)

4.  Contents

a. Written in official language

b. Personally prepared and signed by the judge
c. Contains facts proved
d. Contains law upon which judgment is based

30
  In case of conviction, judgment must state:
a. Legal qualification of offense and aggravating and mitigating circumstances
b. Level of participation
c. Penalty imposed
d. Civil liability for damages, unless right to separate civil action has been reserved

 In case of acquittal, judgment must state:

a. Civil liability for damages, unless acts alleged clearly did not exist
b. Basis of liability

5.  Procedure

a. Judge reads judgment in presence of accused

b. If judgment is of acquittal
c. It becomes final and executory
d. It bars subsequent prosecution for the same offense

 .   If judgment is of conviction, remedy is to file:

a. Motion for reconsideration

b. Motion for new trial
c. Notice of appeal

 Or else, judgment becomes final and is entered in the book of Judgments

6.    When judgment in a criminal case becomes final:

a. After lapse of period for perfecting an appeal; or

b. When sentence partially or totally satisfied or served; or
c. Accused has expressly waived in writing his right to appeal, EXCEPT in cases of automatic
review where death penalty is imposed
d. Accused has applied for probation

7.   Only a judgment in conviction can be modified or set aside

a. Before judgment had been final (otherwise double jeopardy);

b. Before appeal had been perfected; or
c. To correct clerical errors in the judgment

8.  Remedies

a.   Appeal

 Filed within 15 days of promulgation of judgment

 Period is interrupted by filing of a motion for new trial or reconsideration
 On motion of accused or at its own instance with consent of the accused

b.   Motion for reconsideration

 Filed when there are errors of law or fact in the judgment

 Shall require no further proceedings

31
  Notice should be given to the fiscal

c.  Motion for new trial

 Notice should be given to the fiscal

 Filed on the following grounds:

1. Error of law or irregularities have been made during trial which are prejudicial to the
substantial rights of the accused

2. New evidence has been found which could not have been found before and which could
change the judgment

9.  Procedure for new trial

a. Hearing shall be set and held

b. All evidence not alleged to be in error shall stand
c. New evidence will be introduced
d. Old judgment may be set aside and a new one rendered

10. Notes:
 Suspension of sentence for youthful offenders – after conviction, minor is committed to
custody and care of DSWD or any training institution until reaches 21 years of age, or a
shorter period
 Probation –   disposition under which a defendant after conviction and sentences, is released
subject to conditions imposed by the court and to the supervision of a probation officer
 Parole – the conditional release of an offender from a penal or correctional institution after he
has served the minimum period of his prison sentence under the continued custody of the
state and under conditions that permit his reincarceration if he violated the conditions of his
release

RULE 121 - NEW TRIAL OR RECONSIDERATION

1.  Reopening of the case

a. Made by the court before judgment is rendered in the exercise of sound discretion
b. Does not require consent of accused
c. May be made at the instance of either party who can thereafter present additional evidence

2.  Motion for new trial

a. Filed after judgment is rendered but before the finality thereof

b. At the instance or with the consent of the accused
c. The prosecution can move only for the reconsideration of the judgment but cannot present
additional evidence

3.    Motion for New Trial is denied if:

a. Only impeaching evidence is sought to be introduced as the court had already passed upon
issue of credibility

32
 b. Only corroborative evidence is offered
c. Prisoner admits commission of crime with which accused is charged (facility with which such
confession can be obtained and fabricated)
d. Alleged new evidence is inherently improbable and could easily be concocted
e. Alleged new evidence consists of recantations of prosecution witness, due to unreliability of
such recantations, EXCEPT if no other evidence to sustain conviction aside from recanted
testimony

4.  New Trial vs. Reconsideration

 Motion for reconsideration is based on the grounds of errors of law in the judgment is court
is not asked to reopen the case for further proceedings, but to reconsider its findings or
conclusions of law and make them conformable to the law applicable to the case on the
judgment the court has to render anew.

5.   New Trial vs. Modification of Judgment

 In New Trial, irregularities are expunged from the record and/or new evidence is
introduced.  In modification of judgment, no new hearings or proceedings of any kind or
change in the record or evidence.  A simple modification is made on the basis of what is on
the record.

6.   New Trial vs. Reopening of the Case

 New trial presupposes that existence of a judgment to be set aside upon the granting of a
new trial
 In reopening, no judgment has yet been rendered, although the hearing may have already
been closed

7.  Motion for Reconsideration

 Grounds are errors of law or fact in judgment, which require no further proceedings.

8.  Effects of Granting Motion for New Trial or Reconsideration

a.   Based on error of law or irregularities during trial:

 Proceedings and evidence not affected by irregularities stand, and those affected are set
aside.  Court may allow introduction of new evidence

b.   Based on newly discovered evidence:

 Evidence already taken shall stand; new evidence taken with the old

RULE 122  - APPEAL

1.  Procedure

a.   Filed with RTC, if original case was with MTC

33
  Notice served to lower court and to adverse party

b.   Filed with the CA or SC, if original case was with RTC

 With CA: notice of appeal with court, and with copy on adverse party.
 If CA is of opinion that penalty should be reclusion perpetua or higher, it shall render
judgment imposing said penalty, but refrain from entering judgment and then certify the case
and the entire record thereof to the SC for review (R124, §13)
 CA may reverse, affirm, or modify judgment of RTC, or remand case for new trial or re-trial,
or dismiss the case
 If RTC decided case in appellate jurisdiction:  Petition for Review

c.    With SC: notice of appeal where penalty imposed is life imprisonment, or lesser penalty
involving offenses committed on the same occasion, or arising out of same occurrence where graver
penalty of death is available but life imprisonment is imposed; all other cases, by petition for review
on certiorari

 If death penalty, automatic review.

d.   Withdrawal of appeal

 May be made at any time before judgment on the appeal is rendered

 Lower court judgment becomes final
 Case remanded for execution of judgment

 Once notice of appeal is filed, cannot be validly withdrawn to give way for a Motion for Recon
or a Motion for New Trial, since the filing of the notice perfected the appeal, and the trial
court loses its power to modify or set aside the judgment.  The only valid withdrawal of an
appeal is where the accused decides to serve his sentence.

2.  Effect of appeal by any of several accused

 Shall not affect those who did not appeal, EXCEPT if favorable and applicable to them
 Civil appeal by offended party shall not affect criminal aspect of judgment
 Execution of judgment on appellant will be stayed upon perfection of appeal

3.  When appeal by prosecution from order of dismissal of criminal case will not result in double
jeopardy

 Dismissal made upon motion or with express consent of the accused

 Dismissal  is  not  an  acquittal nor based upon consideration of the evidence or merits of the
case
 Question to be passed upon by the appellate court is purely legal so that if the dismissal is
found incorrect, the case has to be remanded to the court of origin to determine the guilt or
innocence of the accused

4.  When serving sentence, remedy is to petition for habeas corpus

 Filed when the law under which the accused was convicted is repealed or declared
unconstitutional

34
 1. When a later judgment is rendered acquitting others for similar circumstances.
Otherwise, equal protection is violated
2. When penalty is lowered and convict has already served more than the maximum
period of the new penalty

 Habeas corpus is available when a person is imprisoned beyond the maximum penalty
imposed by law (Gumabon vs. Dir. of Prisons)

NOTE: When dismissal is capricious, certiorari lies and no double jeopardy since validity and not
correctness of dismissal is being challenged.

RULE 126 - SEARCH AND SEIZURE

1.   Search warrant – an order in writing issued in the name of the People of the Philippines, signed
by a judge and directed to a peace officer, commanding him to search for personal property
described therein and bring it before the court

 Cannot be issued to look for evidence (Uy Khetin vs. Villareal)

 Seizing objects to be used as evidence is equivalent to forcing one to be a witness against
himself (Uy Khetin vs. Villareal)
 For a warrant to be valid, it must meet the requirements set by law (Burgos vs. Chief of Staff)

2. General Rule: No search or seizure can be conducted unless it is authorized by a search warrant.
Evidence gathered from an illegal search and seizure is inadmissible.

 à  Warrantless searches are illegal, unreasonable and unconstitutional (Alvarez vs. CFI)
 It is not the police action which is impermissible, but the procedure and unreasonable
character by which it is exercised (Guazon vs. de Villa)
 Court gains jurisdiction over items seized by a valid search warrant and returned to it, and
such is not an unconstitutional deprivation of property (Villanueva vs. Querubin)
 Evidence from an illegal search may be used as evidence, if no objection is raised (Stonehill
vs. Diokno)

 . Right against unreasonable search and seizure may be waived, but for the waiver to be
effective:

a. The right must exist

b. Person must be aware of the right
c. Person clearly shows the intent to relinquish such right

 No waiver against unreasonable search and seizure when one compromises the criminal
proceedings (Alvarez vs. CFI)
 There is no waiver of right when evidence of coercion is present (Roan vs. Gonzales)

3.  Requisites of a valid search warrant

a.   Issued upon probable cause

35
Probable cause – such facts and circumstances which would lead a reasonably prudent man to
believe that a crime has been committed and the thing to be searched for and seized is in the place
to be searched

b.   Probable cause is personally determined by the issuing judge

 Hence, signed by him

 By any RTC, to be served anywhere in the country, for an offense which occurred anywhere
in the country (Malaloan vs. CA)

c.   Issuing judge personally examined, in the form of searching questions, the appellant and his
witness and took down their written depositions

d.   Search warrant particularly describes or identifies the property to be seized

 Property which men may lawfully possess may not be the object of a search warrant (Uy
Khetin vs. Villareal)
 Nature of goods may allow description to be general or not too technical (Alvarez vs. CFI)

e.   Particularly describes the place to be searched

f.    It shall issue only for one specific offense

 Otherwise, cannot be said to have issued upon probable cause (Asian Surety vs. Herrera)
 Absence of specific offense makes impossible determination of probable cause (Stonehill vs.
Diokno)

g.   Was not issued for more than 10 days prior to a search made pursuant thereto (search warrant
becomes void after 10 days)

h.   Indicates time, if to be served at night

4.  When a search warrant may be said to particularly describe the thing to be seized

a. Description is as specific as circumstances allow

b. Expresses a conclusion of fact by which the warrant officer may be guided
c. Things described are limited to those which bear a direct relation to the offense for which the
warrant is issued

5.  Procedure

a.   Complainant files application, attaches affidavits

 Oath requires that the person taking it personally knows the facts of the case (People vs. Sy
Juco)
 Affidavits submitted must state that the premises is occupied by the person against whom
the warrant is issued, that the objects to be seized are fruits or means of committing a crime,
and that they belong to the same person, thus, not affecting third persons (People vs. Sy
Juco)

36
  When complainant’s knowledge is hearsay, affidavits of witnesses are necessary (Alvarez
vs. CFI)

b.   Judge conducts ex parte preliminary examination of complainant and witnesses under oath to
determine probable cause

 Judge must ask probing questions, not just repeat facts in the affidavit (Roan vs. Gonzales)

c.   Judge issues search warrant good for 10 days.

d.   Peace officer in presence of occupant, members of the family OR 2 witnesses of sufficient age
and discretion residing in the same locality.

 Search may last for more than a day as long as it is part of the same search for the same
purpose and of the same place (Uy Khetin vs. Villareal)

e.   Peace officer leaves receipt with occupant at place searched

f.    Peace officer files return of search warrant and inventory, and surrenders items seized to
receiving court (not necessarily court which issued the warrant)

 Items seized illegally must remain in custodia legis pending resolution of the case (Roan vs.
Gonzales)

6.  Remedies from an unlawful search

a. MTQ the warrant

b. Motion to suppress as evidence the objects illegally taken
c. Return of property illegally seized

7.  When a search may be validly conducted without a warrant

a. With consent of person searched or when the right is voluntarily waived.

 For the valid waiver of a constitutional right, it must appear first that the right exists;
secondly, that the person involved had knowledge, either actual or constructive, of the
existence of such right; and thirdly, that the said person had an actual intention to relinquish
the right

b. When the search is incidental to a lawful arrest

 Limited to:

(1)  Immediate time of arrest

(2)  Immediate vicinity of the arrest

(3)  Weapons and things which may be used as proof of offense charged (Nolasco vs. Pano)

 May extend beyond arrestee to include premises and surrounding under his immediate
control

37
 c. Border searches (customs, mail and airport)
d. Vessels and aircrafts for violation of Tariff and Customs Code, EXCEPT dwelling houses
e. Where prohibited articles are in plain view.
 Elements of a valid seizure based on the “plain view” doctrine are as follows:
(i) a prior valid intrusion in which the police are legally present in the pursuit of their official
duties;
(ii) the evidence was inadvertently discovered by the police who have the right to be where
they are;
(iii) the evidence must be immediately apparent; and
(iv) “plain view” justified the seizure of the evidence without any further search.

f. Moving vehicle
g. Hot pursuit
h. Stop-and-frisk,
 For a “stop-and-frisk” situation, the police officer should properly introduce himself and make
initial inquiries, approach and restrain a person who manifests unusual and suspicious
conduct, in order to check the latter’s outer clothing for possibly concealed weapons. The
apprehending police officer must have a genuine reason, in accordance with the police
officer’s experience and the surrounding conditions, to warrant the belief that the person to
be held has weapons or contraband concealed about him.

i. Reasonable check-points
k. Private searches with no state action (People vs. Marti)
k. Inspection of building and premises for enforcement of fire, sanitary and building regulations

8.  Person making the arrest may take from the person arrested

a. Properties used in the commission of the crime

b. Fruits or proceeds thereof
c. Property which may furnish the arrestee with a weapon against the arresting person
d. Property which may be used as evidence at the trial

Rule 127  Provisional Remedies in Criminal Cases

1.   Attachment as provisional remedy in criminal cases

a. Accused is about to abscond from RP

b. Criminal action is based on a claim for money or property embezzled or fraudulently
misapplied or converted to the use of the accused who is a public officer, or any officer of a
corporation, or an attorney, factor, broker, agent or clerk in a fiduciary capacity, in willful
violation of duty
c. Accused has concealed, removed or disposed of his property, or is about to do so
d. Accused resides outside the RP

38