Crimpro Compilation of All Reports

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
RULE 126 SEARCH AND SEIZURE
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
Criminal Procedure
- It 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
(Herrera, Vol. IV, p. 1, 2007 ed.).
Distinguish criminal law from criminal procedure.
CRIMINAL LAW CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

Substantive Remedial
It declares what acts are punishable It provides how the act is to be punished
It defines crimes, treats of their nature and It provides for the method by which a
provides for their punishment person accused of a crime is arrested, tried
or punished.
System of Criminal Procedure
1. INQUISITORIAL – Which has been in existence since early stage of legal

development, the prosecution of crimes is wholly in the hands of the prosecuting officer
and the court. The procedure is characterized by the secrecy; presence of the accused
before the magistrate is not a requirement.
2. ACCUSATORIAL – Requires all crimes, except private offenses which must be
commenced by the complainant of the offended party. The accused has the right to be
present at any stage of the proceedings and to be heard personally or by counsel.
1|Page
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
3. MIXED SYSTEM – Commixture of the Inquisitorial and Accusatorial system. It

contemplates two contending parties before the court, which hears them impartially and
render judgment only after trial.
JURISDICTION
- It is the authority to hear and try a particular offense and impose the punishment for it
(People v. Mariano, GR. No. L-40527, June 30, 1976).
Note: Jurisdiction is determined by the law in force at the time of the commencement of the
action.
Distinguish jurisdiction over the subject matter from jurisdiction over the person of
the accused.
Jurisdiction over the Subject Matter Jurisdiction over the Persons of the
Accused
Derived from the law. It can never be May be acquired by consent of the accused
acquired solely by consent of the accused. (by voluntary appearance) or by waiver of
objections.
Objection that the court has no jurisdiction
over the subject matter may be made at any If he fails to make his objection on time, he
stage of the proceeding, and the right to will be deemed to have waived it.
make such objection is never waived.
What determines jurisdiction of the court in criminal cases?
1. The geographical limits of its territory;
2. Determined by the allegations in the complaint or information not by the results of proof
or by the trial’s court’s appreciation of the evidence presented;
2|Page
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
3. Determined by the nature of the offense and/ or penalty attached thereto and not what
may be meted out after trial;
4. Determined by the law in force at the time of the institution of the criminal action and
not at the time of its commission. ONCE VESTED IT CANNOT BE WITHDRAWN BY:
a. Subsequent valid amendment of the information (People v. Chipeco GR No.

1968, March 31, 1964) or;
b. Subsequent statutory amendment of the rules of jurisdiction UNLESS the

amendatory law expressly provides otherwise or is construed that it is intended to operate
to actions pending before its amendment, in which case the court where the action is
pending is ousted of jurisdiction and the pending action will have to be transferred to the
court having jurisdiction by virtue of the amendatory law (Binay v. Sandiganbayan GR No.
120011, October 1, 1999)
Requisites for the valid exercise of criminal jurisdiction?
1. Jurisdiction over the subject matter – the power to hear and determine cases of general
class to which the proceeding in question belong. The offense, by virtue of the imposable
penalty or its nature, is one which the court is by law authorized to take cognizance of.
2. Jurisdiction over the territory – The offense must have been committed or any of its
essential ingredients took place within the territorial jurisdiction of the court. It cannot be
waived and where the place of the commission was not specifically charged, the place may
be shown by evidence.
3. Jurisdiction over the person of the accused – The person charged with the offense must
have been brought to its presence for trial, forcibly by warrant of arrest or upon his
voluntary submission to the court.
Note: GR: Questions of jurisdiction may be raised at any stage of the proceedings and for
lack of it, a court can dismiss a case motupropio
3|Page
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
XPN: The party raising the question is guilty of estoppel or laches (Tijam v. Sibonghanoy,
G.R. No. L-21450, Apr. 15, 1968)
Jurisdiction determined.
- It is determined by the allegations in the complaint or information not by the results of

proof or by the trial court’s appreciation of the evidence presented (Buaya v. Polo, G.R.
No. 75097, Jan. 26, 1989)
Principle of Adherence
- It provides that once jurisdiction is vested in the court, it is retained up to the end of
litigation (Dela Cruz v. Moya, G.R. No. 65192, Apr. 27, 1988)
How is Jurisdiction determined If the penalty is fine?
- The amount thereof shall determine the jurisdiction of the court. The RTC has
jurisdiction where the fine is more than 4,000 pesos including offenses committed by
public officers and employees in relation to their office, where the amount of the fine
does not exceed 6,000 pesos (SC Court Circular No. 09-94) except in cases of criminal
negligence involving damage to property which falls under the exclusive original
jurisdiction of the MTC. The MTC has jurisdiction where the fine is 4,000 pesos or
less. Accessory penalties and civil liabilities are no longer determinative of criminal
jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction in Complex Crime
- It is lodged with the trial court having jurisdiction to impose the maximum and most
serious penalty imposable of an offense forming part of the complex crime. It must be
prosecuted integrally and must not be divided into component offenses which may be
made subject of multiple information brought in different courts (Cuyos v. Garcia, G.R.
No. L-46934, Apr. 15, 1988).
4|Page
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Jurisdiction over Continuing Crimes
- Continuing offenses are consummated in one place, yet by the nature of the offense, the
violation of the law is deemed continuing (e.g.estafa and libel). As such, the courts of
the territories where the essential ingredients of the crime took place have concurrent
jurisdiction. But the court which first acquires jurisdiction excludes the other courts.
Jurisdiction over crimes punishable by Destierro;
- Where the imposable penalty is destierro, the case falls within the exclusive jurisdiction
of the Municipal Trial Court, considering that in the hierarchy of penalties under Art.
71 of the RPC, destierrofollowsarresto mayor which involves imprisonment (People v.
Eduarte, G.R. No. 88232, Feb. 26, 1990).
Will injunction lie to restrain criminal prosecution?
- GR: Writs of injunction or prohibition to restrain criminal prosecution are generally

not available because public interest requires that criminal acts be immediately
investigated and prosecuted for the protection of society.
- XPNs:
1. To afford adequate protection to the constitutional rights of the accused;
2. When necessary for the orderly administration of justice or to avoid oppression
or multiplicity of actions;
3. When there is a prejudicial question which is subjudice;
4. When the acts of the officer are without or in excess of authority;
5. Where the prosecution is under an invalid law, ordinance or regulation;
6. When double jeopardy is clearly apparent;
7. Where the court has no jurisdiction over the offense;
8. Where it is a case of persecution rather than prosecution;
9. Where the charges are manifestly false and motivated by lust for vengeance;
5|Page
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
10. When there is clearly no prima facie case against the accused and a motion to
quash on that ground has been denied; and
11. Preliminary injunction has been issued by the SC to prevent the threatened
unlawful arrest of petitioners (Domingo v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No 129904, Mar. 16, 2002).
Sandiganbayan
Overview:
- 1973 and 1987 Philippine Constitution

- SEC. 5. The Batasang Pambansa shall create a special court, to be known as
Sandiganbayan, which shall have jurisdiction over criminal and civil cases involving
graft and corrupt practices and such other offenses committed by public officers and
employees, including those in government-owned or controlled corporations, in relation
to their office as may be determined by law. (Art. XIII), 1973 Constitution.
- SEC. 4. The present anti-graft court known as the Sandiganbayan shall continue to
function and exercise its jurisdiction as now or hereafter may be provided by law. (Art.
XI), 1987 Constitution.
Jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan
• Under RA 8249, to determine whether the Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction, lawyers

must look into two (2) criteria, namely:
• The nature of the offense.
• The salary grade of the public official.
Offences or crimes under the jurisdiction of sandiganbayan:
Original and Exclusive Jurisdiction:
• R.A 3019- Anti Graft and Corrupt practices act.
6|Page
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
• R.A 1379- Ill-gotten Wealth
• Bribery (Direct, Indirect, Qualified Bribery)
• Exec. Orders 1, 2, 14, 14-A (THE PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION ON GOOD

GOVERNMENT)
• Estafa
Estefan, under Hannah serena vs. Sandiganbayan
• Petitioner contends that she is not a public officer. She does not receive any salary or
remuneration as a UP student regent.
• Section 4(A)(1)(g) of P.D. No. 1606 explictly vested the Sandiganbayan with
jurisdiction over Presidents, directors or trustees, or managers of government-owned or
controlled corporations, state universities or educational institutions or foundations.
• it is well established that compensation is not an essential element of public office. At

most, it is merely incidental to the public office.
• Pursuant to Section 10 of R.A. No. 3019, all prosecutions for violation of the said law
should be filed with the Sandiganbayan.
Estafa through Fasification, Ramiscal vs Sandiganbayan
• The Armed Forces of the Philippines Retirement and Separation Benefits System.
• The Information alleged that Ramiscal, et. al. misappropriated and converted the
amount of P250,318,200.00 for their personal use from the funds of AFP-RSBS.
• The Sandiganbayan had no jurisdiction over the case because the AFP-RSBS is a
private entity.
7|Page
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
It was created by Presidential Decree 361. Its purpose and functions are akin to those of the
GSIS and the SSS, as in fact it is the system that manages the retirement and pension funds
of those in the military service.
Who committed the offence/crime
• Public officers in the executive, legislative, judicial branches of government with salary
grade 27 (R.A. 6758)
• Private Individuals committing the offense/crime with public officers.
a) Provincial governors, vice-governors, members of the sangguniang panlalawigan,

provincial treasurers, assessors, engineers and other provincial department heads;
b) City mayors, vice-mayors, members of the sangguniang panglungsod, city
treasurers, assessors, engineers and other 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 PNP 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; officials and the prosecutors in
the Office of the Ombudsman and special prosecutor ;
g) President, directors or trustees or managers of government owned or controlled

corporations, state universities or educational institutions or foundations;
Escobal vs garchitorena
• The Sandiganbayan to have exclusive jurisdiction under the said law over crimes
committed by public officers in relation to their office, it is essential that the facts
showing the intimate relation between the office of the offender and the discharge of
official duties must be alleged in the Information.
8|Page
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
- even if the offender committed the crime charged in relation to his office but occupies a
position corresponding to a salary grade below "27," the proper Regional Trial Court or
Municipal Trial Court, as the case may be, shall have exclusive jurisdiction over the
case. In this case, the petitioner was a Police Senior Inspector, with salary grade "23."
He was charged with homicide punishable by reclusion temporal. Hence, the RTC had
exclusive jurisdiction over the crime.
People vs. Henry t. Go
• His death did not extinguish the crime nor did it remove the basis of the charge of
conspiracy between him and private respondent.
• . His death did not extinguish the crime nor did it remove the basis of the charge of
conspiracy between him and private respondent.
• In contemplation of law “the act of one is the act of all”.
• When a defendant in a criminal case is brought before a competent court by virtue of a

warrant of arrest or otherwise, in order to avoid the submission of his body to the
jurisdiction of the court he must raise the question of the court’s jurisdiction over his
person at the very earliest opportunity. If he gives bail, demurs to the complaint or files
any dilatory plea or pleads to the merits, he thereby gives the court jurisdiction over his
person.
How was the crime committed?
• Sanchez vs Demetriou- the offense must be intimately connected with the office of the
offender and perpetrated while he was in the performance thereof, improper or
irregular, of his official functions.
• Montilla vs Hilario- the offece cannot exist without the office or that the office must be
a constituent element of the crime.
9|Page
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Appellate Jurisdiction
- All cases decided by the RTC in the exercise of original or appellate jurisdiction over
cases of public officers with salary grade less than 27 charged with offenses/crimes
aforementioned.
Jurisdiction of Regional Trial Court
Original and Exclusive Jurisdiction:
- Vested the exclusive original jurisdiction in all criminal cases not within the exclusive
original jurisdiction of any court tribunal or body.
- Sec. 20 (b), BP Blg. 129, as amended by Section 2 of RA 7691.
- All criminal cases wherein the penalty provided by law is higher than 6 years.
- Cases involving Government officers and employees where the salary grade is below
“27”and not among those enumerated in Section 4, PD 1606 as amended.
Family Courts
Jurisdiction of Family Courts
The prosecution points out that, although this Court’s October 7, 2003 Resolution directed a re-
raffle of the cases to a heinous crimes court, the prosecution in the meantime amended the
informations to reflect the fact that two of the murder victims were minors. For this reason, the
Executive Judge should have raffled the cases to a family court pursuant to Section 5 of R.A.
8369.
The Court is not impervious to the provisions of Section 5 of R.A. 8369, that vests in family
courts jurisdiction over violations of R.A. 7610, which in turn covers murder cases where the
victim is a minor. Thus:
Sec. 5. Jurisdiction of Family Courts. – The Family Courts shall have exclusive original
jurisdiction to hear and decide the following cases:
10 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
a) Criminal cases where one or more of the accused is below eighteen (18) years of age but not
less than nine (9) years of age, or where one or more of the victims is a minor at the time of the
commission of the offense: Provided, That if the minor is found guilty, the court shall
promulgate sentence and ascertain any civil liability which the respondent may have incurred.
(Emphasis supplied)
Undoubtedly, in vesting in family courts exclusive original jurisdiction over criminal cases
involving minors, the law but seeks to protect their welfare and best interests. For this reason,
when the need for such protection is not compromised, the Court is able to relax the rule. In
several cases,11 for instance, the Court has held that the CA enjoys concurrent jurisdiction
with the family courts in hearing petitions for habeas corpus involving minors.
Here, the two minor victims, for whose interests the people wanted the murder cases moved to
a family court, are dead. As respondents aptly point out, there is no living minor in the murder
cases that require the special attention and protection of a family court. In fact, no minor would
appear as party in those cases during trial since the minor victims are represented by their
parents who had become the real private offended parties.
x x x."
F. Metropolitan/Municipal Trial Court
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);
11 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
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 imposable 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);
This rule disregarding the amount of the fine and other accessory penalties in determining
jurisdiction applies where the offense is punishable by imprisonment or fine or both but not
when the offense is punishable by fine only.
Note : The jurisdiction of the MTC is qualified by the phrase "Except in cases falling within
the exclusive jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court and of the Sandiganbayan.
This indicates that the MTC does not at all times have jurisdiction isdiction is vested by law
either in the RTC or Sandiganbayan.
Based on Article 27 of the Revised Penal Code, the MTC has jurisdiction over offenses
punishable by up to the maximum of prision correccional which shall not exceed six (6) years.
There are however, offenses which even if punishable by prision correccional are not
cognizable by the MTC because of an express provision of law like libel as defined in Article
355 of the Revised Penal Code.
Under this provision, libel by means of writings or similar means shall be punishable by
prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods or a fine ranging from P200 to P6,000
pesos or both. Nevertheless, under Article 360 of the Revised Penal Code, the criminal action
as well as the civil action for such offense shall be filed simultaneously or separately with the
CFI (now RTC).
Also, some forms of direct bribery under Article 210 of the Revised Penal Code which are
punishable by prision correccional in its medium period, are within the exclusive jurisdiction
of the Sandiganbayan pursuant to Sec. 4(a) of P.D. 1606 as amended. Indirect bribery, a felony
punishable by prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods under Article 211 of
12 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
the Revised Penal Code are likewise cognizable by the Sandiganbayan pursuant to Sec. 4(a) of
P.D. 1606 as amended.
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) (A.M. No.
00-11-01-SC, March 25,2003);
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 prescribed 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]).
13 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Courts of Muslim Mindanao (RA 6734 as amended by 9054)
Republic Act No. 9054
AN ACT TO STRENGTHEN AND EXPAND THE ORGANIC ACT FOR THE

AUTONOMOUS REGION IN MUSLIM MINDANAO, AMENDING FOR THE
PURPOSE REPUBLIC ACT NO. 6734, ENTITLED ‘AN ACT PROVIDING FOR THE
AUTONOMOUS REGION IN MUSLIM MINDANAO’ AS AMENDED
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress

assembled:
PREAMBLE
The people of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao, imploring the aid of Almighty
God, in order to develop a just and humane society and establish a Regional Autonomous
Government that is truly reflective of their ideals and aspirations within the framework of the
Constitution and national sovereignty, as well as the territorial integrity of the Philippines, and
to secure to themselves and their posterity the blessings of autonomy, democracy, peace,
justice and equality, do ordain and promulgate this Organic Act through the Congress of the
Philippines.
ARTICLE I
NAME AND PURPOSE
SECTION 1. The name of the Autonomous Region shall be the Autonomous Region in
Muslim Mindanao unless provided otherwise by the Regional Assembly. The Autonomous
Region in Muslim Mindanao shall be governed by the Regional Government.
ARTICLE II
THE AUTONOMOUS REGION AREA AND SEAT OF GOVERNMENT
SECTION 2. Expanded Autonomous Region
14 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
(1) The Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao which, under the provisions of Republic
Act No. 6734, the Organic Act for the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao, is composed
of the four provinces of Lanao del Sur, Maguindanao, Sulu and Tawi-Tawi, is hereby expanded
to include the provinces and cities, enumerated hereunder, which vote favorably to be included
and in the expanded area of the autonomous region and for other purposes, in a plebiscite
called for that purpose in accordance with Section 18, Article X of the Constitution. The new
area of autonomy shall then be determined by the provinces and cities that will vote/choose to
join the said autonomy. It is understood that Congress may by law which shall be consistent
with the Constitution and in accordance with the provisions of Republic Act No. 7160, the
Local Government Code of 1991, provide that clusters of contiguous-Muslim-dominated
municipalities voting in favor of autonomy be merged and constituted into a new province(s)
which shall became part of the new Autonomous Region.
(2) Plebiscite Coverage. The plebiscite shall be conducted in the provinces of Basilan,
Cotabato, Davao del Sur, Lanao del Norte, Lanao del Sur, Maguindanao, Palawan, Sarangani,
South Cotabato, Sultan Kudarat, Sulu, Tawi-Tawi, Zamboanga del Norte, Zamboanga del Sur
and the newly created Province of Zamboanga Sibugay, and (b) in the cities of Cotabato,
Dapitan, Dipolog, General Santos, Iligan, Kidapawan, Marawi, Pagadian, Puerto Princesa,
Digos, Koronadal, Tacurong, and Zamboanga.
Section 2. Result of the Plebiscite
(a) In the four provinces,if the majority of the voters of the four provinces of Lanao del Sur,
Maguindanao, Sulu, and Tawi-Tawi vote in favor of the above-mentioned proposed
amendments, the amendments are deemed ratified. Otherwise, the amendments are deemed
rejected except as regards the inclusion of the provinces and cities that vote for their inclusion
in the Autonomous Region as provided in this Organic Act, in which case, the said provinces
and cities shall become members of the autonomous region.
(b) In the provinces or cities proposed for inclusion in the expanded area of the autonomous
region. A majority of the votes cast in the plebiscite in every province or city in favor of the
15 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
inclusion of the province or city as members of the expanded area of the autonomous region as
provided in this Organic Act shall effect their membership in the autonomous region.
SECTION 3. Seat of Autonomous Government.
The regional legislative assembly, hereinafter referred to as the Regional Assembly, shall by
law, fix the permanent seat of government of the regional government in any province or city
that is a member of the autonomous region, taking into consideration accessibility and
efficiency in which its mandate may be carried out under this Organic Act. Until the seat of the
Regional Government is transferred as provided above, its provisional seat shall be in Cotabato
City. The Regional Assembly elected after the plebiscite mentioned in this Organic Act, shall,
within its term, identify the site of the permanent seat of the Regional Government. The central
government, which shall also mean the national government, shall appropriate funds for the
transfer of the provisional seat to its permanent site as determined by the Regional Assembly.
ARTICLE III
GUIDING PRINCIPLES AND POLICIES
SECTION 1. Integral Part of the Republic
The Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao shall remain an integral and inseparable part of
the national territory of the Republic as defined by the Constitution and existing laws.
The Autonomous Region shall be governed and administered in accordance with the laws
enacted by the Regional Assembly and by this Organic Act.
SECTION 2. Peaceful Settlement of Conflicts
The Regional Autonomous Government shall adopt the policy of settlement of conflicts by
peaceful means, and renounce any form of lawless violence as an instrument of redress.
SECTION 3. Devolution of Powers
16 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
The Regional Government shall adopt a policy on local autonomy whereby regional powers
shall be devolved to local government units particularly in areas of education, health, human
resource, science and technology and people empowerment. Until a law implementing this
provision is enacted by the Regional Assembly, Republic Act No. 7160, the Local Government
Code of 1991, shall continue to apply to all provinces, cities, municipalities, and barangays
within the autonomous region. The Regional Assembly may not pass any law to diminish,
lessen, or reduce the powers, functions, and shares in the internal revenue taxes of the said
local government units as provided by Republic Act No. 7160, the Local Government Code of
1991.
Adjudication and Settlement of Disputes and Rendition of Legal Opinions
TITLE I
The Shari'a Courts
Art. 137. Creation. — There are hereby created as part of the judicial system, courts of limited
jurisdiction, to be known respectively as Shari'a District Courts and Shari'a Circuit Courts,
which shall exercise powers and functions in accordance with this Title. Shari'a courts and the
personnel thereof shall be subject to the administrative supervision of the Supreme Court.
CHAPTER I
Shari'a District Courts
Art. 138. Shari'a judicial districts. — Five special judicial districts, each to have one Shari'a
District Court presided over by one judge, are constituted as follows:l
(a) The First Shari'a District shall comprise the Province of Sulu; . chanrobles virtual law
library
(b) The Second Shari'a District, the Province of Tawi-Tawi;
17 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
(c) The Third Shari'a District, the Province of Basilan, Zamboanga del Norte and Zamboanga
del Sur, and the Cities of Dipolog, Pagadian and Zamboanga;
(d) The Fourth Shari'a District, the provinces of Lanao del Norte and Lanao del Sur, and the
Cities of Iligan and Marawi; and
(e) The Fifth Shari'a District, the Provinces of Maguindanao, North Cotabato and Sultan
Kudarat, and the City of Cotabato;
Art. 139. Appointment of judges. — The judicial function in the Shari'a District Courts shall be
vested in Shari'a District judges to be appointed by the President of the Philippines. .
chanrobles virtual law library
Art. 140. Qualifications. — No person shall be appointed Shari'a District judge unless, in
addition to the qualifications for judges of Courts of First Instance fixed in the Judiciary Law,
he is learned in Islamic law and jurisprudence.
Art. 141. Tenure. — Shari'a District judges shall be appointed to serve during good behavior
until they reach the age of sixty-five years, or become incapacitated to discharge the duties of
their office, unless sooner removed for the same causes and in the same manner provided by
law for judges of Courts of First Instance.
Art. 142. Compensation. — Shari'a District judges shall receive the same compensation and
enjoy the same privileges as the judges of Courts of First Instance.
Art. 143. Original jurisdiction. — (1) The Shari'a District Court shall have exclusive original
jurisdiction over:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
(a) All cases involving custody, guardianship, legitimacy, paternity and filiation arising under
this Code;
(b) All cases involving disposition, distribution and settlement of the estate of deceased
Muslims, probate of wills, issuance of letters of administration or appointment of
administrators or executors regardless of the nature or the aggregate value of the property;
18 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
(c) Petitions for the declaration of absence and death and for the cancellation or correction of
entries in the Muslim Registries mentioned in Title VI of Book Two of this Code;
(d) All actions arising from customary contracts in which the parties are Muslims, if they have
not specified which law shall govern their relations; and
(e) All petitions for mandamus, prohibition, injunction, certiorari, habeas corpus, and all other
auxiliary writs and processes in aid of its appellate jurisdiction.
(2) Concurrently with existing civil courts, the Shari'a District Court shall have original
jurisdiction over:
(a) Petitions by Muslims for the constitution of a family home, change of name and
commitment of an insane person to an asylum;
(b) All other personal and real actions not mentioned in paragraph 1 (d) wherein the parties
involved are Muslims except those for forcible entry and unlawful detainer, which shall fall
under the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Municipal Circuit Court; and
(c) All special civil actions for interpleader or declaratory relief wherein the parties are
Muslims or the property involved belongs exclusively to Muslims.
Art. 144. Appellate jurisdiction. — (1) Shari'a District Courts shall have appellate jurisdiction
over all cases tried in the Shari'a Circuit Courts within their territorial jurisdiction. . chanrobles
virtual law library
(2) The Shari'a District Court shall decide every case appealed to it on the basis of the evidence
and records transmitted as well as such memoranda, briefs or oral arguments as the parties may
submit.
Art. 145. Finality of decision. — The decisions of the Shari'a District Courts whether on
appeal from the Shari'a Circuit Court or not shall be final. Nothing herein contained shall affect
the original and appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court as provided in the Constitution.
19 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Art. 146. Clerks and other subordinate employees. — Shari'a District Courts shall have the
same officers and other personnel as those provided by law for Courts of First Instance.
The pertinent provisions of the Judiciary Law regarding the number, qualifications,
appointment, compensation, functions, duties and other matters relative to the personnel of the
Courts of First Instance shall apply to those of the Shari'a District Courts.
Art. 147. Permanent stations; offices. — (1) The Shari'a District Courts shall have their
respective permanent stations in the following places:
(a) First Shari'a District, Jolo, Sulu; . chanrobles virtual law library
(b) Second Shari'a District, Bongao, Tawi-Tawi; . chanrobles virtual law library
(c) Third Shari'a District, Zamboanga City; . chanrobles virtual law library
(d) Fourth Shari'a District, Marawi City; . chanrobles virtual law library
(e) Fifth Shari'a District, Cotabato City; . chanrobles virtual law library
(2) The Shari'a District Courts may hold sessions anywhere within their respective districts.
(3) The provinces, cities or municipalities concerned shall provide such courts with adequate
court office, supplies and equipment in accordance with the provisions of the Judiciary Law.
Art. 148. Special procedure. — The Shari'a District Courts shall be governed by such special
rules of procedure as the Supreme Court may promulgate.
Art. 149. Applicability of other laws. — The provisions of all laws relative to the Courts of
First Instance shall, insofar as they are not inconsistent with this Code, be applicable to Shari'a
District Courts.
CHAPTER II
Shari'a Circuit Courts
20 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Art. 150. Where established. — (1) Shari'a Circuit Courts shall be established as
follows:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
(a) Six such courts in the Province of Sulu;
(b) Eight in the Province of Tawi-Tawi;
(c) Ten in and for the Provinces of Basilan, Zamboanga del Norte and Zamboanga del Sur, and
the Cities of Dipolog, Pagadian, and Zamboanga; . chanrobles virtual law library
(d) Twelve in and for the Provinces of Lanao del Norte and Lanao del Sur and the Cities of
Iligan and Marawi;
(e) Fifteen in and for the Province of Maguindanao, North Cotabato and Sultan Kudarat and
the City of Cotabato.
(2) The territorial jurisdiction of each of the 'Shari'a Circuit Courts shall be fixed by the
Supreme Court on the basis of geographical contiguity of the municipalities and cities
concerned and their Muslim population.
Art. 151. Appointment of judges. — Each Shari'a Circuit Court shall be presided over by a
Shari'a Circuit Judge to be appointed by the President of the Philippines. . chanrobles virtual
law library
Art. 152. Qualifications. — No person shall be appointed judge of the Shari'a Circuit Court
unless he is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines, at least twenty-five years of age, and has
passed an examination in the Shari'a and Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh) to be given by the
Supreme Court for admission to special membership in the Philippine Bar to practice in the
Shari'a Courts.
Art. 153. Tenure. — Shari'a Circuit judges shall be appointed to serve during good behavior
until they reach the age of sixty-five years or become incapacitated to discharge the duties of
their office, unless sooner removed for the same causes and in the same manner provided by
law for judges of Municipal Circuit Courts.
21 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Art. 154. Compensation. — Shari'a Circuit judges shall receive the same compensation and
enjoy the same privileges as judges of Municipal Circuit Courts.
ARTICLE 155. Jurisdiction. — The Shari'a Circuit Courts shall have exclusive original
jurisdiction over;
(1) All cases involving offenses defined and punished under this Code.
(2) All civil actions and proceedings between parties who are Muslims or have been married in
accordance with Article 13 involving disputes relating to: . chanrobles virtual law library
(a) Marriage;
(b) Divorce recognized under this Code; . chanrobles virtual law library
(c) Betrothal or breach of contract to marry; . chanrobles virtual law library
(d) Customary dower (mahr);
(e) Disposition and distribution of property upon divorce;
(f) Maintenance and support, and consolatory gifts, (mut'a); and
(g) Restitution of marital rights.
(3) All cases involving disputes relative to communal properties.
Art. 156. Clerks and other subordinate employees.
— (1) Shari'a Circuit Courts shall have the same officers and other personnel as those provided
by law for Municipal Circuit Courts. . chanrobles virtual law library
(2) The pertinent provisions of the Judiciary Law regarding the number, qualifications,
appointment, compensation, functions, duties and other matters relative to the personnel of the
Municipal Circuit Courts shall apply to those of the Shari'a Circuit Courts.
22 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Art. 157. Place of sessions; stations. — Shari'a Circuit Court may hold session anywhere
within their respective circuits, but each shall have a principal station to be fixed by the
Supreme Court.
Art. 158. Special procedure. — The Shari'a Circuit Courts shall be governed by such special
rules of procedure as the Supreme Court may promulgate. . chanrobles virtual law library
Art. 159. Applicability of other laws. — The provisions of all laws relative to Municipal
Circuit Courts shall, to the extent that they are not inconsistent with this Code, be applicable to
the Shari'a Circuit Courts.
What are Shari’a courts?
Shari’a courts are Shari’a District Courts (SDCs) and Shari’a Circuit Courts (SCCs) that were
created in 1977 through Presidential Decree 1083, which is also known as the Code of Muslim
Personal Laws. These courts have been established to resolve cases involving Muslims.
For what offenses can I be liable in Shari’a courts under the Code of Muslim Personal Laws?
H. Military Courts
• Military Court or Tribunals have no jurisdiction over civilians. all officers, soldiers and
personnel in the active service of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, or of the Philippine
Constabulary, charged with any crime or offenses related to the performance of their duties
shall exclusively be tried and punished as a court-martial
• A military commission or tribunal cannot try and exercise jurisdiction over civilians for
offences allegedly committed by them as long as the civil courts are open and functioning. Any
judgement rendered by such body relating to a civilian is null and void for lack of jurisdiction
on the part of the military tribunals concerned.
NOTE:
23 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Bonifacio v. RTC of Makati, Br. 149
Facts: Petitioners Bonifacio et al were charged with the crime of libel after private respondent
Gimenez, on behalf of Yuchengco family and Malayan Insurance Co., filed a criminal
complaint before the Makati City Prosecutor for libel under Article 355 in relation to Article
353 of the Revised Penal Code .
The complaint alleged that petitioners, together with several John Does, publicly and
maliciously with intention of attacking the honesty, virtue, honor and integrity, character and
reputation of Malayan Insurance Co. Inc., and Yuchengco family for exposing them to public
hatred and contempt, and published in the said website http://www.pepcoalition.com a
defamatory article persuading the public to remove their investments and policies from the said
company. This is after the petitioners filed to seek their redress for their pecuniary loss under
the policies they obtained from the company. Makati City Prosecutor, after finding probable
cause to indict the petitioners, filed separate information against them .
Petitioners filed before the respondent RTC of Makati a Motion to Quash on the grounds
that it failed to vest jurisdiction on the Makati RTC; the acts complained of in the Information
are not punishable by law since internet libel is not covered by Article 353 of the RPC.
Petitioners maintained that the Information failed to allege a particular place within the trial
courts jurisdiction where the subject article was printed and first published or that the offended
parties resided in Makati at the time the alleged defamatory material was printed and first
published, and the prosecution erroneously laid the venue of the case in the place where the
offended party accessed the internet-published article.
Issue: Whether petitioners’ Motion to Quash due to lack of jurisdiction is valid.
Held: Yes. Venue is jurisdictional in criminal actions such that the place where the crime was
committed determines not only the venue of the action but constitutes an essential element of
jurisdiction. The venue of libel cases where the complainant is a private individual is limited to
only either of two places, namely: 1) where the complainant actually resides at the time of the
24 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
commission of the offense; or 2) where the alleged defamatory article was printed and first
published.
The Amended Information in the case opted to lay the venue by stating that the offending
article was first published and accessed by the private complainant in Makati City. In other
words, it considered the phrase to be equivalent to the requisite allegation of printing and
first publication. This is wrong. For the court to hold that the Amended Information
sufficiently vested jurisdiction in the courts of Makati simply because the defamatory article
was accessed therein would open the floodgates to the libel suit being filed in all other
locations where the pepcoalition website is likewise accessed or capable of being accessed.
This goes against the purpose as to why Republic Act No. 4363 was enacted. It lays down
specific rules as to the venue of the criminal action so as to prevent the offended party in
written defamation cases from inconveniencing the accused by means of out-of-town libel
suits, meaning complaints filed in remote municipal courts (IN FINE, the public respondent
committed grave abuse of discretion in denying petitioners motion to quash the Amended
Information.
Disini, et al. v. The Secretary of Justice, et al., G.R. No. 203335, 11 February 2014
FACTS: Petitioners lament that libel provisions of the penal code and, in effect, the libel
provisions of the cybercrime law carry with them the requirement of “presumed malice” even
when the latest jurisprudence already replaces it with the higher standard of “actual malice” as
a basis for conviction. Petitioners argue that inferring “presumed malice” from the accused’s
defamatory statement by virtue of Article 354 of the penal code infringes on his
constitutionally guaranteed freedom of expression.
ISSUE: Whether or not Section 4(c)(4) of the Cybercrime Prevention Act on cyberlibel
affected the requirement of “actual malice” as opposed to “presumed malice” as basis for
conviction of libel.
25 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
RULING: The prosecution bears the burden of proving the presence of actual malice in
instances where such element is required to establish guilt. The defense of absence of actual
malice, even when the statement turns out to be false, is available where the offended party is a
public official or a public figure, as in the cases of Vasquez (a barangay official) and Borjal
(the Executive Director, First National Conference on Land Transportation). Since the penal
code and implicitly, the cybercrime law, mainly target libel against private persons, the Court
recognizes that these laws imply a stricter standard of “malice” to convict the author of a
defamatory statement where the offended party is a public figure. Society’s interest and the
maintenance of good government demand a full discussion of public affairs. But, where the
offended party is a private individual, the prosecution need not prove the presence of malice.
The law explicitly presumes its existence (malice in law) from the defamatory character of the
assailed statement. For his defense, the accused must show that he has a justifiable reason for
the defamatory statement even if it was in fact true.
26 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
RULE 110
PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES
SECTION 1. – Institution of criminal actions.
“Criminal actions shall be instituted as follows:
a) For offenses where a preliminary investigation is required pursuant to SECTION 1 of

Rule 112, by filing the complaint with the proper officer for the purpose of conducting
the requisite preliminary investigation.
b) For all other offenses, by filing the complaint or information directly with the
Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts, of the complaint with the
office of the prosecutor. In Manila and other chartered cities, the complaint shall be
filed with the office of the prosecutor unless otherwise provided in their charters.
The institution of criminal action shall interrupt the period of prescription of the offense
charged unless otherwise provided in special laws.”
Discussion:
Modes of instituting criminal action:
a) Commenced by any person presenting to a court a complaint. Such complaint is the

process which begins the action.
b) Action may be commenced by the prosecutor by filing with the court an information.
In relation to jurisdiction:
Municipal Trial Court or the Municipal Circuit Trial Court and the penalty for the offense
is less than four (4) years, two (2) months and one (1) day:
27 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
- The action may be instituted through a complaint or information filed directly with said
courts or with the office of the public prosecutor.
In Manila and other chartered cities:
- The action has always to be commenced by a complaint filed with the office of the
prosecutor, unless their charters provided otherwise.
PROPER OFFICERS – refer to officers authorized to conduct the requisite preliminary

investigation:
1) Provincial or city prosecutors and their assistants,

2) National and regional state prosecutors, and
3) Other officers as may be authorized by law.
Interruption of the prescriptive period:
- The filing of a criminal action either by complaint or information for preliminary

investigation or trial on the merit interrupts the period of prescription of the offense
charged unless provided in special laws.
Proofs of a successful prosecution:
1) Identification of the author of the crime; and

2) The actual commission of the crime.
SECTION 2. – The complaint or information.
“The complaint or information shall be in writing, in the name of the People of the Philippines
and against all persons who appear to be responsible for the offense”
Discussion:
Form of the complaint or information.
28 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
FORM
1. In writing;
2. In the name of the People of the Philippines; and
3. Against all persons who appear to be responsible for the offense involved.
For purposes of Preliminary Investigation the complaint is usually in the name of the offended
party as complainant.
Necessity of formal accusation:
- A formal accusation is an essential condition precedent to a valid prosecution for a

criminal offense, and no criminal proceedings can be said to be brought or instituted
until a formal charge is openly made against the accused by complaint or information.
Accusation must be in writing:
- A written accusation, besides being more compatible with the right of the accused to be
informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him, serves also the practical
purpose of enabling him to prepare his defense fully and intelligently based upon a
fixed record.
- Voxemissavolat; literascriptamanet (The spoken word flies; the written letter remains)
Must be in the name of the People of the Philippines:
- A crime is an outrage against the peace and security of the people at large, so must its
vindication be in the name of the People. Peace in general theory has been breached.
Must be against all persons responsible for the offense:
- To identify the persons committed the offense and proper prosecution will be rendered.
- Every person accused of a crime has positive interest in the inclusion of all his co-
conspirators, a right to demand that all of them be accorded equal treatment and be
made to suffer the penalties imposed by law.
Necessity of the enforcement of the criminal law:
29 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
a) For the orderly administration of justice;

b) To prevent the use of the strong arm of the law in an oppressive and vindictive manner;
c) To avoid multiplicity of suits;
d) To afford adequate protection to constitutional rights; and
e) Where the statute relied upon is unconstitutional or was declared void.
SECTION 3. Complaint defined.
“Complaint is a sworn written statement charging a person with an offense, subscribed by the
offended party, any peace officer or other public officer charged with the enforcement of the
law violated”
Persons authorized to file complaint are: (expressiouniusestexclusioalterius)
1. Offended party
2. Any peace officer
3. A public officer charged with the enforcement of the law violated
Offended Party, defined:
- The person against whom or against whose property the crime was committed.
- The person who is entitled to civil indemnity in the civil action arising out of the
criminal act for which the accused is charged.
Complaint, when required:
- Required to be brought at the instance of and upon complaint expressly filed by the
offended party.
SECTION 4. Information defined.
30 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
“An information is an accusation in writing charging a person with an offense, subscribed by

the prosecutor and filed with the court.”
Discussion:
COMPLAINT VS INFORMATION
Complaint:
- Signed by the offended party, any peace officer or other officer charged with the
enforcement of the law violated
- It may be filed either in court or in the prosecutor’s office
- Must be made under oath
Information:
- Always signed by the fiscal (indispensable requirement)

- It is filed with the court
- Need not be under oath
Who are the Persons authorized to file information?
1. City or Provincial prosecutor and their assistants
2. Duly appointed special prosecutors
3. Lawyer (appointed by the Secretary of Justice)
SECTION 5. Who must prosecute criminal actions.
“All criminal actions commenced by a complaint or information shall be prosecuted under the
direction and control of the prosecutor. However, in Municipal Trial Courts or Municipal
Circuit Trial Courts when the prosecutor assigned thereto or to the case is not available, the
offended party, any peace officer, or public officer charged with the enforcement of the law
31 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
violated may prosecute the case. This authority cease upon actual intervention of the
prosecutor or upon elevation of the case to the Regional Trial Court. (This SECTION was
repealed by A.M. No. 02-2-07-SC effective May 1, 2002)
The crimes of adultery and concubinage shall not be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed
by the offended spouse. The offended party cannot institute criminal prosecution without
including the guilty parties, if both alive, nor, in any case, if the offended party has consented
to the offense or pardoned the offenders.
The offenses of seduction, abduction and acts of lasciviousness shall not be prosecuted except
upon a complaint filed by the offended party or her parents, grandparents or guardian, nor, in
any case, if the offender has been expressly pardoned by any of them. If the offended party dies
or becomes incapacitated before she can file the complaint, and she has no known parents,
grandparents or guardian, the State shall initiate the criminal action in her behalf.
The offended party, even if a minor, has the right to initiate the prosecution of the offenses of
seduction, abduction and acts of lasciviousness independently of her parents, grandparents, or
guardian, unless she is incompetent or incapable of doing so. Where the offended party, who is
a minor, fails to file the complaint, her parents, grandparents, or guardian may file the same.
The right to file the action granted to parents, grandparents or guardian shall be exclusive of all
other persons and shall be exercised successively in the order herein provided, except as stated
in the preceding paragraph.
No criminal action for defamation which consists in the imputation of the offenses mentioned
above shall be brought except at the instance of and upon complaint filed by the offended
party.
The prosecution for violation of special laws shall be governed by the provisions thereof.”
Discussion:
Latest Amendments to SECTION 5, Rule 110 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure
which provides: " SECTION 5. Who must prosecute criminal action. - All criminal actions
32 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
either commenced by complaint or by information shall be prosecuted under the direction and
control of a public prosecutor. In case of heavy work schedule of the public prosecutor or in
the event of lack of public prosecutors, the private prosecutor may be authorized in writing by
the Chief of the Prosecution Office or the Regional State Prosecutor to prosecute the case
subject to the approval of the court. Once so authorized to prosecute the criminal action, the
private prosecutor shall continue to prosecute the case up to end of the trial even in the absence
of a public prosecutor, unless the authority is revoked or otherwise withdrawn. x xx" ).
Prosecution of criminal cases, direction and control:
General Rule: All criminal actions either commence by complaint or by information shall be
prosecuted under the direction and control of the public prosecutor (fiscal)
Except: In case of heavy work schedule of the public prosecutors, the private prosecutor may
be authorized in writing by the Chief of the Prosecutor Office or the Regional State Prosecutor
to prosecute the case subject to the approval of the court.
GENERAL RULE DISCUSSION:
Public prosecutor (Fiscal): As a quasi-judicial officer :
Two-fold aim: The guilt shall not escape or the innocence suffer.
Motion to Dismiss case in court:
1. He is charged with the defense of the community aggrieved by the commission of a crime as
if he himself were the aggrieved party. - A criminal offense is an outrage to the stated, it is but
a natural that the representatives of the state should direct and control the prosecution.
2. Determines whether a prima facie case exists or not
3. He must have control of the prosecution of the criminal case.
4. He must have the power to decide between conflicting testimonies or witnesses.
33 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Rule: When the information has already been file in court, the court steps in and takes control
of the case until the same is finally disposed of, so that the fiscal has no more control over it.
- If a public prosecutor (fiscal) file a motion to dismiss, it should be properly address to

the sound discretion of the trial court.
- If the court refuses to grant the fiscals motion to dismiss: -the fiscal should continue to
appear in the case although he may turn over the presentation of evidence to the private
prosecutor.
- In the event that the court decides to dismiss the case upon motion of the prosecution: -
the court should make independent evaluation or assessment of its merit and not to
solely rely on the said motion as this will be an abdication of its duty and jurisdiction to
determine a prima facie case.
Where to file a motion of reinvestigation:
- Should the fiscal find it proper to conduct a reinvestigation of the case, at such stage,
the permission of the Court must be secured.
- After reinvestigation the finding and recommendation of the fiscal should be submitted
to the court for appropriate action.
(EXCEPTION)
A PRIVATE PROSECUTOR may be authorized to prosecute a criminal action subject to

the following conditions:
1. The public prosecutor has a heavy work schedule, or there is no public prosecutor assigned
in the province or city;
2. The private prosecutor is authorized IN WRITING by the Regional State Prosecutor (RSP),
Provincial or City Prosecutor;
3. The authority of the private prosecutor must be approved by the court;
34 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
4. The private prosecutor shall continue to prosecute the case until the end of the trial unless
the authority is withdrawn or otherwise revoked by the RSP, Provincial or City Prosecutor;
5. In case of the withdrawal or revocation of the authority of the private prosecutor, the same
must be approved by court. (Memo Circ. No. 25, April 26, 2002, Regarding Amendment to
Sec. 5, Rule 110)
AFTER A CASE WAS ALREADY FILE IN COURT
RTC- Public Prosecutor
SC or CA- Solicitor General
General Rule: The office of the Solicitor general is the sole representative of the “People of
the Philippines” on appeals before CA or SC through:
1. Writ of error
2. Petition for review
3. Automatic appeal
4. Special civil actions
Exception: The Office of the Ombudsman, through its Special Prosecutor, shall represent the
“People of the Philippines” in all cases elevated to the Supreme Court by way of:
1. Petition for review against decisions
2. Final orders of the Sandigan Bayan
INTERVENTION OF THE AGGRIEVED PARTY
General Rule: The offended party may intervene in the criminal proceeding personally or by
counsel
Except: The offended party cannot intervene when:
35 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
1. The accused enters a pela of guilty before the commencement of the trial.
2. Where said offended party waives his right to the civil action
3. Expressly reserves his right to institute it after the termination of the criminal action (he is
deemed to have lost his right to intervene.)
Note:
The intervention of the offended party in criminal prosecutions is predicated on his right to
enforce the civil liability borne out of the criminal act and not of demanding punishment of the
accused.
-this means that he may intervene in the prosecution if he seeks damages, if not, the court
cannot make any pronouncement with respect to it.
Even if the offended party may intervene, the criminal actions shall be prosecuted under the
direction and control of the fiscal.
The offended party may not appeal from an order of dismissal by the court entered upon
motion of the fiscal, though he may do so on the civil aspect thereof is concerned.
RIGHT OF THE OFFENDED PARTY TO FILE SPECIAL CIVIL ACTION

INDEPENDENTLY OF THE STATE
Rule 65 Sec 1:
PRIVATE CRIMES: CRIMES THAT’S INSTITUTED BY PRIVATE PARTY
Article 360 of the Revised Penal code provides:
These crimes which cannot be prosecuted de oficio and requires that the criminal action be
brought at the instance of and upon complaint expressly file by the offended party:
1. Adultery
36 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
2. Concubinage
3. Seduction
4. Abduction or acts of lasciviousness
5. Action for defamation
Reason: imposed out of consideration for the aggrieved party who might prefer to suffer the
outrage in silence rather than go through the scandal of a public trial.
Note:
Private crimes may be prosecuted only at the instance of and upon express complaint by the
offended party. Failure to comply deprives the court of jurisdiction to try the action.
Jurisdictional requirement
PROSECUTION OF A PRIVATE CRIM COMPLEXED WITH A PUBLIC OFFENSE
In complex crime , where one of the component offenses is a private crime and the other a
public offense, the fiscal may initiate the proceedings de oficio
Reason: since one of the component offenses is a public crime, the latter should prevail, public
interest being always paramount to private interest.
WHO MAY PROSECUTE?
PROSECUTION OF ADULTERY AND CONCUBINAGE
- Only the offended spouse who should have the status, capacity, legal representation at
the time of filing of the complaint, regardless of age.
- Cannot institute criminal prosecution without including the guilty parties, if they are
both alive, nor, in any case , if he shall have consented or pardon the offenders
37 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SEDUCTION, ABDUCTION AND ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS
1. It can be prosecuted exclusively and successively by the following persons in this order:
a). By the offended woman (party)
b). The parents, grandparents or legal/judicial guardian in that successive order
c). By the state in the exercise of the right of parenspatriae, when the offended party dies or
becomes incapacitated before she could file the complaint and she has no known parents,
grandparents or guardian.
DEFAMATION CASES
2. A defamation imputing to a person any of the foregoing crimes of concubinage, adultery,

seduction, abduction, rape or acts of lasciviousness can be prosecuted only by the party or
parties defamed
SECTION 6.Sufficiency of complaint or information.
"A complaint or information is sufficient if it states the name of the accused; the designation of
the offense given by the statute; the acts or omissions complained of as constituting the
offense; the name of the offended party; the approximate date of the commission of the
offense; and the place where the offense was committed.
When an offense is committed by more than one person, all of them shall be included in the
complaint or information."
Discussion:
A complaint or information is sufficient if it states:
1. Name of the accused
38 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
2. The designation of the offense given by the statute
3. The acts or omissions complained of as constituting the offense
4. Name of the offended party
5. The approximate date of the commission of the offense
6. The place where the offense was committed
Purpose:
1. To notify the defendant of the criminal acts imputed to him so that he can duly prepare his
defense
Note:
- The acts or omissions complained of as constituting the offense must be stated in ordinary
and concise language without repetition, not necessarily in the terms of the statute defining the
offense, but in such form as is sufficient to enable a person of common understanding to know
that offense is intended to charge and enable the court to pronounce judgement.
TEST OF SUFFICIENCY OF COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION
General Rule: that if the complaint or information clearly and succinctly sent out:
1. The names of accused
2. The designation of the crime charged
3. The acts or omissions complained of as constituting the offense
4. The name of the offended party
5. The approximate time of the commission of the offense
6. The place wherein the offense was committed
39 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Note: Substantial defect in the information cannot be cured by evidence that would jeopardize
the accused’s right to be informed of the true nature of the offense he is being charged with.
SECTION 7. Name of the accused.
"The complaint or information must state the name and surname of the accused or any
appellation or nickname by which he has been or is known. If his name cannot be ascertained,
he must be described under a fictitious name with a statement that his true name is unknown.
If the true name of the accused is thereafter disclosed by him or appears in some other manner
to the court, such true name shall be inserted in the complaint or information and record."
Discussion:
The complaint or information must state name of the accused in any of the following
ways:
1) Name and surname
2) Nickname and appellation by which he has been or is known
3) Fictitious name with statement that his true name is unknown
Purposes for this rule:
1) To make a specific identification of the person to whom the commission of an offense is

being imputed
2) To preclude the possibility of having a wrong person apprehended and brought to trial while
the real culprit goes scot-free
Error in name
- It is not reversible, as long as the identity is sufficiently established
40 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
- The defect is curable at any stage of the proceeding
- Error in name must be called to the court at the time of arraignment; if not, the person is
estopped in raising the question
SECTION 8. Designation of the offense.
"The complaint or information shall state the designation of the offense given by the statute,
aver the acts or omissions constituting the offense, and specify its qualifying and aggravating
circumstances. If there is no designation of the offense, reference shall be made to the
SECTION or subSECTION of the statute punishing it."
Discussion:
The information or complaint must state or designate the following whenever possible:
1) The designation of the offense given by the statute.
2) The statement of the acts or omissions constituting the offense, in ordinary, concise and
particular words.
3) The specific qualifying and aggravating circumstances must be stated in ordinary and
concise language.
1) The accused should be fully appraised of the true charges against him to avoid any possible
surprise which might be detrimental to his rights
2) To afford the accused of the opportunity to prepare his defense accordingly
Designation of the Offense
41 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
- Facts must be sufficient to enable a person of common understanding to know what is being
alleged
- It is sufficient if all the essential elements constituting the particular offense in the statute are
present
- Real name of the offense in the crime is determined not by its title but by the facts alleged in
the accusation
SECTION 9. Cause of the accusation.
"The acts or omissions complained of as constituting the offense and the qualifying and
aggravating circumstances must be stated in ordinary and concise language and not necessarily
in the language used in the statute but in terms sufficient to enable a person of common
understanding to know what offense is being charged as well as its qualifying and aggravating
circumstances and for the court to pronounce judgment."
Discussion:
1) To enable the court to pronounce proper judgment;
2) To furnish the accused with such a description of the charge as to enable him to make a
defense;
3) To serve as a protection against further prosecution for the same cause.
Rule on Negative Averments
GENERAL RULE: Where the statute penalizes generally the acts therein defined and is
intended to apply to all persons indiscriminately, the information is sufficient even if does not
allege that the accused falls within the excepted situation, for then the complete definition of
42 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
the offense is entirely separable from the exceptions and can be made without reference to the
latter. In this case, the exception is a matter of defense which the accused has to prove.
EXCEPTION: Where the statute alleged to have been violated applies only to a specific class
of persons and to special conditions, the information must allege facts establishing that the
accused falls within the specific class affected and not those affected from the coverage of law.
Where negative averment is an essential element of the crime, it must be proved.
SECTION 10. Place of commission of the offense.
"The complaint or information is sufficient if it can be understood from its allegations that the
offense was committed or some of the essential ingredients occurred at some place within the
jurisdiction of the court, unless the particular place where it was committed constitutes an
essential element of the offense or is necessary for its identification."
Discussion:
General Rule: The complaint or information is sufficient if:
1) It can be understood from the allegations in the complaint or information that the offense
was committed.
2) Some of the offense essential ingredients occurred at some place within the jurisdiction of
the court.
Exception to the rule:
1) The particular place where the offense was committed constitutes an essential element of the
offense charged.
2) Necessary for the identification of the offense committed.
43 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Purpose of Rule:
- The necessity and sufficiency of an allegation in an information of the place of

commission of the offense must be considered in the light of the fact that such
allegation commonly serves the dual purpose of informing the defendant of the nature
and cause of the accusation against him, and of fixing jurisdiction and venue.
Crimes Where Place is Essential
a. Violation of domicile;
b. Penalty on keeper, watchman and visitor of an opium den;
c. Trespass to dwelling;
d. Violation of election law, e.g., 30 meter-radius carrying of deadly weapon prohibited.
A general allegation in the complaint that the felony was committed within the jurisdiction of
the court is sufficient. The remedy is a motion for Bill of Particulars under Rule 116, Sec. 6.
Venue of Criminal Action for Written Defamation
- Venue in criminal cases is an essential element of jurisdiction. To determine venue in

libel cases, the complaint or information should contain allegations as to whether, at the
time the offense was committed, the offended party was a public officer or a private
individual and where he was actually residing at the time. Whenever possible, the place
where the written defamation was printed and first published should likewise be
alleged. That allegation would be a sine qua non if the circumstances as to where the
libel was printed and first published is used as the basis of the venue of the action.
Jurisdiction - treats of the power of the court to decide the case on merits.
Venue - deals with the locality, the place where the suit may be had.
44 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 11. Date of commission of the offense.
"It is not necessary to state in the complaint or information the precise date the offense was
committed except when it is a material ingredient of the offense. The offense may be alleged to
have been committed on a date as near as possible to the actual date of its commission."
Discussion:
General Rule:
It is not necessary to state in the complaint or information the precise date the offense was
committed. The offense may be alleged to have been committed on a date as near as possible to
the actual date of its commission.
Exception to the rule:
When the precise date is a material ingredient of the offense. "Time" of the commission of the
offense was changed to "DATE."
Crimes Where Time is Essential
a. Infanticide;
b. Violation of Sunday Statutes (Election Law); and
c. Abortion.
The complaint must allege a specific time and place when and where the offense was
committed, but when the time so alleged is not of the essence of the offense, it need not be
proved as alleged, and the complaint will be sufficient if the evidence shows that the offense
was committed at any time within the period of the statute of limitation and before the
commencement of the action.
Where the complaint for rape charges accused with having committed the crime "on or about
the month of June 1978" and the affidavit shows that it was committed for "sometime prior to
45 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
said period and subsequent thereto," attaching thereto the affidavit of the complainant that she
was abused before the start of classes in June 1978 which may thus be considered as part of the
complaint, the discrepancies between the accusation and the complaint as to the time of
occurrence of the carnal copulations in rape do not affect the essential rights of the accused,
where the acts occurred within the period of time alleged in both writings, and the difference
noted in other respects was of a formal, rather than a substantial, character.
"About" is a very comprehensive term which when used with regards to time, may cover a
considerable extent thereof.
BUT in U.S. v. Smith — it was held that the proof need not correspond to the allegation,
unless the time and place is material and of the essence of the offense as a necessary ingredient
in its description.
The evidence is admissible and sufficient if it shows:
(1) That the crime was committed at any time within the period of limitation (statute of
limitations) and
(2) Before or after the time stated in the complaint or indictment and before the action is
commenced.
Statute of Limitations:
Statutes of limitations are construed as acts of grace, and a surrender by the sovereign of its
right to prosecute or of its right to prosecute at its discretion. Such statutes are considered as
equivalent to acts of amnesty founded on the liberal theory that prosecutions should not be
allowed to ferment endlessly in the files of the government to explode only after witnesses and
proofs necessary for the protection of the accused have by sheer lapse of time passed beyond
availability. The periods fixed under such statutes are jurisdictional and are essential elements
of the offenses covered.
46 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 12. Name of the offended party.
"The complaint or information must state the name and surname of the person against whom or
against whose property the offense was committed, or any appellation or nickname by which
such person has been or is known. If there is no better way of identifying him, he must be
described under a fictitious name.
(a) In offenses against property, if the name of the offended party is unknown, the property
must be described with such particularity as to properly identify the offense charged.
(b) If the true name of the of the person against whom or against whose properly the offense
was committed is thereafter disclosed or ascertained, the court must cause the true name to be
inserted in the complaint or information and the record.
(c) If the offended party is a juridical person, it is sufficient to state its name, or any name or
designation by which it is known or by which it may be identified, without need of averring
that it is a juridical person or that it is organized in accordance with law."
Discussion:
General Rule: The Complaint or information must state the name and surname of the person
against whom or against whose property the offense was committed, or any appellation or
nickname by which such person has been or is known. If there is no better way to identifying
them, he must be described under a fictitious name.
SUB RULES OF RULE 110 SEC. 12
A. Offenses against property (Unknown name of the offended party)
The property must be described with such particularity as to properly identify the offense
charged.
B. Disclosed or Ascertained true name of the person against whom or against whose
property the offense was committed
47 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
The court must cause such true name to be inserted in the complaint or information and the
record.
C. The Offended party is a Juridical Person
It is sufficient to state its name,, or any name or designation by which it is known or by which
it may be identified, without need of averring that it is a juridical person or that it is organized
in accordance with law.
Exception to the Rule: In rape cases, or in cases involving violence against women and their
children the court shall withhold the real name of the victim and shall use fictitious initials to
represent her.
SECTION 13. Duplicity of the offense.
"A complaint or information must charge but one offense, except when the law prescribes a
single punishment for various offenses."
Discussion:
General Rule:
“a complaint or information must contain only one offense.”
Exception:
“when the law prescribes a single punishment for various offenses.”
WHEN THE INFORMATION OR COMPLAINT CONTAIN MORE THAN ONE

OFFENSE
- Under Sec. 3 of Rule 120, the accused must object to it before trial.
48 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
- Failure to object the court the court may convict the accused for as many offenses as are
charged and proved.
SECTION 14. Amendment or substitution.
"A complaint or information may be amended, in form or in substance, without leave of court,
at any time before the accused enters his plea. After the plea and during the trial, a formal
amendment may only be made with leave of court and when it can be done without causing
prejudice to the rights of the accused.
However, any amendment before plea, which downgrades the nature of the offense charged in
or excludes any accused from the complaint or information, can be made only upon motion by
the prosecutor, with notice to the offended party and with leave of court. The court shall state
its reasons in resolving the motion and copies of its order shall be furnished all parties,
especially the offended party.
If it appears at any time before judgment that a mistake has been made in charging the proper
offense, the court shall dismiss the original complaint or information upon the filing of a new
one charging the proper offense in accordance with SECTION 19, Rule 119, provided the
accused shall not be placed in double jeopardy. The court may require the witnesses to give
bail for their appearance at the trial."
Discussion:
AMENDMENT BEFORE PLEA
General Rule:
- Can be amended without leave of court.
Exception:
When Leave of Court is required before plea in the following:
49 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
- Amendment intended to downgrade the nature of the offense in; and
- or excludes any accused from the complaint or information.
This requires the following:
- motion by the prosecutor;
- notice to the offended party; and
- with leave of court.
RULES AS TO AMENDMENT AFTER PLEA AND DURING THE TRIAL.
Any formal amendment may only be made under two (2) conditions:
- Leave of court must be secured; and
- The amendments does not cause prejudice to the right of the accused.
The following are mere formal amendments:
- New allegations which relate only to the range of penalty;
- Does not charge another offense separate or distinct from that charged in the original;
- Additional allegations which do not alter the prosecution’s theory of the case so as to cause
surprise to the accused or affect the form of defense he has or will assume;
- Does not adversely affect any substantial right of the accused; and
- Which merely adds specification to eliminate vagueness in the information and not to
introduce new and material facts, and merely states with additional precision something which
is already contained in the original information and which adds nothing essential for conviction
for the crime charged.
Substitution of the offense, when to be made:
50 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
- If it appears at any time before judgement that a mistake has been made in charging the
proper offense, the court shall dismiss the original complaint or information upon filing
of a new one charging the proper offense.
Exception: When the accused will be placed in double jeopardy.
SECTION 15. Place where action is to be instituted.
"(a) Subject to existing laws, the criminal action shall be instituted and tried in the court of the
municipality or territory where the offense was committed or where any of its essential
ingredients occurred.
(b) Where an offense is committed in a train, aircraft, or other public or private vehicle while
in the course of its trip, the criminal action shall be instituted and tried in the court of any
municipality or territory where such train, aircraft or other vehicle passed during such its trip,
including the place of its departure and arrival.
(c) Where an offense is committed on board a vessel in the course of its voyage, the criminal
action shall be instituted and tried in the court of the first port of entry or of any municipality or
territory where the vessel passed during such voyage, subject to the generally accepted
principles of international law.
(d) Crimes committed outside the Philippines but punishable under Article 2 of the Revised
Penal Code shall be cognizable by the court where the criminal action is first filed."
Discussion:
GENERAL RULE: Criminal action shall be instituted and tried in the court of the
municipality or territory:
- Where the offense is committed; or
- Where any of its essential ingredients occurred.
51 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
EXEMPTION: The law provides an exemption to the rule that it is subject to existing laws,
such as written defamation.
Whether committed by a private or public officer, the complaint may be filed with the RTC of
the place where such libelous article is printed and first published.
RULE WHERE OFFENSE I COMMITTED IN A TRAIN, AIRCRAFT OR VEHICLE
Criminal Action shall be instituted and tried in court of any municipality or territory:
- Where such train, aircraft, or other vehicle passed during its trip, including the place of its
departure and arrival.
This rule only applies when the offense is committed in the course of the trip of the above
mentioned vehicles.
RULE WHERE OFFNESE IS COMMITTED ON BOARD A VESSEL
Criminal Action shall be instituted and tried in:
- The court of the first port of entry;
- The municipality or territory where the vessel passed during is voyage.
This rule applies when the offense is committed during the voyage of the vessel and is subject
to the general accepted principles of international law.
RULE WHEN THE OFFENSE IS COVERED BY ARTICLE 2 OF THE RPC
General Rule: Crimes committed outside the Philippines but punishable under Article 2 of
the RPC:
- Shall be cognizable by the court where the criminal action is first filed.
Exemption: When it is provided in the treaties and laws of preferential application.
52 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 16. Intervention of the offended party in criminal action.
"Where the civil action for recovery of civil liability is instituted in the criminal action
pursuant to Rule 111, the offended party may intervene by counsel in the prosecution of the
offense."
Discussion:
GENERAL RULE: Every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable (Article
100 RPC).
- When criminal action is instituted the civil action for the recovery of civil liability arising
from the offense charged shall be deemed instituted (Rule 111)
EXCEPTION
- Unless the offended party waives the civil action;
- Reserves the right to institute it separately; or
- Institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action.
It is because of the existence of a civil liability involved in a crime, that the offended party is
allowed to intervene in the prosecution of the offense.
By virtue of Sec. 16 or Rule 10 in relation to Sec. 1 of Rule 111, for the offended party to
acquire the right to intervene in the prosecution of the offense, it is necessary that the civil
action for the recovery of the civil liability instituted with the criminal action.
53 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
RULE 111
PROSECUTION OF CIVIL ACTIONS
SECTION 1: Institution of Criminal and Civil Actions
General Rule: Civil action deemed instituted with the criminal action
Basis: Article 100 of Revised Penal Code“Every person criminally liable for a felony is also
civilly liable”
Two classes of injuries
 Social Injury
 Personal Injury
Jurisdiction: Civil liability of the accused must be determined in the criminal action
Exceptions:
 Waiver: Offended party waives the right to recover damages from the accused
 Offended party reserves his right to institute a separate civil action
 Offended party may exercise the right to maintain a private suit against the offender
prior to filing of the criminal charges
Determination of Civil Liability
 The civil liability arising from crimes must be determined in the criminal proceedings if
the offended party does not waive to have it adjudged or does not reserve his right to
institute a seperate civil action
Waiver of Civil Action
 When civil action arising from the crime is waived the offended party may still pursue a
civil action sourced from culpa aquiliana or culpa contractual
Reservation of right
How: Separate civil actions shall be made before the prosecution starts to present its evidence
and under circumstances affording the offended party a reasonable opportunity to make such
reservation
54 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Who: Offended Party must reserve his right to institute a separately the civil action
When: A separate civil action may be instituted and prosecuted to final judgement without
waiting for the institution and termination of a criminal action.
Double recovery is not allowed – the aggrieved party is entitled to recover from the offender
only once, regardless of the kind or nature of the action he chose to file
Effect: The offended party in effect abandoned his right to press recovery for damages in the
criminal case and opted instead to recover them in civil case.
As a result, the civil liability of the accused to aggrieved party has ceased to be involved in
criminal action.
Payment of filing fees
 Where the amount of damages is not specified, the filing fee need not to be paid upon
filing of the information or complaint, But the filing fee shall constitute a first lien on
the judgement awarding such damages. (moral, nominal, temperate, or exemplary)
 But where the amount of damages, other than actual is specified, then the
corresponding filing fee shall be paid by the offended party.
B.P. 22 Bouncing Check Law
 No reservation to file separate civil action shall be allowed
 Payment of filing fee based on the amount of the check involved, shall be considered as
the actual damages.
 Additional filing fee (liquidated, moral, nominal, temperate or exemplary damages), if
the amount is not alleged in the complaint, it shall constitute the first lien on the
judgment Additional filing
 If the civil action has been filed separately and trial thereof has not yet commenced, it
may be consolidated with the criminal action
Solidum vs People G.R. No. 192123, March 10, 2014
Facts: Dr. Solidum has been pronounced guilty of reckless imprudence resulting in serious
physical injuries by the RTC and CA for being part of the team during the pull-through
55 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
operation conducted on a three year old born with imperforate anus. Ospital ng Maynila was
adjudged to be jointly liable.
Issue: WON Dr. Solidum was liable for criminal negligence and Ospital ng Maynila be
subsidiary liable.
Ruling: No. Prosecution failed to present expert witness for criminal negligence to prosper.
Rule 111 in criminal procedure, the civil action for recovery of civil liability is deemed
instituted with criminal action refers only to that arising from the offense charged. The hospital
had not been made party to the proceedings, thus subsidiary liability is not properly enforced
pursuant to Art. 103 of the RPC.
SECTION 2: When Separate Civil Action is Suspended

Suspension of Civil Action
- After the criminal action has been commenced, the separate civil action arising
therefrom cannot be instituted until final judgment has been entered in the criminal
action
- If the criminal action is filed after the said civil action has already been instituted, the
latter shall be suspended in whatever stage it may be found before judgment on the
merits
Primacy of Criminal Actions, Exception
 In cases of independent civil actions based upon Articles 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of the
New Civil Code;
 In cases where the civil action presents a prejudicial question;
 In cases where civil action is consolidated with the criminal action;
 Where the civil action is not one intended to enforce the civil liability arising from the
offense.
56 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Consolidation of Criminal and Civil cases

 Before judgment on the merits is rendered in the civil action, the same may, upon
motion of the offended party, be consolidated with the criminal action in the court
trying the criminal action
Note: Consolidation is not mandatory
Reproduction of Evidence
- In case of consolidation, the evidence already adduced in the civil action shall be
deemed automatically reproduced in the criminal action without prejudice to the right
of the prosecution to cross-examine the witnesses presented by the offended party in the
criminal case and of the parties to present additional evidence
Effect of extinction of Penal Action
- The extinction of the penal action does not carry with it extinction of the civil action.
However, the civil action based on delict shall be deemed extinguished if there is a
finding in a final judgment in the criminal action that the act or omission from which
the civil liability may arise did not exist
Effect of extinction of Penal Action
 Award of Civil Damages in case of Acquittal
 Enforcement of Subsidiary Civil Liability
 Employer is Party to Criminal Case
 Award of Civil Damages in Case of Acquittal
 Enforce of Subsidiary Civil Liability
 Employer is party to Criminal Case
SECTION 3: When Civil Action may proceed independently

When Civil Action may proceed independently
 Arts. 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of the New Civil Code
 Proceed independently of the criminal action
 It shall require only preponderance of evidence
57 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
 The offended party cannot recover twice for the same act or omission
Concept of Independent Civil Action
- Spirit of the Law: The result of the criminal case, whether the acquittal or conviction,
would be entirely irrelevant to the civil action
- They do not arise from the offense or crime charged, and hence, are not deemed
instituted with the filing of the criminal action
- Their filing need not be reserved because it is the LAW which has made the reservation
When is the civil action allowed to proceed independently of the criminal prosecution?
 Art. 32 of NCC – Civil Liberties
 Art. 33 of NCC – Defamation, fraud or physical injuries
 Art. 34 of NCC – Based upon the failure of a police officer to render official assistance
 Art. 2176 of NCC – Quasi-delict
Note: Requires only preponderance of evidence
SECTION 4: Effect of death on the Civil Action

Effect of death on the Civil Action
 After arraignment and During the pendency of the criminal action - Extinguishes the
civil liability arising from the delict
 Before arraignment - The case shall be dismissed without prejudice to any civil action
the offended party may file against the estate of the deceased
 Prior to final judgment - Terminates his criminal liability and only the civil liability
directly arising from and based solely on the offense committed
 During the pendency of his appeal with the Supreme Court
o Totally extinguishes his criminal liability (Art 89 of the RPC)
o Extinguishes civil liability based exclusively on the crime for which the accused
was convicted (ex delicto)
o Reason: No final judgment of conviction was yet rendered by the time of his
death.
58 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Sources of obligation (other than delict)

 Law
 Contract
 Quasi-contract
 Quasi-delict
Where civil liability survives, an action for recovery may be pursued by way of filing a
separate civil action.
People vs Romero, G. R. No. 112985. April 21, 1999

The death of the accused during the pendency of the criminal action extinguishes his civil
liability arising from the delict. The criminal action is extinguished as there is no longer a
defendant to stand as an accused, the civil action instituted therein for recovery of civil liability
ex delicto is ipso facto extinguished grounded as it is in the criminal case. Corollarily the claim
for civil liability survives notwithstanding the death of the accused if the same may also be
predicated on a source of obligation other than delict.
SECTION 5: Judgment in Civil Action not a Bar

Judgement in Civil Action not a Bar
- A final judgment rendered in a civil action absolving the defendant from civil liability
is not a bar to a criminal action against the defendant for the same act or omission
subject of the civil action
- Judgment based on: Art 32, 33, 34 and 2176 NCC (ICA)
Application of Rule:
 Separately filed
 Decided prior to institution of criminal action
 ICA decided ahead of criminal action
Castillo vs Salvador, G.R. No. 191240, July 30, 2014
59 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Facts: Salvador was charge with estafa by the RTC which was reversed by CA. Castillo filed
petition on the civil aspect for award of damages.
Issue: WON the award for civil damages be retained.
Held: No. Although the acquittal is based on reasonable ground which does not exempt
Salvador from civil liability that may be proved by preponderance of evidence as contemplated
in Art 29 of NCC and in this case such liability is not proven.
SECTION 6: Suspension by reason of prejudicial question

Suspension by reason of prejudicial question
- A petition for suspension of the criminal action based upon the pendency of a
prejudicial question in a civil action may be filed in the office of the prosecutor or the
court conducting the preliminary investigation. When the criminal action has been filed
in court for trial, the petition to suspend shall be filed in the same criminal action at any
time before the prosecution rests
Prejudicial Question
General Rule: “If the Civil Action was commenced before the institution of the criminal
action, The Civil Action shall be suspended in whatever stage it may be found before
judgement on the merits, once the Criminal Action is commenced. The suspension shall last
until final judgement is rendered in the criminal action”. (Sec 2, Rule 111)
- A prejudicial question is an exception to this rule. The principle of prejudicial question
is not within the ambit of this general rule.
- A prejudicial question accords a civil case a preferential treatment and constitutes an
exception to the general rule that the civil action shall be suspended when the criminal
action is instituted
Reason for the Principle : To avoid two conflicting decisions in the civil case and the
criminal case
60 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Effect of the Existence of Prejudicial Question: Suspension of Criminal Action

- Under the clear terms of Sec.6, the filing of a petition before the suspension of the
criminal action is required. The rule therefore precludes a motu proprio suspension by
the court of the criminal action. The court cannot take cognizance of a claim of a
prejudicial question without a petition being filed.
Suspension does not include dismissal
- The rule authorizing the suspension of the criminal case by reason of a prejudicial
question does not prescribe the dismissal of the criminal action, it only authorizes its
suspension. The suspension shall be made upon the grant of a petition for suspension.
- Does not require that the criminal case be already filed in court. It is sufficient that the
case be in the stage of preliminary investigation as long as there has already been a
previously instituted civil case
- The petition for suspension is not to be filed in the civil case but in the criminal case.
- May be filed with the office of the prosecutorconductingthepreliminary
investigation.When the criminal action has been filed in court for trial, the petition to
suspend shall be filed in the same criminal action at any time before the prosecution
rests.
SECTION 7: Elements of Prejudicial Question
Elements of prejudicial question

(a) The previously instituted civil action involves an issue similar or intimately related
to the issue raised in the subsequent criminal action, and
(b) the resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action may
proceed.
Requisites of Prejudicial Question
- For a civil action to be considered prejudicial to a criminal case, the following
requisites must be present:
61 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
 The civil case involves facts intimately related to those upon which the criminal
prosecution would be based.
 The resolution of the issues raised in the civil action, the guilt or innocence of
the accused would necessarily be determined
 The jurisdiction to try said question must be lodged in another tribunal.
When the Prejudicial Question may not be invoked

 Both cases are criminal
 Both are civil
 Both cases are administrative
 One case is administrative and the other civil
 One case is administrative and the other is criminal
Note:
 Civil action must have been instituted ahead of the criminal action
 The issue that leads to a prejudicial question is one that arises in the civil case and not
in the criminal case. It is the issue in the civil case which needs to be resolved first
before it is determined whether or not the criminal case should proceed or whether or
not there should be, in the criminal case, a judgment of acquittal or conviction.
 It is critical to show that the issue in the civil case is determinative of the issue in the
criminal case, the resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action
may proceed.
 There is no prejudicial question if the civil and the criminal action can according to
law, proceed independently of each other, that is the criminal action can proceed
without waiting for the resolution of the issues in the civil case.
62 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Magistrado vs. People G.R. No. 14807, July 10, 2007
Facts: Elena Librojo, the private respondent filed a criminal complaint for perjury against
Francisco Magestrado, the herein petitioner for executing an affidavit of loss of a certificate of
title of a parcel of land despite allegedly knowing that no loss of the certificate occurred
because the petitioner had actually delivered the same to the private respondent as security for
a loan which the petitioner contracted from the latter. After an information for perjury against
the petitioner was instituted, he filed a motion for suspension of the proceedings based on a
prejudicial question wherein he alleges that a case filed against him by the private respondent
for recovery of a sum of money is pending before the court. He further alleged that another
civil case is also pending before another branch of the same court when he filed against private
respondent a complaint for cancellation of mortgage, delivery of title and damages. The issues
in said civil cases, according to petitioner, are similar or intimately related to the issues raised
in the criminal action.
Issue: Whether or not there was a prejudicial question in the case.
Ruling: No. A prejudicial question is defined as that which arises in a case the resolution of
which is a logical antecedent of the issue involved therein, and the cognizance of which
pertains to another tribunal. The prejudicial question must be determinative of the case before
the court but the jurisdiction to try and resolve the question must be lodged in another court or
tribunal. It is a question based on a fact distinct and separate from the crime but so intimately
connected with it that it determines the guilt or innocence of the accused. For a prejudicial
question in a civil case to suspend criminal action, it must appear not only that said case
involves facts intimately related to those upon which the criminal prosecution would be based
but also that in the resolution of the issue or issues raised in the civil case, the guilt or
innocence of the accused would prejudicial to a criminal case as to cause the suspension of the
criminal proceedings until the final resolution of the civil case, the following requisites must be
present: (1) the civil case involves facts intimately related to those upon which the criminal
prosecution would be based; (2) in the resolution of the issue or issues raised in the civil action,
the guilt or innocence of the accused would necessarily be determined; and (3) jurisdiction to
try said question must be lodged in another tribunal. A perusal of the allegations in the
complaints show that Civil Case No. Q-98-34308 pending before RTC-Branch 77, and Civil
Case No. Q-98-34349, pending before RTC Branch 84, are principally for the determination of
whether a loan was obtained by petitioner from private respondent and whether petitioner
executed a real estate mortgage involving the property covered by TCT No. N-173163. On the
other hand, Criminal Case No. 90721 before MeTC Branch 43, involves the determination of
whether petitioner committed perjury in executing an affidavit of loss to support his request for
issuance of a new owner’s duplicate copy of TCT No. N173163. It is evident that the civil
63 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
cases and the criminal case can proceed independently of each other. Regardless of the
outcome of the two civil cases, it will not establish the innocence or guilt of the petitioner in
the criminal case for perjury. The purchase by petitioner of the land or his execution of a real
estate mortgage will have no bearing whatsoever on whether petitioner knowingly and
fraudulently executed a false affidavit of loss of TCT No. N- 173163.
J.M. Dominguez vs Liclican 764 SCRA 338, July 28, 2015

This is the case pertains to whether the civil case, the validity JMD’s elections, constitutes a
prejudicial question that would warrant a suspension of the criminal case for qualified theft
against respondent. The Court held that prejudicial question generally exists in a situation
where a civil action and criminal action are both pending. The civil case, an intra-corporate
dispute, posed a prejudicial question to the criminal case. Further, the resolution of prejudicial
question did not cure the defect or grave abuse of discretion already committed. There was a
continuance of the criminal proceeding despite the existence of the prejudicial question,
rendering inutile the essence of the doctrine. The trial court trying the criminal case would be
permitted to proceed with trial with the assumption that the resolution of the civil case would
benefit the private complainant in the criminal proceedings.
Pimentel vs People, G.R. No. 172060

September 13, 2010
Facts: On 25 October 2004, Maria Chrysantine Pimentel y Lacap (private respondent) filed an
action for frustrated parricide against Joselito R. Pimentel (petitioner) before the Regional Trial
Court of Quezon City. On 7 February 2005, petitioner received summons to appear before the
Regional Trial Court of Antipolo City for the pre-trial and trial for Declaration of Nullity of
Marriage under Section 36 of the Family Code on the ground of psychological incapacity. On
11 February 2005, petitioner filed an urgent motion to suspend the proceedings before the RTC
Quezon City on the ground of the existence of a prejudicial question. Petitioner asserted that
since the relationship between the offender and the victim is a key element in parricide, the
outcome of Civil Case would have a bearing in the criminal case filed against him before the
RTC Quezon City.
Issue: Whether or not the resolution of the action for annulment of marriage is a prejudicial
question that warrants the suspension of the criminal case for frustrated parricide against
petitioner?
Ruling:No, the Court held that the resolution of the action for annulment of marriage is not a
prejudicial question that would warrant the suspension of the criminal case for frustrated
parricide against petitioner. The Court said that under the Rules of Criminal Procedure, the
64 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
civil case must be instituted before the criminal case. Clearly, the civil case for annulment was
filed after the filing of the criminal case for frustrated parricide. As such, the requirement of
Section 7, Rule 111 of the 2000 Rules on Criminal Procedure was not met since the civil action
was filed subsequent to the filing of the criminal action. Further, the issue in the civil case for
annulment of marriage under Article 36 of the Family Code is whether petitioner is
psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential marital obligations. The issue in
parricide is whether the accused killed the victim. In this case, since petitioner was charged
with frustrated parricide, the issue is whether he performed all the acts of execution which
would have killed respondent as a consequence but which, nevertheless, did not produce it by
reason of causes independent of petitioner’s will. At the time of the commission of the alleged
crime, petitioner and respondent were married. The subsequent dissolution of their marriage, in
case the petition in Civil Case No. 04-7392 is granted, will have no effect on the alleged crime
that was committed at the time of the subsistence of the marriage. In short, even if the marriage
between petitioner and respondent is annulled, petitioner could still be held criminally liable
since at the time of the commission of the alleged crime, he was still married to respondent.
65 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
RULE 112
PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION
SECTION 1. Preliminary Investigation

- is an inquiry or proceeding to determine whether there is sufficient ground to engender
a well-founded belief that a crime has been committed and the respondent is probably
guilty thereof, and should be held for trial.
Purpose
- To secure the innocent against hasty, malicious and oppressive prosecutions and to
protect him from open and public accusation of crime, from the trouble, expense and
anxiety of a public trial, and also to protect the State from useless and expensive
prosecutions
Nature
- Merely inquisitorial, and it is often the only means of discovering the persons who may
be reasonably charged with a crime, to enable the fiscal to prepare his complaint or
information.
Effect of denial of the right to preliminary investigation
- Absence of a preliminary investigation is not a ground to quash a complaint or
information; does not affect court’ jurisdiction of over the case, nor impair the validity
of information.
- Remedy: In case of lack of preliminary investigation is to hold in abeyance the
proceedings and the case remanded to the Office of the Provincial Fiscal or the
Ombudsman, for that matter, for him or him or the Special Prosecutor to conduct a
preliminary investigation.
- Where the denial is tainted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of
jurisdiction, a ground for petition for certiorari and mandamus arises.
66 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Waiver of Preliminary Investigation

- The right to preliminary investigation is a personal right which the accused may waive
either expressly or by implication.
- The right to preliminary investigation is deemed waived in the following:
 Failure to claim it before the accused pleaded
 By silence
 Failed to request it within 5 days from the time he learns of the filing of the
complaint or information, especially if he participated in the trial
 Where the accused posted bond and subsequently proceeds to trial, without
claiming that he did not have the benefit of PI or any irregularity that attended
the investigation
 Where the respondent in PI requested for postponement and the city fiscal
proceeded with the same without notifying the respondent of his action on the
motion, there was an opportunity to be heard but lost by negligence in failing to
attend the scheduled date of the investigation
Admission into the Witness Protection Program
- Before the start of PI or even before that, it may be important on the part of the State or
complainant to ascertain if there is any person who has witnessed or has knowledge or
information on the commission of the offense complained of, and has testified or is
testifying or about to testify on said crime. If there is any, steps should be taken for him
to apply, if he is qualified, under the Witness Protection Program or RA 6981.
SECTION 2. Officers authorized to conduct preliminary investigations

1. Provincial or City Prosecutors and their assistants;
2. National and Regional State Prosecutors; and
3. Other officers as may be authorized by law.
 Ombudsman with respect to Sandiganbayan offenses and other offenses
committed by a Public Officers
67 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
 Comelec with respect to election cases

 PCGG with respect to ill-gotten wealth of the Marcos’s
Authority co-extensive with territorial jurisdiction
- The authority of prosecutors to conduct PI is limited to all offenses cognizable by the
proper court within their respective territorial jurisdiction.
SECTION 3. Procedure
Filing of the complaint
- If the affidavits are sworn to before any one who did not conduct the PI the affiant
must appear again before the investigating fiscal for his examination otherwise,
the latter cannot state in his certification of PI as required by the first paragraph of
Section 4, hereof that “he has examined the complainant and the witnesses.”
Action on the complaint
- Within 10days after the filing of the complaint, the investigating officer shall
either dismiss the same if he finds no ground to continue with the investigation or
issue subpoena.
Counter-affidavit and other supporting evidence also sworn to and certified
- Within 10days from receipt of subpoena, the respondent shall submit his
counter-affidavit and that of his witnesses and other documents relied upon for his
defense.
- Respondent shall not be allowed to file a motion to dismiss in lieu of counter-
affidavit.
Respondent cannot be subpoenaed, or if subpoenaed does not submit counter-affidavit
- Within 10days period, the investigating officer shall resolve the complaint
based on the evidence presented by the complainant.
- Purpose:
 To block attempts of unscrupulous respondents to thwart the prosecution of
offenses by hiding themselves or by employing dilatory tactics.
68 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Hearing by the investigating officer

- Shall be held within 10days from submission of counter-affidavits and other
documents, orfrom expiration of the period for their submission. It shall be
terminated within 5days.
- The provision of the rules do not require the confrontation between the parties,
preliminary investigation is ordinarily conducted through submission of affidavits
and supporting documents through exchange of pleadings. Such being so, it is not
necessary that the affidavits and counter-affidavits to be sworn to before the
investigating prosecutor himself.
Determination by investigating prosecutor
- Within 10days from PI, the investigating prosecutor shall determine whether or
not there is sufficient ground to hold the respondent for trial.
If there was no preliminary investigation conducted, what is the remedy of the accused?
- Refuse to enter plea
- Insist on a preliminary investigation
- File certiorari if refused
- Raise it as an error on appeal
- File a petition for prohibition
SECTION 4. Resolution of investigating prosecutor and its review

- The information prepared by the investigating prosecutor must be accompanied by
certification that he conducted the requisite PI.
- Nonetheless, there is authority for the view that even if the information does not contain
the requisite certificate regarding the prosecutor’s having held a PI, the omission is not
necessarily fatal (People vs Gomez).
- Should the investigating prosecutor finds that no probable cause exists against the
respondent, he must dismiss the case. Because it is as much the duty of the prosecutor
to protect the innocent as to prosecute the guilty.
69 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Probable Cause
 Existence of such facts and circumstances as would excite the belief, in a reasonable
mind, acting on the facts within the knowledge of the prosecutors, that the person
charged was guilty of the crime for which he was prosecuted.
Duty of assistant prosecutor and state prosecutor
- Regardless of the conclusion reached, he must forward the records of the case and his
resolution to the provincial or city fiscal or the chief state prosecutor within 5days
from his resolution.
Duty of the Provincial or City Fiscal
- Mandated to take appropriate action within 10days from receipt of notice and inform
the parties thereof.
Purpose: to afford the parties full information about the results of the investigation.
Appeal to Secretary of Justice
- The rule authorized the parties concerned to file a petition to the Secretary of Justice for
the review of the resolution of the provincial or city fiscal or the chief state prosecutor.
- Under his power of supervision and control over prosecuting officers, the Secretary of
Justice is the ultimate authority to decide, as to which of the conflicting theories of the
complainant and the respondent should be believed.
Appeal to the Office of the President
- Under Memorandum Circular No. 58, an appeal or petition for review of the
decisions/orders/resolutions issued by the Secretary of Justice to the Office of the
President concerning PI of criminal cases involving only offenses punishable by
reclusion perpetua to death wherein new and material issues are raised which were not
previously presented before the DOJ and were not ruled upon in the subject
decision/order/resolution provided that the prescription of the offense is due to lapse
within 6months from notice of the question resolution/order/decision and provided
further that the appeal or petition for review is filed within 30days from such notice.
Appeal to the decision and resolution of the Ombudsman
70 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
- Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65, Rules of Court in criminal cases or PI where there
is grave abuse of discretion, directly filed to the Supreme Court
Appeal to the decision and resolution of the Office of the President
- Petition for Review under Rule 43 , Rules of Court in administrative disciplinary
measures before the Court of Appeals
SECTION 5. When warrant of arrest may issue.

Warrant of Arrest
- Legal process issued by a competent authority, directing the arrest of a person or
persons upon grounds stated therein
- Constitutional Basis: Section 2, Article III, 1987 Constitution
Issuance of warrant of arrest by Municipal Trial Court
- Similar to that of the RTC paragraph a of this section
Concept of Searching Questions
- “Such questions as have a tendency to show the commission of a crime and the
perpetrator thereof”.
What are the remedies of a party against whom a warrant of arrest has been issued?
- Post bail
- Ask for reinvestigation
- File a motion to quash information
- File a petition for review
- If denied, he may appeal the judgment after trial (no certiorari)
SECTION 6. When accused lawfully arrested without warrant.

Coverage of the provision
- When the penalty is imprisonment of not less than 4 years, 2 months and 1 day
- When the accused is already in detention issued by the MTC
71 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
- When the accused was arrested by virtue of a lawful arrest without warrant
- When the penalty is of a fine only
- Those covered by a summary procedure
Waiver of Article 125
- In the event that the arrested person wishes to avail himself of PI prior to the filing of
complaint or information, his petition therefor may be granted but only if he signs a
waiver of the provisions of Article 125 of the RPC, as amended, with the assistance of a
lawyer. The accused alone, even if he himself is a lawyer, cannot make the waiver.
- In any case, the arrested person may apply for bail and the investigation must be
terminated within 15days from its inception.
Preliminary Investigation after filing of information
- If the case has been filed in court without a PI having been first conducted, the accused
may within 5days from the time he learns of the filing of the information, ask for a PI
with the same right to adduce evidence in his favor in the manner prescribed in the rule.
How should the complaint or information be filed when theaccused is lawfully arrested
without warrant?
- The complaint or information may be filed by the prosecutor without need of
preliminary investigation provided an inquest proceeding has been conducted in
accordance with existing rules
- In the absence of an inquest prosecutor, the offended party may file the complaint
directly in court on the basis of the affidavit of the offended party or police officer
- Inquest
 is an informal and summary investigation conducted by the public prosecutor in
a criminal case involving persons ARRESTED AND DETAINED WITHOUT
THE BENEFIT OF A WARRANT OF ARREST issued by the court for the
purpose of determining WHETHER SAID PERSONS SHOULD REMAIN
UNDER CUSTODY AND CORRESPONDINGLY CHARGED IN COURT
72 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Bail for a person lawfully arrested during PI

- While a PI is undertaken, the person arrested is still under detention. To effect his
release, he may apply for bail notwithstanding the waiver of the provisions of Article
125 of RPC.
SECTION 7. Records.
Purpose:
- To implement the requirement in turn of Section 5, Rule 112, that the judge issuing the
warrant shall personally evaluate the resolution of the prosecutor and the supporting
evidence.
- To still any doubt as regards the right of the court to have access to the records of Pi in
the possession of the investigating prosecutor.
SECTION 8. Cases not requiring a preliminary investigation nor covered by the Rule on
Summary Procedure
Cases governed by the rule
- Cases which do not require PI
- Cases not covered by Rule on Summary Procedure
- Treats only of cases punishable by imprisonment of less than 4years 2 months and 1day
- Procedure outline in Section 3(a) of this Rule shall be observed and the prosecutor shall
act on the complaint based on the affidavits and other supporting documents submitted
by the complainant within 10days from its filing.
Procedure where the complaint is filed with the prosecutor
- The complaint must comply with the requirements provided for in Section 3(a) of this
Rule
- Based solely on said complaint the prosecutor shall take appropriate action that is to
say, he may either dismiss the complaint or file an information in court.
73 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
- Since only Section 3(a) of Rule 112 applies, the respondent need not be issued a
subpoena or required to submit counter-affidavits, which is required only in a PI.
Procedure where complaint is information is filed with Municipal Trial court
- The complaint or information must comply with the requisites in Section 3(a) of this
Rule. The judge need not issue a subpoena to the respondent in the same way as when
the complaint is filed directly with the prosecutor.
- Based on the complaint or information, the municipal trial judge may either dismiss the
complaint or information or issue a warrant of arrest
- If on the face of the information the judge finds no probable cause, he may disregard
the certification and require the submission of the affidavits of witnesses to aid him in
arriving at a conclusion as to existence of probable cause
Cases falling under the Rule on Summary procedure
A. Civil Cases
1. All cases of forcible entry and unlawful detainer irrespective of the amount of
damages or unpaid rentals sought to be recovered. Where attorney’s fees are
awarded, the same shall not exceed P20, 000.
2. All other civil cases, except probate proceedings, where the total amount of the
plaintiff’s claim does not exceed P10,000, exclusive of interest and costs.
B. Criminal Cases
1. Violation of traffic laws, rules and regulations
2. Violation of rental laws
3. Violation of municipal or city ordinances
4. All other criminal cases where the penalty does not exceed 6 months or fine of
P1000 or both, irrespective of other imposable penalties and civil liabilities
5. Violations of BP 22
74 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
RULE 113
ARREST
SECTION 1. Definition of arrest

- It is the taking of person into custody in order that he may be bound to answer for the
commission of an offense.
4 Main Elements of an Arrest
1. Intent
The intent of an officer to arrest an individual can be transmitted verbally or with her
actions. This is important because the absence of intent means there can be no arrest.
Since intention formed in the mind may not be expressed verbally, when there is a
dispute the deciding factor is whether a reasonable person would think he was arrested.
2. Authority
State laws authorize police officers to detain and place citizens into custody. Some
officers can make an arrest anytime they witness a crime, while others may perform an
arrest only while on duty.
3. Subjection
Subjection to an arrest happens when the arrestee submits or is forced into detainment
by the officer by an actual or constructive seizure.
An actual seizure involves physical element, be it hands of firearms, during the
detainment.
Constructive seizure occurs when the arrestee voluntarily submits to the detainment,
such as entering a police station to surrender himself.
4. Understanding
An arrest is invalid if the arrestee does not understand that she is being arrested. Most
often the police officer will state an arrest occurring, but in some instances actions
alone are sufficient, in cases where the arrestee is under influence of drugs or alcohol,
unconscious or insane, understanding is not a necessary element of the arrest.
75 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
RODEL LUZ V. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

FACTS: PO3 Emmanuel L. Alteza testified that he saw the accused driving a motorcycle
without a helmet and so he flagged him down. He invited the accused to come inside their sub-
station since the place is almost in front of the sub-station to where he is assigned as a traffic
enforcer. The accused violated a municipal ordinance which requires all motorcycle drivers to
wear helmet. While the officers were issuing a citation ticket for violation of municipal
ordinance, PO3 Alteza noticed that the accused was uneasy and kept on reaching something
from his jacket. He was alerted and told the accused to take out the contents of his jacket’s
pocket as the latter may have a weapon inside it. The accused obliged, slowly put out the
contents of his jacket’s pocket which included two plastic sachets of suspected shabu. The
RTC convicted petitioner of illegal possession of dangerous drugs as the substances are
positive of methamphetamine hydrochloride. Upon appeal, the CA affirmed the RTCs
Decision. Upon a petition for review on certiorari, petitioner claims that there was no lawful
search and seizure, because there was no lawful arrest. He claims that the finding that there
was a lawful arrest was erroneous, since he was not even issued a citation ticket or charged
with violation of the city ordinance. Even assuming there was a valid arrest, he claims that he
had never consented to the search conducted upon him.
ISSUE: Whether or not the arrest, searches and seizure were invalid?
HELD: Yes, arrest, searches and seizure were invalid. When he was flagged down for
committing a traffic violation, he was not, ipso facto and solely for this reason, arrested. There
being no valid arrest, the warrantless search that resulted from it was likewise illegal. Under
R.A. 4136, or the Land Transportation and Traffic Code, the general procedure for dealing
with a traffic violation is not the arrest of the offender, but the confiscation of the driver’s
license of the latter. At the time that he was waiting for PO3 Alteza to write his citation ticket,
petitioner could not be said to have been under arrest. Prior to the issuance of the ticket, the
period during which petitioner was at the police station may be characterized merely as waiting
76 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
time. The subject items seized during the illegal arrest are inadmissible. The drugs are the very
corpus delicti of the crime of illegal possession of dangerous drugs. Thus, their inadmissibility
precludes conviction and calls for the acquittal of the accused.
SECTION 2. Arrest, How made.

a. It is made by an actual restraint of a person to be arrested, or by his submission to the
custody of the person making the arrest.
b. No violation or unnecessary force shall be used in making an arrest. The person
arrested shall not be subject to a greater restraint than is necessary for his detention.
SECTION 3. Duty of Arresting Officer.
WHAT IS THE DUTY OF THE ARRESTING OFFICER WHO ARRESTS A PERSON?

> He must deliver the person immediately to the nearest jail or police station
WHY SHOULD HE DELIVER? WHAT IS THE EVIL SOUGHT TO BE AVOIDED?
> This is to avoid situations when the officer will hold the law in his own hands.
SECTION 4. Execution of warrant.
WITHIN WHAT PERIOD MUST A WARRANT OF ARREST BE SERVED?

> There is no limitation of period.
> A warrant of arrest is valid until the arrest is effected or the warrant lifted.
> The head of the office to whom the warrant was delivered must cause it to be
executed within 10 days from its receipt, and the officer to whom it is assigned must
make a report to the judge who issued the warrant within 10 days from the expiration of the
period. If he fails to execute it, he should state the reasons therefore.
77 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
WHAT IS THE LIFETIME OF A WARRANT OF ARREST?

> A warrant of arrest remains valid until the arrest is effected or the warrant quashed,
lifted, set aside or recalled.
TO VALIDLY EFFECT ARREST, MUST THE PEACE OFFICER HAVE IN HIS
POSSESSION THE WARRANT OF ARREST?
> Police officers may effect arrest without the warrant in their possession at the time of the
arrest.
SECTION 5. Arrest Without Warrant.

GR. No peace officer or person has the power or authority to arrest anyone without a warrant
EXCEPTION:
1. In flagrante delicto arrests
Requisites:
 the person to be arrested must execute an overt act indicating that he just
committed, is actually committing or is attempting to commit a crime;
and
 Such overt act is done in the presence or within the view of arresting
officer
2. Doctrine of hot pursuit
>When an offense has in fact just been committed, and he has probable cause to believe based
on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances that the person to be arrested has committed
it.
3. Evasion of service of sentence
>When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who:
 escaped from a penal establishment or place where he is serving final judgement
or temporarily confined while his case is pending: or
 has escaped while being transferred from one confinement to another
78 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
GEORGE ANTIQUERA vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

FACTS: Police officers were conducting a police visibility patrol in Pasay City when they saw
two unidentified men rush out of a house and boarded a jeep. Believing that there was a crime,
the police officers approached the house. When they peeked through the partially opened door,
they saw Antiquera and Cruz engaged in a pot session. The police officers entered the house,
introduced themselves and arrested Antiquera and Cruz. While inspecting the vicinity, PO1
Cabutihan saw a jewellery box which contained shabu and unused paraphernalia. The RTC
found them guilty of illegal possession of paraphernalia for dangerous drugs. The court
affirmed the decision of RTC.
ISSUE: Whether or not the arrest was invalid?
HELD: Yes, there was unlawful arrest because the circumstances here do not make out a case
of arrest made in flagrante delicto, the police officers claim that they were alerted when they
saw two unidentified men suddenly rush out of 107 David Street, Pasay City. Since they
suspected that a crime had been committed, the natural thing for them to do was to give chase
to the jeep that the two fleeing men boarded, given that the officers were in a patrol car and a
tricycle. Running after the fleeing suspects was the more urgent task but the officers instead
gave priority to the house even when they heard no cry for help from it. Admittedly, the police
officers did not notice anything amiss going on in the house from the street where they stood.
Indeed, even as they peeked through its partially opened door, they saw no activity that
warranted their entering it. Clearly, no crime was plainly exposed to the view of the arresting
officers that authorized the arrest of accused Antiquera without warrant under the above-
mentioned rule. Considering that his arrest was illegal, the search and seizure that resulted
from it was likewise illegal.
PEOPLE v. VASQUEZ
FACTS: Initially the case of illegal possession of drugs was raffled but upon motion it was
consolidated with the case of illegal sale of drugs. On arraignment, the appellant pleaded not
79 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
guilty to both charges. The pre-trial conference of the cases was held, but the same was
terminated without the parties entering into any stipulation of facts. During the trial of the case
the prosecution stated the events. There was a confidential informant reported to PO2
Trambulo about the illegal drug activities. Fajardo form a buy-bust team. It was in the buy-bust
operation that Vasquez was arrested. RTC convicted the appellant of the crimes charged. The
RTC gave more credence to the prosecution’s evidence given that the presumption of
regularity in the performance of official duty on the part of the police officers was not
overcome. On appeal the Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction of the appellant. Hence this
appeal. He argues that the police officers did not have a search warrant or a warrant of arrest at
the time he was arrested. This occurred despite the fact that the police officers allegedly had
ample time to secure a warrant of arrest against him. Inasmuch as his arrest was illegal, the
appellant avers that the evidence obtained as a result thereof was inadmissible in court.
ISSUES:
Whether or not arrest is valid and falls within the ambit of Rule 113 Section 5(a) thus
subsequent search and seizure is also valid?
HELD:
Yes, arrest is valid, thus, falls within the ambit of Section 5(a), Rule 113 of the Revised Rules
on Criminal Procedure when an arrest made without warrant is deemed lawful thus subsequent
search and seizure is also valid. Rule 113 Sec. 5. Arrest without warrant; when lawful. – A
peace officer or a private person may, without a warrant, arrest a person: (a) When, in his
presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to
commit an offense; Having established the validity of the warrantless arrest in this case, the
Court holds that the warrantless seizure of the illegal drugs from the appellant is likewise valid.
We held in People v. Cabugatan that: This interdiction against warrantless searches and
seizures, however, is not absolute and such warrantless searches and seizures have long been
deemed permissible by jurisprudence in instances of (1) search of moving vehicles, (2) seizure
in plain view, (3) customs searches, (4) waiver or consented searches, (5) stop and frisk
situations (Terry search), and search incidental to a lawful arrest. The last includes a valid
80 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
warrantless arrest, for, while as a rule, an arrest is considered legitimate [if] effected with a
valid warrant of arrest, the Rules of Court recognize permissible warrantless arrest, to wit: (1)
arrest in flagrante delicto, (2) arrest effected in hot pursuit, and (3) arrest of escaped prisoners.
Thus, the appellant cannot seek exculpation by invoking belatedly the invalidity of his arrest
and the subsequent search upon his person.
SECTION 6. Time of making arrest.

- An arrest may be made on any day and at any time of the day or night.
SECTION 7. Method of arrest by officer by virtue of warrant.
Duty of the arresting officer:

1. The cause of the arrest; and
2. the fact that a warrant has been issued for his arrest
EXCEPTIONS:
 When he flees
 when he forcibly resists before the officer has opportunity to so inform himl or
 when the giving of such information shall imperil the arrest
SECTION 8. Method of arrest by officer without warrant by officer without warrant.

Duty of arresting officer without warrant:
The officer shall inform the person to be arrested of:
1. His authority; and
2. The cause of the arrest
Except:
a) When the person to be arrested is engaged in the commission of the offense;
81 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
b) When he pursued immediately after its commission;

c) When he has escaped, flees, or forcibly resists before the officer has the
opportunity to so inform him; or
d) When the giving of such information shall imperil the arrest.
SECTION 9. Method of arrest by private person.

 Citizen’s Arrest – refers to arrest effected by a private person.
 Duty of private person effecting an arrest:
The private person shall inform the person to be arrested of:
1. The intention to arrest him; and
2. The cause of the arrest.
Except:
a. When the person to be arrested is engaged in the commission of the offense;
b. When he pursued immediately after its commission;
c. When he has escaped, flees, or forcibly resists before the officer has the
opportunity to so inform him; or
d. When the giving of such information shall imperil the arrest.
The private person must deliver the arrested person to the nearest police station or jail, and he
shall be proceeded against in accordance with Rule 112, Section 7. Otherwise, the private
person may be held liable for illegal detention.
SECTION 10. Officer may summon assistance.

- Only an officer making the arrest is governed in this Rule. It does NOT cover private
individuals making an arrest.
SECTION 11. Right of officer to break into building or enclosure.

Coverage of the rule
 Officer making an arrest
 Does not cover a private individual
82 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
General rule
 Lawful arrest may be made anywhere, even on private property or in a house.
 This rule applicable to arrestvunder a warrant and warrsntless arrest.
Requisites before an officer can break into a building or enclosure to make an arrest:
1. That the person to be arrested is or is reasonably believed to be in said building;
2. That he has announced his authority and purpose for entering therein;
3. That he has requested and been denied admittance.
SECTION 12. Right to break out from building or enclosure.

- A private person making an arrest CANNOT break in or out of a building or enclosure
because only officers are allowed by law to do so.
SECTION 13. Right after escape or rescue.

 Where a person lawfully arrested escapes or is rescued, any person may immediately
pursue or retake him without a warrant at any time and in any place within the country.
 The pursuit must be immediate
 The fugitive may be retaken by any person
 A private person may without a warrant arrest a convicted felon who is escape or at
large, since he might also, before conviction, have arrested the person.
SECTION 14 . Right of attorney or relative to visit person arrested.

- Any person who shall obstruct, prohibit or prevent an attorney entitled to practice in the
courts of the Philippines from visiting and conferring privately with a person arrested at
any hour of the day or in urgent cases, at night being requested by the person arrested
or anyone acting on his behalf shall be punished by arresto mayor (Section 1, Rep. Act
No. 857) . The relatives are given same rights to visit a person in jail at any reasonable
time of the day and in, urgent cases of the night, subject to reasonable regulations.
83 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
RULE 114
BAIL
SECTION 1. Bail defined.
"Bail is the security given for the release of a person in custody of the law, furnished by him or
a bondsman, to guarantee his appearance before any court as required under the conditions
hereinafter specified. Bail may be given in the form of corporate surety, property bond, cash
deposit, or recognizance."
Discussion:
FORMS OF BAIL
1. Cash Bail Bond:

- A sum of money, in the amount designated in an order fixing bail, posted by a
defendant or by another person on his behalf with a court or other authorized public
officer upon condition that such money shall be forfeited if the defendant does not
comply with the directive of a court requiring his attendance at the criminal action or
proceeding involved and does not otherwise render himself amenable to the orders and
processes of the court.
2. Recognizance:
- A contract between the sureties and the State for the production of the principal at the
required time. It is an obligation of record, entered into before some courts or
magistrates 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.
The signature of the accused is not required as an indispensable condition for the
validity of the undertaking under recognizance, except perhaps when he himself is the
recognizer.
84 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
3. Corporate Surety Bond:

- Issued by a professional bondsman, that is, one who is habitually engaged in the
business of furnishing bonds in civil actions or for persons arrested or detained for
prosecution.
4. Property Bond:
- An undertaking constituted as a lien on the real property given as security for the
amount of the bail.
Note: Admission to bail gives fully fealty to the basic principles of freedom, inherent in our
system, that an accused is presumed to be innocent until his guilt is established by evidence
beyond reasonable doubt; it reconciles sound administration of justice with the right of the
accused to be free from harassment and confinement, unhampered in the preparation of his
defense and not subject to punishment prior to conviction.
Hearing required in grant of bail whether it is a matter of right or discretion.
SECTION 2. Conditions of the bail; requirements.
"All kinds of bail are subject to the following conditions:
(a) The undertaking shall be effective upon approval, and unless cancelled, shall remain in
force at all stages of the case until promulgation of the judgment of the Regional Trial Court,
irrespective of whether the case was originally filed in or appealed to it;
(b) The accused shall appear before the proper court whenever required by the court of these
Rules;
(c) The failure of the accused to appear at the trial without justification and despite due notice
shall be deemed a waiver of his right to be present thereat. In such case, the trial may proceed
in absentia; and
(d) The bondsman shall surrender the accused to the court for execution of the final judgment.
85 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
The original papers shall state the full name and address of the accused, the amount of the
undertaking and the conditions herein required. Photographs (passport size) taken within the
last six (6) months showing the face, left and right profiles of the accused must be attached to
the bail."
Discussion:
A bail is good only up to the promulgation of the judgment of the Regional Trial Court whether
the case was originally filed in or appealed to it. However, this is not absolute. If at any time
during the pendency of the case it appears to the court that the bail posted for the release of the
accused has been impaired as when the property bondsman has been judicially adjudged as a
mere usurper of the realty offered as security, the court may order an early termination of the
bail.
SECTION 3. No release or transfer except on court order or bail.
“No person under detention by legal process shall be released or transferred except upon order
of the court or when he is admitted to bail.”
CASE:
Rule on Bail without hearing
Fortuna v. Penaco-Sitaca instructs: Admission to bail as a matter of discretion presupposes

the exercise thereof in accordance with law and guided by the applicable legal principles. The
prosecution must first be accorded an opportunity to present evidence because by the very
nature of deciding applications for bail, it is on the basis of such evidence that judicial
discretion is weighed against in determining whether the guilt of the accused is strong. In other
words, discretion must be exercised regularly, legally and within the confines of procedural
due process, that is, after the evaluation of the evidence submitted by the prosecution. Any
86 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
order issued in the absence thereof is not a product of sound judicial discretion but of whim
and caprice and outright arbitrariness.
Docena-Caspe vs. Judge Arnulfo O. Bugtas,we held that jurisprudence is replete with decisions
on the procedural necessity of a hearing, whether summary or otherwise, relative to the grant of
bail, especially in cases involving offenses punishable by death, reclusion perpetua, or life
imprisonment, where bail is a matter of discretion. Under the present Rules, a hearing is
mandatory in granting bail whether it is a matter of right or discretion.It must be stressed
that the grant or the denial of bail in cases where bail is a matter of discretion, hinges on the
issue of whether or not the evidence of guilt of the accused is strong, and the determination of
whether or not the evidence is strong is a matter of judicial discretion which remains with the
judge. In order for the latter to properly exercise his discretion, he must first conduct a hearing
to determine whether the evidence of guilt is strong.[12] In fact, even in cases where there is no
petition for bail, a hearing should still be held
SECTION 4. Bail, a matter of right; exception.
“All persons in custody shall be admitted to bail as a matter of right, with sufficient sureties, or
released on recognize as prescribed by law or this Rule
(a) before or after conviction by the Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court,
Municipal Trial Court in Cities, or Municipal Circuit Trial Court, and
(b) before conviction by the Regional Trial Court of an offense not punishable by death,
reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment.”
Discussion:
Bail is a matter of right and the bail to be granted is based on the recommendation of the
prosecution as stated in the information or complainant, a hearing is not necessary. There is no
rule requiring a hearing before the approval of the bail as recommended by the prosecution.
87 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 5. Bail, when discretionary.
“Upon conviction by the Regional Trial Court of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion
perpetua, or life imprisonment, admission to bail is discretionary. The application for bail may
be filed and acted upon by the trial court despite the filing of a notice of appeal, provided it has
not transmitted the original record to the appellate court. However, if the decision of the trial
court convicting the accused changed the nature of the offense from non-bailable to bailable,
the application for bail can only be filed with and resolved by the appellate court.
Should the court grant the application, the accused may be allowed to continue on provisional
liberty during the pendency of the appeal under the same bail subject to the consent of the
bondsman.
If the penalty imposed by the trial court is imprisonment exceeding six (6) years, the accused
shall be denied bail, or his bail shall be cancelled upon a showing by the prosecution, with
notice to the accused, of the following or other similar circumstances:
(a) That he is a recidivist, quasi-recidivist, or habitual delinquent, or has committed the crime
aggravated by the circumstance of reiteration;
(b) That he has previously escaped from legal confinement, evaded sentence, or violated the
conditions of his bail without valid justification;
(c) That he committed the offense while under probation, parole, or conditional pardon;
(d) That the circumstances of his case indicate the probability of flight if released on bail; or
(e) That there is undue risk that he may commit another crime during the pendency of the
appeal.
The appellate court may, motuproprio or on motion of any party, review the resolution of the
Regional Trial Court after notice to the adverse party in either case.”
88 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
WHEN BAIL IS TO BE FILED BEFORE THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
- Application for Bail may be filed and acted upon by the RTC despite the filing of a
notice of appeal, provided it has not transmitted the original record to the appellate
court.
WHEN BAIL IS TO BE FILED BEFORE THE APPELLATE COURT
- When the original record has been transmitted to the Appellate court; OR
- When the trial court convicting the accused changed the nature of the offense from
non-bailable to bailable.
WHEN BAIL IS GRANTED
- Should the court grant the application, the accused may be allowed to continue on
provisional liberty during the pendency of the appeal under the same bail subject to the
consent of the bondsman.
WHEN APPLICATION FOR BAIL AFTER CONVICTION BY THE RTC SHALL BE

DENIED OR CANCELLED
- If penalty imposed is death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment;

- If the penalty imposed by the trial court is imprisonment exceeding six (6) years.
IF PENALTY IMPOSED IS IMPRISONMENT EXCEEDING SIX (6) YEARS
- Accused shall be denied bail; or

- Bail already granted shall be cancelled.
BEFORE DENIAL OR CANCELLATION OF APPLICATION FOR BAIL
- The prosecution must show, with notice to the accused, of the following or other similar
circumstances:
89 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
a. That he is a recidivist, quasi-recidivist, or habitual delinquent, or has committed the crime

aggravated by the circumstances of reiteration;
b. That he has previously escaped from legal confinement, evaded sentence, or violated the
conditions of his bail without valid justification;
c. That he committed the offense while under probation, parole, or conditional pardon;
d. That the circumstances of his case indicate the probability of flight if released on bail; or
e. That there is undue risk that he may commit another crime during the pendency of the
appeal.
SECTION 6. Capital offense defined.
“A capital offense is an offense which, under the law existing at the time of its commission and
of the application for admission to bail, may be punished with death.”
Discussion:
REPUBLIC ACT 9346, JUNE 24, 2006
Prohibited the imposition of death penalty;
SEC. 2 of RA 9346 “In lieu of the death penalty, the following shall be imposed.
(a) The penalty of reclusion perpetua, when the law violated makes use of the nomenclature of
the penalties of the Revised Penal Code; or
(b) the penalty of life imprisonment, when the law violated does not make use of the
nomenclature of the penalties of the Revised Penal Code”
90 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
CASE:
Does the discretionary nature of the grant of bail pending appeal mean that bail should
automatically be granted absent any of the circumstances mentioned in the third
paragraph of Section 5, Rule 114 of the Rules of Court?
Leviste v. Court of Appeals provides, discretionary nature of bail mentioned in Section 5 of

Rule 114 does not mean automatic grant of bail in case of appeal.
After conviction by the trial court, the presumption of innocence terminates and,
accordingly, the constitutional right to bail ends. From then on, the grant of bail is subject to
judicial discretion. At the risk of being repetitious, such discretion must be exercised with
grave caution and only for strong reasons. Considering that the accused was in fact convicted
by the trial court, allowance of bail pending appeal should be guided by a stringent-standards
approach. This judicial disposition finds strong support in the history and evolution of the rules
on bail and the language of Section 5, Rule 114 of the Rules of Court. It is likewise consistent
with the trial court’s initial determination that the accused should be in prison. Furthermore,
letting the accused out on bail despite his conviction may destroy the deterrent effect of our
criminal laws. This is especially germane to bail pending appeal because long delays often
separate sentencing in the trial court and appellate review. In addition, at the post-conviction
stage, the accused faces a certain prison sentence and thus may be more likely to flee
regardless of bail bonds or other release conditions. Finally, permitting bail too freely in spite
of conviction invites frivolous and time-wasting appeals which will make a mockery of our
criminal justice system and court processes.
SECTION 7. Capital offense of an offense punishable by reclusion perpetua or life

imprisonment, not bailable. “No person charged with a capital offense, or an offense
punishable by reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, shall be admitted to bail when
evidence of guilt is strong, regardless of the stage of the criminal prosecution.”
91 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
CASE:
Whether or not bail may be granted as a matter of right unless the crime charged is
punishable byreclusionperpetua where the evidence of guilt is strong.
Enrile v. Sandiganbayan.Any person, before conviction of any criminal offense, shall be

bailable. Unless he is charged with an offense punishable with reclusion perpetua [or life
imprisonment] and the evidence of his guilt is strong. Thus, denial of bail should only follow
once it has been established that the evidence of guilt is strong. Where evidence of guilt is not
strong, bail may be granted according to the discretion of the court.
Petitioner's poor health justifies his admission to bail

The Supreme Court took note of the Philippine's responsibility to the international community
arising from its commitment to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This commitment
is enshrined in Section II, Article II of our Constitution which provides: “The State values the
dignity of every human person and guarantees full respect for human rights.” The Philippines,
therefore, has the responsibility of protecting and promoting the right of every person to liberty
and due process, ensuring that those detained or arrested can participate in the proceedings
before a court, to enable it to decide without delay on the legality of the detention and order
their release if justified. In other words, the Philippine authorities are under obligation to make
available to every person under detention such remedies which safeguard their fundamental
right to liberty. These remedies include the right to be admitted to bail.
SECTION 8. Burden of proof in bail application.
“At the hearing of an application for bail filed by a person who is in custody for the
commission of an offense punishable by death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment, the
prosecution has the burden of showing that evidence of guilt is strong. The evidence presented
during the bail hearing shall be considered automatically reproduced at the trial, but upon
92 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
motion of either party, the court may recall any witness for additional examination unless the
latter is dead, outside the Philippines, or otherwise unable to testify. “
Discussion:
EVIDENCE PRESENTED DURING THE BAIL HEARING
SECTION 8 of Rule 114
Evidence presented during the bail hearing shall be considered automatically reproduced at the
trial.
WHEN THE COURT MAY RECALL WITNESS
- The court upon motion of the either parties may recall any witness for additional
examination.
Except: When the witness is dead, outside the Philippines, or otherwise unable to testify.
SECTION 9. Amount of bail; guidelines.
“The judge who issued the warrant or granted the application shall fix a reasonable amount of
bail considering primarily, but not limited to, the following factors:
(a) Financial ability of the accused to give bail;
(b) Nature and circumstances of the offense;
(c) Penalty for the offense charged;
(d) Character and reputation of the accused;
(e) Age and health of the accused;
(f) Weight of the evidence against the accused;
93 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
(g) Probability of the accused appearing at the trial;
(h) Forfeiture of other bail;
(i) The fact that accused was a fugitive from justice when arrested; and
(j) Pendency of other cases where the accused is on bail.
Excessive bail shall not be required.”
Discussion:
Excessive Bail
- Bail shall not be exacted in a sum more than necessary to secure attendance of the person
seeking it.
- Bail is excessive when it is set at an amount higher than that reasonably calculated to insure
that the accused will appear and stand trial and submit to sentence if convicted.
SECTION 10. Corporate surety.
“Any domestic or foreign corporation, licensed as a surety in accordance with law and
currently authorized to act as such, may provide bail by a bond subscribed jointly by the
accused and an officer of the corporation duly authorized by its board of directors.”
Discussion:
Professional Bondsmen
- A person habitually engaged in the business of furnishing bonds in civil actions or for
persons arrested or detained for prosecution.
- A licensed is required before a professional bondsman may act as such.
94 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 11. Property bond, how posted.
“A property bond is an undertaking constituted as lien on the real property given as security for
the amount of the bail. Within ten (10) days after the approval of the bond, the accused shall
cause the annotation of the lien on the certificate of title on file with the Register of Deeds if
the land is registered, or if unregistered, in the Registration Book on the space provided
therefor, in the Registry of Deeds for the province or city where the land lies, and on the
corresponding tax declaration in the office of the provincial, city and municipal assessor
concerned.
Within the same period, the accused shall submit to the court his compliance and his failure to
do so shall be sufficient cause for the cancellation of the property bond and his re-arrest and
detention.”
Discussion:
Property Bond
- Is an undertaking constituted as lien on the real property given as security for the
amount of the bail.
How Posted?
Within 10 days after the approval of the bond
Procedure:
- If the land is registered, the accused shall cause the annotation of the lien on the
certificate of title on file with the Registry of Deeds.
- If the land is unregistered, in the Registration Book on the space provided therefore, in
the Registry of Deeds for the province or city where the land lies, and on the
corresponding tax declaration in the office of the provincial, city and municipal
assessor concerned.
95 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
- Within the same period of 10 days, the accused shall submit to the court his compliance
and his failure to do so shall be sufficient cause for the cancellation of the property
bond and his re-arrest and detention.
- Both registered and unregistered lands may be offered as security.
SECTION 12. Qualifications of Sureties in Property Bond.
“The qualification of sureties in a property bond shall be as follows:
(a) Each must be a resident owner of real estate within the Philippines;
(b) Where there is only one surety, his real estate must be worth at least the amount of the
undertaking;
(c) If there are two or more sureties, each may justify in an amount less than that expressed in
the undertaking but the aggregate of the justified sums must be equivalent to the whole amount
of bail demanded.
In all cases, every surety must be worth the amount specified in his own undertaking over and
above all just debts, obligations and properties exempt from execution.”
SECTION 13. Justification of Sureties.
“Every surety shall justify by affidavit taken before the judge that he possesses the
qualifications prescribed in the preceding SECTION. He shall describe the property given as
security, stating the nature of his title, its encumbrances, the number and amount of other bails
entered into by him and still undischarged, and his other liabilities. The court may examine the
sureties upon oath concerning their sufficiency in such manner as it may deem proper. No bail
shall be approved unless the surety is qualified.”
General Rule: No bail shall be approved unless the surety is qualified.
96 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SURETY: Every surety needs to justify that he passes the qualifications prescribed under
SECTION 12.
What he needs to do?
Describe the property given as security by:
1. Nature of his title
2. Its encumbrances
3. Number and amounts of other bails entered into by him that’s still undischarged.
4. Other liabilities
On the part of Court:
The judge may examine the surety, under oath, concerning their sufficiency in such manner as
it may deem proper.
Purpose: To enable the judge to determine whether or not the surety possess the qualification
to act as such, specially his financial worth.
SECTION 14. Deposit of cash as bail.
“The accused or any person acting in his behalf may deposit in cash with the nearest collector
or internal revenue or provincial, city, or municipal treasurer the amount of bail fixed by the
court, or recommended by the prosecutor who investigated or filed the case. Upon submission
of a proper certificate of deposit and a written undertaking showing compliance with the
requirements of SECTION 2 of this Rule, the accused shall be discharged from custody. The
money deposited shall be considered as bail and applied to the payment of fine and costs while
the excess, if any, shall be returned to the accused or to whoever made the deposit.”
97 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
What is the effect of depositing cash as bail?

Accused shall be discharged from custody as it is considered as bail
SECTION 15. Recognizance.
— Whenever allowed by law or these Rules, the court may release a person in custody to his
own recognizance or that of a responsible person. (15a)
Recognizance - an obligation of record, entered into before some court or officer authorized to
take it with a condition to do some particular act and the accused is often allowed to obligate
himself to answer the charge.x
SECTION 16. Bail, when not required; reduced bail or recognizance. — No bail shall be
required when the law or these Rules so provide.
When a person has been in custody for a period equal to or more than the possible maximum
imprisonment prescribe for the offense charged, he shall be released immediately, without
prejudice to the continuation of the trial or the proceedings on appeal. If the maximum penalty
to which the accused may be sentenced is destierro, he shall be released after thirty (30) days
of preventive imprisonment.
A person in custody for a period equal to or more than the minimum of the principal penalty
prescribed for the offense charged, without application of the Indeterminate Sentence Law or
any modifying circumstance, shall be released on a reduced bail or on his own recognizance, at
the discretion of the court. (16a)
What are the offenses that can be released without Bail?

1. Offense charged is violation of an ordinance, light felony or a criminal offense, the
imposable penalty wherefore does not exceed 6 months of imprisonment and/or fine of P 2,000
under R.A.6036.
98 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
2. Where the accused has applied for probation and before the same has been resolved but no
bail was filed or the accused is incapable of filing one, in which case he may be released on
recognizance
3. In case of a youthful offender held for physical or mental examination, trial or appeal, if
unable to furnish bail and under the circumstances under PD 603, as amended
What are the offenses that can be released on reduced bail or his own recognizance?
A person in custody for a period equal to or more than the minimum of the principal penalty
prescribed for the offense charged, without application of the indeterminate sentence law or
any modifying circumstance shall be released on reduced bail or on his own recognizance.
UNDER THE REVISED RULES ON SUMMARY PROCEDURE

General Rule: no bail
Exception:
1. When a warrant of arrest is issued for failure to appear when required by the court
2. When the accused
a. is a recidivist;
b. is a fugitive from justice;
c. is charged with physical injuries
d. does not reside in the place where the violation of the law or ordinance is committed;
or
e. has not reside in the place where the violation of the law or ordinance is committed; or
f. has no known residence
SECTION 17. Bail, where filed.
(a) Bail in the amount fixed may be filed with the court where the case is pending, or in the
absence or unavailability of the judge thereof, with any regional trial judge, metropolitan trial
judge, municipal trial judge, or municipal circuit trial judge in the province, city, or
municipality. If the accused is arrested in a province, city, or municipality other than where the
case is pending, bail may also be filed with any regional trial court of said place, or if no judge
99 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
thereof is available, with any metropolitan trial judge, municipal trial judge, or municipal
circuit trial judge therein.
(b) Where the grant of bail is a matter of discretion, or the accused seeks to be released on
recognizance, the application may only be filed in the court where the case is pending, whether
on preliminary investigation, trial, or on appeal.
(c) Any person in custody who is not yet charged in court may apply for bail with any court in
the province, city, or municipality where he is held. (17a)
SECTION 18. Notice of application to prosecutor.
— In the application for bail under SECTION 8 of this Rule, the court must give reasonable
notice of the hearing to the prosecutor or require him to submit his recommendation. (18a)
Why is it Necessary?
- Such notice is necessary because the burden of proving that the evidence of guilt is
strong is on the prosecution and that the discretion of the court in admitting the accused
to bail can only be exercised after the fiscal has been heard regarding the nature of the
evidence in his possession. (People vs. Raba, 130 Phil. 384)
SECTION 19. Release on bail.
— The accused must be discharged upon approval of the bail by the judge with whom it
was filed in accordance with SECTION 17 of this Rule.
Whenever bail is filed with a court other than where the case is pending, the judge who
accepted the bail shall forward it, together with the order of release and other supporting
papers, to the court where the case is pending, which may, for good reason, require a different
one to be filed. (19a)
100 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 20. Increase or reduction of bail.
— After the accused is admitted to bail, the court may, upon good cause, either increase or
reduce its amount. When increased, the accused may be committed to custody if he does not
give bail in the increased amount within a reasonable period. An accused held to answer a
criminal charge, who is released without bail upon filing of the complaint or information, may,
at any subsequent stage of the proceedings and whenever a strong showing of guilt appears to
the court, be required to give bail in the amount fixed, or in lieu thereof, committed to custody.
(20a)
People v. Raba. Such notice is necessary because the burden of proving that the evidence of
guilt is strong is on the prosecution and that the discretion of the court in admitting the accused
to bail can only be exercised after the fiscal has been heard regarding the nature of the evidence
in his possession.
SECTION 21. Forfeiture of bond.
— When the presence of the accused is required by the court or these Rules, his bondsmen
shall be notified to produce him before the court on a given date and time. If the accused fails
to appear in person as required, his bail shall be declared forfeited and the bondsmen given
thirty (30) days within which to produce their principal and to show cause why no judgment
should be rendered against them for the amount of their bail. Within the said period, the
bondsmen must:
(a) produce the body of their principal or give the reason for his non-production; and
(b) explain why the accused did not appear before the court when first required to do so.
Failing in these two requisites, a judgment shall be rendered against the bondsmen, jointly and
severally, for the amount of the bail. The court shall not reduce or otherwise mitigate the
liability of the bondsmen, unless the accused has been surrendered or is acquitted. (21a)
101 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
ORDER OF FORFEITURE VS. ORDER OF CONFISCATION

1. an ORDER OF FORFEITURE is conditional and interlocutory, there being something more
to be done such as the production of the accused within 30 days as provided by the rules an
order of forfeiture is not appealable
2. an ORDER OF CONFISCATION is not independent of the order of the order of forfeiture.
It is a judgment ultimately determining the liability of the surety thereunder, and therefore final
and execution may issue at once.
SECTION 22. Cancellation of bail.
— Upon application of the bondsmen, with due notice to the prosecutor, the bail may be
cancelled upon surrender of the accused or proof of his death.
The bail shall be deemed automatically cancelled upon acquittal of the accused, dismissal of
the case, or execution of the judgment of conviction.
In all instances, the cancellation shall be without prejudice to any liability on the bond. (22a)
SECTION 23. Arrest of accused out on bail.
— For the purpose of surrendering the accused, the bondsmen may arrest him or, upon
written authority endorsed on a certified copy of the undertaking, cause him to be arrested by a
police officer or any other person of suitable age and discretion.
An accused released on bail may be re-arrested without the necessity of a warrant if he

attempts to depart from the Philippines without permission of the court where the case is
pending. (23a)
102 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 24. No bail after final judgment; exception.
— No bail shall be allowed after the judgment of conviction has become final. If before
such finality, the accused has applies for probation, he may be allowed temporary liberty under
his bail. When no bail was filed or the accused is incapable of filing one, the court may allow
his release on recognizance to the custody of a responsible member of the community. In no
case shall bail be allowed after the accused has commenced to serve sentence. (24a)
GENERAL RULE: The finality of the judgment terminates the criminal proceeding. Bail
becomes of no avail. The judgment contemplated is a judgment of conviction. The judgment is
final if the accused does not appeal the conviction.
No bail shall be granted after judgment, if the case has become final even if continued
confinement of the accused would be detrimental or dangerous to his health. The remedy
would be to submit him to medical treatment or hospitalization.
EXCEPTION: If the accused applies for probation he may be allowed temporary liberty under
his existing bail bond, or if no bail was filed, or is incapable of filing one, he may be released
on recognizance to the custody of a responsible member of the community
SECTION 25. Court supervision of detainees.
— The court shall exercise supervision over all persons in custody for the purpose of
eliminating unnecessary detention. The executive judges of the Regional Trial Courts shall
conduct monthly personal inspections of provincial, city, and municipal jails and their
prisoners within their respective jurisdictions. They shall ascertain the number of detainees,
inquire on their proper accommodation and health and examine the condition of the jail
facilities. They shall order the segregation of sexes and of minors from adults, ensure the
observance of the right of detainees to confer privately with counsel, and strive to eliminate
conditions inimical to the detainees.
103 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
In cities and municipalities to be specified by the Supreme Court, the municipal trial judges or
municipal circuit trial judges shall conduct monthly personal inspections of the municipal jails
in their respective municipalities and submit a report to the executive judge of the Regional
Trial Court having jurisdiction therein.
A monthly report of such visitation shall be submitted by the executive judges to the Court
Administrator which shall state the total number of detainees, the names of those held for more
than thirty (30) days, the duration of detention, the crime charged, the status of the case, the
cause for detention, and other pertinent information. (25a)
SECTION 26. Bail not a bar to objections on illegal arrest, lack of or irregular
preliminary investigation.
— An application for or admission to bail shall not bar the accused from challenging the
validity of his arrest or the legality of the warrant issued therefor, or from assailing the
regularity or questioning the absence of a preliminary investigation of the charge against him,
provided that he raises them before entering his plea. The court shall resolve the matter as early
as practicable but not later than the start of the trial of the case.
AN APPLICATION FOR OR ADMISSION TO BAIL SHALL NOT BAR THE

ACCUSED
a. from challenging the validity of his arrest OR
b. legality of the warrant issued therefore, OR
c. from assailing the regularity or questioning the absence of preliminary investigation of the
charge against him, PROVIDED, he raises them before entering his plea.
104 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
RULE 115
RIGHTS OF ACCUSED
SECTION 1. Rights of the accused at the trial.- In all criminal prosecutions, the accused
shall be entitled to the following rights:
(a) To be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved beyond reasonable doubt.
(b) To be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him.
(c) To be present and defend in person and by counsel at every stage of the proceedings, from
arraignment to promulgation of the judgment. The accused may, however, waive his presence
at the trial pursuant to the stipulations set forth in his bail, unless his presence is specifically
ordered by the court for purposes of identification. The absence of the accused without
justifiable cause at the trial of which he had notice shall be considered a waiver of his right to
be present thereat. When an accused under custody escapes, he shall be deemed to have waived
his right to be present on all subsequent trial dates until custody over him is regained. Upon
motion, the accused may be allowed to defend himself in person when it sufficiently appears to
the court that he can properly protect his right without the assistance of counsel.
(d) To testify as a witness in his own behalf but subject to cross-examination on matters
covered by direct examination. His silence shall not in any manner prejudice him.
(e) To be exempt from being compelled to be a witness against himself.
(f) To confront and cross-examine the witnesses against him at the trial. Either party may
utilize as part of its evidence the testimony of a witness who is deceased, out of or cannot with
due diligence be found in the Philippines, unavailable or otherwise unable to testify, given in
another case or proceeding, judicial or administrative, involving the same parties and subject
matter, the adverse party having the opportunity to cross-examine him.
105 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
(g) To have compulsory process issued to secure the attendance of witnesses and production of
other evidence in his behalf.
(h) To have speedy, impartial and public trial.
(i) To appeal in all cases allowed and in the manner prescribed by law.
(a) To be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved beyond reasonable doubt.
- The right of an accused to be presumed innocent is a mandate of the fundamental law.
The burden of proof is on the prosecution to demonstrate guilt. Every prestige of doubt
having a rational basis must be removed, all essential elements constituting the offense
charged must be proved beyond reasonable doubt for, in case of reasonable doubt that
the offender’s guilt has not been shown, he is entitled to an acquittal.
Del Castillo vs People G.R. No. 185128, January 30, 2012
The prosecution must prove that the petitioner had knowledge of the existence and presence of
the drugs in the place under his control and dominion and the character of the drugs. With the
prosecution's failure to prove that the nipa hut was under petitioner's control and dominion,
there casts a reasonable doubt as to his guilt. In considering a criminal case, it is critical to start
with the law's own starting perspective on the status of the accused - in all criminal
prosecutions, he is presumed innocent of the charge laid unless the contrary is proven beyond
reasonable doubt. Proof beyond reasonable doubt, or that quantum of proof sufficient to
produce a moral certainty that would convince and satisfy the conscience of those who act in
judgment, is indispensable to overcome the constitutional presumption of innocence.
106 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
(b) To be informed of the nature and caused of the accusation against him.
- Every material fact and essential element of the offense charged must be stated with
precision and certainty in the question, in simple and understandable language, in sufficient
detail to enable the person to prepare his defense.
Accusation serves as:
 To furnish the accused with such description of the charge against him as will enable
him to make his defense;
 To avail himself in case of his conviction or acquittal, of the protection against a further
prosecution for the same cause;
 To inform the court of the facts alleged, so that it may decide whether they are
sufficient in law to support a conviction if one should be had.
Miguel vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 172035, July 4, 2012
In deference to the constitutional right of an accused to be informed of the nature and the cause
of the accusation against him,Section 6, Rule 110 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure
requires, inter alia, that the information shall state the designation of the offense given by the
statute and the acts or omissions imputed which constitute the offense charged. Additionally,
the Rules requires that these acts or omissions and its attendant circumstances must be stated in
ordinary and concise language and in terms sufficient to enable a person of common
understanding to know what offense is being charged and for the court to pronounce judgment.
The test of the informations sufficiency is whether the crime is described in intelligible terms
and with such particularity with reasonable certainty so that the accused is duly informed of the
offense charged.
(b) To be present and defend in person and by counsel at every stage of the
proceedings, from arraignment to promulgation of the judgment.
- The right to be heard and present evidence is another indispensable requisite of due
process to which every person accused of a criminal offense is entitle under the
Constitution.
107 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
- The right to be heard would be of little avail if it does not include the right to be heard
by counsel. Even the most intelligent or educated man may have no skill in the science
of law, particularly in the rules of procedure and, without counsel, he may convicted
not because he is guilty but because he does not know how to establish his innocence.
Right to be present; trial in absentia
• Right: The presence of the accused is an absolute necessity at all stages of the
proceedings against him in all cases.
• Can be lawfully waived, either by expressly or by implication.
• Purpose of the rule is to speed up the disposition of criminal cases, trial of which could
in the past be indefinitely deferred.
Trial in absentia
• Requisites:
• (1) That there has been an arraignment
• (2) That the accused has been notified
• (3) That he fails to appear and his failure to do so is unjustified
The provision of the Constitution authorizing trial in absentia of the accused in case of his non-
appearance after arraignment despite due notice means that he waives his right to meet the
witness face to face among others. An express waiver of appearance after arraignment has the
same effect.
(d) To testify as a witness in his own behalf but subject to cross-examination on matters
covered by direct examination. His silence shall not in any manner prejudice him.
- The accused has the right to appear as witness in his own behalf, and his testimony must be
considered in the same light as the testimony of any other witness.
- Denial of this right would constitute an unjustifiable violation of his constitutional right.
108 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
- The accused may take the witness stand and testify in his own behalf but subject to cross
examination on matters covered by direct examination.
- But if he is asked a question which might incriminate him, not for the crime with which he is
charged but for some other crime he may decline to answer that question (Rule against self-
incrimination).
General Rule: Silence of the accused should not be used against him.
It also carries with it, the negative aspect – that of which not giving testimony, his silence shall
not in any manner prejudice him.
If the accused does not want to testify in his behalf and chooses to remain silent, his silence
shall not in any manner prejudice him.
His silence cannot be used as a presumption of his guilt.
Exception: When the prosecution has already established a prima facie case, the accused must
present proof to overturn the evidence.
(e) To be exempt from being compelled to be a witness against himself.
The privilege is expressed in the following provisions:
• “No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself” (Sec 17, Art 3,
Philippine Constitution)
• “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be entitled to the following
rights x xx (Rule 115)
The privilege is intended to prevent the State, with all its coercive powers, from extracting
from the suspect testimony that may convict him and to avoid a person subject to such
compulsion to person subject to such compulsion to perjure himself for his own protection.
The court may not extract from a defendant’s own lips and against his will an admission of his
guilt.
109 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
The right prescribes an “option of refusal to answer incriminating questions and not a
prohibition of inquiry.”
The accused is protected under this rule from questions which tend to incriminate him, that is,
which may subject him to penal liability.
The right may be waived by the failure of the accused to invoke the privilege at the proper
time, that is, AFTER the incriminating question is asked and before his answer.
The privilege of the accused to be exempt from testifying as a witness involves a prohibition
against testimonial compulsion only and the production by the accused of incriminating
documents, and articles demanded from him.
Exceptions: Immunity statutes such as:
 RA 1379 – Forfeiture of Illegally obtained wealth

 RA 749 – Bribery and Graft cases
RIGHT OF THE ACCUSED AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION vs RIGHT OF THAT

OF AN ORDINARY WITNESS
The ordinary witness may be compelled to take the witness stand and claim the privilege as
each question requiring an incriminating answer is shot at him, an accused may altogether
refuse to take the witness stand and refuse to answer any and all questions.
The constitutional privilege against self-incrimination is essentially a personal one, applying

only to natural individuals.
People vs. Ayson, G.R. No. 85215. July 7, 1989
Facts: Felipe Ramos was a ticket freight clerk of the PAL assigned at its Baguio City station.
He was allegedly involved in irregularities in the sales of plane tickets. On the day before the
investigation of the irregularities by the management, Ramos gave to his superiors’
handwritten notes which stated that he is willing to settle the irregularities allegedly charged
110 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
against him. At the investigation, Ramos was informed of the findings of the Audit Team.
Thereafter, his answers to every question by the management were taken down in writing. Two
months later, Ramos was charged with the crime of estafa in connection with the ticket sales
irregularities. Ramos entered a not guilty plea and trial ensued. The private prosecutors
presented evidence against Ramos which included his statement taken during the PAL
management investigation (Exhibit A) as well as his handwritten admission to superiors to
compromise his obligations (Exhibit K). The defendant's attorneys objected to the evidence
presented on the ground that they appear to be a confession and was taken without the accused
being represented by a lawyer. By Order, the lower court judge admitted all the exhibits except
Exhibits A and K. He declared that it does not appear in Exhibit A and K that the accused was
reminded of his constitutional rights “to remain silent and to have counsel and that these rights
may be waived provided it was with the assistance of a counsel and in writing."
Issue:Whether or not the evidence against Ramos which included his statement taken during
the PAL management investigation (Exhibit A) as well as his handwritten admission to
superiors to compromise his obligations can be admitted as an evidence.
Ruling: Yes. The right against self-incrimination is accorded to every person who gives
evidence, whether voluntarily or under compulsion of subpoena, in any civil, criminal, or
administrative proceeding. The right is not to "be compelled to be a witness against himself"
However, the right can be claimed only when the specific question, incriminatory in character,
is actually put to the witness. It cannot be claimed at any other time. It does not give a witness
the right to disregard a subpoena, to decline to appear before the court at the time appointed, or
to refuse to testify altogether. A defendant on trial or under preliminary investigation is not
under custodial interrogation. His interrogation by the police, if any there had been would
already have been ended at the time of the filing of the criminal case in court or the public
prosecutors' office. Hence, there is no occasion to speak of his right while under "custodial
interrogation." In the instant case, the Orders of the judge of the lower court were rendered
with grave abuse of discretion and should be annulled and set aside. Felipe Ramos was not in
any sense under custodial interrogation prior to and during the administrative inquiry into the
111 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
discovered irregularities in ticket sales in which he appeared to have had a hand. The
constitutional rights of a person under custodial interrogation did not therefore come into play.
It is also clear that Ramos had voluntarily answered questions posed to him on the first day of
the administrative investigation and agreed that the proceedings should be recorded. His offer
to compromise his liability in the alleged irregularities thru a letter was a free and even
spontaneous act on his part. They may not be excluded on the ground that the so-called
"Miranda rights" had not been accorded to Ramos.
(f) Right to confrontation and cross-examination
Confrontation – act of setting a witness face-to-face with the accused so that the latter may
make any objection he has to the witness, and the witness may identify the accused, and this
must take place in the presence of the court having jurisdiction to permit the privilege of cross-
examination.
3 Essential Purposes of Right of Confrontation
 It insures that the witness will give his testimony under oath, thus deterring lying by the
threat of a perjury charge.
 It forces the witness to submit to cross-examination – a valuable instrument in exposing
falsehood and bringing on the truth
 It enables the court to observe the demeanor of the witness and assess his credibility
General Rule: The right of the accused to be confronted at the trial by and to cross-examine
the witnesses against him, means at his own trial and not the trial of another.
Exceptions:
 Either party may utilize as part of its evidence the testimony of a witness who is
deceased
 Out of or cannot be with due diligence be found in the Philippines
112 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
 Unavailable or otherwise unable to testify, given in another case or proceeding, judicial

or administrative, involving the same parties and subject party, having had the
opportunity to cross-examine him.
The right to meet the witnesses face to face is a personal right
• May be waived expressly or impliedly by one’s conduct
• It is a right to assert and demand, otherwise it is deemed to have been waived.
(g) To have compulsory process issued to secure the attendance of witnesses and
production of other evidence in his behalf.
What is the right to compulsory process?
It is the right of the accused to have a subpoenaand/or a subpoena duces tecum issued in
his behalf in order to compel the attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence
What happens if witness refuses to testify when required?
The court should order the witness to give bail or even order his arrest, if necessary.
Failure to obey a subpoena amounts to contempt of court
May a witness be excused from appearing at trial for the reason that his residence
exceeds 50 kilometers from the place of trial?
The provision in the Rules of Court providing for this exemption of excusing a witness from
appearance before a Court, judge or officer of the province in which he is resides to the place
of trial by usual course of travel applies only to Civil Cases and no to criminal cases.
(h) To have speedy, impartial and public trial.
Right to Speedy Trial – one free from vexatious, capricious and oppressive delays, its salutary
objective being to assure that an innocent person may be freed from the anxiety and expense of
a court litigation or, if otherwise, of having his guilt determined within the shortest possible
time compatible with the presentation and consideration of whatever legitimate defense he may
interpose.
113 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Three-fold Purpose:
• It protects the accused, if held in jail to await trial, against prolonged imprisonment;
• It relieves him of the anxiety and public suspicion attendant upon an untried accusation
of crime;
• It prevents him from being exposed to the hazard of a trial after the lapse of so great a
time the means of proving his innocence may have been lost.
Villareal vs People, G. R. No. 151258, February 1, 2012
Facts: In 1991, seven freshmen law students of ADMU signifies their intention to join Aquila
Legis Fraternity. Hazing was a prerequisite that caused the death of Leny Villa. Thirty-five
Aquilians were indicted for homicide. The 26 accused were jointly tried and convicted while
the remaining 9 was held in abeyance. In 2002 the case against Escalon, et. al was dismissed.
Issue: WON Escalon, et.al right to speedy trial was violated.
Held: Yes. The 12 years lapse from arraignment without further proceedings was indicative of
violation of the accused’s right to speedy trial.
Right to an Impartial Trial
• There shall be a degree of objectivity on the part of a judge sufficient to reassure

litigants of his being fair and being just.
Right to a Public Trial
Public trial – is one which is not limited or restricted to any one particular class of the
community but is open to the free observation of all.
Recognized as a safeguard against any attempt to employ the courts as instruments of

persecution.
(i) To appeal in all cases allowed and in themanner prescribed by law
Right to appeal from a judgement of conviction is fundamentally of statutory origin.
114 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
It is not a matter of absolute right, independently of constitutional or statutory provisions

allowing such appeal.
The Right of appeal is personal to the accused and similarly to other rights of kindered nature,
it may be waived either expressly or by implication. (e.g. Petition for Probation)
People vs Espiritu, G.R. No. 180919, January 9, 2013
Facts: Appellant, together with her mother, Primitiva M. Seraspe (Seraspe), and Melba L.
Espiritu (Espiritu) were charged with violation of Section 15, Article II of Republic Act (R.A.)
No. 6425 (The Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972), as amended, in an Amended Information. The
three entered separate pleas of "not guilty" to the crime charged during their arraignment. The
CA upheld the RTC’s finding of a valid entrapment and accorded respect and finality upon the
trial court’s assessment of the credibility of witnesses. Hence, this appeal.
Issue: Whether or not the PAOCTF instigated the appellant to commit the offense charged?
Held: No, the Court held that there was no instigation committed by the PAOCTF. The Court
said that, “Instigation means luring the accused into a crime that he, otherwise, had no
intention to commit, in order to prosecute him." It differs from entrapment which is the
employment of ways and means in order to trap or capture a criminal. In instigation, the
criminal intent to commit an offense originates from the inducer and not from the accused who
had no intention to commit and would not have committed it were it not for the prodding of the
inducer. In entrapment, the criminal intent or design originates from the accused and the law
enforcers merely facilitate the apprehension of the criminal by using ruses and
schemes. Instigation results in the acquittal of the accused, while entrapment may lead to
prosecution and conviction. Here, the evidence clearly established that the police operatives
employed entrapment, not instigation, to capture appellant and her cohorts in the act of selling
shabu. It must be recalled that it was only upon receipt of a report of the drug trafficking
activities of Espiritu from the confidential informant that a buy-bust team was formed and
negotiations for the sale of shabu were made. Also, appellant testified that she agreed to the
transaction of her own free will when she saw the same as an opportunity to earn money.
Notably too, appellant was able to quickly produce a sample. This confirms that she had a
ready supply of the illegal drugs. Clearly, she was never forced, coerced or induced through
incessant entreaties to source the prohibited drug for Carla and PO3 Cariño and this she even
categorically admitted during her testimony.
115 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
RULE 116
ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
SECTION 1. Arraignment and plea; how made.

(a) The accused must be arraigned before the court where the complaint or information
was filed or assigned for trial. The arraignment shall be made in open court by the judge or
clerk by furnishing the accused with a copy of the complaint or information, reading the
same in the language or dialect known to him, and asking him whether he pleads guilty or not
guilty. The prosecution may call at the trial witnesses other than those named in the complaint
or information.
(b) The accused must be present at the arraignment and must personally enter his plea.
Both arraignment and plea shall be made of record, but failure to do so shall not affect the
validity of the proceedings.
(c) When the accused refuses to plead or makes a conditional plea, a plea of not guilty
shall be entered for him.
(d) When the accused pleads guilty but presents exculpatory evidence, his plea shall be
deemed withdrawn and a plea of not guilty shall be entered for him.
(e) When the accused is under preventive detention, his case shall be raffled and its
records transmitted to the judge to whom the case was raffled within three (3) days from the
filing of the information or complaint. The accused shall be arraigned within ten (10) days
from the date of the raffle. The pre-trial conference of his case shall be held within ten
(10) days after arraignment.
(f) The private offended party shall be required to appear at the arraignment for
purposes of plea bargaining, determination of civil liability, and other matters requiring his
presence. In case of failure of the offended party to appear despite due notice, the court may
allow the accused to enter a plea of guilty to a lesser offense which is necessarily included in
the offense charged with the conformity of the trial prosecutor alone.
116 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
(g) Unless a shorter period is provided by special law or Supreme Court circular, the
arraignment shall be held within thirty (30) days from the date the court acquires jurisdiction
over the person of the accused. The time of the pendency of a motion to quash or for a bill of
particulars or other causes justifying suspension of the arraignment shall be excluded in
computing the period.
Arraignment
 Is the proceeding in a criminal case, whose object is to fix the identity of the accused,
to inform him of the charge and to obtain his plea to the information;
 It is the stage wherein for the first time the accused is granted the opportunity to know
the precise charge that confronts him;
 It is the phase of criminal proceedings where the issues are joined, although,
technically, arraignment is not part of the trial.
 Purpose:
o To inform the accused as to why he was indicted
o What penal offense the accused will face in the event that his guilt is proved beyond
reasonable doubt
o An opportunity for the accused to disprove the evidence against him.
 Significance
o Absence of arraignment is violative of the procedural due process.
o No valid judgment can be rendered upon an invalid arraignment.
- Where the original information has been superseded by an amended information, the
rearraignment under such original information and the accused’s plea to the charge
therein set forth is null and void and no proper judgment could be rendered in the case.
- Where the accused was charged in separate informations, he must be arraigned in all of
them, even though said cases would be tried jointly in the court. It is the duty of the
trial courts, charged with the administration of justice, especially in criminal cases, to
conduct the proceedings in strict accord with the prescribed rules of procedure; and
while irregularities may and doubtless will intrude themselves which may and should
be overlooked on appeal where the rights of the accused are not prejudiced, convictions
117 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
cannot be maintained when, as in the case, all the safeguards which the law establishes
to secure the rights of the accused are flagrantly disregarded.
 Jurisprudence holds that the absence of record of an arraignment cannot give rise to a
presumption of a valid arraignment.
 Where and How made
o The accused must be arraigned before the court where the complaint or information
was filed or assigned for trial
o The arraignment is made in open court by the judge or clerk by furnishing the accused
with a copy of the complaint or information with the list of witnesses, reading the
same in the language or dialect known to him, and asking him whether he pleads
guilty or not guilty.
- During arraignment, the court must endeavor to inform the accused of the nature and
cause of the charge against him so that he may be able to understand it as well as the
circumstances attendant thereto. And when the charge is of serious nature, it becomes
imperative duty of the counsel not only to assist him during the reading of the
information but also to explain to him the real import of the charge so that he may fully
realize the gravity and consequence of his plea.
- The defendant is entitled as a matter of right to be furnished by the prosecution with a
list of the witnesses to be presented against him during the trial. Purpose: to avoid the
presentation of surprise witnesses and to enable the defense to examine their record,
morality and character. The time for the accused to know all the witnesses
against him is when they take the witness stand.
- It is an established rule that the prosecution may call unlisted witnesses to testify
without the previous consent of the court.
- Mere failure to present prosecution witnesses listed in the information does not warrant
an inference that the prosecution has suppresses their respective testimonies because
they were false. This is consistent with the principle that the presentation of witness for
the prosecution depends upon the discretion of the fiscal who has control of the
prosecution of the criminal case.
118 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
 Presence of the accused

o The accused must be present at the arraignment and must personally enter his plea.
This is premised upon the theory that the presence of the accused at the arraignment is
not only a personal right but also a public duty.
It was held in Marcos vs Ruiz, that there can be no valid arraignment in the absence of
the accused for the rules require the accused to personally enter his plea.
 Presence of the offended party
o The offended party is required to appear in the arraignment for the purpose of plea
bargaining, determination of civil liability and other matters requiring his presence.
o In case of failure to appear by the offended party despite due notice, the court may
allow the accused to enter a plea of guilty to a lesser offense which is necessarily
included in the offense charged with the conformity of the trial prosecutor only.
 Effect of entry of plea on pre-arraignment irregularities
o The settled doctrine is that the right to preliminary investigation must be invoked
before plea, otherwise it is deemed waived.
- The moment an accused enters his plea, he is deemed to have abandoned his right to
question any irregularity that surrounds it.
 Kinds of Pleas
1. Plea of guilty
- A plea by a defendant admitting that he committed the offense or crime charged. A
guilty plea is a complete admission of guilt to the charge and a waiver of all rights. A
guilty plea must be made with the consent of the court.
2. Plea of not guilty
A plea where the defendant denies the charges against him. The burden remains on
the city, state, or federal government to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
When you plead not guilty, the magistrate will give you a hearing date. At the hearing, the
prosecutor will present evidence to try and show the court that you are guilty. You can
119 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
also present evidence that shows you are not guilty or that you have a defense. The
magistrate will then make a decision.
If you plead not guilty plea and you change your mind, you can change your plea to
guilty. You can do this at any time before your hearing date or on your hearing
date, but you should do this as soon as possible.
3. Plea of No Contest (otherwise known as Nolo Contendere)
A plea entered by a defendant that does not admit guilt, but that subject the
defendant to punishment, while allowing the defendant to deny the alleged facts in
other proceedings. For purposes of sentencing a defendant, a plea of no contest is
equivalent to a plea of guilty.
Allows a defendant to accept a punishment without admitting guilt. This is
relevant in the event that a guilty plea later could be used in a civil case or
additional criminal charges.
This plea requires approval of the court or the prosecuting attorney. In some cases, a
defendant may be able to withdraw a plea of guilty in favor of a plea of no
contest.
- The real and important question at the arraignment is this: Did you commit the offense
charged in the complaint or information?
 Effects of plea
1. Plea of guilty
An unqualified plea of guilty constitutes an admission of all the material facts
alleged in the information including the aggravating circumstance therein stated.
A plea of guilty is sufficient to sustain a conviction of any offense charged in
the information without the introduction of further evidence where the defendant has
himself supplied the necessary proof.
An affirmative plea to the crime charged carries with it admission of the
aggravating circumstances averred in the information but not to the amount of
damages that may be alleged therein.
120 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
2. Plea of not guilty

The magistrate will give you a hearing date, at the hearing, the prosecutor will present
evidence to try and show the court that you are guilty. You can also present evidence
that shows you are not guilty or that you have a defense. The magistrate will then
make a decision.
If you plead not guilty plea and you change your mind, you can change your plea to
guilty. You can do this at any time before your hearing date or on your hearing
date, but you should do this as soon as possible.
3. Plea of No Contest (otherwise known as Nolo Contendere)
Has the same effects as a plea of guilty, but may have residual effects or
consequences in future actions.
For instance, a conviction arising from a nolo contendere plea is subject to any and
all penalties, fines, and forfeitures of a conviction from a guilty plea in the same case,
and can be considered as an aggravating factor in future criminal actions. However,
unlike a guilty plea, a defendant in a nolo contendere plea may not be required
to allocute the charges. This means that a nolo contendere conviction typically
may not be used to establish either negligence per se, malice, or whether the acts
were committed at all in later civil proceedings related to the same set of facts as the
criminal.
4. Refusal to plead
If the accused refuses to plead, or makes a conditional plea of guilty, a plea of not
guilty shall be entered for him.
An accused may not enter a conditional plea of guilty in the sense that he admits
his guilt, provided that a certain penalty be imposed upon him. In such cases the
information should first be amended or modified with the consent of the fiscal if
the fact so warrant, or the accused must be considered as having entered a plea of
not guilty.
 Period to plea
A. If the accused is under preventive detention
121 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
When the accused is under preventive detention, his case shall be raffled and its
records transmitted to the judge to whom the case was raffled within 3 days from the
filing of the information or complaint. The accused shall be arraigned within 10 days
from the date of the raffle. The pre-trial conference of his case shall be held within 10
days after arraignment.
Purpose: To expedite the proceedings because the accused is under detention.
B. If the accused is not under preventive detention
Within 30 days from the date the court acquires jurisdiction over the person of the
accused, unless a shorter period is provided by special law or Supreme Court Circular.
The time of the pendency of the motion to quash, or for a bill of particulars, or other
causes justifying suspension of the arraignment shall be excluded in computing the
period.
The 30day period for arraignment is not absolute. The Rule 116, Section 1(g) states
that the time of the pendency of a motion to quash or for a bill of particulars or other
causes justifying suspension of the arraignment shall be excluded in computing the
period. While Section 11 of the same rule provides when arraignment shall be
suspended. The aforementioned rule and the Speedy Trial Act of 1998 set the time
limit for arraignment and trial of a case. This however does not preclude justifiable
postponements and delay so warranted by the situation.
SECTION 2. Plea of guilty to a lesser offense.
- Arraignment, the accused, with the consent of the offended party and the prosecutor,
may be allowed by the trial court to plead guilty to a lesser offense which is necessarily
included in the offense charged. After arraignment but before trial, the accused may
still be allowed to plead guilty to said lesser offense after withdrawing his plea of not
guilty. No amendment of the complaint or information is necessary.
122 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
 Allowance to plea to lesser offense, when proper

The plea of guilty to a lighter offense than that actually charged is not supposed to be
allowed as a matter of bargaining or compromise for the convenience of the accused.
The rules allow such a plea only when the prosecution does not have sufficient evidence to
establish guilt of the accused of the crime charged. When such an offer is made, the
court is duty bound to inquire carefully into the circumstances on which it is premised.
 When to enter a plea of guilty to a lesser offense
o Should be made during the arraignment
o After arraignment but before trial, the accused may still be allowed to plead guilty to
said lesser offense after withdrawing his plea of not guilty.
SECTION 3. Plea of guilty to capital offense; reception of evidence.

- When the accused pleads guilty to a capital offense, the court shall conduct a searching
inquiry into the voluntariness and full comprehension of the consequences of his plea
and require the prosecution to prove his guilt and the precise degree of culpability. The
accused may present evidence in his behalf.
 Plea of guilty to a capital offense
As a general rule, a plea of guilty constitutes an admission of the crime and the attendant
circumstances alleged in the information. However, where the crime charged is a
capital offense, the rule assumes a different character. Three things are enjoined the
trial court after a plea of guilty to a capital offense has been entered into by the
accused:
1. To conduct a searching inquiry into the voluntariness and full comprehension of the
consequences of his plea
2. To require the prosecution to present evidence to prove the guilt of the accused and the
precise degree of his culpability.
3. To ask the accused if he desires to present evidence in his behalf and allow him to do
so if he desires.
123 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
This procedure is mandatory, and a judge who fails to observe it commits a grave abuse of
discretion. Purpose: to remove any doubt that the accused fully understood the
consequences of his plea is the fact that the evidence taken thereon is essential to the
fulfillment by the Supreme Court of its duty to review of automatic appeals from death
sentences.
When a plea of guilty is entered into a capital offense the trial court should exercise
solicitous care before sentencing the accused by first insuring that the accused fully
understands the gravity of the offense, the severity of the consequences attached
thereto, as well as the meaning and significance of his plea.
However, the defendant after pleading guilty may not present evidence as would exonerate
him completely from criminal liability.
When the inquiry made by the trial judge on the accused was so thorough and searching as
to show that he is guilty and that he understands the charge, a deviation from the
doctrine requiring the trial court to call witnesses where a plea of guilty is made, is
proper.
 Effect of plea of guilty on aggravating circumstances
o The appellants are deemed to have admitted all the material facts alleged in the
information
o They admitted not only the commission of the crime, but also the attendant
circumstances alleged therein, qualifying and/or aggravating the crime.
o A plea of guilty, when formally entered on arraignment, is sufficient to sustain
conviction even for a capital offense without the introduction of further evidence., the
requisite proofs having been supplied by the accused themselves.
SECTION 4. Plea of guilty to non-capital offense; reception of

evidence, discretionary.
- When the accused pleads guilty to a non-capital offense, the court may receive evidence
from the parties to determine the penalty to be imposed.
124 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
 Plea of guilty to non-capital offense

Since aggravating circumstances need not be alleged in the complaint or information, the
court upon motion may allow the presentation of evidence to prove such
circumstances. By the same token, if the defendant desires to present evidence in his
favor to show the attendance of mitigating circumstances in the commission of the
offense, he may be allowed to do so. In either case, the allowance of evidence after the
plea of guilty is subject to the discretion of the court.
While the discretion is lodged with the trial court to permit or not the submission of
evidence of mitigating circumstances, after a plea of guilty has been entered, such
discretion must be exercised in accordance with the facts and circumstances of the
case and should not be used to prevent the disclosure of circumstances that would
mitigate in any manner the responsibility of the accused who has pleaded guilty.
But in the event that no evidence is taken, the appellate court, if called upon to review the
proceedings had in the court below, may reverse the judgment and remand the case for
a new trial, if on the whole record, a reasonable doubt arises as to whether the accused
did in fact enter the plea of “guilty” with full knowledge of the meaning and
consequences of his act.
The rules of procedure were not designed to curtail the disclosure of the real facts,
especially of mitigating circumstances, but with the end in view that the criminal law
may be applied with justice and fairness both to the prosecution and to the accused.
 Failure to charge an offense
o Where the facts charged in the information do not state an offense, no conviction
thereon can be had notwithstanding the defendant’s plea of guilty thereto.
o The plea of guilty entered by the accused admits the facts set out in the information
and, if these do not constitute a crime or violation of law, such plea does not have the
effect of admitting the commission of the crime or violation of a law, for there is none
charged in the information, or of supplying what has been omitted or what has not
125 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
been pleaded therein, to the extent of curing a defective information or one that does
not allege facts sufficient to constitute a public offense or a violation of law.
SECTION 5. Withdrawal of improvident plea of guilty.

- At any time before the judgment of conviction becomes final, the court may permit an
improvident plea of guilty to be withdrawn and be substituted by a plea of not guilty.
 Withdrawal of plea of guilty

o At any time before judgment of conviction becomes final, a plea of guilty imprudently
entered may be withdrawn and substituted by a negative plea. This has been construed
liberally in the sense that the allowance of said substitution is within the discretion of
the court even after judgment of conviction.
o The withdrawal of a plea of guilty is not a matter of strict right to the accused but of
sound discretion to the trial court, and the appellate court will not interfere with such
discretion in the absence of abuse thereof.
o As to whether or not a plea of guilty will be permitted to be withdrawn depends on the
factors in attendance.
o It is not the ministerial or routinary duty of the trial court, on a mere request or petition
of the accused, to allow him to substitute a plea of not guilty for his prior plea of guilty
and to set aside the judgment of conviction already rendered in the case.
o The trial judge has the power to set aside judgment of conviction based on a plea of
guilty entered by the accused and to allow the accused to change his plea to one of not
guilty, the exercise of that power must be based on some compelling reason such as
error, fraud, illegality or manifest injustice. The trial court is not invested with
unbridled discretion to set aside a judgment of conviction based on a plea of guilty just
because it has not yet become final.
126 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 6. Duty of court to inform accused of his right to counsel.

- Before arraignment, the court shall inform the accused of his right to counsel and ask
him if he desires to have one. Unless the accused is allowed to defend himself in person
or has employed a counsel of his choice, the court must assign a counsel de oficio to
defend him.
 Right to counsel during arraignment
o One of the great principles of justice guaranteed by the Constitution is that “no person
shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law,” and that all
accused “shall enjoy the right to be heard by himself and counsel.” In criminal cases,
there can be no fair hearing unless the accused be given an opportunity to be heard by
counsel. The right to counsel would be of little avail if it does not include the right to
be heard.
o The right to be assisted by counsel is deemed so important that it has become a
constitutional right and it is so implemented that under our rules of procedure, it is not
enough for the court to apprise the accused of his right to have an attorney, it is not
enough to asked him whether he desires the aid of an attorney, but it is essential that
the court should assign one de oficio for him if he so desires and he is poor or grant
him reasonable time to procure an attorney of his own.
 Duty of the court during arraignment
Under the rules, when an accused appears without an attorney, the court has four
important duties to comply with:
1. To inform the accused of his right to have an attorney before being arraigned
2. After giving him such information, the court must ask him if he desires the aid of an
attorney
3. If he desires and is unable to employ an attorney, the court must assign an attorney de
oficio to defend him
4. If the accused desires to procure an attorney of his own, the court must grant him a
reasonable time therefor.
127 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
The court comply rigorously with this duty because it constitutes part of due process of
law, a right recognized in the Constitution. It is not proper to impose a sentence upon
the accused without affording him the opportunity to defend himself with the
assistance of counsel if he so desires, unless the accused expressly and formally
renounced such right.
 Choice and appointment of attorney
o The constitutional right of the accused to be assisted by an attorney is sacred and
courts should be slow in depriving them of such right. The appointment of a counsel
de oficio who was not to the liking of the accused without giving the latter reasonable
time within which to procure another lawyer is violative of that right.
o This is a right that the accused should not be deprived of, and failure of the court to
assign counsel or, after counsel has been assigned, to require him to perform this
duty by appearing and defending the accused, would be sufficient cause for the
reversal of the case.
o Where a counsel de oficio has been assigned to a person on trial and has acted without
opposition from his client, the latter’s conviction cannot be set aside on the sole
ground that the counsel was not his choice. And the fact that the attorney appointed by
the trial court to aid the accused in his defense expressed reluctance to accept the
designation because he did not sympathize with the accused’s cause, does not
necessarily imply that he did not perform his duty to protect the interest of the
accused, in the absence of proof that he was remiss in the performance of his duties as
sworn member of the Bar.
 Waiver of right to counsel
The right set forth in the Rule is personal in nature and may therefore be waived. Hence, if
the accused himself opted to handle his own defense, the defense may validly
continue.
128 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 7. Appointment of counsel de oficio.

- The court, considering the gravity of the offense and the difficulty of the questions that
may arise, shall appoint as counsel de oficio only such members of the bar in good
standing who, by reason of their experience and ability, can competently defend the
accused. But in localities where such members of the bar are not available, the court
may appoint any person, resident of the province and of good repute for probity and
ability, to defend the accused.
 Reason for the rule: To secure to the accused, who is unable to engage the services
of an attorney of his own choice, effective representation by making it imperative on
the part of the court to consider in the appointment of counsel de oficio, the gravity of
the offense and the difficulty of the questions likely to arise in the case vis-à-vis the
ability and experience of the prospective appointee.
 Appointment of non-lawyers as counsel: In localities where members of the Bar are
not available, the court is authorized to appoint any person, resident of the province
and of good repute for probity and ability, to defend the accused.
SECTION 8. Time for counsel de oficio to prepare for arraignment.

- Whenever a counsel de oficio is appointed by the court to defend the accused at the
arraignment, he shall be given a reasonable time to consult with the accused as to his
plea before proceeding with the arraignment.
 Time to prepare for arraignment
- As to what is reasonable time, it depends upon the circumstances surrounding the case
like the gravity of the offense, the complexity of the allegations in the complaint or
information, whether a motion to quash or a bill of particular has to be filed, and other
similar considerations. Needless to say, the right may be waived.
Motion to quash - is a request to a court to render a previous decision of that court or a
lower judicial body null or invalid.
129 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Bill of particulars – is a detailed, formal written statement of charges or claims by a

plaintiff or a prosecutor given upon the defendant’s formal request to the court for
more detailed information.
SECTION 9. Bill of particulars.
- The accused may, before arraignment, move for a bill of particulars to enable him
properly to plead and to prepare for trial. The motion shall specify the alleged defects
of the complaint or information and the details desired.
 A defendant in a criminal case who believes or feels that he is not sufficiently
informed of the crime with which he is charged and not in position to defend himself
properly and adequately could move for specifications.
 Failure to move for specifications – deprives the defendant of the right to object to
evidence which could be lawfully introduced and admitted under an information of
more or less general terms but which sufficiently charges the accused with a definite
crime.
SECTION 10. Production or inspection of material evidence in possession of

prosecution.
- Upon motion of the accused showing good cause and with notice to the parties, the
court, in order to prevent surprise, suppression, or alteration, may order the prosecution
to produce and permit the inspection and copying or photographing of any written
statement given by the complainant and other witnesses in any investigation of the
offense conducted by the prosecution or other investigating officers, as well as any
designated documents, papers, books, accounts, letters, photographs, objects or tangible
things not otherwise privileged, which constitute or contain evidence material to any
matter involved in the case and which are in the possession or under the control of the
prosecution, police, or other law investigating agencies.
130 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
 Production of evidence in the possession of prosecution

o This rule is one of the modes of discovery in criminal cases specifically given to the
accused. Purpose: to prevent surprise, suppression, or alteration of any written
statements given by the complainant and other witnesses in any investigation of the
offense conducted by the prosecution or any other investigating officers, as well as any
documents, which constitute or contain evidence material to any matter involved in the
case, which are in the possession of the prosecution, the police or any law enforcement
agencies.
o The production of evidence or their inspection is not a matter of absolute right on the
part of the defense; nor does the privilege operate ipso facto upon the filing of a
motion to that effect. The petition must be anchored on justifiable grounds; its use as a
procedural device cannot be resorted to in order to fish for evidence or to compel
disclosure of privileged matter.
o The privilege must be exercised only by the accused since the prosecution has already
at its disposal the entire machinery of the government.
SECTION 11. Suspension of arraignment.

- Upon motion by the proper party, the arraignment shall be suspended in the following cases:
(a) The accused appears to be suffering from an unsound mental condition which effective
renders him unable to fully understand the charge against him and to plead
intelligently thereto. In such case, the court shall order his mental examination and, if
necessary, his confinement for such purpose;
(b) There exists a prejudicial question; and
(c) A petition for review of the resolution of the prosecutor is pending at either the
Department of Justice, or the Office of the President; provided, that the period of
suspension shall not exceed sixty (60) days counted from the filing of the petition with
the reviewing office.
131 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
 When arraignment may be suspended, reasons.

1. When the defendant is of unsound mind at the time of the arraignment
Reason: If the latter is not in full possession of his mental faculties at the time he is
informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him, the process is itself a
felo de se, for he can neither comprehend the full import of the charge nor can he give
an intelligent plea thereto.
2. When a prejudicial question exists
Reason: Because prejudicial question is determinative of the guilt or innocence of the
accused, it is but proper and just that the arraignment be deferred for some other day.
3. When a petition for review of the resolution of the prosecutor is pending at either the
DOJ or of the OP.
Reason: To observe the so-called judicial courtesy and to avoid legal complications in the
event that the resolution of the DOJ or of the OP is different from the offense for
which the accused is arraigned, especially is said resolution upgrades the original
offense.
132 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
RULE 117
MOTION TO QUASH
SECTION 1. Time to move to quash.

Motion to Quash
- a special pleading filed by the defendant before entering his please, which
hypothetically admits the truth of the facts spelled out in the Complaint or
Information at the same time that it sets up a matter which, if duly proved,
would preclude further proceedings.
- Sole right of the accused
The test in determining the sufficiency of the material averments in an Information is
whether or not the facts alleged therein, which are hypothetically admitted, would
establish the essential elements of the crime defined by law.
General Rule:
Other facts such as matters of defense, which are not in information, should
NOT be considered.
EXCEPTION:
When the grounds invoked to quash the Information are:
1. Extinction of criminal liability;
2. Prescription; and
3. Former jeopardy.
Time of Filing
General Rule: The accused may file MQ ONLY before entering his plea.
XPNS: Instances where a motion to quash may be filed after entering his plea
1. Failure to charge an offense;
2. Lack of jurisdiction over the offense charged;
3. Extinction of the offense or penalty; or
4. Double jeopardy
133 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Panaguiton vs. DOJ - 571 SCRA 549

Facts: Cawili borrowed money from Panaguiton. Cawili and Tongson jointly executed 3
checks for payment, but such were dishonored. Panaguiton filed a case for BP 22 before
Prosecutor but found probable cause only on Cawili so he appealed before DOJ. When DOJ
directed Prosecutor for reinvestigation, the case was ultimately dismissed for being filed
beyond the prescriptive period following Act. 3326.
Issue: Whether or not that the offense had already prescribed under Act No. 3326 which
governs the prescription of offenses penalized by special laws?
Held: No, SC ruled that the case was not filed beyond the prescriptive period. It is NOT the
filing of the case in court that can toll the prescriptive period, BUT the institution of
preliminary investigations against the accused.
Motion to Quash Demurrer to Evidence
filed before the defendant enters his plea filed after the prosecution has rested its case
Does not go into the merits of the case but is based upon the inadequacy of the evidence
anchored on matters not directly related to the adduced by the prosecution in support of the
question of guilt or innocence of the accused accusation
Governed by Rule 117 of the Rules of Criminal governed by Rule 119 of the Rules of Criminal
Procedure Procedure
SECTION 2. Form and contents.

Form and Contents of MQ:
1. In writing;
2. Signed by the accused or his counsel; and
3. Shall specify distinctly the factual and legal grounds therefore.
134 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
- The court shall consider no ground other than those stated in the motion,
except lack of jurisdiction over the offense charged and when the
Information does not charge an offense.
- MQ must be resolved beforetrial and cannot defer the hearing and
determination of said motion until trial on the merits as it would impair the
right of the accused to speedy trial.
- It may also be resolved at the preliminary investigation since the
investigating officer has the power to either dismiss the case or bind the
accused over for trial by the proper court, depending on its determination of
lack or presence of probable cause.
SECTION 3. Grounds
The accused may move to quash the complaint or information on any of the following grounds:
(a) That the facts charged do not constitute an offense;

(b) That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the offense charged;
(c) That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the person of the accused;
(d) That the officer who filed the information had no authority to do so;
(e) That it does not conform substantially to the prescribed form;
(f) That more than one offense is charged except when a single punishment for various
offenses is prescribed by law;
(g) That the criminal action or liability has been extinguished;
(h) That it contains averments which, if true, would constitute a legal excuse or
justification; and
(i) That the accused has been previously convicted or acquitted of the offense charged,
or the case against him was dismissed or otherwise terminated without his express
consent.
1st ground: (a) That the facts charged do not constitute an offense;
The counter part of this in civil cases is that the pleading asserting the claim states no
cause of action.
135 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
The fundamental rule in considering a motion to quash on the ground that the
averments of the information are not sufficient to constitute the offense charged is
whether the facts alleged, if hypothetically admitted, would meet the essential elements
of the offense.
To know if the complaint or information do not constitute an offense if the allegations
in the complaint the facts alleged do not constitute any crime, then the information
should be quashed.
Soriano vs. People 591 SCRA 244

Facts: Soriano was charged for estafa through falsification of commercial documents for
allegedly securing a loan of 48 million in the name of two (2) persons when in fact these
individuals did not make any loan in the bank, nor did the bank's officers approved or had any
information about the said loan. The state prosecutor conducted a preliminary investigation on
the basis of letters sent by the officers of Special Investigation of BSP together with 5
affidavits and filed two (2) separate information against Soriano for estafa through falsification
of commercial documents and violation of DORSI law.
Soriano moved for the quashal of the two (2) informations based on the ground: 1) that
the court has no jurisdiction over the offense charged, for the letter transmitted by the BSP to
the DOJ constituted the complaint and was defective for failure to comply with the mandatory
requirements of Sec. 3(a), Rule 112 of the Rules of Court, such as statement of address of the
petitioner and oath of subscription and the signatories were not authorized persons to file the
complaint; and 2)that the facts charged do not constitute an offense, for the commission of
estafa under par. 1(b) of Art. 315 of the RPC is inherently incompatible with the violation of
DORSI law (Sec. 83 or RA 337 as amended by PD 1795), and therefore a person cannot be
charged of both offenses.
Issue#1: Whether or not the complaint filed complied with the mandatory requirements of
law?
Held #1: Yes, the letters transmitted were not intended to be the complaint but merely
transmitted for preliminary investigation. The affidavits and not the letter transmitting them
136 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
initiated the preliminary investigation and therefore the complaint substantially complied with
the mandatory requirements of law.
Issue#2: Whether or not the petition for certiorari under Rule 65 is the proper remedy in an
order denying a Motion to Quash?
Held#2: No. The proper procedure in such a case is for the accused to enter a plea, go to trial
without prejudice on his part to present special defenses he had invoked in his motion to quash
and if after trial on the merits, an adverse decision is rendered, to appeal therefrom in the
manner authorized by law.
Rationale: Duplicity of offenses in a single information is a ground to quash the Information
under Section 3(e), Rule 117 of the 1985 Rules of Criminal Procedure; The Rules prohibit the
filing of a duplicitous information to avoid confusing the accused in preparing his defense. By
duplicity of charges is meant a single complaint or information that charges more than one
offense. Otherwise stated, there is duplicity (or multiplicity) of charges when a single
Information charges more than one offense.
The fundamental test in considering a motion to quash anchored on Section 3(a), Rule 117 of
the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure, is the sufficiency of the averments in the information;
that is, whether the facts alleged, if hypothetically admitted, would establish the essential
elements of the offense charged as defined by law. The trial court may not consider a situation
contrary to that set forth in the criminal complaint or information. Facts that constitute the
defense of the petitioners against the charge under the information must be proved by them
during trial. Such facts or circumstances do not constitute proper grounds for a motion to quash
the information on the ground that the material averments do not constitute the offense.
2nd ground: (b) That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the offense charged;
3rd ground: (c) That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the person of the
accused;
Instances when the court has no jurisdiction:
1.) The court has no jurisdiction to try the case because of penalty;
2.) The court has no jurisdiction to try the offense because it id committed in another
place – territorial jurisdiction; or
137 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
3.) The court has no jurisdiction over the person of the accused because the latter has
never been arrested and never surrender himself.
4th ground: (d) That the officer who filed the information had no authority to do so;
The prosecutor has the authority to file the case. In instances where person who is not authorise
to file the accused can move to quash. Remember, if the fiscal filed an information without the
previous complaint signed by the victim or by the parents, the same can be quashed.
5th ground: (e) That it does not conform substantially to the prescribed form;
Rule 110 speaks of the form of complaint or information. Rule 112 states the a certification is
required.
The fiscal will certify that the fiscal conducted the preliminary investigation that is the form.
The fiscal will certify that the other party has given the chance to be heard. If the same was no
afforded the accused can move to dismiss the case.
6th ground: (f) That more than one offense is charged except when a single punishment for
various offenses is prescribed by law;
This refers to a duplicitous complaint or information- when it charges more than one offense
under Rule 110, Section 13. It is not allowed. However under Rule 120, section 3 it is
waivable. If the accused fails to object to it before trial, the court may convict him of as many
offenses as are charged and proved, and impose on him the penalty for each offense.
7th ground: (g) That the criminal action or liability has been extinguished;
Criminal liability is extinguished under Article 89 of 5he RPC
1.) By death of the convict;

2.) By service of sentence;
3.) By amnesty;
4.) By absolute pardon;
5.) By prescription of the crime;
6.) By prescription of the penalty;
7.) By the marriage of the offended woman, as provided in Article 344 of the Revised
Penal Code.
138 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
8th ground: (h) That it contains averments which, if true, would constitute a legal excuse or
justification; and
The complainant or information contains averments, which if true would show that you are
NOT liable.
Situation: The information says that there is a case of homicide because in such certain
date Rose stabbed Rucel because Rucel tried to stab Rose first. The information is
admitting that Rose acted in self-defense. Therefore, the information admits the
existence of justifying circumstances.
That is what it meant by a complaint or information, which contains averments, which
is true, constitute a legal excuse or justification. Why would the fiscal allege in the
information something that is favourable to the accused.
9th ground: (i) That the accused has been previously convicted or acquitted of the offense
charged, or the case against him was dismissed or otherwise terminated without his express
consent.
This is known as a defense against double jeopardy.
“Section 21, Article III of the 1987 Constitution provides that “no person shall be twice
put in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense. If an act is punished by a law and
an ordinance, conviction or acquittal under either shall constitute a bar to another
prosecution for the same act.”
To successfully invoke double jeopardy, the following requisites must have obtained in the
original prosecution.
1.) A valid complaint or information

2.) A competent court
3.) The defendant pleaded to the charge and
4.) The defendant was acquitted, or convicted, or the case against him was dismissed or
otherwise terminated without his consent.
139 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
People vs. Dumlao 580 SCRA 409

FACTS: The accused are members of the board of trustees of GSIS charged with RA 3019
ANTI-GRAFT AND CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT, unlawful entry to contract of lease-
purchase with La'o private person. In the case under consideration the Sandiganbayan
dismissed the case against respondent for insufficiency of evidence, even without giving the
prosecution the opportunity to present its evidence. In so doing, it violated the prosecution’s
right to due process. It deprived the prosecution of its opportunity to prosecute its case and to
prove the accused’s culpability. It was therefore erroneous for the Sandiganbayan to dismiss
the case under the premises. Not only did it not consider the ground invoked by respondent
Dumlao (that the facts charged do not constitute an offense); it even dismissed the case on a
ground not raised by him (that it dismissed the case because of insufficiency of evidence), and
not at the appropriate time. The dismissal was thus without basis and untimely.
ISSUES: Whether or not insufficiency of evidence is a ground for motion to quash?
HELD: Insufficiency of evidence is not one of the grounds of motion to quash. Insufficiency
is ground for dismissal only after the prosecution rests its case, the ground invoked by Dumlao
(that the facts charged do not constitute an offense); otherwise, it could have denied respondent
Dumlao’s motion. From the reasoning given by the Sandiganbayan, it is clear that it dismissed
the case because of insufficiency of evidence. Insufficiency of evidence is not one of the
grounds of a Motion to Quash. The grounds, as enumerated in Section 3, Rule 117 of the
Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, are as follows: (a) That the facts charged do not
constitute an offense; (b) That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the offense
charged; (c) That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the person of the accused;
(d) That the officer who filed the information had no authority to do so; (e) That it does not
conform substantially to the prescribed form; (f) That more than one offense is charged except
when a single punishment for various offenses is prescribed by law; (g) That the criminal
action or liability has been extinguished; (h) That it contains averments which, if true, would
constitute a legal excuse or justification; and (i) That the accused has been previously
convicted or acquitted of the offense charged, or the case against him was dismissed or
140 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
otherwise terminated without his express consent. Insufficiency of evidence is a ground for
dismissal of an action only after the prosecution rests its case.
SECTION 4. Amendment of Complaint or Information.

If an alleged defect in the complaint or information, which is the basis of a motion to quash,
can be cured by amendment, the court shall order the amendment instead of quashing the
complaint or information. If, after the amendment, the defect is still not cured, the motion to
quash should be granted.
Amendments of accusatory pleading- the rule states that if the motion to quash is based on
an alleged defect in the complaint or information which can be cured by amendment, the court
shall order the amendment to be made.
SECTION 5. Effect of Sustaining the Motion to Quash.

EFFECTS IF COURT SUSTAINS THE MOTION TO QUASH
1. If the ground of the motion is either:

a) that the facts charged do not constitute an offense; or
b) that the officer who filed the information had no authority to do so, or
c) that it does not conform substantially to the prescribed form; or
d) that more than one offense is charged,
the court may order that another information be filed or an amendment thereof as the
case may be within a definite period. If such order is NOT MADE, or if having been
made, another information is NOT FILED within a time to be specified in the order, or
within such time as the court may allow, the accused, if in custody, shall be discharged
therefrom, unless he is also in custody on some other charge.
141 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
2. If the motion to quash is sustained upon any of the following grounds:

a) that a criminal action or liability has been extinguished;
b) that it contains averments which, if true, would constitute a legal excuse or
justification; or
c) that the accused has been previously convicted or acquitted of the offense charged,
the court must state, in its order granting the motion, the release of the accused if he is
in custody or the cancellation of his bond if he is on bail.
3. If the ground upon which the motion to quash was sustained is that the court has NO
jurisdiction over the offense, the better practice is for the court to remand or forward the
case to the proper court, not to quash the complaint or information.
 The prosecution may elevate to the Higher Courts an order granting a motion to quash.
PROCEDURE IF MOTION TO QUASH IS DENIED

1. accused should plead;
2. accused should go to trial without prejudice to the special defenses he invoked in the
motion;
3. appeal from the judgment of conviction, if any, and interpose the denial of the motion
as an error.
- An order denying a motion to quash is INTERLOCUTORY and NOT
APPEALABLE. Appeal in due time, as the proper remedy, implies a
previous conviction as a result of a trial on the merits of the case and does
not apply to an interlocutory order denying a motion to quash. The denial by
the trial court of a motion to quash CANNOT be the subject of a petition for
certiorari, prohibition or mandamus in another court of coordinate rank.
SECTION 6. Order sustaining the Motion to quash NOT a bar to another prosecution.
- A motion SUSTAINING the motion to quash is NOT a bar to another
prosecution for the same offense UNLESS:
142 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
1. the motion was based on the ground that the criminal action or liability has been
extinguished, AND
2. that the accused has been previously convicted or in jeopardy of being convicted or
acquitted of the offense charged.
SECTION 7. Former conviction or acquittal; Double jeopardy

- Double Jeopardy means that when a person is charged with an offense and
the case is terminated either by acquittal or conviction or in any other
manner without the consent of the accused, the latter cannot again be
charged with the same or identical offense.
REQUISITES:
It is necessary that in the first case that-
1. the complaint or information or other formal charge was sufficient in form and
substance to sustain a conviction;
2. the court had jurisdiction;
3. the accused had been arraigned and had pleaded; and
4. he was convicted or acquitted or the case was dismissed without his express consent;
When all these circumstances are present, they constitute a BAR to a second prosecution
for –
1. the same offense, or
2. an attempt to commit the said offense, or
3. a frustration of the said offense, or
4. any offense which necessarily includes or is necessarily included in the first offense
charged.
The discharge of a defendant on a preliminary investigation is NOT such an adjudication in his
favor as will bar subsequent prosecution for the offense. This is because, a preliminary
investigation is not a trial and does not have for its object that of determining definitely the
guilt of the accused. Further, the accused has not yet been arraigned.
143 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Cerezo vs. People 650 SCRA 222

Facts: On September 12, 2002, petitioner Cerezo filed a case of libel against private
respondents Yaneza, Abunda JR., and Afulugencia as well as Mapalo before the Quezon City
Prosecutors Office (OP-QC). Finding probable cause against the respondents, the OP-QC filed
the corresponding Information before the RTC. However, on November 20, 2003, the OP-QC
reversed its earlier findings and recommended the dismissal of the case in its Resolution. They
then filed before the RTC a Motion to Dismiss and Withdraw Information but the respondents
already were arraigned and pleaded not guilty before such filing was done. The RTC granted
the petitioners’ motion and ordered the dismissal of the criminal case. Petitioner then moved
for a Reconsideration arguing that the resolution was still subject for review before the
Secretary of Justice. RTC then deferred the action for the motion until the DOJ already
presented its resolution. On June 26, 2006, the Secretary of Justice promulgated its resolution
reversing the OP-QC resolution and directed the Information for libel to be refiled whereby the
RTC granted the petitioners’ Motion for Reconsideration. Respondents’ motion for
Reconsideration was denied. The Court of Appeals, through a petition for Certiorari filed by
the respondents, found that the RTC gravely abused its discretion in reinstating the case and
found that elements of double jeopardy existed. Respondent relied on Sec. 7. Rule 117
Former conviction or acquittal; double jeopardy. Petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration on
the CA’s Decision was denied, hence, this appeal.
Issue: Whether there was a valid termination of the case so as to usher in the impregnable wall
of double jeopardy?
Held: SC said No valid termination of the case so as to usher in the impregnable wall of
double jeopardy. The petition is impressed with merit.
Well-entrenched is the rule that once a case is filed with the court, any disposition of it rests on
the sound discretion of the court. In thus resolving a motion to dismiss a case or to withdraw an
Information, the trial court should not rely solely and merely on the findings of the public
prosecutor or the Secretary of Justice.20 It is the court’s bounden duty to assess independently
the merits of the motion, and this assessment must be embodied in a written order disposing of
the motion.21 While the recommendation of the prosecutor or the ruling of the Secretary of
144 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Justice is persuasive, it is not binding on courts. In this case, it is obvious from the March 17,
2004 Order of the RTC, dismissing the criminal case, that the RTC judge failed to make his
own determination of whether or not there was a prima facie case to hold respondents for trial.
He failed to make an independent evaluation or assessment of the merits of the case. The RTC
judge blindly relied on the manifestation and recommendation of the prosecutor when he
should have been more circumspect and judicious in resolving the Motion to Dismiss and
Withdraw Information especially so when the prosecution appeared to be uncertain, undecided,
and irresolute on whether to indict respondents.
Double jeopardy exists when the following requisites are present: (1) a first jeopardy attached
prior to the second; (2) the first jeopardy has been validly terminated; and (3) a second
jeopardy is for the same offense as in the first. A first jeopardy attaches only (a) after a valid
indictment; (b) before a competent court; (c) after arraignment; (d) when a valid plea has been
entered; and (e) when the accused has been acquitted or convicted, or the case dismissed or
otherwise terminated without his express consent.
DISMISSAL vs. ACQUITTAL

Acquittal is always based on the merits, that is, the defendant is acquitted because the
evidence does not show defendant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt; but Dismissal does not
decide the case on the merits or that the defendant is not guilty.
If an act is punished by a law and an ordinance, even if they are considered as different
offenses, conviction or acquittal under either shall constitute a bar to another prosecution for
the same act.
If a single act is punished by two different provisions of law or statutes, but each provision
requires proof of an additional fact which the other does not so require, neither conviction nor
acquittal in one will bar a prosecution for the other.
TESTS FOR DETERMINING WHETHER THE TWO OFFENSES ARE IDENTICAL:

A. SAME OFFENSE TEST - There is IDENTITY between two offenses not only when the
second offense is exactly the same as the first, but ALSO when the second offense is an
145 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
attempt to or frustration of, OR is necessarily included in the offense charged in the first
information.
EXCEPTIONS TO THE IDENTITY RULE:
1. The graver offense developed due to supervening facts arising from the same act or
omission constituting the former charge.
2. The facts constituting the graver charge became known or were discovered only after a
plea was entered in the former complaint or information.
3. The plea of guilty to the lesser offense was made without the consent of the prosecutor
and of the offended party; except when the offended party failed to appear during the
arraignment.
In any of these instances, such period of the sentence as may have been served by the accused
under the former conviction shall be credited against and deducted from the sentence he has to
serve should he be convicted under the subsequent prosecution.
B. SAME EVIDENCE TEST - whether the facts as alleged in the second information, if
proved, would have been sufficient to sustain the former information, or from which the
accused may have been acquitted or convicted.
SECTION 8. Provisional dismissal.

Requisites for Provisional Dismissal
There is provisional dismissal when a motion filed expressly for that purpose complies
with the following requisites:
1. It must be with the express consent of the accused; and
2. There must be notice to the offended party. Section 8, Rule 117 contemplates the
filing of a motion to dismiss, and not a motion to withdraw information.
People vs. Lacson 400 SCRA 267

Facts: In 1995, the Presidential Anti-Crime Commission (PACC) headed by Lacson was
linked to the killing of 11 members of KuratongBaleleng in Quezon City. Meanwhile,
146 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
amendments on the Rules of Court as to the Criminal Procedure were being deliberated and the
modified Rules on Criminal Procedure took effect on December 1, 2000 wherein in the case at
bar under Section 8 Rule 117(when applied retroactively will be in favor of the accused and
time-bar rule against the state and victims), to apply SC said the following requisites should
be followed: 1) The prosecution, with the express conformity of the accused or the
latter’s counsel moves for a provisional dismissal of the case; or both the prosecution or
accused move for a provisional dismissal of the case. 2) The offended party is notified of
the motion for a provisional dismissal of the case. 3) The court issues an order granting the
motion and dismissing the case provisionally. 4) The public prosecutor is served with a
copy of the order of provisional dismissal of the case. In 2003, SC ordered the Quezon City
RTC to try the case against Lacson and other police officials. The trial court however
dismissed the criminal case, finding lack of probable cause.
Issue #1: Whether or not the rule 117 section 8 will be applied prospectively or retroactively?
Held #1: The rule should be applied prospectively. The court upheld the petitioners’
contention that while Sec.8 secures the rights of the accused, it does not and should not
preclude the equally important right of the State to public justice. If a procedural rule impairs a
vested right, or would work injustice, the said rule may not be given a retroactive application.
In this case, when the Court approved Section 8, it intended the new rule to be applied
prospectively and not retroactively, for if the intention of the Court were otherwise, it would
defeat the very purpose for which it was intended, namely, to give the State a period of two
years from notice of the provisional dismissal of criminal cases with the express consent of the
accused. It would be a denial of the State’s right to due process and a travesty of justice for the
Court to apply the new rule retroactively in the present case as the respondent insists,
considering that the criminal cases were provisionally dismissed by Judge Agnir, Jr. on March
29, 1999 before the new rule took effect on December 1, 2000. A retroactive application of the
time-bar will result in absurd, unjust and oppressive consequences to the State and to the
victims of crimes and their heirs. It must be stressed that the institution and prosecution of
criminal cases are governed by existing rules and not by rules yet to exist.
147 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Issue #2: Whether or not the application of the time-bar under Section 8 Rule 117 be given a
retroactive application without reservations, only and solely on the basis of its being favorable
to the accused?
Held # 2: The Court is not mandated to apply rules retroactively simply because it is
favorable to the accused. The time-bar under the new rule is intended to benefit both the State
and the accused. When the rule was approved by the court, it intended that the rule be applied
prospectively and not retroactively, for to do so would be tantamount to the denial of the
State’s right to due process. A retroactive application would result in absurd, unjust and
oppressive consequences to the State and to the victims of crimes and their heirs.
Co vs. New Prosperity Plastics Products 727 SCRA 503

Facts: Respondent New Prosperity Plastic Products, represented by Elizabeth Uy (Uy), is the
private complainant for Violation of Batas Pambansa (B.P.) Bilang 22 filed against petitioner
William Co (Co), which were raffled to the MeTC Branch 49 of Caloocan City. In the absence
of Uy and the private counsel, the cases were provisionally dismissed on June 9, 2003 in open
court pursuant to Section 8, Rule 117 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure (Rules). Uy
received a copy of the June 9, 2003 Order on July 2, 2003, while her counsel-of-record
received a copy a day after. On July 2, 2004, Uy, through counsel, filed a Motion to Revive the
Criminal Cases.
Issue: Whether or not the provisional dismissal of the criminal case has become permanent?
Held: No, the provisional dismissal of the criminal case has not become permanent. When the
rules states that the provisional dismissal shall become permanent one year after the issuance
of the order temporarily dismissing the case, it should not be literally interpreted as such. There
is evident want of jurisprudential support on Co’s supposition that the dismissal of the cases
became permanent one year after the issuance of the June 9, 2003 Order and not after notice to
the offended party. There is a vital need to satisfy the basic requirements of due process.
The essential requisites of the first paragraph of Section 8, Rule 117 of the Rules, which are
conditions sine qua non to the application of the time-bar in the second paragraph thereof, to
wit: (1) the prosecution with the express conformity of the accused or the accused moves for a
148 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
provisional (sin perjuicio) dismissal of the case; or both the prosecution and the accused move
for a provisional dismissal of the case; (2) the offended party is notified of the motion for a
provisional dismissal of the case; (3) the court issues an order granting the motion and
dismissing the case provisionally; and (4) the public prosecutor is served with a copy of the
order of provisional dismissal of the case.
SECTION 9. Failure to move to quash or to allege any ground therefor.
All grounds for a motion to quash are WAIVED if NOT seasonably raised,
EXCEPT:
a) when the information does not charge an offense;
b) lack of jurisdiction of the court;
c) extinction of the offense or penalty; and
d) double jeopardy.
Motion to Dismiss
An order granting the withdrawal of the information attains finality after fifteen (15)
days from receipt thereof, without prejudice to the re-filing of the information upon
reinvestigation
Motion to Withdraw Information
An order granting a motion to dismiss becomes final fifteen (15) days after receipt
thereof, with prejudice to the re-filing of the same case once such order achieves finality.
not time-barred and does not fall within the ambit of Section 8, Rule 117 of the Revised
Rules of Court.
149 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
RULE 118
PRE-TRIAL
SECTION 1. Pre-trial; mandatory in criminal cases
When is pre-trial held?
- After arraignment and within thirty (30) days from the date the court acquires
jurisdiction over the person of the accused unless a shorter period is provided by special
laws or circulars of the Supreme Court (Sec. 1, Rule 118).
Note: When the accused is under preventive detention, wherein his case shall be raffled
and records transmitted within 3 days from the filing of the complaint or information. The
accused shall be arraigned within 10 days from the date of the raffle [Sec. 1(d), Rule 116].
Pre-trial in criminal cases is mandatory.
Pre-trial in Criminal Cases VS. Pre-trial in Civil Cases
The accused is merely required to sign the The presence of the defendant is required
written agreement arrived at in the pre-trial unless he is duly represented at the pretrial
conference, if he is in conformity therewith. conference by his counsel with the requisite
Unless otherwise required by the court, his authority to enter into a compromise
presence therefore is not indispensable. agreement. Failing in either of which, the
case shall proceed as if the defendant has
Note: This is aside from the consideration been declared in default.
that the accused may waive his presence at
all stages of the criminal action, except at
the arraignment, promulgation of judgment
or when required to appear for
identification.
The presence of the private offended party is The presence of the plaintiff is required
not required. Instead, he is priorly required unless excused therefrom for valid cause or
to appear at the arraignment of the accused if he is represented therein by a person fully
for purpose of plea bargaining, authorized in writing to perform the acts
determination of civil liability and other specified in Sec. 4, Rule 18. Absent such
150 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
matters requiring his presence. Should he justification, the case may be dismissed with
fail to appear therein and the accused offers or without prejudice.
to plead guilty to a lesser offense necessarily
included in the offense charged, the accused
may be allowed to do so with the
conformity of the trial prosecutor alone.
The filing of a pre-trial brief is not required. A pre-trial brief is required with the
It only requires attendance at a pre-trial particulars and the sanctions provided by
conference to consider the matters stated in Sec. 6, Rule 18.
Sec. 1, Rule 118. (1997 Bar Question)
Order for pre-trial conference
It must contain orders:
1. Requiring the private offended party to appear thereat for purposes of pleabargaining and
for other matters requiring his presence;
2. Referring the case to the branch clerk of court, if warranted, for a preliminary conference
to be set at least three (3) days prior to the pre-trial to mark the documents or exhibits to be
presented by the parties and copies thereof to be attached to the records after comparison
and to consider other matters as may aid in its prompt disposition; and
3. Informing the parties that no evidence shall be allowed to be presented and offered
during the trial other than those identified and marked during the pre-trial except when
allowed by the court for good cause shown. In mediatable cases, the judge shall refer the
parties and their counsel to the Philippine Mediation Center unit for purposes of mediation
if available (A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC).
Form of a valid pre-trial agreement
1. Plea bargaining - Plea bargaining is the process whereby the accused, the offended
party and the prosecution 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
151 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
only one or some of the counts of a multicount indictment in return for a lighter sentence
than that for the graver charge.
2. Stipulation of facts;
3. Marking for identification of evidence of parties;
4. Waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence;
5. Modification of the order of the trial if one of the accused admits the charge but
interposes a lawful defense (reverse trial); and
6. Such other matters as will promote a fair and expeditious trial of the civil and criminal
aspects of the case (Sec. 1).
Note: During the preliminary conference, the branch clerk of court shall assist the parties
in reaching a settlement of the civil aspect of the case, mark the documents to be presented
as exhibits and copies thereof attached to the records after comparison, ascertain from the
parties the undisputed facts and admissions on the genuineness and due execution of
documents marked as exhibits and consider such other matters as may aid in the prompt
disposition of the case. The proceedings during the preliminary conference shall be
recorded in the minutes of preliminary conference to be signed by both parties and counsel.
The minutes of preliminary conference and the exhibits shall be attached by the branch
clerk of court to the case record before the pre-trial (A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC).
Plea bargaining not applicable
- Violations of the Dangerous Drugs Act regardless of the imposable penalty.
The court do if the plea bargaining fails.
The court shall: 1. Adopt the minutes of preliminary conference as part of the pre-trial
proceedings, confirm markings of exhibits or substituted photocopies and admissions on the
genuineness and due execution of documents and list object and testimonial evidence;
152 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
2. Scrutinize every allegation of the information and the statements in the affidavits and other
documents which form part of the record of the preliminary investigation and other documents
identified and marked as exhibits in determining farther admissions of facts, documents and in
particular as to the following:
a. The identity of the accused;
b. Court’s territorial jurisdiction relative to the offense/s charged;
c. Qualification of expert witness;
d. Amount of damages;
e. Genuineness and due execution of documents;
f. The cause of death or injury, in proper cases;
g. Adoption of any evidence presented during the preliminary investigation;
h. Disclosure of defenses of alibi, insanity, self-defense, exercise of public authority and

justifying or exempting circumstances; and
i. Such other matters that would limit the facts in issue.
3. Define factual and legal issues;
4. Ask parties to agree on the specific trial dates and adhere to the flow chart determined by the
court which shall contain the time frames for the different stages of the proceeding up to
promulgation of decision and use the time frame for each stage in setting the trial dates;
5. Require the parties to submit to the Branch COC the names, addresses and contact numbers
of witnesses that need to be summoned by subpoena; and
6. Consider modification of order of trial if the accused admits the charge but interposes a
lawful defense (A.M. No. 03- 1-09-SC)
153 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Effect if the prosecution and the offended party agree to the plea offered by the accused:
The court shall:
1. issue an order which contains the plea bargaining arrived at;
2. proceed to receive evidence on the civil aspect of the case; and
3. render and promulgate judgment of conviction, including the civil liability or damages duly
established by the evidence (A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC).
Pre- trial agreement
- All agreements or admissions made or entered into during the pre- trial conference shall
be reduced to writing and signed by the accused and counsel, otherwise the same shall
not be used un evidence against the accused.
Requisites before a pre- trial agreement may be used as evidence:
1. They are reduced to writing;
2. The pre-trial agreement is signed by the accused and his counsel.
Effect of non-appearance of counsel for the accused or the prosecutor during the pretrial
without valid justification
- The court may impose proper sanctions or penalties in the form of reprimand, fines or
imprisonment if he does not offer an acceptable excuse for his lack of cooperation (Sec.
3, Rule 118).
Note: These sanctions are not applicable on the accused, because to include him among the
mandatory parties to appear might violate his constitutional right to remain silent.
154 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Pre-trial order
- It is an order issued by the court reciting the actions taken, the facts stipulated and the
evidence marked during the pre-trial conference. Such order binds the parties and limits
the trial to those matters not disposed of (Sec. 4).
Contents of Pre-trial Order
- It must be issued within ten (10) days after the termination of the pre-trial. It shall set
forth the following:
1. Actions taken during the pre-trial conference.
2. Facts stipulated;
3. Admissions made;
4. Evidence marked; and
5. Number of witnesses to be presented and the schedule of trial (Sec. 4).
155 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
RULE 119
TRIAL
SECTION 1. Time to Preprare for Trial
Trial - the examination before a competent tribunal according to the laws of the land, of the
facts put in issue in a case for the purpose of determining such issue.
The trial shall commence within 30 days from receipt of the pre-trial order.
SECTION 2. Continuous Trial Until Terminated; Postponements.
CONTINUOUS TRIAL SYSTEM

Trial once commenced shall continue from day to day as far as practicable until terminated; but
it may be postponed for a reasonable period of time for good cause.
LIMITATION OF THE TRIAL PERIOD
It shall in no case exceed 180 days from the first day of the trial, except as otherwise provided
by the Supreme Court.
Requisites before a trial can be put-off on account of the absence of a witness:
1. that the witness is material and appears to the court to be so

2. that the party who applies has been guilty of no neglect
3. that the witnesses can be had at the time to which the trial is deferred and incidentally
that no similar evidence could be obtained
4. that an affidavit showing the existence of the above circumstances must be filed.
Remedies of accused where a prosecuting officer without good cause secures postponements of
the trial of a defendant against his protest beyond a reasonable period of time:
1. mandamus to compel a dismissal of the information
2. if he is restrained of his liberty, by habeas corpus to obtain his freedom.
156 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
The SC adopted the continuous trial system as a mode of judicial fact-finding and adjudication
conducted with speed and dispatch so that trials are held on the scheduled dates without
postponement, the factual issues for trial well-defined at pre-trial and the whole proceedings
terminated and ready for judgment within 90 days from the date of initial hearing, unless for
meritorious reasons an extension is permitted.
The system requires that the Presiding Judge:
1. adhere faithfully to the session hours prescribed by laws;
2. maintain full control of the proceedings; and

3. effectively allocate and use time and court resources to avoid court delays.
The non-appearance of the prosecution at the trial, despite due notice, justified a provisional
dismissal or an absolute dismissal depending upon the circumstances.
SECTION 3. Exclusions
The following periods of delay shall be exclused in computing the time within which trial must
commence:
1. Any period of delay resulting from other proceedings concerning the accused, including
but not limited to the following:
a) Delay resulting from an examination of the physical and mental condition of the
accused;
b) Delay resulting from proceedings with respect to other criminal charges against
the accused;
c) Delay resulting from extra-ordinary remedies against interlocutory orders;
d) Delay resulting from extraordinary prioceedings; provided that the delay does
not exceed thirty (30) days;
e) Delay resulting from orders of inhibition or proceedings relating to change of
venue of cases or transfer from other courts;
f) Delay resulting frim a finding of the existence of a prejudicial question; and
157 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
g) Delay reasonably attributable to any period, not exceeding thirty (30) days,
during which any proceeding concerning the accused is actually under
advisement.
2. Any period of delay resulting from the absence or unavailability of an essential witness;
NOTE: A witness shall be considered absent when his whereabouts are unknown or
cannot be determined with due diligence. He shall be considered unavailable if his
whereabouts kknown but his presence for that trual cannot be obtained with due
diligence.
3. Any period of delay resulting from the mental incompetence or physical inability of the
accused to stand in trial;
4. If the Information is dismissed upon motion of the prosecution and thereafter a charge
is filed against the accused for the same offense, any period of delay from the date the
charge was dismissed to the date the time limitation would commence to run as to the
subsequent charge had there been no previous charge;
5. A reasonable period of delay when the accused is joined for trial with a co-accused over
whom the court has not acquired jurisdiction, or, as to whom the time for trial has not
run and no motion for separate trial has been granted;
6. Any period of delay resulting from a continuance granted by any court motu proprio, or
on motion of either the accused or his counsel, or the prosecutin, if the court granted the
continuance on the basis of its findings set forth in the order that the ends of justice
served by taking such action outweigh the best interest of the public and the accused in
speedy trial.
IMPERIAL VS JOSON
FACTS: As a consequence of the collision between a Fuso six-wheeler truck (owned by
respondent Leticia Pedraja, its alleged registered owner, and respondent Maricel Joson, its
alleged present owner, driven by respondent Giganto with assistance of respondent pahinante
Cubeta) and Isuzu ten-wheeler truck (owned by petitioner Nelson Imperial driven by petitioner
158 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Santos Francisco) who further rammed into a Kia Besta Van, a criminal complaint for Reckless
Imprudence Resulting to Multiple Homicide, Multiple Serious Physical Injuries and Damage to
Property was filed against petitioners Santos Francisco and Noel Imperial on 16 May 2001. On
3 July 2001, a complaint for damages was also filed by petitioners Francisco and Imperial
against respondents Giganto the driver and Cubeta the pahinante of the Fuso six-wheeler truck.
Anchored on the supposed fact that the accident was caused by the recklessness and gross
negligence of respondent Giganto.
The right to speedy trial is considered violated only when the proceeding is attended by
vexatious, capricious and oppressive delays. In this case, far from being vexatious, capricious
and oppressive, the delays entailed by the postponements of the hearings were, to a great
extent, attributable to petitioner Francisco’s extraordinary remedies against the interlocutory
orders issued by the lower court and the assignment of at least three public prosecutors to the
case.
ISSUE: Whether or not delay resulting from extraordinary remedy against interlocutory orders
shall be excluded in the computation of trial time as per sec 3 of rule 119?
HELD: Yes, the delay resulting from extraordinary remedy against interlocutory orders shall
be excluded in the computation of trial time as per sec 3 of rule 119.
Although the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure mandate commencement of trial within 30
days from receipt of the pre-trial order, and the continuous conduct thereof for a period not
exceeding 180 days, Section 3(a)(1) of Rule 119 provides that delays resulting from
extraordinary remedies against interlocutory orders shall be excluded in computing the time
within which trial must commence. In determining the right of an accused to speedy trial,
courts are required to do more than a mathematical computation of the number of
postponements of the scheduled hearings of the case and to give particular regard to the facts
and circumstances peculiar to each case. Based on the foregoing, the Court rejected petitioner
Francisco’s claim that the postponements of the pre-trial conferences before the lower court
violated his right to a speedy trial.
159 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 4. Factors for granting continuance.

PURPOSE: To control the discretion of the judge in the grant of continuance on his instance
or on motion of any party litigant.
SECTION 5.Time limit following an order for new trial.
The trial shall commence within 30 days from the date the order for a new trial becomes final.
SECTION 6. Extended time limit.
— Notwithstanding the provisions of section 1(g), Rule 116 and the preceding section 1,
for the first twelve-calendar-month period following its effectivity on September 15, 1998, the
time limit with respect to the period from arraignment to trial imposed by said provision shall
be one hundred eighty (180) days. For the second twelve-month period, the limit shall be one
hundred twenty (120) days, and for the third twelve-month period, the time limit shall be
eighty (80) days. (sec. 7, cir. 38-98)
STAGE OF WHEN IT MUST BE HELD

PROCEEDING
Arraignment Within 30 days from the date of the court acquires jurisdiction over the person
of the accused
Pre-trial Within 30 days from the date the court acquires jurisdiction of the person of the
accused
Trial GENERAL PERIOD: Within 30 days from receipt of pre-trial order.
EXTENDED PERIOD: Within 80 days from the trial.
160 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Time limit
Under Republic Act No. 8493 the period of arraignment shall be as follows:
 12 months from September 15, 1998 up to September 15, 1999—180 days.

The law provides that the time limit after the 3rd 12 months is 80 days but it did not provide the
time limit after 80 days. Such being the case, the arraignment can be made after 80 days.
SECTION 7. Public attorney's duties where accused is imprisoned.

— If the public attorney assigned to defend a person charged with a crime knows that the
latter is preventively detained, either because he is charged with a bailable crime but has no
means to post bail, or, is charged with a non-bailable crime, or, is serving a term of
imprisonment in any penal institution, it shall be his duty to do the following:
(a) Shall promptly undertake to obtain the presence of the prisoner for trial or cause a
notice to be served on the person having custody of the prisoner requiring such person
to so advise the prisoner of his right to demand trial.
(b) Upon receipt of that notice, the custodian of the prisoner shall promptly advise the
prisoner of the charge and of his right to demand trial. If at anytime thereafter the
prisoner informs his custodian that he demands such trial, the latter shall cause notice to
that effect to sent promptly to the public attorney.
(c) Upon receipt of such notice, the public attorney shall promptly seek to obtain the
presence of the prisoner for trial.
(d) When the custodian of the prisoner receives from the public attorney a properly
supported request for the availability of the prisoner for purposes of trial, the prisoner
shall be made available accordingly. (sec. 12, cir. 38-98)
161 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Public Attorneys and their Duties
These are the attorneys of the Public Attorney’s Office of the Department of Justice who are
assisting the accused not financially capable to have a counsel of their own.
The purpose of this section is for the detained accused who cannot afford a counsel to be
inform of his right to trial and the right of public attorney for the preparation of the trial.
SECTION 8. Sanctions.
— In any case in which private counsel for the accused, the public attorney, or the
prosecutor.
(a) Knowingly allows the case to be set for trial without disclosing that a necessary
witness would be unavailable for trial;
(b) Files a motion solely for delay which he knows is totally frivolous and without
merit;
(c) Makes a statement for the purpose of obtaining continuance which he knows to be
false and which is material to the granting of a continuance; or
(d) Willfully fails to proceed to trial without justification consistent with the provisions
hereof, the court may punish such counsel, attorney, or prosecution, as follows:
(1) By imposing on a counsel privately retained in connection with the defense of an accused, a
fine not exceeding twenty thousand pesos (P20,000.00);
(2) By imposing on any appointed counsel de oficio, public attorney, or prosecutor a fine not
exceeding five thousand pesos (P5,000.00); and
(3) By denying any defense counsel or prosecutor the right to practice before the court trying
the case for a period not exceeding thirty (30) days. The punishment provided for by this
section shall be without prejudice to any appropriate criminal action or other sanction
authorized under these rules. (sec. 13, cir. 38-98)
162 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SANCTIONS: Committing the acts enumerated in this section, the concerned party may be
subject to:
 Criminal sanction
 Administrative sanction
 Contempt of court
SECTION 9. Remedy where accused is not brought to trial within the time limit.
— If the accused is not brought to trial within the time limit required by Section 1(g),
Rule 116 and Section 1, as extended by Section 6 of this rule, the information may be
dismissed on motion of the accused on the ground of denial of his right of speedy trial. The
accused shall have the burden of proving the motion but the prosecution shall have the burden
of going forward with the evidence to establish the exclusion of time under section 3 of this
rule. The dismissal shall be subject to the rules on double jeopardy.
Failure of the accused to move for dismissal prior to trial shall constitute a waiver of the right
to dismiss under this section. (sec. 14, cir. 38-98)
NATURE OF DISMISSAL
The dismissal is subject to double jeopardy.
5. If the dismissal is with prejudice, the case cannot be revived anymore.
6. But if the dismissal is without prejudice, the revival of the case is proper.
DISTINCTION:
Dismissal without prejudice
It allows a new suit to be brought on the same cause of action.

It shows that the judicial act is not intended to be res judicata of the merits of the
controversy.
It terminates the case but the plaintiff has the right to file a new complaint.
Dismissal with prejudice
163 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
It means an adjudication on the merits and final disposition.

It is res adjudicata as to every matter litigated.
SECTION 10. Law on speedy trial not a bar to provision on speedy trial in the
Constitution.
— No provision of law on speedy trial and no rule implementing the same shall be
interpreted as a bar to any charge of denial of the right to speedy trial guaranteed by section
14(2), article III, of the 1987 Constitution. (sec. 15, cir. 38-98)
SUPREMACY OF THE PROVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION
It is expressly provided in this rule that the speedy trial under the constitution must always
prevail in case of conflict with any provision of law or rule.
SECTION 11. Order of Trial
1. The prosecution shall present evidence to prove the charge and, in the proper case, the
civil liability.
2. The accused may present evidence to prove his defense and damages, if any,
arising, from the issuance of a provisional remedy in the case.
3. The prosecution and the defense may, in that order, present rebuttal and sur-rebuttal
evidence unless the court, in furtherance of justice, permits them to present additional
evidence bearing
upon the main issue.
4. Upon admission of evidence of the parties, the case shall be deemed submitted for
decision unless the court directs them to argue orally or to submit written memoranda.
5. When the accused admits the act or omission charged in the complaint or
information but interposes a lawful defense, the order of trial may be modified.
164 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
General Rule: The order in the presentation of evidence must be followed. The accused may
not be required to present his evidence first before the prosecution adduces its own proof.
Exception: Where a reverse procedure was adopted without the objection of the defendant and
such procedure did not prejudice his substantial rights, the defects is not a reversible error.
A departure from the order of the trial is not reversible error as where it was agreed upon or
not seasonably objected to, but not where the change in the order of the trial was timely
objected by the defense.
Where the order of the trial set forth under this Section was not followed by the court to the
extent of denying the prosecution an opportunity to present its evidence, the judgment is a
nullity.
Reverse trial
When the accused admits the act or omission charged in the Complaint/Information but
interposes a lawful defense, the trial court may allow the accused to present his defense first
and thereafter give the prosecution the opportunity to present its rebuttal evidence.
Refusal of the trial court to reverse the order of trial upon demand of the accused who pleads
self-defense as a defense is not reversible error.
Note: Trial of an accessory can proceed without awaiting the result of the separate charge
against the principal. They are distinct from each other.
SECTION 12: Application for Examination of Witness for Accused Before Trial
The accused may have his witness examined conditionally in his behalf before trial upon
motion with notice to all other parties.
The motion must state:
165 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
1. Name and residence of witness;
2. Substance of testimony; and
3. Witness is so sick to afford reasonable ground to believe that he will not be able to attend the
trial or resides more than one hundred (100) kilometers and has no means to attend the same,
or other similar circumstances exist that would make him unavailable or prevent him from
attending trial.
SECTION 13: Examination of Defense Witness; How Made
If the court is satisfied that the examination of witness is necessary as provided in Section 4, an
order shall be made and a copy served on the fiscal at least three (3) days before the scheduled
examination.
Who should make the examination?
The examination shall be taken before any judge or if not practicable, any member of the Bar
in good standing designated by the trial court, or by a lower court designated by a court of
superior jurisdiction which issued the order. The examination shall proceed even in the absence
of the prosecutor provided he was duly notified.
Deposition
It is the testimony of a witness taken upon oral questions or written interrogatories, in open
court, but in pursuance of a commission to take testimony issued by a court, or under a general
law or court rule on the subject, and reduced to writing and duly authenticated, and intended to
be used in preparation and upon the trial of a civil or criminal prosecution.
166 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 14: Bail to secure appearance of material witness
If the court is satisfied, upon proof or oath, that a material witness will not testify when so
required, it may on motion of either party order the witness to post bail in sum as may be
deemed proper.
Should the witness refuse to post such bail as required, the court may commit him to prison
until he complies or is legally discharged after his testimony has been taken.
SECTION 15: Examination of witness for the Prosecution
Conditional Examination of Witness
1. The witness for the prosecution may be conditionally examined by the court where the case
is pending if said witness is:
a. Too sick to appear at the trial; or
b. Has to leave the Philippines with no definite date of return.
2. Such examination should be in the presence of the accused or in his absence after reasonable
notice to attend the examination has been served on him.
3. Examination of child witness is tackled under the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness
which took effect on December 15, 2000. (A.M. 004-07-SC)
SECTION 16. Trial of several accused.

— When two or more accused are jointly charged with any offense, they shall be tried
jointly unless the court, in its discretion and upon motion of the prosecutor or any accused,
orders separate trial for one or more accused. (8a)
167 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
People vs. Go, 88 Phil. 203, No. L-1527 February 27, 1951>>>
SEPARATE TRIAL, DlSCRETIONARY WITH TRIAL COURT; DENIAL JUSTIFIED

WHEN ACCUSED IS NOT SUBSTANTIALLY PREJUDICED.—As a matter of law the
granting of a separate trial when two or more defendants are jointly charged with an offense is
discretionary with the trial court. No substantial prejudice was caused by the joint trial in this
case, it apearing that, despite claim to the contrary, defendants did not as a matter of fact put up
antagonistic defenses.
Talino vs. Sandiganbayan, 148 SCRA 598, Nos. L-75511-14 March 16, 1987>>>
Grant of separate trials rests in the sound discretion of the court. It should be done before the
prosecution starts presenting evidence, although it may also be granted after the prosecution
has rested its case where there are antagonisms in defenses of several accused.—The grant of a
separate trial rests in the sound discretion of the court and is not a matter of right to the
accused, especially where, as in this case, it is sought after the presentation of the evidence of
the prosecution. While it is true that Rule 119, Section 8, of the Rules of Court does not specify
when the motion for such a trial should be filed, we have held in several cases that this should
be done before the prosecution commences presenting its evidence, although, as an exception,
the motion may be granted later, even af ter the prosecution shall have rested, where there
appears to be an antagonism in the respective defenses of the accused. In such an event, the
evidence in chief of the prosecution shall remain on record against all the accused, with right of
rebuttal on the part of the fiscal in the separate trial of the other accused.
People vs. Carpio, 68 Phil. 490, No. 46109 September 22, 1939>>>
SEPARATE TRIALS; DUTY OF THE FISCAL TO PRESENT ALL THE EVIDENCE FOR
THE PROSECUTION AT EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THEM; EXCEPTION.—When the
case against all of the accused was called for trial, P. M. and M. A. asked for separate trial. The
court granted it with the notice that the evidence to be presented by the prosecution against the
former would not be repeated at the trial to be held in connection with the latter, to which
168 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
effect it enjoined both accused, together with their attorneys, to be present at the trial against P.
M. and said attorneys to cross-examine all the witnesses for the prosecution. None of the
attorneys for these two accused protested against the condition or limitation imposed by the
court and at the trial held, the attorney for A. cross-examined the witnesses presented by the
prosecution. It is alleged in the third assignment of error that the trial held against A. was
illegal and that the court could not convict him upon the evidence presented by the prosecution
during the trial held against P. M., on the ground that said evidence was not actually presented
at the trial conducted against him. The right of two or more accused in a criminal case to be
tried separately is essential and cannot be denied by the court, according to section 33 of
General Orders No. 58 (U. S. vs. Sta. Ana, 4 Phil., 421; U. S. vs. Morales, 8 Phil., 300; U. S.
vs. Lim Buanco, 14 Phil., 472; U. S. vs. Raymundo, 14 Phil., 416; U. S. vs. Remigio, 35 Phil.,
719; U. S. vs. Bermejo, 46 Phil., 252; U. S. vs. Torres, 62 Phil., 942). When a separate trial is
demanded and granted, it is the duty of the prosecution to repeat and produce all its evidence at
each and every trial, unless it had been agreed by the parties that the evidence for the
prosecution would not have to be repeated at the second trial and all the accused had been
present during the presentation of the evidence for the prosecution and their attorneys had had
the opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses for the prosecution, who had testified. In the
case under consideration, the substantial right of the accused-appellant to be tried separately
has not been violated because his attorney did not object to the condition imposed by the court,
and the appellant was present at the first trial where the witnesses for the prosecution were
presented and his attorney had ample opportunity to cross-examine them. For these reasons we
hold that the assignment of error is without merit.
People vs. Torres, 62 Phil. 942, No. 43406 January 30, 1936 citing (U. S. vs. Morales, 8
Phil., 300.)
SEPARATE TRIAL.—It is not a reversible error to deny an application for a separate trial
made after two witnesses for the prosecution had already testified; the proper time for making
such application being any time before the commencement of the trial.
169 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PEOPLE VS DE GRANO G.R. NO. 167710

FACTS: On November 28, 1991, an Information for murder was filed with the RTC against
Joven de Grano (Joven), Armando de Grano (Armando), and Estanislao Lacaba (Estanislao),
together with their co-accused Leonides Landicho (Leonides), Domingo Landicho (Domingo),
and Leonardo Genil (Leonardo), who were at large. Duly arraigned, Joven, Armando, and
Estanislao pleaded “not guilty” to the crime as charged; while their co-accused Leonides,
Leonardo, and Domingo remained at-large. Thereafter, respondents filed a motion for bail
contending that the prosecution’s evidence was not strong. RTC found the accused guilty of the
offenses charged. In 2004 an order was issued that modified the previous decision, from
murder the case was downgraded to homicide. However, Joven, Armando, and Domingo was
not present during promulgation. They maintained that while they were not present during the
promulgation of the RTC Decision, Estanislao, who was under police custody, attended the
promulgation. Thus according to them, when they filed their Joint Motion for Reconsideration,
which included that of Estanislao, the RTC was not deprived of its authority to resolve the joint
motion.
ISSUE#1: Whether or not RTC erred in taking cognizance of the joint motion for
reconsideration despite the absence of the other accused during the promulgation of judgment?
HELD#1: Yes. Section 14(2), Article III of the Constitution, authorizing trials in absentia,
allows the accused to be absent at the trial but not at certain stages of the proceedings, to wit:
(a) at arraignment and plea, whether of innocence or of guilt; (b) during trial, whenever
necessary for identification purposes; and (c) at the promulgation of sentence, unless it is for a
light offense, in which case, the accused may appear by counsel or representative. At such
stages of the proceedings, his presence is required and cannot be waived. When the Decision
dated April 25, 2002 was promulgated, only Estanislao Lacaba was present. Subsequently
thereafter, without surrendering and explaining the reasons for their absence, Joven, Armando,
and Domingo joined Estanislao in their Joint Motion for Reconsideration. In blatant disregard
of the Rules, the RTC not only failed to cause the arrest of the respondents who were at large,
it also took cognizance of the joint motion.
ISSUE#2: Whether or not Section 6 Rule 120 promulgation of judgment is applicable?
HELD#2: Yes, Section 6 Rule 120 is applicable. Failure to appear at the promulgation of the
accused who failed to appear without justifiable cause shall lose the remedies available in the
Rules against the judgment. However, within 15 days from promulgation of judgment, the
accused may surrender and file a motion for leave of court to avail of these remedies. He shall
state in his motion the reasons for his absence at the scheduled promulgation, and if he proves
that his absence was for a justifiable cause, he shall be allowed to avail of said remedies within
15 days from notice.
170 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 17. Discharge of accused to be state witness. — When two or more persons are
jointly charged with the commission of any offense, upon motion of the prosecution before
resting its case, the court may direct one or more of the accused to be discharged with their
consent so that they may be witnesses for the state when, after requiring the prosecution to
present evidence and the sworn statement of each proposed state witness at a hearing in support
of the discharge, the court is satisfied that:
(a) There is absolute necessity for the testimony of the accused whose discharge is
requested;
(b) The is no other direct evidence available for the proper prosecution of the offense
committed, except the testimony of said accused;
(c) The testimony of said accused can be substantially corroborated in its material
points;
(d) Said accused does not appear to be the most guilty; and
(e) Said accused has not at any time been convicted of any offense involving moral
turpitude.
Evidence adduced in support of the discharge shall automatically form part of the trial. If the
court denies the motion for discharge of the accused as state witness, his sworn statement shall
be inadmissible in evidence. (9a)
SALVANERA VS PEOPLE 523 SCRA 147

FACTS: Rimberto Salvanera, Feliciano Abutin and Domingo Tampelix were charged with
conspiracy of murder; Salvanera as the mastermind. The prosecution moved for the discharge
of Abutin and Tampelix from the information to serve as State witnesses. However, the trial
court denied the prosecution’s motion.
Thereafter, the prosecution appealed to the CA, contending that the trial court committed a
grave abuse of discretion when it denied the motion for discharge, as the testimonies of
accused Abutin and Tampelix are essential to establish that Salvenera masterminded the
murder. The CA ruled in favor of the prosecution. Hence, the appeal.
171 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
ISSUE: Whether the CA committed serious error when it ruled that the “substantial
corroboration” requirement under Sec. 17, Rule 119 of the Rules of Court was satisfied by the
prosecution to make as state witness Abutin and Tampelix?
HELD: No. The CA did not commit an error in its judgment.
In the discharge of an accused, in order that he may be a State witness, the following condition
must be present, namely: 1) Two or more accused are jointly charged with the commission of
an offense; 2) The motion for discharged is filed by the prosecution before it rests its case; 3)
The prosecution is required to present evidence and the sworn statement of each proposed State
witness at a hearing in support of the discharge; 4) The accused gives his consent to be a State
witness; and 5) The trial court is satisfied that: a.) There is absolute necessity for the testimony
of the accused; b.) There is no other direct evidence available for the proper prosecution of the
offense committed; c.) The testimony of said accused can be substantially corroborated in its
material points; d.) Said accused does not appear to be the most guilty; e.) Said accused has not
at any time been convicted of any offense involving moral turpitude. Hence petition denied.
JIMENEZ VS PEOPLE 735 SCRA 596

FACTS: Manuel A. Montero confessed his participation in the killing of Ruby Rose
Barrameda naming Manuel J. Jimenez and several others as co-conspirators. His statements
detailed where the alleged steel casing containing the body of Ruby Rose was dumped, led to
the recovery of a cadaver near the place which he pointed. Montero filed a motion for
discharge as a state witness for the prosecution, to which Jimenez opposed. The motion to
discharge was granted by Judge Zaldy B. Docena stating that the prosecution had presented
clear, satisfactory and convincing evidence showing compliance with the requisites of granting
the said motion. Jimenez opposed Judge Docena’s ruling averring that the Judge committed
grave abuse of discretion in granting the motion to discharge because: (1) the requirements for
granting a motion were not properly complied; (2) there is no absolute necessity of the
testimony of Montero; (3) Montero’s testimony do not corroborate with the prosecution’s
evidence; (4) and Montero is favored as a state witness though he appears to be the most guilty.
172 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
ISSUE: Did Judge Docena gravely abuse his discretion when he granted Montero as a state
witness pursuant to Section 17 of Rule 119 of the Rules of Court?
HELD: No, Judge Docena did not gravely abuse his discretion when he granted the motion to
discharge Montero as a state witness pursuant to Section 17 of Rule 119 of the Rules of Court.
According to Judge Docena which the Court agree the crime would have remained
undiscovered and unsolved had it not been for Montero’s extrajudicial confession that narrated
in detail the manner of the abduction and subsequent murder of Ruby Rose. As the crime was
committed in secret, only one of the co-conspirators, such as Montero, could give direct
evidence identifying the other co-conspirators. Judge Docena further ruled that Montero is
qualified to be discharged as a state witness as he does not appear to be the most guilty
although he is a principal by direct participation. The principals by inducement are more guilty
because, without their orders, the crime would not have been committed. Finally, Montero has
not been convicted of any crime involving moral turpitude.
SECTION 18. Discharge of accused operates as acquittal.

— The order indicated in the preceding section shall amount to an acquittal of the
discharged accused and shall be a bar to future prosecution for the same offense, unless the
accused fails or refuses to testify against his co-accused in accordance with his sworn
statement constituting the basis for the discharge. (10a)
PEOPLE VS TAN 625 SCRA 388

FACTS: Two separate information were filed against respondent Tan for violation of the
Revised Securities Act, when he failed to file with SEC the amount of all BWRC (Best World
Resources Corporation) shares within 10 days after he became such beneficial owner. During
the trial, petitioner made its formal offer of evidence. RTC admitted the pieces of evidence, but
denied admission of all other exhibits. Tan filed Motion for Leave to File Demurrer to
Evidence. Petitioner filed its Opposition to which Tan filed a Reply. In the end, RTC issued an
order granting Tan’s Demurrer to Evidence. Petitioner filed a petition before the CA assailing
173 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
the order of RTC which granted Tan’s motion. CA denied, ruling that the dismissal of a
criminal action by the grant of a Demurrer to Evidence is one on the merits and operates as an
acquittal, for which reason, the prosecution cannot appeal therefrom as it would place the
accused in double jeopardy. Hence, the appeal.
ISSUE: Whether or not the court erred in granting Tan’s Demurrer to Evidence (Section 23
Rule 119) ?
HELD: No, The demurrer to evidence in criminal cases, such as the one at bar, is “filed after
the prosecution had rested its case,” and when the same is granted, it calls “for an appreciation
of the evidence adduced by the prosecution and its sufficiency to warrant conviction beyond
reasonable doubt, resulting in a dismissal of the case on the merits, tantamount to an acquittal
of the accused.” Such dismissal of a criminal case by the grant of demurrer to evidence may
not be appealed, for to do so would be to place the accused in double jeopardy. The verdict
being one of acquittal, the case ends there.
The only instance when double jeopardy will not attach is when the trial court acted with grave
abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, which is not present in this
case. RTC did not violate petitioner’s right to due process as the petitioner was given more
than ample opportunity to present its case which led to grant of Tan’s demurrer. As such RTC
did not abuse its discretion in the manner it conducted the proceedings of the trial, as well as its
grant of respondent’s demurrer to evidence.
SECTION 19. When mistake has been made in charging the proper offense.
— When it becomes manifest at any time before judgment that a mistake has been made
in charging the proper offense and the accused cannot be convicted of the offense charged or
any other offense necessarily included therein, the accused shall not be discharged if there
appears good cause to detain him. In such case, the court shall commit the accused to answer
for the proper offense and dismiss the original case upon the filing of the proper information.
(11a)
174 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
>>Section 14. Rule 110 Amendment or substitution. — A complaint or information may

be amended, in form or in substance, without leave of court, at any time before the accused
enters his plea. After the plea and during the trial, a formal amendment may only be made with
leave of court and when it can be done without causing prejudice to the rights of the accused.
However, any amendment before plea, which downgrades the nature of the offense
charged in or excludes any accused from the complaint or information, can be made only upon
motion by the prosecutor, with notice to the offended party and with leave of court. The court
shall state its reasons in resolving the motion and copies of its order shall be furnished all
parties, especially the offended party.
If it appears at any time before judgment that a mistake has been made in charging the
proper offense, the court shall dismiss the original complaint or information upon the filing of
a new one charging the proper offense in accordance with section 19, Rule 119, provided the
accused shall not be placed in double jeopardy. The court may require the witnesses to give
bail for their appearance at the trial.
ASISTIO VS PEOPLE 602 SCRA 760

FACTS: The subject matter of this case are the unreported sales profits of Coca-Cola products
by Jocelyn Asistio y Consino, who was charged with violation of Section 46 of the
Cooperative Code of the Philippines (Republic Act No. [RA] 6938). Allegedly, Asistio
defrauded the Cooperative and its members for three (3) years. Prosecution presented
documentary evidence from Coca cola, including the records of actual deliveries and sales, and
the financial statements prepared by Asistio. Trial ensued and after the presentation and offer
of evidence by the prosecution, Asistio moved to dismiss the case by way of Demurrer to
Evidence with prior leave of court. In this case, the RTC granted the demurrer to evidence. and
dismissed the case not for insufficiency of evidence, but for lack of jurisdiction over the
offense charged.
Petitioner’s another argument that the prosecution of her case before the RTC for violation of
Section 46 of RA 6938 in Criminal Case No. 07-197750 is barred by res judicata because the
MeTC of Manila, Branch 22, in a Resolution dated August 13, 2012, granted her demurrer to
175 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
evidence and acquitted her in a criminal case for falsification of private document in Criminal
Case No. 370119-20-CR. Petitioner points out that the private complainants the officers and
directors of the Cooperative and the subject unreported sales profits of Coca-Cola products of
both cases are the same, and that the case for violation of Section 46 of RA 6938 is actually
and necessarily included in the case for falsification of private documents.
ISSUE#1) Whether or not RTC decided the case on the merit therefore operate as an acquittal?
HELD#1) The RTC did not decide the case on the merits, let alone resolve the issue of
petitioner’s guilt or innocence based on the evidence proffered by the prosecution. In this case,
the RTC granted the demurrer to evidence dismissed the case not for insufficiency of evidence,
but for lack of jurisdiction over the offense charged. The RTC Order of dismissal does not
operate as an acquittal, hence, may still be subject to ordinary appeal under Rule 41 of the
Rules of Court. As aptly noted by the CA.
ISSUE#2) Whether or not the offense charged in the information for Section 46 of RA 6938
necessarily includes or is necessarily included in a crime for falsification of private document
under Article 172 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended (RPC)?
HELD#2) SC said No, The test to determine whether an offense necessarily includes or is
necessarily included in the other is provided under Section 5, Rule 120 of the Rules of Court.
There is nothing common or similar between the essential elements of the crimes of
falsification of private document under Article 172(2) of the RPC and that of violation of
Section 46 of RA 6938, as alleged in the Information filed against petitioner. As neither of the
said crimes can be said to necessarily include or is necessarily included in the other. The
essential elements of violation of Section 46 of RA 6938 are (1) that the offender is a director,
officer or committee member; and (2) that the offender willfully and knowingly (a) votes for or
assents to patently unlawful acts; (b) is guilty of gross negligence or bad faith in directing the
affairs of the cooperative; or (c) acquires any personal or pecuniary interest in conflict with
their duty as such directors, officers or committee member. The elements of falsification of
private document under Article 172, paragraph 2 of the RPC are: (1) that the offender
committed any of the acts of falsification, except those in paragraph 7, Article 171; (2) that the
falsification was committed in any private document; and (3) that the falsification caused
176 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
damage to a third party or at least the falsification was committed with intent to cause such
damage.
ISSUE#3) Whether or not the remand of the criminal case to the RTC violated her right
against double jeopardy due to its earlier dismissal on the ground of lack of jurisdiction?
HELD#3) No, the Court rules in the negative and upholds the CA in ruling that the dismissal
having been granted upon petitioner’s instance, double jeopardy did not attach. The requisites
that must be present for double jeopardy to attach are: (a) a valid complaint or information; (b)
a court of competent jurisdiction; (c) the accused has pleaded to the charge; and (d) the accused
has been convicted or acquitted or the case dismissed or terminated without the express
consent of the accused.
BANGAYAN JR VS BANGAYAN 659 SCRA 590

FACTS: Sally Go-Bangayan filed a complaint for bigamy against Benjamin Bangayan and
Resally Delfin. Later, Sally learned that Benjamin, Jr. had taken Resally as his concubine
whom he subsequently married under the false name, “Benjamin Z. Sojayco.” Furthermore,
Sally discovered that on September 10, 1973, Benjamin, Jr. also married a certain Azucena
Alegre in Caloocan City. After pleading not guilty, Benjamin and Resally both filed their
motions for leave to file a demurrer to evidence. Benjamin, Jr. filed his Demurrer to Evidence,
praying that the criminal case for bigamy against him be dismissed for failure of the
prosecution to present sufficient evidence of his guilt. His plea was anchored on two main
arguments: (1) he was not legally married to Sally Go because of the existence of his prior
marriage to Azucena; and (2) the prosecution was unable to show that he and the “Benjamin Z.
Sojayco Jr.,” who married Resally, were one and the same person.
RTC dismissed the criminal case against Benjamin, Jr. and Resally for insufficiency of
evidence. Sally Go elevated the case to the CA via a petition for certiorari. The CA
promulgated its Decision granting her petition and ordering the remand of the case to the RTC
for further proceedings. The CA held that the following pieces of evidence presented by the
prosecution were sufficient to deny the demurrer to evidence: (1) the existence of three
marriages of Benjamin, Jr. to Azucena, Sally Go and Resally; (2) the letters and love notes
177 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
from Resally to Benjamin, Jr.; (3) the admission of Benjamin, Jr. as regards his marriage to
Sally Go and Azucena; and (4) Benjamin, Jr.’s admission that he and Resally were in some
kind of a relationship. CA further stated that Benjamin, Jr. was mistaken in claiming that he
could not be guilty of bigamy because his marriage to Sally Go was null and void in light of
the fact that he was already married to Azucena. A judicial declaration of nullity was required
in order for him to be able to use the nullity of his marriage as a defense in a bigamy charge.
ISSUE: Whether or not petitioners’ right against double jeopardy was violated by the CA
when it reversed the RTC Order dismissing the criminal case against them?
HELD: Yes, Double Jeopardy had already set-in. Even if the trial court had incorrectly
overlooked the evidence against the petitioners, it only committed an error of judgment, and
not one of jurisdiction, which could not be rectified by a petition for certiorari because double
jeopardy had already set in.
A demurrer to evidence is filed after the prosecution has rested its case and the trial court is
required to evaluate whether the evidence presented by the prosecution is sufficient enough to
warrant the conviction of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. If the court finds that the
evidence is not sufficient and grants the demurrer to evidence, such dismissal of the case is one
on the merits, which is equivalent to the acquittal of the accused. Well-established is the rule
that the Court cannot review an order granting the demurrer to evidence and acquitting the
accused on the ground of insufficiency of evidence because to do so will place the accused in
double jeopardy. The only instance when the accused can be barred from invoking his right
against double jeopardy is when it can be demonstrated that the trial court acted with grave
abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, such as where the prosecution
was not allowed the opportunity to make its case against the accused or where the trial was a
sham. In this case, all four elements of double jeopardy are doubtless present. Valid
information for the crime of bigamy was filed against the petitioners, resulting in the institution
of a criminal case against them before the proper court. They pleaded not guilty to the charges
against them and subsequently, the case was dismissed after the prosecution had rested its case.
Therefore, the CA erred in reversing the trial court’s order dismissing the case against the
petitioners because it placed them in double jeopardy. An acquittal by virtue of a demurrer to
178 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
evidence is not appealable because it will place the accused in double jeopardy. However, it
may be subject to review only by a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court
showing that the trial court committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction or a denial of due process.
SECTION 20. Appointment of acting prosecutor.

— When a prosecutor, his assistant or deputy is disqualified to act due to any of the
grounds stated in section 1 of Rule 137 or for any other reasons, the judge or the prosecutor
shall communicate with the Secretary of Justice in order that the latter may appoint an acting
prosecutor.
Par. 1 of section 1 of rule 137 applies also as legal grounds for challenging a public
prosecutor’s just replace term judge with prosecutor below>>
Disqualification of judges. — No judge or judicial officer shall sit in any case
 in which he, or his wife or child, is pecuniarily interested as heir, legatee, creditor or
otherwise,
 or in which he is related to either party within the sixth degree of consanguinity or
affinity,
 or to counsel within the fourth degree, computed according to the rules of the civil law,
 or in which he has been executor, administrator, guardian, trustee or counsel,
 or in which he has been presided in any inferior court when his ruling or decision is the
subject of review, without the written consent of all parties in interest, signed by them
and entered upon the record.
A judge may, in the exercise of his sound discretion, disqualify himself from sitting in a case,
for just or valid reasons other than those mentioned above
179 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 21. Exclusion of the public.

GENERAL RULE: THE ACCUSED HAS THE RIGHT TO A PUBLIC TRIAL AND UNDER
ORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES, THE COURT MAY NOT CLOSE THE DOOR OF THE COURTROOM
TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC.
EXCEPTION: Where the evidence to be produced during the trial is of such character as to be
offensive to decency or public morals, the court may motu propio excludes the public from the
courtroom.
SECTION 22. Consolidation of trials of related offenses.

This contemplates a situation where separate informations are filed:
 for offenses founded on the same facts;

 for offenses which form part of a series of offenses of similar character
SECTION 23. Demurrer to evidence.

- After the prosecution rests its case, the court may dismiss the action on the
ground of insufficiency of evidence:
 on its own initiative after giving the prosecution the opportunity to be heard; or
 upon demurrer to evidence filed by the accused with or without leave of court.
The arrest rule allows the accused in a criminal case to present evidence even after a motion to
dismiss PROVIDED the demurrer was made with the express consent of the court.
The filing of the motion to dismiss WITHOUT leave of court results in the submission of the
case for decision on the basis of the evidence on record and does not lie from such order
denying the motion to dismiss.
If said motion to dismiss is sustained, such dismissal being on the merits is equivalent to an
acquittal, hence the prosecution cannot appeal as it would place the accused in double
jeopardy.
180 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
An order denying a demurrer to evidence being interlocutory is NOT APPEALABLE.
VDA DE MANGUERRA VS RISOS 563 SCRA 499

FACTS: On November 4, 1999, respondents (Risos, et. al.) were charged with Estafa through
Falsification of Public Document before the RTC of Cebu City, Branch 19, through a criminal
information dated October 27, 1999, which was subsequently amended on November 18, 1999.
The case, arose from the falsification of a deed of real estate mortgage allegedly committed by
respondents where they made it appear that petitioner (Concepcion De Manguerra), the owner
of the mortgaged property known as the Gorordo property, affixed her signature to the
document. Concepcion who was a resident of Cebu City, while on vacation in Manila, was
unexpectedly confined at the Makati Medical Center due to upper gastro-intestinal bleeding;
and was advised to stay in Manila for further treatment. The counsel of Concepcion filed a
motion to take the latter’s deposition due to her weak physical condition and old age, which
limited her freedom of mobility. The RTC of Cebu granted the motion and directed that
Concepcions’ deposition be taken before the Clerk of Court of Makati City. After several
motions for change of venue of the deposition-taking, Concepcion’s deposition was finally
taken on March 9, 2001 at her residence.
ISSUE: Whether or not Rule 23 (Civil Procedure) of or Rule 119 (Criminal Procedure) apply
to the case at bar?
HELD: Rule 119 applies to the case at bar. It is thus required that the conditional examination
be made before the court where the case is pending. It is also necessary that the accused be
notified, so that he can attend the examination, subject to his right to waive the same after
reasonable notice. As to the manner of examination, the Rules mandate that it be conducted in
the same manner as an examination during trial, that is, through question and answer.
It is true that Section 3, Rule 1 of the Rules of Court provides that the rules of civil procedure
apply to all actions, civil or criminal, and special proceedings. In effect, it says that the rules of
civil procedure have suppletory application to criminal cases. However, it is likewise true that
the criminal proceedings are primarily governed by the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure.
Considering that Rule 119 adequately and squarely covers the situation in the instant case, we
find no cogent reason to apply Rule 23 suppletorily or otherwise.
181 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
CABADOR VS PEOPLE 602 SCRA 760

FACTS: On June 23, 2000 the public prosecutor accused petitioner Antonio Cabador before
the RTC of Quezon City in Criminal Case Q-00-93291 of murdering, in conspiracy with
others, Atty. Jun N. Valerio. On November 9, 2001, the accused was arrested and subsequently
brought to the Quezon City jail through a commitment order dated November 21, 2001 where
he had been detained during the course of this case. On February 13, 2006, after presenting
only five witnesses over five years of intermittent trial, the RTC declared at an end the
prosecution’s presentation of evidence and required the prosecution to make a written or
formal offer of its documentary evidence within 15 days from notice. But the public prosecutor
asked for three extensions of time, the last of which was to end on July 28, 2006. Still, the
prosecution did not make the required written offer. On August 1, 2006 petitioner Cabador
filed a motion to dismiss the case, complaining of a turtle-paced proceeding in the case since
his arrest and detention in 2001 and invoking his right to a speedy trial. Further, he claimed
that in the circumstances, the trial court could not consider any evidence against him that had
not been formally offered. He also pointed out that the prosecution witnesses did not have
knowledge of his alleged part in the crime charged. Unknown to petitioner Cabador, however,
four days earlier or on July 28, 2006 the prosecution asked the RTC for another extension of
the period for its formal offer, which offer it eventually made on August 1, 2006, the day
Cabador filed his motion to dismiss. On August 31, 2006 the RTC issued an Order treating
petitioner Cabador’s August 1, 2006 motion to dismiss as a demurrer to evidence. And, since
he filed his motion without leave of court, the RTC declared him to have waived his right to
present evidence in his defense. The trial court deemed the case submitted for decision insofar
as he was concerned. Cabador filed a motion for reconsideration of this Order but the RTC
denied it on February 19, 2007. Cabador questioned the RTC’s actions before the CA but on
August 4, 2008 the latter denied his petition and affirmed the lower court’s actions. With the
CA’s denial of his motion for reconsideration, on October 28, 2008 petitioner came to this
Court via a petition for review on certiorari.
182 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
ISSUE: Whether or not petitioner Cabador’s motion to dismiss on the ground of violation of
his right to speedy trial (Rule 115 Sec. 1 Par. h) before the trial court was in fact a demurrer to
evidence (Rule 119 Sec. 23) filed without leave of court, with the result that he effectively
waived his right to present evidence in his defense and submit the case for decision insofar as
he was concerned?
HELD: Supreme Court finds that petitioner Cabador filed a motion to dismiss on the ground of
violation of his right to speedy trial, not a demurrer to evidence. This Court held in Enojas, Jr.
v. Commission on Elections, 283 SCRA 229 (1997), that, to determine whether the pleading
filed is a demurer to evidence or a motion to dismiss, the Court must consider (1) the
allegations in it made in good faith; (2) the stage of the proceeding at which it is filed; and (3)
the primary objective of the party filing it.
In criminal cases, a motion to dismiss may be filed on the ground of denial of the accused’s
right to speedy trial. This denial is characterized by unreasonable, vexatious, and oppressive
delays without fault of the accused, or by unjustified postponements that unreasonably
prolonged the trial. It can be said that petitioner Cabador took pains to point out how trial in the
case had painfully dragged on for years. The gaps between proceedings were long, with
hearings often postponed because of the prosecutors’ absence. This was further compounded,
Cabador said, by the prosecutions repeated motions for extension of time to file its formal offer
and its failure to file it within such time. Cabador then invoked his right to speedy trial. But the
RTC and the CA simply chose to ignore these extensive averments and altogether treated
Cabador’s motion as a demurrer to evidence. The fact is that Cabador did not even bother to do
what is so fundamental in any demurrer and the prosecution was not yet deemed to have rested
its case on that date. He did not state what evidence the prosecution had presented against him
to show in what respects such evidence failed to meet the elements of the crime charged. His
so-called demurrer did not touch on any particular testimony of even one witness. He cited no
documentary exhibit. Thus, the petitioner’s motion to dismiss cannot be treated as a demurrer
to evidence.
183 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PEOPLE VS. SANDIGANBAYAN 645 SCRA 726

FACTS: Vice Mayor Manuel Barcenas of Toledo City in Cebu was charged with violation of
Sec. 89 PD 1445 (SECTION 89. Limitations on Cash Advance. — No cash advance shall be
given unless for a legally authorized specific purpose. A cash advance shall be reported on
and liquidated as soon as the purpose for which it was given has been served) before
Sandiganbayan for failure to liquidate cash advances amounting to P61,765.00 Philippine
Currency, despite demands to the damage and prejudice of government. He was arraigned for
which he pleaded not guilty. Prosecution presented lone witness COA State Auditor Villad
(COA Circular No. 90-331 or the “Rules and Regulations on the Granting, Utilization and
Liquidation of Cash Advances” which implemented Section 89 of P.D. No. 1445). Thereafter,
prosecution filed its formal offer of evidence and rested its case. Barcenas filed motion for
leave to file demurrer to evidence pursuant to Rule 119 Sec. 23. Sandiganbayan granted the
motion on ground that prosecution failed to prove that government suffered any damage from
Barcenas non-liquidation of subject cash advance.
ISSUE: Whether or not Sandiganbayan acted with grave abuse of discretion when it granted
the motion of demurrer to evidence pursuant to Rule 119 Sec. 23 on ground that prosecution
failed to prove that government suffered any damage from Barcenas non-liquidation of subject
cash advance?
HELD: No, Actual damage to government arising from non-liquidation of cash advance is not
an essential element. Instead, mere failure to timely liquidate is the gravamen of the offense.
Even if Sandiganbayan proceeded from an erroneous interpretation of law, the error committed
was an error of judgment and not of jurisdiction. The error committed is of such nature that can
no longer be rectified on appeal by prosecution because it would place accused in double
jeopardy. Such error cannot be corrected because double jeopardy had already set in.
PEOPLE VS JOSE GO 732 SCRA 216

FACTS: On October 14, 1998, the Monetary Board of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas issued
a Resolution ordering the closure of the Orient Commercial Banking Corporation ( OCBC )
and placing such bank under receivership of the Phil. Deposit Insurance Corporation ( PDIC ).
184 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PDIC took all the assets and liabilities of OCBC. PDIC began collecting OCBC’s due loans by
sending demand letters from the borrowers. Among these borrowers are Timmy’s Inc. and Asia
Textile Mills, Inc. which appeared to have loan in the amount of P10 million each. Both
Corporation denied the allegation. Because of this, the PDIC conducted investigation and
found out that the loans purported for Timmy’s Inc. and Asia Textile Mills, Inc. were released
in the form of manager’s check deposited in the account of the private respondents JOSE C.
GO, AIDA C. DELA ROSA, and FELECITAS D. NECOMEDES.
PDIC filed two counts of Estafa thru falsification of Commercial Documents against
the private respondents. Upon arraignment, accused pleaded not guilty. After the presentation
of all of the prosecutor’s evidence, the private respondents filed a Motion for Leave to File
Demurrer to Evidence and a Motion for Voluntary inhibition. The presiding judge granted
private respondents’ Motion for voluntary inhibition an ordered the case to be re-raffled to
another branch. Respondent judge grant the Motion for Leave to File Demurrer of Evidence
praying for the dismissal of the criminal cases instituted against them due to the failure of the
prosecution to establish their guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The prosecution through the
Office of the Solicitor General filed a certiorari before the Court of Appeals but was also
denied.
ISSUE: Whether or not the CA erred in affirming the decision of RTC judge who erred in
granting the Motion for Leave to File Demurrer of Evidence?
HELD: Yes, CA grossly erred in affirming the trial court’s Order granting the respondent’s
demurrer, which order was patently null and void for having issued with grave abuse of
discretion and manifest irregularity, thus causing substantial injury to the banking industry and
public interest. The Court finds that the prosecution has presented competent evidence to
sustain the indictment for the crime of estafa through falsification of commercial documents
and respondent appear to be the perpetrators thereof. What the trial and appellate courts
disregarded, however is that the OCBC funds ended up in the personal bank account of
respondent Go, and were used to fund his personal checks, even as he was not entitled thereto.
These if not rebutted are indicative of estafa. Hence, the Petition is GRANTED. The
September 30, 2009 Decision and January 22, 2010 Resolution of the Court of Appeals are
185 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The July 2, 2007 and October 19, 2007 Orders of the Regional
Trial Court of Manila, Branch 49 in Criminal Case Nos. 00187318 and 00-187319 are declared
null and void, and the said cases are ordered REINSTATED for the continuation of
proceedings.
SECTION 24. Reopening.

At any time BEFORE finality of the judgment of conviction, the judge may, motu propio or
upon motion, with hearing in either case, reopen the proceedings to avoid miscarriage of
justice. The proceedings shall be terminated within 30 days from the order granting it.
186 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
RULE 120
JUDGMENT
SECTION 1. Judgment: definition and Form
• Judgment- is the adjudication by the court that the accused is the accused is guilty or
not guilty of the offense charged against and the imposition on him of the proper
penalty and civil liability if any.
Requisites for the Judgement:
A. Formal Requisites
• It must be written in the official language

• Personally and directly prepared by the judge and signed by him
• Shall contain clearly and distinctly a statement of the facts and the law upon which is
based.
B. Jurisdictional Requirements
 Jurisdiction over the Subject Matter

 Jurisdiction over the Territory
 Jurisdictio over the person and the accused
PEOPLE vs CAYAGO312 SCRA 623 [1999]
HELD: “A strict compliance with the mandate of the said provision is imperative
in the writing of every decision. Otherwise, the rule would simply a tool for speculations, whic
h this Court will not countenance speciﬁcally in criminal cases involving the possible
deprivation of human life.”
187 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PEOPLE vs. BUGARIN 273 SCRA 384 [1997]
HELD: The requirement that the decisions of courts must be in writing and that they must set
forth clearly and distinctly the facts and the law on which they are based serves many
functions. It is intended, among other things, to inform the parties of the reason or reasons for
the decision so that if any of them appeals, he can point out to the appellate court the findings
of facts or the rulings on points of law with which he disagrees. More than that, the
requirement is an assurance to the parties that, in reaching judgment, the judge did so through
the processes of legal reasoning. It is, thus, a safeguard against the impetuosity of the judge,
preventing him from deciding by ipse dexit. Vouchsafed neither the sword nor the purse by the
Constitution but nonetheless vested with the sovereign prerogative of passing judgment on the
life, liberty or property of his fellowmen, the judge must ultimately depend on the power of
reason for sustained public confidence in the justness of his decision. The decision of the trial
court in this case disrespects the judicial function.
SECTION 2. Contents of the Judgement
Conviction:
• The legal qualification of the offense constituted by the acts committed by the accused
and the aggravating or mitigating circumstances which attended its commission.
• The participation of the accused in the offense, whether as principal, accomplice, or
accessory after the fact
• The penalty imposed upon the accused
• The civil liability or damages caused by his wrongful act or omission to be recovered
from the accused by the offended party, if there is any, unless the enforcement of the
civil liability by a separate civil action has been reserved or waived.
Acquittal:
188 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
• It shall state whether the evidence of the prosecution absolutely failed to prove the guilt
of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
• The judgement shall determine if the act or omission from which the civil liability
might arise did not exist.
Acquittal - A finding of not guilty based on the merits, that is the accused is acquitted because
the evidence does not show that his guilt is beyond resonable doubt, or a dismissal of the case
after the prosecution has rested its case upon motion of the accused on the ground that the
evidence fails to show beyond reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty.
Judgement of Acquittal is considered a final and executroy order
Reason: There can be no appeal in a judgement of acquittal no matter how erroneous, to rule
otherwise will place the accused in double jeopardy.
SECTION 3. Judgment for two or more offenses
When two or more offenses are charged in a single complaint or information but the
accused fails to object to it before trial, the court may convict him of as many offenses as are
charged and proved, and impose on him the penalty for each offense, setting out separately the
findings of fact and law in each offense.
A complaint or information must charge but one offense, except only in those cases in which
existing laws prescribed a single punishment for various offense ( ROC Rule 110 Sec 13).
What is the effect of the failure of the accused to object to a complaint or information
that charges more than one offense before he is arraigned?
 The court may convict him of as many offenses as are charged and proved and
impose on him the penalty of each offense.
 The court must set out separately the findings of fact and law in each offense.
189 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 4. Judgment in case of variance between allegation and proof.
General Rule: An accused can be convicted of an offense only when it is both charged and
proved. If it is not charged although proved, or is not proved although charged, the accused
cannot be convicted.
Exception: When there is variance between the offense charged in the complaint or
information and that proved, and the offense as charged is included in or necessarily includes
the offense proved, the accused shall be convicted of the offense proved which is included in
the offense charged, or of the offense charged which is included in the offense proved.
Rule in case the offense charged is different from the offense proved.
 The accused can only be convicted of the lesser offense which is included in the graver
offense either proved or charged
 The reason for this is that the accused can only be convicted of the offense which
is both charged and proved
 For example, if the offense charged is rape and the offense proved is acts of
lasciviousness, the accused can only be convicted of acts of lasciviousness
 If the offense charged is less serious physical injuries and the offense proved is
serious physical injuries, then the defendant should only be convicted of the offense
charged
SECTION 5. When an offense includes or is included in another
General Rule: If what is proved by the prosecution evidence is an offense which is included in
the offense charged in the Information, the accused may validly be convicted of the offense
proved.
Exception: Where facts supervened after the filing of the Information which change the nature
of the offense.
190 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
— An offense charged necessarily includes the offense proved when some of the essential
elements or ingredients of the former, as alleged in the complaint or information,
constitute the latter. And an offense charged is necessarily included in the offense
proved, when the essential ingredients of the former constitute or form a part of those
constituting the latter.
Note: An accused cannot be convicted for the lesser offense necessarily included in the crime
charged if at the time of the filing of the Information, the lesser offense has already prescribed.
When an offense includes or is included in another.
• The rule does note require that all essential elements of the offence charged in the
information be proved.
Conviction for a greater offense, not allowed:
• Cannot be convicted of a higher offence than that which he is charged in the complaint
or information on which he is tried.
Jurisdiction for a lesser offense
• Lesser offense outside the trial court’s jurisdiction was committed, does not deprive the
trial court of it’s jurisdiction.
SECTION 6. Promulgation of Judgment
• The judgment is promulgated by reading it in the presence of the accused and any judge
of the court in which it was rendered.
• However, if the conviction is for a light offense, the judgment may be pronounced in
the presence of his counsel or representative. When the judge is absent or outside of the
province or city, the judgment may be promulgated by the clerk of court.
• If the accused is confined or detained in another province or city, the judgment may be
promulgated by the executive judge of the Regional Trial Court having jurisdiction
191 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
over the place of confinement or detention upon request of the court which rendered the
judgment.
• The court promulgating the judgment shall have authority to accept the notice of appeal
and to approve the bail bond pending appeal; provided, that if the decision of the trial
court convicting the accused changed the nature of the offense from non-bailable to
bailable, the application for bail can only be filed and resolved by the appellate court.
Time for the rendition of judgment
• Must be rendered after presentation of evidence.

Promulgation of judgment:
• Judgment is promulgated by reading the same in the presence of the accused and any
judge of the court in which it was rendered.
Who may Promulgate the Judgment:
 Judge of the court in which it was rendered

 Clerk of the said court in the absence of the judge who rendered judgment; or
 Executive Judge of the RTC having jurisdiction over the place of confinement or
detention, when accused is confined or detained and upon the request of the judge who
rendered judgment.
Promulgation must be in the presence of the accused:
 Must be physically present at all times. EXCEPT: When a conviction is for a light
offense.
Promulgation in absentia
• Judgment may be promulgated without the presence of the accused:

1. Lighter offense
2. Even with due notice, accused did not appear
192 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Essential elements when promulgation in absentia is allowed:
1. Judgment be recorded in the criminal docket
2. Copy shall be served to his last known address or to his counsel
• Presence of counsel in promulgation.

• Presence of judge at promulgation.
• Decision of the judge may be promulgated even without his presence, as long as he is
still a judge of that court.
Promulgation after judge ceased holding office:
- Judgment is not valid

Exception: Where judgment is for acquittal, the presence of the accused is not necessary.
SALVADOR v. CHUA GR No. 212865 15 July 2015
FACTS :
1. Petitioner and his wife were charged with Estafa.
2.On the scheduled day of promulgation of judgment of CONVICTION, the counsel of

petitioner moved for deferment on the ground that his client is suffering hypertension. RTC
unconvinced of the reason proceeded to promulgate the judgment.
3. RTC issued a warrant of arrest. Thereafter the petitioner was APPREHENDED 8 DAYS
after the promulgation of the judgment.
4. Petitioner filed a MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE NOTICE OF APPEAL. RTC initially
denied the motion but was subsequently granted upon the petitioner’s MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION upon the showing a medical certificate to prove the hypertension
suffered by the accused during promulgation.
193 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
5.Prosecution moved for reconsideration and presented an affidavit by the alleged doctor who
signed the Medical Certificate denying his signature affixed. The Petitioner opposed the
motion by filing another Med Cert signed by a new doctor.
6.The case was re raffled to another JUDGE. SECOND JUDGE denied the MR filed by
prosec.
7.Private respondent commenced a special civil action for certiorari with CA. CA granted the
petition and nullified the assailed order of the SECOND JUDGE. MR by petitioner was
also denied.
ISSUE/S
I. WON the order granting the notice of appeal was proper.
RATIO: NO. The accused who fails to appear at the promulgation of the judgment of
conviction loses the remedies available under the Rules of Court against the judgment,
specifically: (a) the filing of a motion for new trial or for reconsideration (Rule 121 ), and (b)
an appeal from the judgment of conviction (Rule 122). However, the Rules of Court permits
him to regain his standing in court in order to avail himself of these remedies within 15 days
from the date of promulgation of the judgment conditioned upon: (a) his surrender; and (b) his
filing of a motion for leave of court to avail himself of the remedies, stating therein the reason
for his absence. Should the trial court find that his absence was for a justifiable cause, he
should be allowed to avail himself of the remedies within 15 days from notice of the order
finding his absence justified and allowing him the available remedies from the judgment of
conviction. Even assuming that he had suffered hypertension, which could have validly
excused his absence from the promulgation, the petitioner did not fulfill the other requirement
of Section 6, supra, to surrender himself to the trial court.
194 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 7. Modification of Judgment.
Promulgation in case the accused fails to appear
- Recording shall be consist in the criminal docket and a copy shall be served to the accused
or counsel
— A judgment of conviction may, upon motion of the accused, be modified or set aside before
it becomes final or before appeal is perfected. Except where the death penalty is imposed, a
judgment becomes final after the lapse of the period for perfecting an appeal, or when the
sentence has been partially or totally satisfied or served, or when the accused has waived in
writing his right to appeal, or has applied for probation.
Judgment of Acquittal:
• A judgment of acquittal becomes final immediately after promulgation and cannota be

recalled for correction or amendment
Judgment of Conviction:
• A judgment of conviction may be modified or set aside before it has become final or an
appeal has been perfected.
• Within 15 days from date of promulgation, the court may still revise, change or correct
the judgment.
Modification of Judgment after perfection of appeal, not allowed.
• After an appeal has been perfected, a court has no power to set aside its judgment or to
grant a new trial.
No modification allowed after judgment becomes final:
• In general, a sentence in a criminal case becomes final after the lapse of 15 days.
• However, this is not the only way a sentence may become final.
When the defendant voluntarily submits himself to the execution of judgment
When defendant perfects his appeal
195 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
When the accused withdraws his appeal

When the accused expressly waives in writing his right to appeal
When the accused files a petition for probation
Satisfaction or service of sentence:
• When the sentence imposed upon the accused has already become final, it can no
longer be reopened with the end in view of modifying the sentence. Such a move will
place the accused in double jeopardy.
• When the defendant has/had:
Began to serve his sentence on the same day the same was rendered
Completely served his sentence and was released
Paid the fine imposed upon him.
Waiver and withdrawal of appeal
• Within 15 days after the promulgation of the judgment, the court can annul or amend
the judgment unless the accused has expressly renounced in writing his right to appeal
and that he is ready to serve his sentence.
Filing of petition for probation:
-Such an act implicitly acknowledges the validity and correctness of the judgment rendered
against him and his conformity therewith.
Modification of judgment before it becomes final
• Only at the instance of the accused that a judgment of conviction may be modified or
set aside by the court.
The exception of the death penalty in the finality of the decision of lower courts:
- When death penalty is imposed, it shall be automatically be reviewed by the Supreme Court.
196 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 8. Entry of judgment.
— After a judgment has become final, it shall be entered in accordance with Rule 36.
Entry of judgment, how made?
- The recording of the judgment or order in the book of entries of judgments shall constitute
its entry. The record shall contain the dispositive part of the judgement order and shall be
signed by the clerk, with a certificate that such judgement or order has become final and
executory.
Execution of Judgment:
• The final judgment of the court is carried into effect by a process called “mittimus”.
• Process in writing issuing from a court or magistrate, directed to the sheriff or other
officer commanding him to convey to prison the persons named therein and to the
jailer, commanding him to receive and safely keep such person until he shall be
delivered by due course of law.
SECTION 9: Existing Provisions Governing Suspension of Sentence, Probation, and

Parole not Affected by this Rule
Exceptions for Suspension of Sentence of Youthful Offenders:
- Offender has enjoyed previous suspension of sentence;

- Offender is convicted of crime punishable by death or life imprisonment
- Offender is convicted by military tribunal;
- Offender is already of age at the time of sentencing even if he was a minor at the time of
the commission of the crime.
197 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Probation:
- The court may, after it shall have convicted and sentenced a defendant within the period
for perfecting an appeal, suspend the execution of the sentence and place the defendant on
probation for such period and conditions it may deemed best.
- No application for probation shall be entertained or granted if the defendant has perfected
an appeal from the judgment of conviction. (PD 968, as amended, Sec. 4)
- The basis of coverage of the Probation Law is the gravity of the offense.
- Fixing the cut-off at a maximum term of six years imprisonment is based on the
assumption that those sentenced to higher penalties pose too great a risk to society, not
serious wrongdoing but because of the gravity of serious consequences of the offense they
might further commit.
Offenders disqualified from Probation:
- Those sentenced to serve a maximum term of imprisonment of more than six years.
- Those charged with subversion or any crime against national security or public order
- Those previously convicted by final judgment of an offense punished by imprisonment not
less than 1 month and one day and/or a fine not less than P 200.
- Those who have been once on probation.
- Those who are already serving sentence at the time the Probation Law of 1976 became
applicable.
When the court should deny Probation:
- Offender is in need of treatment that can be provided most effectively by his commitment
to an institution.
- There is an undue risk that offender will commit another crime during the period of
probation.
- When probation will depreciate the seriousness of the crime.
198 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
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 violates the conditions of his release.
(Sec. 2 (d), Rules and Regulations of the Parole and Probation Administration on Parole
Supervision)
PEOPLE VS RENE BRON ET AL G.R. No. 185209 June 28, 2010

Facts: At about 9 o’clock in the evening of June 28, 1995 at Hda. Sta. Ana, Brgy. Burgos,
Cadiz City, Negros Occidental, Philippines, the accused Rene Baron, Rey Villatima, and alias
“Dedong” bargo, conspiring, confederating and helping one another with evident premeditation
and treachery and with intent to kill, did then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously
assault, attack and stab to death one JuanitoBerallo in order to rob, steal and take away the
latter’s sidecar and motorcycle, wallet, and wristwatch; and inflicted multiple stabbed wounds
which directly caused the victim’s death.
Appellant, Rene Baron, denied any participation in the crime. He claimed that on June 28,
1995, at around 7 o’clock in the evening, he bought rice and other necessities for his family
and proceeded to the public transport terminal to get a ride home where he chanced upon the
deceased and his two passengers who insisted that he came along for the trip. During said trip,
the two passengers announced a hold-up and thereafter tied the driver’s hands and dragged him
towards the sugarcane fields while Baron stayed in the tricycle. Baron was then accompanied
by the two passengers back to his house where he and his wife were threatened at gunpoint not
to report the incident to the authorities.
On February 12, 2002, the trial court rendered a Decision finding the appellant guilty
beyond reasonable doubt of the complex crime of robbery with homicide.
Before the appellate court, appellant alleged that the trial court erred in finding him guilty
as charged and in not appreciating in his favor the exempting circumstance of irresistible force
and/or uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury. However, the same was disregarded by
the CA holding that all the requisites for said circumstances were lacking.
Issue: Is the appellant entitled to the exempting circumstances of irresistible force and/or
uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury?
Held: No. The appellant’s attempt to evade criminal liability by insisting that he acted under
the impulse of an uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury fails to impress. To avail of
199 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
this exempting circumstance, the evidence must establish: (1) the existence of an
uncontrollable fear; (2) that the fear must be real and imminent; and (3) the fear of an injury is
greater than or at least equal to that committed. A threat of future injury is insufficient. The
compulsion must be of such a character as to leave no opportunity for the accused to escape.
The Court found nothing in the records to substantiate appellant’s insistence that he was
under duress from his co-accused in participating in the crime. In fact, the evidence was to the
contrary. Villatima and Bargo dragged the victim towards the sugarcane field and left the
appellant inside the tricycle that was parked by the roadside. While all alone, he had every
opportunity to escape since he was no longer subjected to a real, imminent or reasonable fear.
Surprisingly, he opted to wait for his co-accused to return and even rode with them to
Kabankalan, Negros Occidental to hide the victim’s motorcycle in the house of Villatima’s
aunt.
The appellant had other opportunities to escape since he travelled with his co-accused for
more than 10 hours and passed several transportation terminals. However, he never tried to
escape or at least request for assistance from the people around him. From the series of proven
circumstantial evidence, the inescapable and natural conclusion was the three accused were in
conspiracy with one another to kill the victim and cart away the motorcycle.
HIPOS VS BAY G.R. Nos. 174813-15
Facts: Two Informations for the crime of rape and one Information for the crime of acts of
lasciviousness were filed against petitioners Darryl Hipos et al., before Branch 86 of the
Regional Trial Court of Quezon City. Petitioners filed their Joint Memorandum to Dismiss the
Case[s] before the City Prosecutor. They claimed that there was no probable cause to hold
them liable for the crimes charged. The Office of the City Prosecutor issued a Resolution on
the reinvestigation affirming the Informations.
2nd Assistant City Prosecutor Lamberto C. de Vera, treating the Joint Memorandum to
Dismiss the Case as an appeal of the 10 August 2004 Resolution, reversed the Resolution dated
10 August 2004, holding that there was lack of probable cause. On the same date, the City
Prosecutor filed a Motion to Withdraw Informations before Judge Bay. Judge Bay denied the
Motion to Withdraw Informations in an Order of even date.
Issue: WON the Hon. Supreme compel Judge Bay to dismiss the case through a writ of
mandamus by virtue of the resolution of the office of the city prosecutor of QC finding no
probable cause against the accused and subsequently filing a motion to withdraw information.
Decision: Petition bereft of merit.
200 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Mandamus is an extraordinary writ commanding a tribunal, corporation, board, officer or

person, immediately or at some other specified time, to do the act required to be done, when
the respondent unlawfully neglects the performance of an act which the law specifically
enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station; or when the respondent excludes
another from the use and enjoyment of a right or office to which the latter is entitled, and there
is no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.
As an extraordinary writ, the remedy of mandamus lies only to compel an officer to perform
a ministerial duty, not a discretionary one; mandamus will not issue to control the exercise of
discretion by a public officer where the law imposes upon him the duty to exercise his
judgment in reference to any manner in which he is required to act, because it is his judgment
that is to be exercised and not that of the court.
There is indeed an exception to the rule that matters involving judgment and discretion are
beyond the reach of a writ of mandamus, for such writ may be issued to compel action in those
matters, when refused. However, mandamus is never available to direct the exercise of
judgment or discretion in a particular way or the retraction or reversal of an action already
taken in the exercise of either. While a judge refusing to act on a Motion to Withdraw
Informations can be compelled by mandamus to act on the same, he cannot be compelled to act
in a certain way, i.e., to grant or deny such Motion. In the case at bar, Judge Bay did not refuse
to act on the Motion to Withdraw Informations; he had already acted on it by denying the
same. Accordingly, mandamus is not available anymore. If petitioners believed that Judge Bay
committed grave abuse of discretion in the issuance of such Order denying the Motion to
Withdraw Informations, the proper remedy of petitioners should have been to file a Petition for
Certiorari against the assailed
201 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
RULE 121
NEW TRIAL OR RECONSIDERATION
SECTION 1. New trial or reconsideration.
— At any time before a judgment of conviction becomes final, the court may, on motion
of the accused or at its own instance but with the consent of the accused, grant a new trial or
reconsideration. (1a)
New Trial V. Reconsideration
1. In New Trial, Rehearing of a case already decided but before the judgment of
conviction therein rendered has become final, whereby errors of law or irregularities are
expunged from the record or new evidence is introduced, or both steps are taken. In
Reconsideration, May be filed in order to correct errors of law or fact in the judgment.
It does not require any further proceeding.
2. The ground in new trial are,
a. Errors of law or irregularities prejudicial to the substantial rights of the accused
have been committed during the trial.
b. New and material evidence has been discovered which the accused could not, with
reasonable diligence, have discovered and produced at the trial and which if
introduced and admitted would probably change the judgment
c. (Sec. 2).
3. The ground for Reconsideration are:
a. Error of law; or
b. Errors of fact
202 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
What are the other grounds that the court may consider as ground for new trial?
a. Negligence or incompetency of counsel or mistake which is so gross amounting to

deprivation of the substantial rights of the accused and due process;(Aguilar v. Court of
Appeals GR No. 114282,November 28, 1995)
b. Recantation of a witness where there is no evidence sustaining the judgment of
conviction other than the testimony of such witness; (Tan Ang Bun v. Court of
Appeals)
c. Improvident plea of guilty which may be withdrawn;
d. Disqualification of attorney de officio to represent accused in trial
SECTION 2. Grounds for a new trial.
— The court shall grant a new trial on any of the following grounds:
(a) The errors of law or irregularities prejudicial to the substantial rights of the accused
have been committed during the trial;
(b) The new and material evidence has been discovered which the accused could not with
reasonable diligence have discovered and produced at the trial and which if introduced and
admitted would probably change the judgment. (2a)
CASE:
Exceptional Circumstances on New Trial

Estino and Pescadera vs. People. Rule 121 of the Rules of Court allows the conduct of a
new trial before a judgment of conviction becomes final when new and material evidence has
been discovered which the accused could not with reasonable diligence have discovered and
produced at the trial and which if introduced and admitted would probably change the
judgment. Although the documents offered by petitioners are strictly not newly discovered, it
appears that petitioners were mistaken in their belief that its production during trial was
unnecessary. In their Supplemental Motion and/or Motion for New Trial, they stressed that
they no longer presented the evidence of payment of RATA because Balabaran testified that
203 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
the subject of the charge was the non payment of benefits under the 1999 budget, without
mention of the RATA nor the 1998 re-enacted budget. It seems that they were misled during
trial. They were precluded from presenting pieces of evidence that may prove actual payment
of the RATA under the 1998 re-enacted budget because the prosecution’s evidence was
confined to alleged non payment of RATA under the 1999 budget. In this instance, we are
inclined to give a more lenient interpretation of Rule 121, Sec. 2 on new trial in view of the
special circumstances sufficient to cast doubt as to the truth of the charges against petitioners.
The situation of the petitioners is peculiar, since they were precluded from presenting
exculpatory evidence during trial upon the honest belief that they were being tried for non
payment of RATA under the 1999 budget. This belief was based on no less than the testimony
of the prosecution’s lone witness, COA Auditor Mona Balabaran.
SECTION 3. Ground for reconsideration.
— The court shall grant reconsideration on the ground of errors of law or fact in the
judgment, which requires no further proceedings. (3a)
What are the grounds of motion for reconsideration?

1. errors of law;
2. errors of fact in the judgment, which require no further proceedings.
Note: The principle underlying this rule is to afford the trial court the opportunity to correct its
own mistakes and to avoid unnecessary appeals from being taken. The grant by the court of
reconsideration should require no further proceedings, such as the taking of additional proof.
SECTION 4. Form of motion and notice to the prosecutor.
— The motion for a new trial or reconsideration shall be in writing and shall state the
grounds on which it is based. If based on a newly-discovered evidence, the motion must be
supported by affidavits of witnesses by whom such evidence is expected to be given or by duly
204 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
authenticated copies of documents which are proposed to be introduced in evidence. Notice of

the motion for new trial or reconsideration shall be given to the prosecutor. (4a)
What should be the form of a motion for new trial or reconsideration?
The motion must:
1. be in writing;
2. filed in court;
3. state the grounds on which it is based ;and
4. if the motion for new trial is based on newly discovered evidence, it must be supported
by the affidavits of the witness by whom such evidence is expected to be given or duly
authenticated copies of documents which it is proposed to introduce in evidence.(Sec.
4)
Note: While the rule requires that an affidavit of merits be attached to support a motion for
new trial based on newly discovered evidence, the rule also allows that the defect of lack of
merit may be cured by the testimony under oath of the defendant at the hearing of the motion
(Paredes v. Borja, G.R. No. L-15559, Nov. 29, 1961).
SECTION 5. Hearing on motion.
— Where a motion for a new trial calls for resolution of any question of fact, the court
may hear evidence thereon by affidavits or otherwise. (5a)
SECTION 6. Effects of granting a new trial or reconsideration.

— The effects of granting a new trial or reconsideration are the following:
(a) When a new trial is granted on the ground of errors of law or irregularities committed
during the trial, all proceedings and evidence affected thereby shall be set aside and taken
anew. The court may, in the interest of justice, allow the introduction of additional evidence.
205 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
(b) When a new trial is granted on the ground of newly-discovered evidence, the evidence
already adduced shall stand and the newly-discovered and such other evidence as the court
may, in the interest of justice, allow to be introduced shall be taken and considered together
with the evidence already in the record.
(c) In all cases, when the court grants new trial or reconsideration, the original judgment
shall be set aside or vacated and a new judgment rendered accordingly. (6a)
What are the effects of granting a new trial or reconsideration?
In all cases, when the court grants a new trial or reconsideration, the original judgment shall be
set aside or vacated and a new judgment rendered accordingly.
In addition, when granted on the ground of
1. Errors of law or irregularities committed during the trial

a. All proceedings and evidence not affected by such errors and irregularities shall stand;
b. Those affected shall be set aside and taken anew; and
c. In the interest of justice, the court may allow the introduction of additional evidence.
2. Newly discovered evidence
a. The evidence already taken shall stand;
b. Newly discovered and other evidence as the court may, in the interest of justice, allow
to be introduced, shall be taken and considered together with the evidence already in
the record(Sec. 6)
206 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
RULE 122
APPEAL
SECTION 1. Who may appeal.
- Any party may appeal from a judgment or final order, unless the accused may be placed
in double jeopardy.
The word party in this section includes not only the government and the accused but the other
people as well, such as the complainant who may be affected by the judgement. The
complainant has an interest in the civil liability arising from the crime, unless of course, he has
reserved the right to bring a separate civil action to recover the civil liability.
 Right of the People to appeal is expressly made subject to the proviso that such an
appeal should not place the accused in Double Jeopardy.
 Civil Liability – Where the trial court found the accused guilty of the crime charged but
erroneously failed to enter judgement as to the civil liability of the accused in favor of
the offended party, the fiscal may appeal the judgement for that particular purpose.
Tiu vs CA, G.R. No. 162370, April 21, 2009
Facts: The instant controversy stemmed from a criminal charge for slight physical injuries
filed by respondent Edgardo Postanes (Postanes) against Remigio Pasion (Pasion). On the
other hand, petitioner David Tiu (Tiu) filed a criminal charge for grave threats against
Postanes. During the trial, Postanes testified as a witness, together with his eyewitnesses Jose
Aynaga (Aynaga) and Aristotle Samson (Samson). Postanes’ testimony was also offered to
prove his innocence as the accused in Criminal Case No. 96-413 (Grave Threats). Postanes
requested more time to submit a formal offer of evidence in Criminal Case No. 96-413.
However, Postanes’ counsel filed a formal offer of evidence belatedly. In its Order dated 22
December 1998, the MeTC denied Postanes’ motion to admit formal offer of evidence and
207 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
ordered it expunged from the records.The MeTC dismissed both the case of Grave Threats and
Slight Physical Injuries.
Issue:Whether or not there was double jeopardy when Tiu filed a petition for certiorari
questioning the acquittal of Postanes by the MeTC?
Ruling: The Court held that there is double jeopardy in this case. The elements of double
jeopardy are (1) the complaint or information was sufficient in form and substance to sustain a
conviction; (2) the court had jurisdiction; (3) the accused had been arraigned and had pleaded;
and (4) the accused was convicted or acquitted or the case was dismissed without his express
consent. These elements are present here: (1) the Information filed in Criminal Case No. 96-
413 against Postanes was sufficient in form and substance to sustain a conviction; (2) the
MeTC had jurisdiction over Criminal Case No. 96-413; (3) Postanes was arraigned and entered
a non-guilty plea; and (4) the MeTC dismissed Criminal Case No. 96-413 on the ground of
insufficiency of evidence amounting to an acquittal from which no appeal can be had. Clearly,
for this Court to grant the petition and order the MeTC to reconsider its decision, just what the
RTC ordered the MeTC to do, is to transgress the Constitutional proscription not to put any
person "twice x xx in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense." Further, as found by the
Court of Appeals, there is no showing that the prosecution or the State was denied of due
process resulting in loss or lack of jurisdiction on the part of the MeTC, which would have
allowed an appeal by the prosecution from the order of dismissal of the criminal case.
SECTION 2.Where to appeal.
The appeal may be taken as follows:
(a) The Regional Trial Court in cases decided by the Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial
Court in Cities, Municipal Trial Court, or Municipal Circuit Trial Court;
(b) To the Court of Appeals or to the Supreme Court in the proper provided by law, in cases
decided by the Regional Trial Court; and
(c) To the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Court of Appeals.
208 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
 Appellate Jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court

Regional Trial Courts exercise appellate jurisdiction over all cases decided by the
Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Municipal Trial Court, or
Municipal Circuit Trial Court in their respective jurisdiction.
 Appellate Jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals
Under Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980, the Court of Appeals exercises exclusive
appellate jurisdiction over all final judgements, decisions, resolutions, orders or awards
of the Regional Trial Courts, except those cases falling within the exclusive appellate
jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan and the Supreme Court.
 Appellate jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan.
The Sandiganbayan exercises exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all final judgements,
resolutions, or orders of the Regional Trial Courts, whether in the exercise of their own
original jurisdiction or of their appellate jurisdiction in government related cases as
provided in Section 4, PD No. 1606, amended by RA No. 8249.
 Appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in criminal cases.
The Supreme Court shall have jurisdiction to review, revise, reverse, modify or affirm
on appeal, as the law or Rules of Court may provide, final judgements and of inferior
courts in all criminal cases.
Colinares vs People, G.R. No. 182748, December 13, 2011
The accused may still apply for probation on remand of the case to the trial court. Ordinarily,
an accused would no longer be entitled to apply for probation, he having appealed from the
judgment of the RTC convicting him for frustrated homicide. But in this case the Supreme
Court ruled to set aside the judgment of the RTC and found him only liable for attempted
homicide, if the Supreme Court follows the established rule that no accused can apply for
probation on appeal, the accused would suffer from the erroneous judgment of the RTC with
no fault of his own, therefore defying fairness and equity.
209 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 3. How appeal taken.

(a) The appeal to the Regional Trial Court, or to the Court of Appeals in cases decided
by the Regional Trial Court in the exercise of its original jurisdiction, shall be taken by filing a
notice of appeal with the court which rendered the judgment or final order appealed from and
by serving a copy thereof upon the adverse party.
(b) The appeal to the Court of Appeals in cases decided by the Regional Trial Court in the
exercise of its appellate jurisdiction shall be by petition for review under Rule 42.
(c) The appeal to the Supreme Court in cases where the penalty imposed by the Regional
Trial Court is death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment, or where a lesser penalty is
imposed but for offenses committed on the same occasion or which arose out of the same
occurrence that gave rise to the more serious offense for which the penalty of death, reclusion
perpetua, or life imprisonment is imposed, shall be by filing a notice of appeal in accordance
with paragraph (a) of this section.
(d) No notice of appeal is necessary in cases where the death penalty is imposed by the
Regional Trial Court. The same shall be automatically reviewed by the Supreme Court as
provided in section 10 of this Rule.
(e) Except as provided in the last paragraph of section 13, Rule 124, all other appeals to
the Supreme Court shall be by petition for review on certiorari under Rules 45.
Mode of Review
1. Ordinary Appeal (Rule 40, 41, 44, Rule 122 Sec. 3a, 3c) – By this mode, the part
aggrieved by the decision or final order of the lower court may cause the review thereof
by filing a notice of appeal with the court that render the decision or final order
appealed from and by serving a copy thereof upon the adverse party.
2. Petition for Review (Rule 42) - The appeal to the Court of Appeals in cases decided
by the Regional Trial Court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction shall be by
petition for review under Rule 42.
3. Petition for Review on Certiorari or Appeal by Certiorari (Rule 45) – In all cases in
which only an error or question of the law is involved, or those which involve the
constitutionality or validity of the law, ordinance, treaty or executive order or
210 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
regulation, or those in which the jurisdiction of any inferior court is in issue, the
Supreme Court exercises exclusive jurisdiction to review, revise, reverse, modify or
affirm on certiorari final judgements and decrees of inferior courts.
4. Automatic Appeal (Rule 42 Sec. 10)- In all cases where the death penalty is imposed
by the trial court, the records shall be forwarded to the Supreme Court for automatic
review and judgment within five (5) days after the fifteenth (15) day following the
promulgation of the judgment or notice of denial of a motion for new trial or
reconsideration. The transcript shall also be forwarded within ten (10) days after the
filing thereof by the stenographic reporter.
SECTION 4. Publication of notice of appeal.

- If personal service of the copy of the notice of appeal cannot be made upon the adverse
party or his counsel, service may be done by registered mail or by substituted service pursuant
to sections 7 and 8 of Rule 13.
As a General Rule, the adverse party or his counsel is entitled to a copy of the notice of appeal.
If personal service of the copy of the notice of appeal cannot be made upon the adverse party
or his counsel, service may be done by registered mail or by substituted service.
SECTION 5. Waiver of notice.

- The appellee may waive his right to a notice that an appeal has been taken. The appellate
court may, in its discretion, entertain an appeal notwithstanding failure to give such notice if
the interests of justice so require.
 The appellee may waive his right to a notice that an appeal has taken.
 In the interests of justice, the appellate court may entertain an appeal notwithstanding
the failure of the appellant to give such notice.
211 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 6. When appeal to be taken.

- An appeal must be taken within fifteen (15) days from promulgation of the judgment or
from notice of the final order appealed from. This period for perfecting an appeal shall be
suspended from the time a motion for new trial or reconsideration is filed until notice of the
order overruling the motion shall have been served upon the accused or his counsel at which
time the balance of the period begins to run.
Period of Appeal
 General Rule: Period of appeal is 15 days from the rendition or notice thereof
 Exception: Can be extended, if it is satisfactorily shown that there is justifiable reason

for such action, like fraud, accident, mistake or excusable negligence or similar
supervening casualty without fault on the part of the appellant.
 Mandatory and also jurisdictional and failure to do so renders the questioned decision
final and executory.
Computation of period of appeal
 The first day is excluded and the last day included
 Should the last day fall on a Sunday or holiday, the period continues to run until the
next day or a holiday which is neither a Sunday nor holiday.
 Court may not shorten the period of appeal.
Suspension of period of appeal
 The filing of a motion for new trial or reconsideration interrupts the running of the
period to perfect an appeal until notice of the order overruling the motion is served
upon the accused or his lawyer.
 The pendency of the motion to set aside the judgment or motion for reconsideration
suspends the computation of a reglementary period to appeal.
212 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
 NOTE: The filing of a motion for extension of time to appeal does not suspend the
running of that period.
SECTION 7. Transcribing and filing notes of stenographic reporter upon appeal.
- When notice of appeal is filed by the accused, the trial court shall direct the stenographic
reporter to transcribe his notes of the proceedings. When filed by the People of the Philippines,
the trial court shall direct the stenographic reporter to transcribe such portion of his notes of the
proceedings as the court, upon motion, shall specify in writing. The stenographic reporter shall
certify to the correctness of the notes and the transcript thereof, which shall consist of the
original and four copies, and shall file the original and four copies with the clerk without
unnecessary delay.
If death penalty is imposed, the stenographic reporter shall, within thirty (30) days from
promulgation of the sentence, file with the clerk original and four copies of the duly certified
transcript of his notes of the proceedings. No extension of time for filing of said transcript of
stenographic notes shall be granted except by the Supreme Court and only upon justifiable
grounds.
 When notice of appeal is filed by the accused, the trial court shall direct the
stenographic reporter to transcribe his notes of the proceedings.
 When filed by the People of the Philippines, the trial court shall direct the stenographic
reporter to transcribe such portion of his notes of the proceedings as the court, upon
motion, shall specify in writing.
 The stenographic reporter shall certify to the correctness of the notes and the transcript
thereof, which shall consist of the original and four copies, and shall file the original
and four copies with the clerk without unnecessary delay.
213 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
If death penalty is imposed
 The stenographic reporter shall, within thirty (30) days from promulgation of the
sentence, file with the clerk original and four copies of the duly certified transcript of
his notes of the proceedings.
 No extension of time for filing of said transcript of stenographic notes shall be granted
except by the Supreme Court and only upon justifiable grounds.
 This must be so because a decision condemning the accused to death automatically
goes to the Supreme Court for review.
SECTION 8. Transmission of papers to appellate court upon appeal.

— Within five (5) days from the filing of the notice of appeal, the clerk of the court with
whom the notice of appeal was filed must transmit to the clerk of court of the appellate court
the complete record of the case, together with said notice. The original and three copies of the
transcript of stenographic notes, together with the records, shall also be transmitted to the clerk
of the appellate court without undue delay. The other copy of the transcript shall remain in the
lower court.
Remand of the case where record is incomplete –
 In an appeal from the RTC to the Supreme Court in criminal cases, the evidence must
be transmitted to the latter court (SC).
 If any of the material part of the evidence is not so transmitted and is lost, the cause will
be remanded to the court of origin for a new trial.
 Clerk of the trial court should guard carefully every exhibit introduced during the trial
and, in sending the record to the Supreme Court, should carefully note each exhibit thus
sent.
214 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 9. Appeal to the Regional Trial Courts -

(a) Within five (5) days from perfection of the appeal, the clerk of court shall transmit the
original record to the appropriate Regional Trial Court.
(b) Upon receipt of the complete record of the case, transcripts and exhibits, the clerk of
court of the Regional Trial Court shall notify the parties of such fact.
(c) Within fifteen (15) days from receipt of the said notice, the parties may submit
memoranda or briefs, or may be required by the Regional Trial Court to do so. After the
submission of such memoranda or briefs, or upon the expiration of the period to file the same,
the Regional Trial Court shall decide the case on the basis of the entire record of the case and
of such memoranda or briefs as may have been filed.
 An appeal from the final judgment of the Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial
Court, Municipal Circuit Trial Court must be taken within 15 days from the
promulgation or notice thereof.
 From the perfection of such appeal, the clerk of court has 5 days within which to
transmit the original record to the Regional Trial Court.
 Upon receipt of the complete record of the case and of the transcript/exhibits the clerk
of the Regional Trial Court shall notify the parties of such fact.
 After the submission of the parties, memoranda or briefs or upon the expiration of the
period within which to file the same the Regional Trial Court may then render its
decision based on the record of the proceedings had in the lower court and on the
memoranda or briefs submitted by the parties.
SECTION 10. Transmission of records in case of death penalty.

- In all cases where the death penalty is imposed by the trial court, the records shall be
forwarded to the Supreme Court for automatic review and judgment within five (5) days after
the fifteenth (15) day following the promulgation of the judgment or notice of denial of a
motion for new trial or reconsideration. The transcript shall also be forwarded within ten (10)
days after the filing thereof by the stenographic reporter.
215 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
 The judgment of conviction entered by the trial court imposing death penalty is not
final, cannot be executed and is wholly without force/effect until the case has been
passed upon by the Supreme Court.
 Intended for the protection of the accused, the Supreme Court in its exercise of
Automatic review, may review the findings of fact of the trial court.
2 Modes of Automatic Review
1. Section 3 (d) and 10 Rule 122, the death penalty was imposed by the RTC, the court
even without notice of appeal, shall forward the records to the Court of Appeals for
automatic review and judgment within 20 days but not earlier than 15 days from the
promulgation/notice of denial for new trial or reconsideration.
2. Where the Court of Appeals affirms the death penalty automatically referred to it as
previously stated or in a case where it will impose a death penalty in cases appealed to
it punishable by a penalty lesser than death, the court shall render judgment but refrain
from making an entry of judgment and forthwith certify the case and elevate its entire
record to the Supreme Court for review.
Period for transmission of records
 The 20 days period in this section, may be extended or shortened
 It is intended where the accused sentenced to death says nothing within the period of 15
days within which the case remains within the jurisdiction of the trial court.
If a defendant sentenced to death penalty within the period of 15 days file a motion for a new
trail, the trial court may grant or deny it, and if the consideration of the motion for new trial or
a new trial itself takes several days including the rendering of new decision, then the 20 days
mentioned in the Rule must necessarily be extended.
People vs. Taruc, G.R. No. 185202, February 18, 2009
Facts: Francisco Taruc (“Taruc”) was charged before the RTC of Bataan with the crime of
murder in connection with the death of EmelitoSualog. Taruc pleaded not guilty. After trial on
the merits, the RTC of Bataan found Taruc guilty for murder and sentenced him to suffer the
death penalty. The case was brought to the Court of Appeals for automatic review in
216 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
accordance with A.M. No. 00-5-03-SC. Thereafter, the CA was informed that Taruc escaped
from prison. Then, the CA affirmed the Decision of the RTC. Taruc appealed the Decision of
the CA to the Supreme Court.
Issue:Whether or not Taruc has lost his right to appeal his conviction considering that he
escaped from jail and eluded arrest.
Ruling: Once an accusedescapes from prison or confinement or jumps bail or flees to a foreign
country, he loses his standing in court and unless he surrenders or submits to the jurisdiction of
the court he is deemed to have waived any right to seek relief from the court. Although Rule
124, Section 8 particularly applies to the Court of Appeals, it has been extended to the
Supreme Court by Rule 125, Section 1 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure.
Notwithstanding, accused-appellant did not preclude the Court of Appeals from exercising its
review jurisdiction, considering that what was involved was capital punishment. Automatic
review being mandatory, it is not only a power of the court but a duty to review all death
penalty cases. But accused-appellant impliedly waived his right to appeal to the Supreme
Court. There are certain fundamental rights which cannot be waived even by the accused
himself but the right of appeal is not one of them. The accused cannot be accorded the right to
appeal unless he voluntarily submits to the jurisdiction of the court or is otherwise arrested
within 15 days from notice of the judgment against him. While at large, he cannot seek relief
from the court, as he is deemed to have waived the appeal. Thus, having escaped from prison
or confinement, he loses his standing in court; and unless he surrenders or submits to its
jurisdiction, he is deemed to have waived any right to seek relief from the court. Thus, appeal
is dismissed.
SECTION 11. Effect of appeal by any of several accused.

–(a) An appeal taken by one or more of several accused shall not affect those who did not
appeal, except insofar as the judgment of the appellate court is favorable and applicable to the
latter;
217 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
(b) The appeal of the offended party from the civil aspect shall not affect the criminal aspect of
the judgment or order appealed from.
(c) Upon perfection of the appeal, the execution of the judgment or final order appealed from
shall be stayed as to the appealing party.
 Shall not affect those who did not appeal, EXCEPT if favorable and applicable to them
 Appeal from civil aspect by offended party shall not affect criminal aspect of judgment.
 Execution of judgment on appellant will be stayed upon perfection of appeal
Quidet vs People (618 SCRA 1)

Petitioner together with Taban and Tubo were charged with homicide for the death of
Tagarda and frustrated homicide with the injuries sustained by Andrew. Petitioner appealed to
SC arguing that there was no conspiracy between the three of them when stabbing incident has
happened. SC held that the crime committed was attempted homicide and not frustrated
homicide because the stab wounds that Andrew sustained were not life threatening. Although,
Taban and Tubo did not appeal their conviction, this part of the appellate court’s judgment is
favorable to them, thus, they are entitled to a reduction of their person terms. The rule is that an
appeal taken by one or more of several accused shall not affect those who did not appeal except
insofar as the judgment of the appellate court is favorable and applicable to latter. Quidet is
found guilty of slight physical injuries while Taban and Tubo are guilty of attempted homicide.
SECTION 12. Withdrawal of appeal.

-Notwithstanding the perfection of the appeal, the Regional Trial Court, Metropolitan Trial
Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Municipal Trial Court, or Municipal Circuit Trial Court,
as the case may be, may allow the appellant to withdraw his appeal before the record has been
forwarded by the clerk of court to the proper appellate court as provided in section 8, in which
case the judgment shall become final. The Regional Trial Court may also, in its discretion,
allow the appellant from the judgment of a Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court in
Cities, Municipal Trial Court, or Municipal Circuit Trial Court to withdraw his appeal,
218 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
provided a motion to that effect is filed before rendition of the judgment in the case on appeal,
in which case the judgment of the court of origin shall become final and the case shall be
remanded to the latter court for execution of the judgment.
 Before the record has been forwarded by the clerk of court to the proper appellate court
as provided by Sec 8, in which case the judgment shall become final.
 Court discretionary, a motion is filed before the rendition of the judgment in the case
on appeal.
 Once appeal is withdrawn, the decision or judgment appealed from becomes at once
final and executory.
SECTION 13. Appointment of counsel de oficio for accused on appeal.
- It shall be the duty of the clerk of the trial court, upon filing of a notice of appeal, to
ascertain from the appellant, if confined in prison, whether he desires the Regional Trial Court,
Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court to appoint a counsel de oficio to defend him and to
transmit with the record on a form to be prepared by the clerk of court of the appellate court, a
certificate of compliance with this duty and of the response of the appellant to his inquiry.
219 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
RULE 123
PROCEDURE IN THE MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS
SECTION 1. UNIFORM PROCEDURE - The procedure to be observed in the

Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts
shall be the same as in the Regional Trial Courts except where a particular provision
applies only either of said courts and in criminal cases governed by the Revised Rule on
Summary Procedure.
Procedure in the Municipal Trial Courts- The rule expressly provides that the procedure to
be observed in the Metropolitan trial Court, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit
Trial Courts is, except in certain cases, the same as in the Regional Trial Courts. The complaint
or information may be filed directly with said courts or with the City Prosecutor’s Office.
● In Manila and other chartered cities, the complaint may be filed only with the Office
of the City Prosecutor, and if the case is directly filed with the court, the proper procedure is,
without dismissing the case, to have it referred to the City Prosecutor for the filing of the
corresponding information if the evidence so warrants.
Cases excepted from the operation of the uniform rules- In the following criminal cases,
the Rules on Summary Procedure in Special Cases, as amended, governs:
1. Violation of the traffic laws, rules and regulations;
2. Violations of the rental law;
3. Violations of the municipal or city ordinances; and
4. Violations of Batas PambansaBilang 22 (Bouncing Checks Law)
5. All other criminal cases where the penalty prescribed by the law for the offense
charged is imprisonment not exceeding six months or a fine not exceeding one
thousand pesos (P 1,000.00), or both, irrespective of other imposable penalties,
accessory or otherwise, or of the civil liability arising therefrom: Provided,
however, that in offenses involving damage to property through criminal
220 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
negligence, this Rule shall govern where the imposable fine does not exceed ten
thousand pesos ( P 10,000.00)
Procedure in Special cases- For convenience, the pertinent provisions of the Revised Rules on
Summary procedure are hereby reproduced:
Sec. 2. Determination of applicability- Upon the filing of a civil or criminal action, the court
shall issue an order declaring whether or not the case shall be governed by this Rule.
A patently erroneous determination to avoid the application of the Rule on Summary
procedure is a ground for disciplinary action.
Criminal Cases
Sec. 11 How commenced- The filing of criminal cases falling within the scope of this Rule
shall be either by complaint or by information: Provided, however, that in Metropolitan Manila
and in Chartered Cities, such cases shall be commenced only by information, except when the
offense cannot be prosecuted de oficio.
Sec. 12 Duty of the Court-
a.) If commenced by complaint- On the basis of the complaint and the affidavits and
other evidence accompanying the same, the court may dismiss the case outrightfor
being patently without basis or merit and order the release of the accused if in
custody.
b.) If commenced by information- When the case commenced by information, or is not
dismissed pursuant to the next preceding paragraph, the court shall issue an order
which, together with copies of the affidavits and other evidence submitted by the
prosecution, shall require the accused to submit his counter- affidavit and the
affidavits of his witnesses as well as any evidence in his behalf, serving copies
thereof on the complaint or prosecutor not later than 10 days from receipt of said
order.
Sec. 13 Arraignment and trial- Should the court, upon a consideration of the complaint or
information and the affidavits submitted by both parties, find no cause or ground to hold the
221 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
accused for trial, it shall order the dismissal of the case, otherwise, the court shall set the case
for arraignment and trial.
Sec. 14. Preliminary Conference- Before conducting the trial, the court shall call the parties
to a preliminary conference during which a stipulation of facts may be entered into, or the
propriety of allowing the accused to enter a plea of guilty to a lesser offense may be
considered. Or such other matters may be taken up to clarify the issues and to ensure a speedy
disposition of the case. However, no admission by the accused shall be used against him unless
reduced to writing and signed by the accused and his counsel. A refusal or failure to stipulate
shall not prejudiced the accused.
Sec. 15.Procedure I Trial- At the trial, the affidavits submitted by the parties shall constitute
the direct testimonies of the witnesses who executed the same.
Sec. 16. Arrest of Accused.- The court shall not order the arrest of the accused except for
failure to appear whenever required. Release of the person arrested shall either be on bail or on
recognizance by a responsible citizen acceptable to the court.
Sec. 17. Judgment- Where a trial has been conducted, the court shal promulgate the judgment
not later than thirty (300 days) after the termination of trial.
Common Provisions
Sec. 18 Referral to Lupon- Cases requiring referral to the Lupon for conciliation under the
provisions of the Presidential Decree No. 1508 where ther is no showing of compliance with
such requirement, shall be dismissed without prejudice, and may be revived only after such
requirement shall have been complied with. This provision shall not apply to criminal cases
where the accused was arrested without a warrant.
Sec. 19. Prohibited pleadings and motions- The following pleadings. Motions, or petitions
shall not be allowed in the cases covered by this Rule:
a. Motion to dismiss the complaint or to quash the complaint or information except on the
ground of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter; or failure to comply with the
preceding section
b. Motion for a bail of particulars
222 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
c. Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of judgement, or for reopening of trial
d. Petion for relief from judgment
e. Motion for extention of the time to file pleading, affidavits or any other paper
f. Memoranda
g. Petition for certiorari, mandamus or prohibition against any interlocutory order issued
by the court
h. Motion to declare the defendant in default
i. Dilatory motions for postponement
j. Reply
k. Third party complaint
l. Interventions
Sec. 20 Affidavits- The Affidavits required to be submitted under this Rule shall state only
facts of direct personal knowledge of the affiants which are admissible in evidence, and shall
show their competence to testify to the matters stated therein.
Sec. 21. Appeal- The judgment or final order shall be appealable to the appropriate Regional
Trial Court which shall decide the same in accordance with Sec. 22 of the Batas PambansaBlg.
129. The decision of the Regional Trial Court in civil cases governed by this Rule, including
forcible entry and unlawful detainer, shall be immediately executory, without prejudice a
further appeal that may be taken therefrom. Sec. 10 of rule 70 shall be deemed repealed.
Sec. 22 Applicability of the regular rules- the regular procedure prescribed in the Rules of
Court shall apply to the special cases herein provided for in a suppletory capacity insofar as the
are not inconsistent herewith.
Sec. 23. Effectivity- This revised Rules on Summary Procedure shall be effective November
15,1991.
223 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
RULE 124
PROCEDURE IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
SECTION 1. Title of the Case

Appellant – party appealing the case
Appellee – adverse party
SECTION 2. Appointment of counsel de oficio for the accused.

REQUISITES BEFORE AN ACCUSED CAN BE GIVEN A COUNSEL DE OFICIO ON
APPEAL
1. that he is confined in prison
2. without counsel de parte on appeal
3. signed the notice of appeal himself
EXCEPTIONS: An accused-appellant not confined to prison can have a counsel de oficio if
requested by him in the appellate court within 10 days from receipt of the notice to file brief
and the right thereto is established by affidavit.
SECTION 3. When brief for the appellant to be filed.

7 copies of the brief shall be filed within 30 days from receipt by the appellant or his
counsel of the notice from the clerk of court of the Court of Appeals that the evidence, oral and
documentary, is already attached to the record.
Brief - literally means a short or condensed statement. The purpose of the brief is to present to
the court in concise form the points and questions in controversy, and by fair argument on the
facts and law of the case, to assist the court in arriving at a just and proper conclusion.
224 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PURPOSE: To present to the court in concise form the points and questions in controversy
and, by fair argument on the facts and law of the case, to assist the court in arriving at a just
and proper conclusion.
Time limit following an order for new trial.
The trial shall commence within 30 days from the date the order for a new trial becomes final.
SECTION 4. When brief for Appellee to be Filed; Reply Brief of the Appellant
The appellee shall file seven (7) copies of the brief with the clerk of court within thirty
(30) days from receipt of the brief of the appellant accompanied by proof of service of two (2)
copies thereof upon the appellant.
A reply brief on the other hand, may be filed by the appellant within twenty (20) days from
receipt of the brief of the appellee. The reply brief shall traverse matters raised in the appellee’s
brief but not covered in the brief of the appellant.
SECTION 5. Extension of Time for filing briefs

Extension of time for the filing of briefs will not be allowed except:
1. For good and sufficient cause; and
2. Only if the motion for extension is filed before the expiration of the time sought to be
extended.
SECTION 6. Form of briefs

Briefs shall either be printed, encoded or typewritten in double space on legal size good
quality unglazed paper, 330 mm in length by 216 mm in width.
225 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 7. Contents of brief. — The briefs in criminal cases shall have the same contents as
provided in sections 13 and 14 of Rule 44. A certified true copy of the decision or final order
appealed from shall be appended to the brief of appellant. (7a)
CONTENTS OF THE BFIEF
APPELLANT’S BRIEF
 A subject index of the matter in the brief with digest of the argument and page
references and a table of cases alphabetically arranged, text-books and statutes cited
with reference to the pages where they are cited;
 An assignment of the errors intended to be urged. Such errors shall be separately,
distinctly and concisely stated without repetition, and shall be numbered consecutively;
 Under the heading “Statement of the case” a clear and concise statement of the nature
of action, a summary of the proceedings, the appealed rulings and orders of the court,
the nature of the judgment and any other matters necessary to an understanding of the
nature of the controversy, with page references to the record;
 Under the heading “Statements of Facts” a clear and concise statement in a narrative
form of the facts admitted by both parties and of those in controversy together with the
substance of the proof relating thereto in sufficient details to make it clearly intelligible,
with page references to the record;
 A clear, and concise statement of the issues of facts or law to be submitted to the court
for its judgment;
 Under the heading “Argument” the appellant’s arguments on each assignment of errors
with reference to the record. The authorities relied upon shall be cited by the page of
the report at which the case begins and the page of the report on which the citation is
found;
 Under the heading “Relief” a specification of the order or judgment which the appellant
seeks;
 In case not brought up by record on appeal, the appellant’s brief shall contain as an
appendix, a copy of the judgment or order appealed from.
226 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
APPELLEE’S BRIEF
A subject index of the matter in the brief with digest of the argument and page
references and a table of cases alphabetically arranged, text-books and statutes cited with
reference to the pages where they are cited;
Under the heading “Statement of Facts” the appellee shall state that he accepts the
statement of facts in the appellant’s brief, or under the heading “Counter-Statement of Facts”
he shall point out such insufficiencies or inaccuracies as he believes exist in the appellant’s
statement of facts with references to the page of the record in support thereof, but without
reception of matters in appellant’s statement of facts;
Under the heading “Argument” the appellee shall set forth his arguments in the case on
each assignment of error with the page references to the record. The authorities relied on shall
be cited by the page of the report at which the case begins and the page lf the report on which
the citation is found.
SECTION 8. Dismissal of appeal for abandonment or failure to prosecute.

— The Court of Appeals may, upon motion of the appellee or motu proprio and with
notice to the appellant in either case, dismiss the appeal if the appellant fails to file his brief
within the time prescribed by this Rule, except where the appellant is represented by a
counsel de oficio.
The Court of Appeals may also, upon motion of the appellee or motu proprio, dismiss the
appeal if the appellant escapes from prison or confinement, jumps bail or flees to a foreign
country during the pendency of the appeal. (8a)
GROUNDS FOT DISMISSAL OF APPEALS
1. Failure on the part of the appellant to file brief within the elementary period, except
when he is represented by a counsel de oficio;
2. Escape of the appellant from prison or confinement;
3. When the appellant jumps bail; and
4. Flight of appellant to a foreign country during the pendency of the appeal.
227 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 9. Prompt disposition of appeals.

— Appeals of accused who are under detention shall be given precedence in their
disposition over other appeals. The Court of Appeals shall hear and decide the appeal at the
earliest practicable time with due regard to the rights of the parties. The accused need not be
present in court during the hearing of the appeal. (9a)
PRESENCE OF ACCUSED DURING THE HEARING OF APPEAL, NOT NECESSARY.
Both on principle and authority, the various provisions securing to an accused person the right
to be present “in all criminal prosecutions” must be understood as securing to him merely the
right to be present during every step in the trial court; and that the phrase “at the trial” is to be
taken “to include everything that is done in the course of trial, from the arraignment until the
sentence is announced” which clearly refers to the proceedings subsequent to the entry of final
judgement looking merely to the execution of sentence.
SECTION 10. Judgement not to be reversed or modified except for substantial error.
No judgment shall be reversed or modified unless the Court of Appeals, after an

examination of the record and of the evidence adduced by the parties, is of the opinion that
error was committed which injuriously affected the substantial rights of the appellant.
General Rule: The findings of the judge who tried the case and heard the witnesses are
not disturbed on appeal.
When can judgment be reversed or modified?
1. It can only reversed or modified when there has been substantial errors.
2. When the trial court has overlooked certain facts of substantial value, if considered,
might affect the result of the case.
3. When the trial court has misinterpreted the facts and circumstances established in
the record.
228 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
4. When the witnesses were heard by a trial judge other than the one who penned the
decision.
SECTION 11. Scope of judgment.
The court of Appeals may reverse, affirm, or modify the judgment and increase or reduce
the penalty imposed by the trial court, remand the case to the Regional Trial Court for new
trial, or dismiss the case.
What is the scope of judgment of the court of appeals?
1. Reverse, affirm, or modify the judgment

2. Increase or reduce the penalty imposed by the trial court
3. Remand the case to the RTC for new trial or retrial
4. Dismiss the case
Must all be alleged in the appeal in order to review the case in its entirety? No. An appeal in
criminal proceedings throws the whole case open for review. It is the duty of the appellate
court to correct such errors as might be found in the appealed judgment, whether they are
assigned or not.
On appeal the accused may be found guilty of a graver offense, or a greater degree of liabilities
or imposed a graver penalty, or assessed a greater amount of civil damage.
For example:
A. A person found guilty of falsification thru reckless imprudence by the trial court may
be found guilty of malversation thru falsification by the appellate court, so long as the
latter offense was charged in the information.
B. Where the accused was originally charged with murder but was found by the trial court
liable for assault, he may be found guilty of homicide on appeal.
229 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 12. Power to receive evidence.
The Court of Appeals shall have the power to try cases and conduct hearings, receive
evidence and performs all acts necessary to resolve factual issues raised in cases falling within
its original and appellate jurisdiction, including the power to grant and conduct new trials or
further proceedings. Trials or hearings in the Court of Appeals must be continuous and must be
completed within three months, unless extended by the Chief Justice.
Can the Court of Appeals accept evidence during an appeal? Generally, an appellate court
doesn’t accept new evidence during an appeal. Its decision is based on the records and other
documents forwarded to it by the lower courts.
It can accept evidence thought in the resolution of contentious factual issues, which are raised
in cases:
1. Falling within its original jurisdiction

2. Involving claim for damages arising from provisional remedies
3. Where the court grants a new trial based on the ground of newly-discovered evidence.
SECTION 13. Quorum of the court; certification or appeal of cases to Supreme Court.
Three (3) Justices of the Court of Appeals shall constitute a quorum for the sessions of a
division. The unanimous vote of the three (3) Justices of a division shall be necessary for the
pronouncement of judgment or final resolution, which shall be reached in consultation before
the writing of the opinion by a member of the division. In the event that the three (3) Justices
can not reach a unanimous vote, the Presiding Justice shall direct the raffle committee of the
Court to designate two (2) additional Justices to sit temporarily with them, forming a special
division of five (5) members and concurrence of a majority of such division shall be necessary
for the pronouncement of a judgment or final resolution. The designation of such additional
Justices shall be made strictly by raffle and rotation among all other justices of Court of
Appeals.
230 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
a. Whenever the Court of Appeals finds that the penalty of death should be imposed, the
court should shall render judgment but refrain from making an entry of judgment and
elevate its entire record to the Supreme Court for review.
b. Where the judgment also imposes a lesser penalty for offenses committed on the same
occasion or which arose from the same occurrence that gave rise to the more severe
offense for t=which the penalty of death is imposed, and the accused appeals, the
appeal shall be included in the case certified for review to the Supreme Court.
c. In cases where the Court of Appeals imposes reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment or
lesser penalty, it shall render and enter judgment imposing such penalty. The judgment
may be appealed to the Supreme Court by notice of appeal filed with the Court of
Appeals.
How does the CA decide the case? Three (3) Justices of the Court of Appeals shall constitute a
quorum for the session of a division.
The unanimous vote of the three (3) Justices of a division shall be necessary for the
pronouncement of a judgment or final resolution, which shall be reached in consultation before
the writing of the opinion by a member of the division.
In the event that that the three (3) Justices can not reach a unanimous vote, the presiding
Justice shall direct the raffle committee of the Court to designate two (2) additional Justices to
sit temporarily with them, forming a special division of five (5) members and the concurrence
of a majority of such division shall be necessary for the pronouncement of a judgment or final
resolution. The designation of such additional Justices shall be made strictly by raffle and
rotation mong all other justices of the Court of Appeals.
What is the procedure when the CA finds that the penalty to be imposed is death, reclusion
perpetua, or life imprisonment? Whenever the court of Appeals finds that the penalty of death
should be imposed, the court shall render judgment but refrain from making an entry of
judgment and forthwith certify the case and elevate its entire record to the Supreme Court.
231 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
When a judgment also imposes a lesser penalty for offense committed on the same occasion or
which arose out of the same occurrence that give rise to the more severe offense for which the
penalty of death is imposed, and the accused appeals, the appeal shall be included in the case
certified for review to the Supreme Court.
In cases where the Court of Appeals imposes reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment or lesser
penalty, it shall render and enter judgment imposing such penalty. The judgment may e
appealed to the Supreme Court by notice of appeal filed with the Court of Appeals.
What if the decision appealed to the CA is purely questions of Law? The CA may certify it to
the Supreme Court directly.
SECTION 14. Motion for new trial.

– At any time after the appeal from the lower court has been perfected and before the
judgment of the Court of Appeals convicting the appellant becomes final, the latter
may move for a new trial on the ground of newly-discovered evidence material to his
defense. The motion shall conform with the provisions of section 4, Rule 121.
CAN THE CA CONDUCT A NEW TRIAL?
Yes, the ground for new trial is based on newly-discovered evidence and the
motion shall conform with the provisions of Section 4, Rule 121
WHAT IS NEWLY-DISCOVERED EVIDENCE?
This is material evidence that can change the outcome of the judgment when admitted
WHEN SHOULD THE NEWLY-DISCOVERED EVIDENCE BE DISCOVERED?
The evidence must be discovered after the perfection of appeal, but before the CA
renders its judgment, because after the perfection of the appeal, the trial court loses its
jurisdiction. On the other hand, prior perfection of an appeal, the party discovering
the new evidence may file a motion for new trial with the trial court anyway.
INSTEAD OF FILING A MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL, CAN A PARTY FILE A
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION INSTEAD?
No since a motion for reconsideration only covers errors of facts or laws and not newly-
232 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
discovered evidence, which pertains exclusively as a ground for new trial

WHY IS THE PERIOD FOR FILING A MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL FROM A
DECISION OF THE RTC DIFFERENT FROM THAT OF THE CA?
For the reason that at some point in time, the case must end.
SECTION 15. Where new trial conducted.

– When a new trial is granted, the Court of Appeals may conduct the hearing and receive
evidence as provided in section 12 of this Rule or refer the trial to the court of origin.
SECTION 16. Reconsideration.

– A motion for reconsideration shall be filed within fifteen (15) days from
notice of the decision or final order of the Court of Appeals with copies thereof served upon
the adverse party, setting forth the grounds in support thereof. The mittimus shall be
stayed during the pendency of the motion for reconsideration. No party shall be allowed
a second motion for reconsideration of a judgment or final order.
WHEN SHOULD A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION BE FILED?

- A motion for reconsideration shall be filed within fifteen (15) days from notice of the
decision or final order of the Court of Appeals with copies thereof served upon the
adverse party, setting forth the grounds in support thereof.
- The mittimus shall be stayed during the pendency of the motion for reconsideration.
No party shall be allowed a second motion for reconsideration of a judgment or final
order.
- According to People vs. Mamatik = "A 'mittimus' after conviction is, in criminal cases,
similar to an execution after judgment in a civil case. It is final process. It is carrying
into effect the judgment of the court.
233 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
WHAT IS THE MEANING OF MITTIMUS?

It is the process issued by the court after conviction to carry out the final judgment such as
commanding a prison warden to hold the accused in accordance with the terms of the
judgment
SECTION 17. Judgment transmitted and filed in trial court.

– When the entry of judgment of the Court of Appeals is issued, a certified true copy of
the judgment shall be attached to the original record which
shall be remanded to the clerk of the court from which the appeal was taken.
WHAT SHOULD BE DONE AFTER THE JUDGMENT OF THE CA HAS
BECOME FINAL?
- When the judgment of the CA becomes final, a certified true copy of the judgment
shall be attached to the original record which shall be remanded to the clerk of the
court from which the appeal was taken.
- According to People vs. Sumilang = The rules on promulgation of the judgment
granted by section 1, Rule 111, refers also to said sentence or judgment of the Trial
Court. The certified copy of the judgment is sent by the clerk of the appellate court to
the lower court under section 9 of Rule 53, not for the promulgation or reading thereof
to the defendant, but for execution of the judgment against him.
SECTION 18. Application of certain rules in civil procedure to criminal cases.

– The provisions of Rules 42, 44 to 46 and 48 to 56 relating to procedure in the Court of
Appeals and in the Supreme Court in
original and appealed civil cases shall be applied to criminal cases insofar as they are
applicable and not inconsistent with the provision of this Rule.
- According to Fiscal of Tacloban vs. Espina = Fiscal may represent the People of the
Philippines in the prosecution of offenses before the trial courts. When criminal actions
234 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
are brought to the Court of Appeals or Supreme Court, it is the Solicitor General who
must represent the People of the Philippines.
Balaba v People
Facts: Accused Balaba, Assistant Municipal Treasurer of Guindulman, Bohol, was charged
and convicted with Malversation of Public Funds by the RTC on it’s decision dated December
9, 2002. On January 14, 2003 filed his Notice of Appeal before the CA which was dismissed
on its December 14, 2004 decision on the ground that it had no jurisdiction to act on the appeal
because
SB has exclusive appellate jurisdiction over the case. Hence this appeal on the ground that CA
erred in dismissing his appeal instead of certifying the case to the proper court.
Issue: WON CA erred in dismissing his appeal instead of certifying the case to the proper
court?
Held: No. An error in designating the appellate court is not fatal to the appeal. However, the
correction in designating the proper appellate court should be made within the 15-day period to
appeal. Once made within the said period, the designation of the correct appellate court may be
allowed even if the records of the case are forwarded to the Court of Appeals. An appeal
erroneously taken to the Court of Appeals shall not be transferred to the appropriate court but
shall be dismissed outright. In this case, Balaba sought the correction of the error in filing the
appeal only after the expiration of the period to appeal.
GUASCH vs. DELA CRUZ

FACTS: Respondent Arnaldo dela Cruz (respondent) filed a Complaint-Affidavit against
petitioner Mercedita T. Guasch (petitioner) with the City Prosecutor of Manila. On several
occasions, petitioner transacted business with him by exchanging cash for checks of small
amount without interest.
On July 26, 1999, petitioner went to his residence requesting him to exchange her check with
cash of P3,300,000.00. Initially, he refused. However, petitioner returned the next day and was
able to convince him to give her P3,300,000.00 in cash in exchange for her Insular Savings
235 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Bank Check No. 0032082 dated January 31, 2000 upon her assurance that she will have the
funds and bank deposit to cover the said check by January 2000. On the date of maturity and
upon presentment, however, the check was dishonored for the reason that the account against
which it was drawn was already closed.
An information for estafa was filed against the petitioner.
After petitioner entered her plea of not guilty and after the prosecution rested its case,
petitioner filed a Motion with Leave to Admit Demurrer to Evidence with attached Demurrer
to Evidence. The trial court issued an Order dated June 16, 2005 granting the demurrer to
evidence and dismissing the case.
The trial court found that respondent’s assertion of misrepresentation by petitioner that her
check will be fully funded on the maturity date was not supported by the evidence on record.
Accordingly, her guilt not having been proven beyond reasonable doubt, petitioner was
acquitted.
On June 28, 2005, respondent received a copy of the said order. On July 14, 2005, respondent
filed a Manifestation with attached Motion to Amend Order dated June 16, 2005 (Motion to
Amend) to include a finding of civil liability of petitioner. Respondents counsel justified his
failure to file the motion within the reglementary period of 15 days because all postal offices in
Metro Manila were allegedly ordered closed in the afternoon due to the rally staged on Ayala
Avenue.
Meantime, on August 30, 2005, respondent filed a Petition for Certiorari with the Court of
Appeals praying that the trial courts Order dated June 16, 2005 granting the demurrer to
evidence be set aside. The trial court denied respondents Motion to Amend in its Order dated
September 20, 2005 finding that counsel for respondent was inexcusably negligent;
Respondent filed a Motion for Reconsideration but the same was denied by the trial court.
On December 7, 2005, respondent filed a Notice of Appeal informing the trial court that he
was appealing the Order but it was likewise denied.
Consequently, on February 13, 2006, respondent filed a Supplemental Petition for Certiorari
with the Court of Appeals to set aside the Orders.
236 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
The Court of Appeals rendered the assailed Decision. On the issue of whether the issuance of
the Order dated June 16, 2005 granting the demurrer to evidence was made with grave abuse of
discretion, the Court of Appeals ruled in the negative as it found that the trial court did not
anchor the acquittal of petitioner on evidence other than that presented by the prosecution as
contended by petitioner. On the issue of whether the denial of respondents Motion to Amend
was tainted with grave abuse of discretion, the Court of Appeals ruled in the affirmative.
Motion to Amend Order dated 16 June 2005 is hereby SET ASIDE.
ISSUE: Whether the Court of Appeals erred in holding that the trial court committed grave
abuse of discretion when it denied respondents Motion to Amend.
HELD: As a general rule, the statutory requirement that when no motion for reconsideration is
filed within the reglementary period, the decision attains finality and becomes executory in due
course must be strictly enforced as they are considered indispensable interdictions against
needless delays and for orderly discharge of judicial business. The purposes for such statutory
requirement are twofold: first, to avoid delay in the administration of justice and thus,
procedurally, to make orderly the discharge of judicial business, and, second, to put an end to
judicial controversies, at the risk of occasional errors, which are precisely why courts exist.
Controversies cannot drag on indefinitely. The rights and obligations of every litigant must not
hang in suspense for an indefinite period of time.
However, in exceptional cases, substantial justice and equity considerations warrant the
giving of due course to an appeal by suspending the enforcement of statutory and mandatory
rules of procedure. Certain elements are considered for the appeal to be given due course, such
as: (1) the existence of special or compelling circumstances, (2) the merits of the case, (3) a
cause not entirely attributable to the fault or negligence of the party favored by the suspension
of the rules, (4) lack of any showing that the review sought is merely frivolous and dilatory,
and (5) the other party will not be unduly prejudiced thereby. Several of these elements obtain
in the case at bar.
First, there is ostensible merit to respondents cause. The records show that petitioner admits
her civil obligation to respondent. Respondent did not waive, reserve, nor institute a civil
237 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
action for the recovery of civil liability. Hence, since the civil action is deemed instituted with
the criminal action, the trial court was duty-bound to determine the civil liability.
Second, it cannot be said that petitioner will be unduly prejudiced if respondents Motion to
Amend for the sole purpose of including the civil liability of petitioner in the order of acquittal
shall be allowed. Respondent concededly has an available remedy even if his Motion to Amend
was denied, which is to institute a separate civil action to recover petitioners civil liability.
However, to require him to pursue this remedy at this stage will only prolong the litigation
between the parties which negates the avowed purpose of the strict enforcement of
reglementary periods to appeal, that is, to put an end to judicial controversies.
It is a cherished rule of procedure that a court should always strive to settle the entire
controversy in a single proceeding leaving no root or branch to bear the seeds of future
litigation. Given the circumstances in this case, we find that the trial court committed grave
abuse of discretion when it denied respondents Motion to Amend.
238 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
RULE 125
PROCEDURE IN THE SUPREME COURT
SECTION 1. Uniform procedure.
- Unless otherwise provided by the Constitution or by law, the procedure in the Supreme
Court in original and in appealed cases shall be the same as in the Court of Appeals.
 The Supreme Court in reviewing the judgement of a lower court in a criminal case may
determine for itself the guilt or innocence of the defendant, upon proofs presented at the
trial, because in a criminal case, an appeal to the Supreme Court throws the whole case
open for review, and it becomes the its duty to correct such errors as may be found in
the judgement appealed from, whether assigned as errors or no.
The Supreme Court may examine the judgement as to:
 Qualification of the crime and degree of the penalty imposed
 Reclassify the crime
 Increase or decrease the penalty imposed
 Assess and award civil indemnity
A case may reach the supreme court by ways of the following:
Automatic review:
1. Where the judgement of the RTC imposed upon is death, the case goes up to the SC for
automatic review.
2. When a decision of the RTC is appealed to the CA, following a review, and the later
court is of the opinion that the penalty imposed should be death or life imprisonment, it
shall render judgement imposing the penalty of either death or reclusion perpetua as the
239 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
circumstances warrant, refrain from entering judgement and forthwith certify the case
and elevate the entire record thereof to the SC.
Note: both are a matter of law and not only a matter of right of the accused.
Ordinary Appeal:
 Cases where the penalty imposed is life imprisonment, or where a lesser penalty is
imposed but involving offences committed on the same occasion or arising out of the
same occurrence that gave rise to the serious offense for which the penalty of death or
life imprisonment is imposed.
Petition for review on certiorari:
 A constitutionality or validity of any treaty, executive agreement, law, ordinance or

executive order or regulation is in question.
 The jurisdiction of any inferior court is in issue.
 Only an error or question of law is involved, the appeal is taken from the decision of
law is involved, the appeal is taken from the decision of the lower court to the Supreme
Court by petition for review on certiorari.
Two other instances:
 Those decided by the Court of Appeals
 Those decided by the Sandiganbayan
SECTION 2. Review of Decisions of the Court of Appeals
General Rule: Findings of fact in the Court of Appeals is conclusive upon the Supreme
Court.
240 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Exceptions:
1. Findings are grounded entirely on speculations, surmises or conjectures;
2. Interference made is manifestly mistaken, absurd or impossible;
3. There is grave abuse of discretion;
4. Judgment is based on misapprehension of facts;
5. Findings of fact are conflicting;
6. CA went beyond the issues of the case, or its findings are contrary to the admissions of
both appellant and appellee;
7. Findings are contrary to the trial court;
8. Findings are conclusions without citation of specific evidence on which they are based;
9. Facts set in the petition and petitioner’s main and reply briefs are not disputed by the
respondent;
10. Findings of fact are premised on the supposed absence of evidence and contradicted by
the evidence on record;
11. CA overlooked certain relevant facts not disputed by the parties which would justify a
different conclusion if properly considered
• QUESTION OF LAW– doubt or difference arises as to what the law is on certain state
of facts.
- does NOT involve an examination of the probable value of the evidence presented by
the litigants or any of them.
• QUESTION OF FACT– doubt arises as to the truth or falsehood of the alleged facts
or query necessarily invites calibration of the whole evidence; considering mainly the:
241 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
a) Credibility of witnesses
b) Existence and relevancy of specific surrounding circumstances
c) Relation to one another and the whole
d) Probabilities of the situation
SECTION 3. Decision if opinion is equally divided
• Supreme Court shall be composed of a Chief Justice and 14 Associate Justices.
• It may sit en banc or in its discretion, in divisions of 3, 5, or 7 members (CONST. Art.

VIII, Sec. 4(1))
• A criminal case shall be reheard by the SC when the Court en banc is equally divided in
opinion or the necessary majority cannot be had;
• if no decision is reached the conviction of the lower court shall be reversed and the
accused acquitted.
• ONLY the SC en banc may modify or reverse a doctrine or principle of law or ruling
laid down by the Court in a decision rendered en banc or in division.
Cases:
Villareal V People
FACTS: In February 1991, seven freshmen law students (including Leonardo "Lenny" Villa)
of the Ateneo de Manila University School of Law signified their intention to join the Aquila
Legis Juris Fraternity (Aquila Fraternity). On the night of February 8, 1991, the neophytes
were "briefed" and brought to the Almeda Compound in Caloocan City for the commencement
of their initiation. The rites were scheduled to last for three days. Lenny received several
paddle blows. After their last session of physical beatings, Lenny could no longer walk that he
242 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
had to be carried to the carport. The initiation for the day was officially ended. They then slept
at the carport.
After an hour of sleep, the neophytes were suddenly roused by Lenny’s shivering and
incoherent mumblings. Initially, Villareal and Dizon dismissed these rumblings, as they
thought he was just overacting. When they realized, though, that Lenny was really feeling cold,
some of the Aquilans started helping him. They removed his clothes and helped him through a
sleeping bag to keep him warm. When his condition worsened, the Aquilans rushed him to the
hospital. Lenny was pronounced dead on arrival. The trial court rendered judgment holding
the 26 accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of homicide. The criminal case
against the remaining nine accused commenced anew.
The CA set aside the finding of conspiracy by the trial court and modified the criminal
liability of each of the accused according to individual participation. One accused had by then
passed away, so the following Decision applied only to the remaining 25 accused:
1. Nineteen of the accused-appellants were acquitted, as their individual guilt was not
established by proof beyond reasonable doubt.
2. Four of the accused-appellants were found guilty of the crime of slight physical
injuries.
3. Two of the accused-appellants – Fidelito Dizon and Artemio Villareal – were found
guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of homicide under Article 249 of the Revised
Penal Code.
ISSUE: Whether or not the CA committed grave abuse of discretion, amounting to lack or
excess of jurisdiction, when it set aside the finding of conspiracy by the trial court and
adjudicated the liability of each accused according to individual participation (NO)
HELD: NO. Grave abuse of discretion cannot be attributed to a court simply because it
allegedly misappreciated the facts and the evidence. Mere errors of judgment are correctible by
an appeal or a petition for review under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, and not by an
application for a writ of certiorari. Pursuant to the rule on double jeopardy, the Court is
constrained to deny the Petition contra Victorino et al. – the 19 acquitted fraternity members.
243 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
A verdict of acquittal is immediately final and a re-examination of the merits of such acquittal,
even in the appellate courts, will put the accused in jeopardy for the same offense.
Colinares VS. People of the Philippines
Facts: Arnel Colinares was charged and found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of frustrated
homicide by the RTC of Camarines Sur. He was sentenced to suffer imprisonment from two
years and four months of prison correccional, as minimum, to six years and one day of prison
mayor, as maximum. Since the maximum probationable imprisonment under the law was only
up to six years, Arnel did not qualify for probation. On appeal by Colinares, the Court of
Appeals sustained the RTC’s decision. Unsatisfied with the Court of Appeal’s decision,
petitioner then appealed to the Supreme Court and took the position that he should be entitled
to apply for probation in case the Court metes out a new penalty on him that makes his offense
probationable, which was strongly opposed by the Solicitor General reiterating that under the
Probation Law, no application for probation can be entertained once the accused has perfected
his appeal from the judgment of conviction. The Supreme Court, however, found that
Colinares is guilty of attempted homicide and not of frustrated homicide.
Issue: Whether or not Arnel Colinares may still apply for probation on remand of the case to
the trial court
Ruling: Yes, The Supreme Court ruled that Colinares may apply for probation upon remand of
his case to the RTC. Ordinarily, an accused would no longer be entitled to apply for probation,
he having appealed from the judgment of the RTC convicting him for frustrated homicide. But
in this case the Supreme Court ruled to set aside the judgment of the RTC and found him only
liable for attempted homicide, if the Supreme Court follows the established rule that no
accused can apply for probation on appeal, the accused would suffer from the erroneous
judgment of the RTC with no fault of his own, therefore defying fairness and equity.
244 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
RULE 126
SEARCH AND SEIZURE
SECTION 1. Search Warrant Defined.
Search Warrant - A search warrant is an order in writing issued in the of the People of the
Philippines, signed by the judge and directed to a peace officer, commanding him to search for
personal property described therein and bring it before the court.
Nature of a Search Warrant
1. Search warrants are in the nature of criminal process and may be invoked only in
furtherance of public prosecutions;
2. Search warrants have no relation to civil process or trials; and
3. They are not available to individuals in the course of civil proceedings;
4. It is not for the maintenance of any mere private right;
5. It is interlocutory in character- it leaves something more to be done, the determination of
the guilt of the accused.
RIGHT TO PRIVACY: SECTION 2, ARTICLE III, 1987 CONSTITUTION.
Requisites for Issuing a Search Warrant:
1. The search warrant must be issued upon probable cause;

2. Probable cause must be determined by the judge;
3. The judge must have personally examined the witness, in the form of searching questions
and answers, the applicant and his witnesses and took down their depositions;
4. Must particularly describe or identify the property to be seized as far as the circumstances
will ordinarily allow;
5. Must particulary describe the place to be searched and the person or things to be seized;
6. Must be in connection with one specific offense;
245 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
7. The sworn statements together with the affidavit submitted by witnesses must be attached to
the record. (Prudente v. Dayrit GR No. 82870, December 14, 1989);
8. It must not have been issued more than 10 days prior to the search made pursuant thereto.
Distinguish Search from Seizure.
-The term search as applied to searches and seizures is an examination of a man’s house
or other buildings or premises or of his person with a view to the discovery of contraband or
illicit or stolen property or some evidence of guilt to be used in the prosecution of a criminal
action for some offense with which he is charged. A seizure is the physical taking of a thing
into custody.
Warrant of Arrest vs. Search Warrant
WARRANT OF ARREST SEARCH WARRANT

Order directed to the peace Order in writing in the name of
officer to execute the warrant by the Republic of the Philippines
taking the person stated therein signed by the judge and directed
into custody so that he may be to the peace officer to search
bound to answer for the personal property described
commission of the offense. therein and to bring it to court.
Does not become stale. Validity is for 10 days only
May be served on any day and at To be served only in daytime
any time of day or night. unless the affidavit alleges that
the property is on the person or in
the place to be searched.
Searching examination of Must personally conduct an
witnesses is not necessary. examination of the complainant
and the witnesses.
Judge is merely called upon to Examination must be probing.
examine and evaluate the report Not enough to merely adopt the
of the prosecutor and the questions and answers asked by a
evidence. previous investigator.
246 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 2. Court where application for search warrant shall be filed.
Where should an application for a search warrant be filed?
GENERAL RULE: It should be filed with the court within whose territorial jurisdiction the
crime was committed. For compelling reasons, any court within the judicial region where the
crime was committed if the place of the commission of the crime is known, or any court within
the judicial region where the warrant shall be enforced.
EXCEPTION:
1. However, if the criminal action has been filed, the application shall only be made in the
court where the criminal action is pending (Sec. 2);
2. In case of search warrant involving heinous crimes, illegal gambling, illegal possession of
firearms and ammunitions as well as violations of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of
2002, the Intellectual Property Code, the Anti- Money Laundering Act of 2001, the Tariff and
Customs Code, the Executive judges and whenever they are on official leave of absence or are
not physically present in the station, the Vice- Judges of RTCs of Manila and Quezon City
shall have the authority to act on the application filed by the NBI, PNP and the Anti- Crime
Task Force (ACTAF). (Administrative Matter No. 99-10-09-SC)
SECTION 3. Personal property to be seized:
A search warrant may be issued for the search and seizure of personal property:
a) Subject of the offense;

b) Stolen or embezzled and other proceeds, or fruits of the offense; or
c) Used or intended to be used as the means of committing an offense.
247 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Kinds of property subject to seizure:
A search warrant may be issued for the search and seizure of personal property only. (except.
machineries)
Ownership of property to be seized, immaterial:
The rule does not require that the property to be seized should be owned by the person against
whom the search warrant is directed (can be stolen property). Ownership is of no consequence,
and it is sufficient that the person against whom the warrant is directed has control or
possession of the property sought to be seized.
Particular properties to be seized
a) Property subject of the offense;
b) Property stolen or embezzled and other proceeds or fruits of the offense;
c) Property used or intended to be used as a means of committing an offense.
SECTION 4. Requisites for issuing search warrant:
1) It must be issued upon probable cause;

2) The probable cause must be determined personally by the judge himself and not by the
applicant or any other person;
3) In the determination of probable cause, the judge must examine under oath or
affirmation, the complainant, and such witnesses as he may produce;
4) The warrant issued must particularly describe the place to be searched and the persons
or things to be seized.
248 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Concept of probable cause: Probable cause has been defined as such reasons, supported by
facts and circumstances, as will warrant a cautious man in the belief that his action and the
means taken in prosecuting it are legally just and proper (a reasonable ground for suspicion).
Probable cause is determined by the judge after a judicial appraisal of facts and should not be
allowed to be delegated in the absence of any rule to the contrary.
Particular description of place to be searched and things and persons to be seized:
The evident purpose and intent of this requirement is to limit the things to be seized to those,
and only the officers of the law no discretion regarding what articles they shall seize, to the end
that unreasonable searches and seizures may not be made and that abuses may not be
committed. (typographical error would not necessarily cause its invalidation)
-the warrant for the apprehension of an unnamed party is void except in those cases where it
contains description personae (a sufficient designation of a person).
Search warrant should issue for one specific offense alone.- a search warrant shall not issue
but upon probable cause in connection with one specific offense.
SECTION 5: Examination of complaint;

The judge must, before issuing the warrant, personally examine in the form of searching
questions and answers in writing and under oath, the complainant and the witnesses he may
produce on facts personally known to them and attach to the record their sworn statements,
together with the affidavits submitted.
Examination Under Oath:
1. The search warrant must be based upon an application supported by oath of the applicant
and the witnesses he may produce.
Oath – outward pledge given by the person taking it that his attestation or promise is
made under an immediate sense of his responsibility to God.
249 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
2. An affidavit of complaint is not sufficient.

Judge must conduct examination:
1. Probable cause
2. Examination must be in form of searching questions and answers.
3. Deposition of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce must be in writing and
attached to the record, in addition to the affidavits presented to the judge.
Rights and remedies of the party against whom an illegal warrant is issued:
1. No public official or any other person has the right to enter the premises of another without
the laters consent.
2. The persons sought to be searched may resist it and may use any means necessary to
prevent the search without incurring any criminal liability.
3. Where a search warrant was defectively issued, the aggrieved party may seek its quashal
and if the search is already conducted and goods were already seized, the party may move
for their return.
4. They remedy for questioning the validity of search warrant must be sought in the sala of
the judge that issued it, not in any court of the same rank.
Motion to Quash:
1. The matters that may be raised in a motion to quash search warrant must not go beyond the
immediate, limited issue of the existence or non existence of probable cause.
2. In determining whether the seizure is valid or not, it has to determine factors which are
essential to the determination of probable cause.
Waiver of Immunity Against Unreasonable Search and Seizure:
250 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
1. The constitutional immunity against unreasonable searches and seizures is a personal right
that may be waived.
Party who may question validity of Search Warrant:
3. Only by the party whose rights have been impaired.
Illegally seized property: Inadmissible in evidence
1. Any evidence obtained in violation of the constitutional immunity against unreasonable

searches and seizures are inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding.
SECTION 6: Issuance and form of search warrant;
If the judge is satisfied of the existence of facts upon which the application is based or that
there is probable cause to believe that they exist, he shall issue the warrant, which must be
substantially in the form of prescribed by these rules.
Issuance of Search Warrant:
Issuance of warrant shall be issued upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation.
Search Warrant cannot be issued against Diplomatic Officers:
The Principle of International Law and under our system of Separation of powers, that
diplomatic immunity is recognized and affirmed by the executive branch of the government.
SECTION 7: Right to break door or window to effect search
The officer, if refused admittance to the place of directed search after giving notice of his
purpose and authority, may break open any outer or inner door or window of a house or any
party of a house or anything therein to execute the warrant or liberate himself of any person
lawfully aiding him when unlawfully detained therein.
251 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Right to break open door or window to effect search:
If refused admittance to the place of directed search after giving notice of his purpose and
authority, the officer may break open any outer or inner door or window of a house or any part
of a house or anything therein to execute the warrant.
Prior notice is required only where some persons are found in charge of the building to be
searched, where the house is unoccupied, the officers executing the Search Warrant may force
an entrance into the edifice without notice.
Any officer who shall procure a warrant without just a cause shall be punished with Arresto
Mayor (max) to Prison Correcional (min) and a fine not exceeding P1,000 pesos.
SECTION 8: Search of house, room, or premise to be made in presence of two witnesses.
No search of a house, room, or any other premise shall be made except in the presence of the
lawful occupant thereof or any member of his family or in the absence of the latter, two
witnesses of sufficient age and discretion residing in the same locality. (7a)
Search must be conducted in the presence of witnesses:
1. In the presence of the lawful occupant or any member of his family, or in their absence, in
the presence of two witnesses of sufficient age and discretion residing in the same locality.
2. Any officer who shall not follow the procedure shall be punished with Arresto Mayor
under Art. 130 of the Revised Penal Code.
People vs Tuan:
Facts: At around 9am on January 24, 2000, two male informants namely, Jerry Tudlongand
Frank Lad-ing arrived at the office of the 14th Regional CIDG at DPS Compound, Marcoville,
Baguio City, and reported to SPO2 Fernandez, Chief of the Station Drug Enforcement Unit
that a certain Estela Tuan had been selling marijuana at Barangay Gabriela Silang, Baguio
252 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
City. SPO2 Fernandez set out to verify the report of Tudlong and Lad-ing. At around one
oclock in the afternoon of the same day, he gave Tudlong and Lad-ing P300.00 to buy
marijuana, and then accompanied the two informants to the Tuan house. Tudlong and Lad-ing
entered Tuan’s house, while SPO2 Fernandez waited at the adjacent house. After thirty
minutes, both came out of the house and showed SPO2 Fernandez the marijuana leaves they
bought. After returning to the CIDG regional office, SPO2 Fernandez requested the laboratory
examination of the leaves bought from accused-appellant. When said laboratory examination
yielded positive results for marijuana, SPO2 Fernandez prepared an Application for Search
Warrant for Tuan’s house.
Upon receipt of the Search Warrant, SPO2 Fernandez and his team implemented the
warrant. Before going to the house, SPO2 Fernandez invited barangay officials to be present
when the Search Warrant was to be served, but since no one was available, he requested one
Eliza Pascual, Tuan’s neighbor, to come along. The CIDG team thereafter proceeded to Tuan’s
house. Even though Tuan was not around, the CIDG team was allowed entry into the house by
Magno Baludda, Tuan’s father, after he was shown a copy of the Search Warrant. They began
searching the rooms on the first floor in the presence of Magno and Pascual. They continued
their search on the second floor. They saw a movable cabinet in Tuan’s room, below which
they found a brick of marijuana and a firearm. At around 6pm, accused-appellant arrived with
her son. The police officers asked accused-appellant to open a built-in cabinet, in which they
saw eight more bricks of marijuana.PO2 Chavez issued a receipt for the items confiscated from
accused-appellant and a certification stating that the items were confiscated and recovered
from the house and in Tuan’s presence. Tuan was found guilty of illegal possession of
marijuana by the RTC.
The Court of Appeals held that the contested search and consequent seizure of the marijuana
bricks were done pursuant to the Search Warrant validly issued by the MTCC. There was no
showing of procedural defects or lapses in the issuance of said Search Warrant as the records
support that the issuing judge determined probable cause only after conducting the searching
inquiry and personal examination of the applicant and the latter’s witnesses, in compliance
253 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
with the requirements of the Constitution. Hence, the appellate court affirmed the conviction of
Tuan for illegal possession of marijuana.
Issue: whether or not the trial court erred in not considering as void the Search Warrant issued
against Tuan.
Held: No. The validity of the issuance of a search warrant rests upon the following factors: (1)
it must be issued upon probable cause; (2) the probable cause must be determined by the judge
himself and not by the applicant or any other person; (3) in the determination of probable
cause, the judge must examine, under oath or affirmation, the complainant and such witnesses
as the latter may produce; and (4) the warrant issued must particularly describe the place to be
searched and persons or things to be seized A magistrate’s determination of probable cause for
the issuance of a search warrant is paid great deference by a reviewing court, as long as there
was substantial basis for that determination. Substantial basis means that the questions of the
examining judge brought out such facts and circumstances as would lead a reasonably discreet
and prudent man to believe that an offense has been committed, and the objects in connection
with the offense sought to be seized are in the place sought to be searched. Such substantial
basis exists in this case.SPO2 Fernandez based his Application for Search Warrant not only on
the information relayed to him by Lad-ing and Tudlong. He also arranged for a test buy and
conducted surveillance of accused-appellant. Equally without merit is accused-appellants
assertion that the Search Warrant did not describe with particularity the place to be searched.
A description of the place to be searched is sufficient if the officer serving the warrant can,
with reasonable effort, ascertain and identify the place intended and distinguish it from other
places in the community. A designation or description that points out the place to be searched
to the exclusion of all others, and on inquiry unerringly leads the peace officers to it, satisfies
the constitutional requirement of definiteness. In the case at bar, the address and description of
the place to be searched in the Search Warrant was specific enough. There was only one house
located at the stated address, which was accused-appellants residence, consisting of a structure
with two floors and composed of several rooms.
254 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 9: Time of making search:
The warrant must direct that it be served in the day time, unless the affidavit asserts that the
property is on the person or in the place ordered to be searched, in which case a direction may
be inserted that it be served at any time of the day or night. (8)
Time for the execution of Search Warrant:
General Rule: Search Warrant must be served in the DAY TIME, or that portion of the 24-
hours in which a man’s person and countenance are distinguishable.
Exception: A search may be made at night when it is positively asserted in the affidavit that
the property is on the person or in the place ordered to be searched.
SECTION 10. Validity of search warrant:

A search warrant shall be valid for ten (10) days from its date. Thereafter it shall be void.
Duration of the validity of a search warrant:
A search warrant shall be valid for ten (10) days from its date. Thereafter, it shall be void (Sec.
10, Rule 126, Rules of Court).
SECTION 11. Receipt for the property seized:

The officer seizing property under the warrant must give a detailed receipt for the same to the
lawful occupant of the premises in whose presence the search and seizure were made, or in the
absence of such occupant, must, in the presence of at least two witnesses of sufficient age and
discretion residing in the same locality, leave a receipt in the place in which he found the
seized property.
The officer seizing the property must give a detailed receipt for the same to the lawful
occupant of the premises in whose presence the search and seizure were made, or in the
absence of such occupant, must, in the presence of at least two witnesses of sufficient age and
discretion residing in the same locality, leave a receipt in the place in which he found the
seized property (Sec. 11, Rule 126, Rules of Court).
255 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 12: Delivery of property and inventory thereof to court; return and
proceedings thereon:
(a) The officer must forthwith deliver the property seized to the judge who issued the warrant,
together with a true inventory thereof duly verified under oath.
(b) Ten (10) days after issuance of the search warrant, the issuing judge shall ascertain if the
return has been made, and if none, shall summon the person to whom the warrant was issued
and require him to explain why no return was made. If the return has been made, the judge
shall ascertain whether section 11 of this Rule has been complained with and shall require that
the property seized be delivered to him. The judge shall see to it that subsection (a) hereof has
been complied with.
(c) The return on the search warrant shall be filed and kept by the custodian of the log book on
search warrants who shall enter therein the date of the return, the result, and other actions of
the judge.
A violation of this section shall constitute contempt of court.
Duties of the officer after the search and seizure; delivery and inventory:
(a) The officer must forthwith deliver the property seized to the judge who issued the warrant;
(b) The officer must, together with the delivery of the property also deliver a true inventory of
the property seized. Such inventory must be duly verified under oath (Sec. 12, Rule 126, Rules
of Court).
Note: A violation of the above rules shall constitute contempt of court (Sec.12, Rule 126,
Rules of Court).
Duty of the judge; return and other proceedings:
1. Under Sec. 12(b) of Rule 126, the judge issuing the search warrant has the following duties:
(a) The judge who issued the warrant shall ascertain if the return has been made. He shall
do so ten (10) days after issuance of the search warrant.
(b) If no return has been made, the judge shall summon the person to whom the warrant
was issued and require him to explain why no return was made.
(c) If the return has been made, the judge shall ascertain whether Sec. 11 of Rule 126
(giving of a receipt for the property seized) was complied with and shall require that the
256 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
property seized be delivered to him. The judge shall also see to it that subsection "a" of Sec. 12
of Rule 126 (delivery of the property seized and true inventory) has been complied with.
2. A judge should know that his duty as a magistrate does not end when the warrant is issued.
When the evidence shows that the judge who issued the search warrant did not require the
officers executing the warrant to make an accurate and complete inventory of the things seized
and submit the same to him, he is guilty of gross ignorance of the law (Betoy v. Coliflores, 483
SCRA 435).
Santos v. Pryce Gases, Inc.,
The Court found that the Court of Appeals, in reversing the order of the trial court granting the
motion to quash, erred in ordering the return of the seized items to respondent. The Court held
that Section 12, Rule 126 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure expressly mandates the
delivery of the seized items to the judge who issued the search warrant to be kept in custodia
legis in anticipation of the criminal proceedings against petitioner. The delivery of the items
seized to the court which issued the warrant together with a true and accurate inventory
thereof, duly verified under oath, is mandatory in order to preclude the substitution of said
items by interested parties. The judge who issued the search warrant is mandated to ensure
compliance with the requirements for:
(1) The issuance of a detailed receipt for the property received,
(2) Delivery of the seized property to the court, together with
(3) A verified true inventory of the items seized. Any violation of the foregoing
constitutes contempt of court.
Duty of the custodian of the log book:
The return on the search warrant shall be filed and kept by the custodian of the log book on
search warrants who shall enter therein the date of the return, the result, and other actions of
the judge (Sec. 12, Rule 126, Rules of Court) A violation of the above rules shall constitute
contempt of court (Sec.12, Rule 126, Rules of Court).
257 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECTION 13: Search incidental to lawful arrestA person lawfully arrested may be
searched for dangerous weapons or anything which may have been used or constitute proof in
the commission of an offense without a warrant.
Valid warrantless search:
Immediate control test - A search incidental to a lawful warrantless arrest may extend
beyond the person of the one arrested to include the premises or surroundings under his
immediate control
SEARCH INCIDENTAL TO AN ARREST
In flagrante delicto arrest
Requisites:
1. The person to be arrested must execute an overt act indicating that he has just
committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit a crime; and
2. Such overt acts is done in the presence or within the view of the arresting officer.
Waiver or Consent Searches”
To constitute a WAIVER:
1. The right exist
2. The person involved had knowledge, actual or constructive, of the existence of such
right
3. The person had actual intention to relinquish the right
It is the state which has the burden of proving, by clear and positive testimony, which the
necessary consent was obtained freely and voluntarily.
258 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Customs Searches - The jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Customs is clearly with regard to
custom duties. Should the PNP suspect anything, it should coordinate with the BOC and obtain
written authority in order to conduct searches and seizures or arrest.
Search of Moving Vehicles, Vessels and Aircraft -Justified on the ground that it is not
practicable to secure warrant because the vehicle can be quickly moved out of the locality or
jurisdiction.
Nonetheless, officers conducting the search should have reasonable or probable cause to
believe that they will find instrumentality of a crime.
Seizure of evidence in plain view:
Requisites:
a. There must have been a legal presence in the place where the search is made;
b. The evidence was discovered inadvertently by an officer with a right to be where he is;
c. The evidence is immediately apparently illegal; and
d. There is no need for any further search to obtain the evidence
STOP AND FRISK Theory:
This is a limited protective search of the outer clothing of a person to determine the presence of
weapons.
Probable cause is not required but a genuine reason (not mere suspicion) must exist, in the light
of the officer’s experience and surrounding circumstances, to warrant the belief that the
persons has concealed weapons
Exigent and emergency circumstances:
Such urgency and exigency of the moment for which a search warrant could lawfully be
dispensed with.
259 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
There was a prevailing general chaos and disorder because of an ongoing coup and the raid of
the office or building was precipitated by intelligence report that the said office was being used
as headquarters by the RAM.
People vs Mariacos:
Facts: At about 1:00 oclock in the afternoon of November 8, 2002, P/Insp. Jose Valencia of
the Caloocan City Police Station-SDEU called upon his subordinates after the (sic) receiving
an INFOREP Memo from Camp Crame relative to the illicit and down-right drug-trading
activities being undertaken along Palmera Spring II, Bagumbong, Caloocan City involving Abe
Miclat, Wily alias Bokbok and one Mic or Jojo (Exhs. E, E-1, and (sic) E-3, and E-4).
Immediately, P/Insp. Valencia formed a surveillance team headed by SPO4 Ernesto Palting
and is composed of five (5) more operatives from the Drug Enforcement Unit, namely: PO3
Pagsolingan, PO2 Modina, PO2 De Ocampo, and herein witness PO3 Antonio. After a short
briefing at their station, the team boarded a rented passenger jeepney and proceeded to the
target area to verify the said informant and/or memorandum.
When the group of SPO4 Palting arrived at Palmera Spring II, Caloocan City at around 3:50
oclock that same afternoon, they were [at] once led by their informant to the house of one Alias
Abe. PO3 Antonio then positioned himself at the perimeter of the house, while the rest of the
members of the group deployed themselves nearby. Thru a small opening in the curtain-
covered window, PO3 Antonio peeped inside and there at a distance of 1 meters, he saw Abe
arranging several pieces of small plastic sachets which he believed to be containing
shabu. Slowly, said operative inched his way in by gently pushing the door as well as the
plywood covering the same. Upon gaining entrance, PO3 Antonio forthwith introduced himself
as a police officer while Abe, on the other hand, after being informed of such authority,
voluntarily handed over to the former the four (4) pieces of small plastic sachets the latter was
earlier sorting out. PO3 Antonio immediately placed the suspect under arrest and brought him
and the four (4) pieces of plastic sachets containing white crystalline substance to their
headquarters and turned them over to PO3 Fernando Moran for proper disposition.
260 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Issue: Whether or not the warrantless search was valid
Held: Firstly, this Court opines that the invocation of Section 2, Article III of the Constitution
is misplaced. At the time, when PO2 Pallayoc looked into the contents of the suspicious bags,
there was no identified owner. He asked the other passengers atop the jeepney but no one knew
who owned the bags. Thus, there could be no violation of the right when no one was entitled
thereto at that time.
Second: The search was conducted in a moving vehicle. Time and again, a search of a moving
vehicle has been justified on the ground that the mobility of motor vehicles makes it possible
for the vehicle to move out of the locality or jurisdiction in which the warrant must be sought.
Thus, under the facts, PO2 Pallayoc could not be expected to secure a search warrant in order
to check the contents of the bags which were loaded on top of the moving jeepney. Otherwise,
a search warrant would have been of no use because the motor vehicle had already left the
locality.
The constitutional proscription against warrantless searches and seizures admits of certain
exceptions. Aside from a search incident to a lawful arrest, a warrantless search had been
upheld in cases of a moving vehicle, and the seizure of evidence in plain view.
It is well to remember that in the instances we have recognized as exceptions to the

requirement of a judicial warrant, it is necessary that the officer effecting the arrest or seizure
must have been impelled to do so because of probable cause. The essential requisite of
probable cause must be satisfied before a warrantless search and seizure can be lawfully
conducted. Without probable cause, the articles seized cannot be admitted in evidence against
the person arrested. Probable cause is defined as a reasonable ground of suspicion supported
by circumstances sufficiently strong in themselves to induce a cautious man to believe that the
person accused is guilty of the offense charged. It refers to the existence of such facts and
circumstances that can lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that an offense
has been committed, and that the items, articles or objects sought in connection with said
offense or subject to seizure and destruction by law are in the place to be searched.
261 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
The grounds of suspicion are reasonable when, in the absence of actual belief of the arresting
officers, the suspicion that the person to be arrested is probably guilty of committing the
offense is based on actual facts, i.e., supported by circumstances sufficiently strong in
themselves to create the probable cause of guilt of the person to be arrested. A reasonable
suspicion therefore must be founded on probable cause, coupled with good faith on the part of
the peace officers making the arrest.
SECTION 14: A motion to quash a search warrant or to suppress evidence
Where a Motion to Quash a Search Warrant may be filed?
A motion to quash a search warrant may be filed and acted upon only by the court where the
action has been instituted.
If no criminal action has been instituted, it may be filed in and resolved by the court that issued
the warrant. However, if such court failed to resolve the motion and a criminal case is
subsequently filed in another court, motion shall be resolve by the latter court.
Remedies of a party:
Motion to quash the search warrant with the issuing court;
Motion to suppress evidence with the court trying the criminal case; or
Replevin, if the objects are legally possessed.
* Remedy is alternative, not cumulative.
Objection to issuance or service of a warrant:
Any objection concerning the issuance or service of a warrant or a procedure in the acquisition
by the court of jurisdiction over the person of the accused must be made before he enters his
plea, otherwise the objection is deemed waived.
262 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Esquillo vs People:
Facts: On the basis of an informants tip, PO1 Cruzin, together with PO2 Angel Aguas,
proceeded at around 4p.m. on December 10, 2002 to Bayanihan St., Malibay, Pasay City to
conduct surveillance on the activities of an alleged notorious snatcher operating in the area
known only as Ryan.
As PO1 Cruzin alighted from the private vehicle that brought him and PO2 Aguas to the target
area, he glanced in the direction of petitioner who was standing three meters away and seen
placing inside a yellow cigarette case what appeared to be a small heat-sealed transparent
plastic sachet containing white substance. While PO1 Cruz was not sure what the plastic sachet
contained, he became suspicious when petitioner started acting strangely as he began to
approach her. He then introduced himself as a police officer to petitioner and inquired about
the plastic sachet she was placing inside her cigarette case. Instead of replying, however,
petitioner attempted to flee to her house nearby but was timely restrained by PO1 Cruzin who
then requested her to take out the transparent plastic sachet from the cigarette case.PO1 Cruzin
confiscated the plastic sachet on which he marked her initials SRE. With the seized item,
petitioner was brought for investigation to a Pasay City Police Station.
Petitioner claimed that the evidence against her was planted, stemming from an all too obvious
attempt by the police officers to extort money from her and her family.
On July 28, 2003 the Trial Court found Esquillo guilty of illegal possession of
Methylamphetamine Hydrochloride or shabu.
Before the Court of Appeals, appellant questioned as illegal her arrest without warrant to thus
render any evidence obtained on the occasion thereof inadmissible.
In its challenged Decision affirming petitioners conviction, the appellate court, held that
the police officers had probable cause to search petitioner under the stop-and-frisk concept, a
recognized exception to the general rule prohibiting warrantless searches.
Issue: Whether or not Esquillo was illegally arrested
263 | P a g e
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Held: No. Petitioner did not question early on her warrantless arrest before her
arraignment. Neither did she take steps to quash the Information on such ground. Verily, she
raised the issue of warrantless arrest as well as the inadmissibility of evidence acquired on the
occasion thereof for the first time only on appeal before the appellate court.By such omissions,
she is deemed to have waived any objections on the legality of her arrest.
That a search may be conducted by law enforcers only on the strength of a valid search warrant
is settled. The same, however, admits of exceptions, viz:
(1) consented searches; (2) as an incident to a lawful arrest; (3) searches of vessels and
aircraft for violation of immigration, customs, and drug laws; (4) searches of moving vehicles;
(5) searches of automobiles at borders or constructive borders; (6) where the prohibited articles
are in plain view; (7) searches of buildings and premises to enforce fire, sanitary, and building
regulations; and (8) stop and frisk operations.
What is, therefore, essential is that a genuine reason must exist, in light of the police officers
experience and surrounding conditions, to warrant the belief that the person who manifests
unusual suspicious conduct has weapons or contraband concealed about him. Such a stop-and-
frisk practice serves a dual purpose: (1) the general interest of effective crime prevention and
detection, which underlies the recognition that a police officer may, under
appropriate circumstances and in an appropriate manner, approach a person for purposes of
investigating possible criminal behavior even without probable cause; and (2) the more
pressing interest of safety and self-preservation which permit the police officer to take steps to
assure himself that the person with whom he deals is not armed with a deadly weapon that
could unexpectedly and fatally be used against the police officer. From these standards, the
Court finds that the questioned act of the police officers constituted a valid stop-and-frisk
operation.
264 | P a g e
[Type the author name]
[Type text] Page 265

Crimpro Compilation of All Reports

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Crimpro Compilation of All Reports

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Crimpro Compilation of All Reports

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

RULE 126 SEARCH AND SEIZURE

Distinguish criminal law from criminal procedure.

CRIMINAL LAW CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

System of Criminal Procedure

1. INQUISITORIAL – Which has been in existence since early stage of legal

3. MIXED SYSTEM – Commixture of the Inquisitorial and Accusatorial system. It

What determines jurisdiction of the court in criminal cases?

1. The geographical limits of its territory;

a. Subsequent valid amendment of the information (People v. Chipeco GR No.

b. Subsequent statutory amendment of the rules of jurisdiction UNLESS the

Requisites for the valid exercise of criminal jurisdiction?

- It is determined by the allegations in the complaint or information not by the results of

How is Jurisdiction determined If the penalty is fine?

Jurisdiction in Complex Crime

Jurisdiction over Continuing Crimes

Jurisdiction over crimes punishable by Destierro;

Will injunction lie to restrain criminal prosecution?

- GR: Writs of injunction or prohibition to restrain criminal prosecution are generally

7. Where the court has no jurisdiction over the offense;

8. Where it is a case of persecution rather than prosecution;

- 1973 and 1987 Philippine Constitution

Jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan

• Under RA 8249, to determine whether the Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction, lawyers

• The nature of the offense.

• The salary grade of the public official.

Offences or crimes under the jurisdiction of sandiganbayan:

Original and Exclusive Jurisdiction:

• R.A 3019- Anti Graft and Corrupt practices act.

• R.A 1379- Ill-gotten Wealth

• Bribery (Direct, Indirect, Qualified Bribery)

• Exec. Orders 1, 2, 14, 14-A (THE PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION ON GOOD

Estefan, under Hannah serena vs. Sandiganbayan

• it is well established that compensation is not an essential element of public office. At

Estafa through Fasification, Ramiscal vs Sandiganbayan

Who committed the offence/crime

• Private Individuals committing the offense/crime with public officers.

a) Provincial governors, vice-governors, members of the sangguniang panlalawigan,

g) President, directors or trustees or managers of government owned or controlled

People vs. Henry t. Go

• In contemplation of law “the act of one is the act of all”.

• When a defendant in a criminal case is brought before a competent court by virtue of a

How was the crime committed?

Jurisdiction of Regional Trial Court

Original and Exclusive Jurisdiction:

Jurisdiction of Family Courts

F. Metropolitan/Municipal Trial Court

Criminal Jurisdiction of the Municipal

following criminal jurisdiction:

5. Violations of B.P. 22 (Bouncing Checks Law) (A.M. No.

00-11-01-SC, March 25,2003);

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;

c. Offenses involving damage to property through criminal negligence where the

Courts of Muslim Mindanao (RA 6734 as amended by 9054)

Republic Act No. 9054

AN ACT TO STRENGTHEN AND EXPAND THE ORGANIC ACT FOR THE

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress