Criminal Procedure CLJ 6 Notes

U.P.
LAW BOC CRIMINAL PROCEDURE REMEDIAL LAW
III. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
A. GENERAL MATTERS
1. Jurisdiction over Subject Matter and Jurisdiction over Person of the

Accused Distinguished
Jurisdiction over Jurisdiction over Territorial jurisdiction

subject matter person of the accused
Definition The authority of the court… The place of the

commission of the
…to …over the person offense charged
hear and decide the charged determines venue of
case. Simply put, it the action, and is an
means jurisdiction essential element of
over the offense jurisdiction [Alfelor v.
charged Intia G.R. No. L-27590
(1976)]
Exception: Those
crimes mentioned in
Art. 2, RPC are not
covered by this rule
How Conferred by law; Acquired through: The offense should

acquired cannot be conferred 1. Arrest of the have been committed
by the parties accused or any one of its
2. Consent of the essential ingredients
Jurisdiction cannot accused took place within the
be fixed by the will of 3. Waiver of objections territorial jurisdiction of
the parties; nor as when the said court. [Uy v. CA,
acquired through accused enters his G.R. No. 119000
waiver, or enlarged plea (1997)] One cannot be
by the parties’ 4. Voluntary held to answer for any
omission; nor submission of the crime he committed
conferred by accused to the except in the
acquiescence of the jurisdiction of the jurisdiction where he
court, or by mere court. committed said crime
administrative policy [People v. Mercado,
Page 354 of 525

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL PROCEDURE REMEDIAL LAW
of any trial court G.R. No. L-2760

[Cudia v. Court of (1950)]
Appeals, G.R. No. Note: there is no
110315 (1998)] voluntary appearance
in case of special
appearance to
challenge the
jurisdiction of the court
[Garcia v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R.
Nos. 170122 & 171381
(2009)]
How to Jurisdiction is N/A Jurisdiction is

determine determined by the determined by the
which court allegations in the allegations in the
has complaint or complaint or
jurisdiction information [Avecilla information [Avecilla v.
v. People, G.R. No. People, G.R. No.
46370 (1992)]. 46370 (1992)].
Applicable Jurisdiction is N/A N/A

law to determined by the
determine procedural law in
jurisdiction force at the time of
the institution of the
action; not the law in
force at the time of
the commission of
the crime [People v.
Lagon, G.R. No.
45815 (1990)]
In determining
whether the court
has jurisdiction over
an offense, the
penalty to be
considered is that
which may, under
law, be imposed for
the offense and not
Page 355 of 525

the actual penalty

imposed after trial
Waiver of Cannot be waived by Right to object may be Cannot be waived by

objection the parties waived (e.g., failure of the parties
the accused to object
in time)
Principle of adherence of Exception: When subsequent legislation:

jurisdiction/continuing jurisdiction 1. Expressly provides, or
General rule: Once a court acquires 2. Is clearly intended to apply to actions
jurisdiction over a controversy, it shall continue pending before its enactment [Palana v.
to exercise it until final determination of the People, G. R. No. 149995 (2007)]
case [Mendoza v. Comelec, G.R. No. 188308
(2009)]. Dismissal of the case on jurisdictional
grounds
It is not affected by: General rule: An objection on the ground that
1. A valid amendment of the information the court lacks jurisdiction over the subject
[People v. Chupeco, G.R. No. L-19568 matter may be raised or considered motu
(1964)]; or proprio by the court at any stage of the
2. Subsequent legislation vesting jurisdiction proceedings or appeal
in another tribunal.
Exception: Estoppel by reasons of public
policy, as when the party has initially invoked
such jurisdiction [Tijam v. Sibonghanoy, G.R.
no. L-21450 (1968)]
Page 356 of 525

2. Requisites for Exercise of 3. Offenses involving damage to property

through criminal negligence [Sec. 32, B.P.
Criminal Jurisdiction
129]
Criminal jurisdiction 4. Summary procedure in certain cases
The authority to hear and try a particular a. Violations of traffic laws, rules and
offense and impose the punishment for it regulations
[People v. Mariano, G.R. No. L-40527 (1976)] b. Violations of the rental law
c. B.P. 22 cases
Requisites for a court to exercise d. Violation of municipal and city
jurisdiction: ordinances
a. Subject matter jurisdiction: the offense is e. All other criminal cases where the
one it is authorized by law to take penalty prescribed by law for the
cognizance of offense charged is imprisonment not
b. Territorial jurisdiction: the offense has exceeding 6 months, or a fine not
been committed within its territorial
exceeding P1,000, or both
jurisdiction
f. Offenses involving damage to property
c. Jurisdiction over the person: the person
through criminal negligence where the
charged must have been brought before it
for trial, forcibly by arrest or upon his imposable penalty does not exceed
voluntary submission to the court. P10,000 [Sec. 1(b), 1991 Rules on
Summary Procedure]
All three requisites must concur before a court 5. Special jurisdiction to decide on
can acquire jurisdiction [Antiporda v. applications for bail in the absence of all
Garchitorena, G.R. No. 133289 (1999), citing RTC judges in a province or city [Sec. 35,
Arula v. Espino, G.R. No. L-28949 (1969)]. B.P. 129, as amended by R.A. 7691].
3. Jurisdiction of Criminal Concurrent original jurisdiction with RTCs over

violations of R.A. 7610 (Child Abuse Act) in
Courts
cities or provinces where there are no family
courts yet, depending on the penalties
a. MTC/MeTC/MCTC
prescribed for the offense charged [Sec. 16-A,
R.A. 7610, as amended by R.A. 9231]
Jurisdiction
Except those cases falling within the
SC Admin Circ. No. 09-94 (1994):
jurisdiction of higher courts, these courts shall
# The provisions of Sec. 32(2) of B.P. 129,
have exclusive original jurisdiction over:
1. Violations of city or municipal ordinances apply only to offenses punishable by
committed within their territorial jurisdiction imprisonment or fine, or both, in which
[Sec. 32, B.P. 129, as amended] cases the amount of the fine is disregarded
2. Offenses punishable with imprisonment not in determining the jurisdiction of the court.
exceeding 6 years irrespective of the # In cases where the law only imposes the
amount of fine, and regardless of other fine, and such fine exceeds P4,000, the
imposable or accessory penalties, RTC shall have jurisdiction, including
including civil liability irrespective of its offenses committed by public officers
kind, nature, or value [Sec. 32, B.P. 129] and employees in relation to their office
Page 357 of 525

b. RTC c. Sandiganbayan
Jurisdiction Jurisdiction
Exclusive original jurisdiction in criminal 1. Violations of R.A. 3019
cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of 2. Violations of R.A. 1379
any court, tribunal or body, EXCEPT those 3. Violations of Book 2, Title VII, Section 2,
under the exclusive and concurrent jurisdiction Chapter 2 of the RPC (Indirect Bribery,
of the Sandiganbayan [Sec. 20, B.P. 129] Corruption of Public officials, etc.), where
Appellate jurisdiction over cases decided by one or more of the accused are officials
first-level courts within its territorial jurisdiction occupying the following positions in the
[Sec. 22, B.P. 129, as amended by R.A. 7691]
government, at the time of the commission
of the offense:
Jurisdiction over criminal cases under specific
a. Officials of the executive branch
laws such as:
1. Criminal and civil aspects of written occupying the positions of regional
defamation [Art. 360, RPC] direction and higher, otherwise
2. Criminal cases commenced by information classified as Grade “27” and higher of
against a child upon determination of R.A. 6758 (see enumeration in RA
probable cause by the prosecutor [Sec. 33, 10660)
R.A. 9344, as amended by R.A. 10630] b. Members of Congress and officials
where there are no family courts [Sec. 4(g), thereof classified as “Grade 27” and up
R.A. 9344] under R.A. 6758 (see enumeration in
3. Violence against women and children, in RA 10660)
the absence of an RTC designated as a 4. Other offenses, simple or complex, with
Family Court where the offense was other crimes committed by the above-
committed [R.A. 9262 (Anti-VAWC Act)] mentioned public officials and employees
4. Designated special courts over cases in in relation to their office.
violation of R.A. 9165 (Dangerous Drugs 5. Criminal cases filed pursuant to and in
Act) [Sec. 90, R.A. 9165] connection with EO 1, 2, 14, 14-A (1986)
5. Violations of intellectual property rights [SC
An offense is deemed committed in relation to
Admin-Circ. No. 03-03 (2003)]
his office when:
6. Money laundering cases [Sec. 5, R.A.
1. The office is a constituent element of the
9160] EXCEPT those committed by public
crime as defined in the statute
officers and private persons in conspiracy
2. The offense be intimately connected with
with such public officers, as jurisdiction is
the office of the offender
with the Sandiganbayan
3. The fact that the offense was committed in
relation to the office must be alleged in the
For offenses cognizable by the Sandiganbayan
Information [People v. Magallanes, G.R.
where the information a) does not allege any
damage to the government or any bribery; or b) No. 118013-14 (1995)]
the alleged damage to the government or the
bribery arising from the or closely related Failure to allege that the offense was
transactions are of an amount not exceeding committed in relation to the office or was
P1 million [Sec. 4, P.D. 1606, as amended by necessarily connected with the discharge of
R.A. 10660] their functions vests jurisdiction with the RTC.
[People v. Cawaling G.R. No. 117970 (1998)]
Page 358 of 525

d. Military Courts 10. Where the charges are manifestly false

and motivated by vengeance
General rule: Ordinary courts will have 11. Where there is no prima facie case and a
jurisdiction over cases involving members of motion to quash on that ground has been
the armed forces, and other persons subject denied
to military law, regardless of who the co- 12. Where preliminary injunction has been
accused or victims are. issued by the SC to prevent the threatened
unlawful arrest of petitioners [Brocka v.
Exception: When the offense is service-
Enrile, G.R. No. 69863-65 (1990)]
oriented, it will be tried by the court martial;
13. To prevent the use of the strong arm of the
Provided, that the President may, in the
law in an oppressive and vindictive manner
interest of justice, order or direct, at any time
before arraignment, that any such crimes or [Hernandez v. Albano, G.R. No. L-19272
offenses be tried by the proper civil courts. (1967)]
[Sec. 1, R.A. 7055]
B. PROSECUTION OF
4. When Injunction May Be
OFFENSES
Issued To Restrain Criminal
Prosecution 1. Criminal Actions; How
General rule: Criminal prosecution may NOT Instituted
be blocked by court prohibition or injunction
[Brocka v. Enrile, G.R. No. 69863-65 (1990)] The institution of a criminal action generally
for the reason that public interest requires that depends upon whether the offense is one
criminal acts be immediately investigated and which requires a preliminary investigation (PI)
prosecuted for the protection of society or not:
[Domingo v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 109376
(2000)] Offenses requiring Other offenses
PI
Exceptions
1. To afford adequate protection to the Nature of Offenses
constitutional rights of the accused
2. For the orderly administration of justice Those where the Offenses where the
3. To avoid oppression or multiplicity of suits penalty prescribed penalty prescribed
4. Where there is a prejudicial question which by law is at least 4 by law is less than
is sub judice years, 2 months 4 years, 2 months,
5. Where acts of the officer are without or in and 1 day [Sec. 1, and 1 day
excess of authority Rule 112, as
6. When the prosecution is under an invalid amended by A.M.
law, ordinance or regulation No. 05-8-26-SC]
7. When double jeopardy is clearly apparent
8. When the court has no jurisdiction over the How Instituted
offense
9. When it is a case of persecution rather than
prosecution
Page 359 of 525

By filing the a. Filed directly Criminal cases required to be filed with

lupon
complaint with the with the MTCs and
Offenses punishable by imprisonment not
appropriate officer MCTCs; or
exceeding one (1) year or a fine not exceeding
for PI [Sec. 1(a), b. Filed with the
P5,000 [Sec. 408(c), LGC] and where the
Rule 110] office of the
parties actually reside in the same city or
prosecutor [Sec. municipality
1(b), Rule 110]
c. In Manila and Exceptions, when [PGP-ODP]:
other chartered 1. There is no Private offended party [Sec.
cities, the 408(d), LGC]
complaint shall be 2. One party is the Government or any
filed with the office subdivision thereof [Sec. 408(a), LGC];
of the prosecutor 3. One party is a Public officer or employee,
unless otherwise and the dispute relates to the performance
provided in their of his Official functions [Sec. 408(b), LGC];
charters [Sec. 1(b), 4. Parties actually reside in Different cities or
Rule 110] municipalities, EXCEPT where such
barangays adjoin each other AND the
parties agree to amicable settlement by an
Effect of institution appropriate lupon [Sec. 408(f), LGC];
The institution of a criminal action shall 5. Accused is under Police custody or
interrupt the running of the prescription period detention
of the offense charged UNLESS otherwise
provided in special laws [Sec. 1, Rule 110] 2. Who May File; Crimes That
Falling under the authority of the lupon
Cannot be Prosecuted De
While the dispute is under mediation, Officio
conciliation or arbitration, the prescriptive
periods shall be interrupted upon the filing of General rule: Complaint or Information may
the complaint with the Punong Barangay only be filed or dismissed if there is prior written
[Sec. 410, LGC] authority or approval of the provincial or city
prosecutor or chief state prosecutor or the
Limitation: Interruption shall not exceed 60 Ombudsman or his deputy [Sec. 4, Rule 112,
days from filing of complaint with the punong as amended by A.M. 05-8-26-SC] .
barangay [Sec. 410(c), LGC].
Note: Secs. 3 and 4, Rule 110 discuss who
The prescriptive periods shall resume upon should subscribe (not file) the complaint or
receipt by the complainant information.
1. of the complaint or
2. the certificate of repudiation or Exceptions: Crimes that cannot be
3. of the certification to file action issued by prosecuted de oficio [ACSAAD]:
the Lupon or Pangkat Secretary 1. Adultery
2. Concubinage
3. Seduction
4. Abduction
5. Acts of Lasciviousness
Page 360 of 525

6. Defamation outrage in silence rather than go through with

the scandal of a public trial [People v.
Rationale Yparraguirre, G.R. No. 124391 (2000)]
This was imposed out of consideration for the
aggrieved party who might prefer to suffer the
Adultery and Concubinage Seduction, Abduction, Acts of Defamation, which

Lasciviousness consists of imputation
of any of the foregoing
offenses
Who Can File
Offended Spouse Offended party, it includes: Offended Party

a. Minors, even independently of
those in item b, except if
incompetent or incapable
b. Parents, grandparents, guardian
– right to file shall be exclusive of
all other persons and shall be
exercised successively in this
order
c. State – Only if the offended party
dies or becomes incapacitated
before she can file the complaint,
and she has no known parents,
grandparents or guardian
Requirements
a. Must include both guilty The offender must not have been None
parties, if both alive pardoned by any of a and b in the
b. Must not have consented preceding column
to the offense or
pardoned the offenders
c. c. Marital relationship
must still be subsisting
[Pilapil v. Ibay-Somera,
G.R. No. 80116, (1989)].
Page 361 of 525

EVENTS THAT MAY OCCUR AFTER THE [People v. de Guzman, [G.R. No. 185843
FILING OF THE CASE (2010)]
a. Death of offended party
Pardon distinguished from Consent
Death after filing the complaint would not
Pardon Consent
deprive the court of jurisdiction. The death of
the offended party in private crimes is essential Definition
solely for the initiation of the action. [People v.
Diego, G.R. No. 1626 (1937)] Refers to past acts Refers to future acts
It is not one of the causes for extinguishment of In order to absolve In order to absolve
criminal liability enumerated in Art. 89 of the the accused from the accused from
Revised Penal Code. liability, it must be liability, it is sufficient
extended to both even if granted only
b. Desistance by offended party
offenders to the offending
spouse
Desistance does not bar the People of the
Philippines from prosecuting the criminal
action, but it operates as a waiver of the right When given
to pursue civil indemnity [People v. Amaca,
G.R. No. 110129 (1995)]. Given after the Given before the
commission of the commission of the
c. Pardon by offended party
crime but before the crime
institution of the
General rule: A pardon by the offended party
criminal action
does not extinguish criminal action but civil
liability with regard to the interest of the injured In adultery and concubinage
party is extinguished by his express waiver
[Art. 23, RPC]. If there is more than one
May be done Can only be done
accused, the pardon must be extended to all
expressly or expressly
offenders.
impliedly
Exception: Seduction, abduction and acts of
lasciviousness shall not be prosecuted if the There is implied
offender has been expressly pardoned by the pardon when the
offended party or her parents, grandparents or offended party
guardian [Art. 344, RPC] [Sec. 5, Rule 110] continued to live with
his spouse even
When should pardon be done after the commission
General rule: Pardon must be made before the of the offense. There
filing of the criminal complaint in court [People is no implied pardon
v. Bonaagua, G.R. No. 18897 (2011)] when the wife
continues living in
Exception: In rape, marriage between the the conjugal home
offender and the offended party would be after her arrest only
effective as pardon even when the offender
in order to take care
has already commenced serving his sentence
Page 362 of 525

of their children e. File criminal action against the prosecutor

for negligence to prosecute or tolerance of
[Ligtas v. CA, G.R.
the crime [Art 208, RPC] with the
No. L-47498 (1987)]]
corresponding civil action for damages for
failure to render service by a public officer
In Seduction, Abduction and Acts of [Art 27, NCC]
Lasciviousness
3. Criminal Actions, When
Must be expressly Offended party Enjoined
made cannot consent to
the crime See When Injunction May Be Issued To
Restrain Criminal Prosecution, supra.
d. Subsequent marriage
4. Control of Prosecution
General rule: In cases of seduction,
abduction, acts of lasciviousness and rape, General rule: All criminal actions commenced
the marriage of the offender with the offended by a complaint or information shall be
party shall extinguish the criminal action or prosecuted under the direction and control
remit the penalty already imposed upon him, of the prosecutor.
together with the co-principals, accomplices,
and accessories after the fact of the above- Exception: A private prosecutor may be
mentioned crimes [Art. 344, RPC] authorized in writing by the Chief of the
Prosecution office or the Regional State
Exceptions: Prosecutor to prosecute the case subject to the
1. Marriage was invalid or contracted in bad approval of the court [Sec. 5, Rule 110, as
faith to escape criminal liability [People v. amended by A.M. No. 02-2-07-SC (2002)]
Santiago, G.R. No. L-27972 (1927)]
2. In multiple rape, insofar as the other Conditions for a private prosecutor to
prosecute a criminal action
accused in the other acts of rape
a. The public prosecutor has heavy work
respectively committed by them are
schedule or there is no public prosecutor
concerned [People v. Bernardo (38 O.G.
assigned in the province or the city
3479)] b. The private prosecutor is authorized in
writing by the Chief of the Prosecutor office
Remedies if the prosecutor refuses to file or the Regional State Prosecutor
an information c. The authority of the private prosecutor was
a. Action for mandamus to compel the approved by the Court
prosecutor to charge the accused, in case d. The private prosecutor shall continue to
of grave abuse of discretion prosecute the case up to the end of the trial
b. Lodge a complaint before the court having unless the authority is revoked or otherwise
jurisdiction over the offense; withdrawn. [Sec. 5, Rule 110, A.M. No. 02-
c. Take up the matter with the Department of 2-07-SC (2002)]
Justice under the appropriate e. In case of withdrawal or revocation of
administrative procedure; authority, the same must be approved by
d. Institute an administrative charge against the court [DOJ Memorandum Circular No.
the erring prosecutor; and 25 (2002)]
Page 363 of 525

f. The prosecution of the civil liability has not EXTENT OF PROSECUTOR’S CONTROL
been reserved or waived.
Prior to filing After filing
Rule in Cases filed before MTCs/MCTCs

When the prosecutor assigned thereto or to the Matters which are The following
case is not available, the following may within the control of matters are already
prosecute the case: the prosecutor within the control of
a. Offended party 1. What case to file the court and no
b. Any peace officer; or 2. Whom to longer within the
c. Public officer charged with the enforcement prosecute discretion of the
of the law violated may prosecute the case. 3. Manner of prosecutor:
prosecution 1. Suspension of
This authority shall cease upon actual 4. Right to arraignment [Sec
intervention of the prosecutor or upon elevation
withdraw 1, Rule 116]
of the case to the RTC [OCA Circular No. 39-
information 2. Granting a
02, stating in toto Sec. 5, Rule 110, as
before reinvestigation
amended by A.M. No. 02-2-07-SC]
arraignment [Levista v.
Cases in the Court of Appeals and the even without Alameda, G.R.
Supreme Court notice and No. 182677
General rule: Only the Solicitor General may hearing [Crespo (2010)]
bring or defend actions in behalf of the v. Mogul, G.R. 3. Dismissal of the
Republic of the Philippines, or represent the No. L-53373 case [Crespo v.
People of the Philippines or State in criminal (1987)] Mogul, G.R. No.
proceedings before the SC and the CA [Cariño L-53373 (1987)]
v. De Castro, G.R. No. 176084 (2008)] 4. Downgrading of
the offense or
Exceptions: dropping of
a. When there is denial of due process of law accused before
to the prosecution and the State or its
plea [Sec. 14(b),
agents refuse to act on the case to the
Rule 110]
prejudice of the State and the private
offended party [Cariño v. De Castro, G.R.
No. 176084 (2008)], and Once a complaint or information is filed in court,
b. When the private offended party questions any disposition of the case as its dismissal or
the civil aspect of a decision of a lower the conviction or acquittal of the accused rests
court [Heirs of Delgado v. Gonzalez, G.R. on the sound discretion of the court. A motion
No. 184337 (2009)] to dismiss should be filed with the court, which
has the option to grant or deny it [Crespo v.
Cases elevated to the Sandiganbayan and Mogul, G.R. No. L-53373 (1987)]
the Supreme Court
The Office of the Ombudsman, through the
Special Prosecutor, shall represent the People
of the Philippines, except in cases filed
pursuant to EO Nos. 1,2, 14, 14-A as these are
under the PCGG [Sec. 4, P.D. 1606, as
amended by R.A. 10660]
Page 364 of 525

Limitations on the court’s control 5. Sufficiency of Complaint or

a. The prosecution is entitled to notice of
hearing;
Information
b. The court must suspend arraignment, upon
motion by the proper party, when a petition Complaint Information
for review of the resolution of the
prosecutor is pending at either the DOJ, or Definition
the OP; provided, that the period of
suspension shall not exceed 60 days
counted from the filing of the petition with Sworn written statement Accusation in
the reviewing office [Sec. 11(c), Rule 116] charging a person with writing, charging a
c. The court must make its own independent an offense, subscribed person with an
evaluation or assessment of the merits of by the offended party, offense, subscribed
the case (e.g. on a motion to dismiss any peace officer or by the prosecutor
[should be to quash]). Otherwise, there will other public officer and filed with the
be a violation of private complainant’s right charged with the court [Sec. 4, Rule
to due process and erroneous exercise of enforcement of the law 110]
judicial discretion [Martinez v. CA, [G.R. violated [Sec. 3, Rule
No. L-112387 (1994)] 110]
Who subscribes
Effect of lack of presence of the fiscal
Although the private prosecutor had previously
been authorized to present the evidence for the Subscribed by: Subscribed by the
prosecution, the absence of the City Fiscal at a. offended party; prosecutor
the hearing means that the prosecution of the b. any peace officer;
case was NOT under the control of the City or *Indispensable
Fiscal; thus, it follows that the evidence c. other officer requirement.
presented by the private prosecutor at said charged with the
hearing could not be considered as enforcement of the
evidence for the plaintiff [People v. Beriales, law violated.
G.R. No. L-39962 (1976)]
Where filed
Note: OCA Circular No. 39-02 [stating in toto
Sec. 5, Rule 110, as amended by A.M. No. 02- May be filed in court or Filed with the court
2-07-SC]: However, in MTCs or MCTCs when the prosecutor’s office
the prosecutor assigned thereto or to the [Sec. 1, Rule 110]
case is not available, the offended party,
any peace officer, or public officer charged Oath Requirement
with the enforcement of the law violated
may prosecute the case. This authority shall
Must be “sworn,” hence Requires no oath
cease upon actual intervention of the
under oath
prosecutor or upon elevation of the case to the
*Fiscal filing the
RTC.
information is
acting under the
oath of his office
Page 365 of 525

[NOTE: The complaint contemplated under Waiver of objection to sufficiency

Sec. 3 differs from the complaint filed in the General rule: An accused is deemed to have
prosecutor’s office for purposes of preliminary waived his right to assail sufficiency of the
investigation.] information when he voluntarily entered a plea
during arraignment and participated in the trial
CONTENT REQUIRED FOR VALIDITY OF [Frias v. People, G.R. No. 171437 (2007)].
AN INFORMATION
A complaint or information is sufficient if it Objections relating to the form of the complaint
states the [ADA-ODP]: or information cannot be made for the first time
a. Name and surname of the Accused; or on appeal. The accused should move for a bill
any appellation or nickname by which he is of particulars or for quashal of information
known or had been known before arraignment, otherwise he is deemed to
i. When an offense is committed by more have waived his objections to such a defect
than one person, all of them shall be [People v. Teodoro, G.R. No. 172372 (2009)]
included in the complaint or information
[Sec. 6, Rule 110] Exception: When the defect consists in the
b. Designation of the offense given by the lack of authority of the prosecutor who filed the
statute information, as such defect would be
c. Acts or Omissions complained of as jurisdictional. [Sec. 9, Rule 117]
constituting the offense
d. Name of the Offended party a. Name of the accused
e. Approximate Date of the commission of
the offense, and The complaint or information must state the
f. Place where the offense was committed name and surname of the accused or any
appellation or nickname by which he has been
FORM REQUIRED FOR VALIDITY or is known.
a. In writing
b. In the name of the People of the Philippines If his name cannot be ascertained, he must be
c. Against all persons responsible for the described under a fictitious name with a
offense involved [Sec. 2, Rule 110] statement that his true name is unknown.
Test for sufficiency of the information If the true name of the accused is thereafter
Whether the crime is described in intelligible disclosed by him or appears in some other
terms with such particularity as to apprise the manner to the court, such name shall be
accused with reasonable certainty of the inserted in the complaint or information and
offense charged [Lazarte v. Sandiganbayan, record. [Sec. 7, Rule 110]
G.R. No. 180122 (2009)]
John Doe Informations
General rule: A defective information cannot When the information does not sufficiently
support a judgment of conviction describe the accused and all are described as
“John Does,” the arrest warrants against them
Exception: Where the defect in the information are void. [Pangandaman v. Casar, G.R. No. L-
was cured by evidence during the trial and no 71782 (1988)]
objection appears to have been raised
[Abunado v. People, G.R. No. 159218 (2004)] Mistake in the name of the accused
Mistake does not necessarily amount to a
mistake in the identity of the accused
Page 366 of 525

especially when sufficient evidence is adduced during trial or may even be corrected by a
to show that the accused is pointed to as one formal amendment of the information.
of the perpetrators of the crime. [People v.
Amodia, G.R. No. 173791 (2009)] Exception: Fatal when discrepancy is so great
that it induces the perception that the
b. Name of the offended party information and the evidence are no longer
pertaining to one and the same offense. The
The complaint or information must state the defective allegation in the information is struck
name and surname of the person against down for violating the right of the accused to be
whom or against whose property the offense informed [People v. Delfin, G.R. No. 201572
was committed, or any appellation or nickname (2014)]
by which such person has been or is known. If
there is no better way of identifying him, he d. Place of commission
must be described under a fictitious name.
a. In crimes against property, if the name of General rule: The complaint or information is
the offended party is unknown, the property sufficient if it can be understood from its
must be described with such particularity allegations that the offense was committed or
as to properly identify the offense charged some of its essential ingredients occurred at
b. If the true name of the person against some place within the jurisdiction of the court.
whom or against whose property the
offense was committed is thereafter Exception: If the particular place where it was
disclosed or ascertained, the court must committed constitutes an essential element of
cause such true name to be inserted in the the offense charged or is necessary for its
complaint or information and the record identification [Sec. 10, Rule 110]
c. If the offended party is a juridical person, it
is sufficient to state its name, or any name 6. Designation of Offense
or designation by which it is known or may
be identified, without need of averring that The designation of the offense given by the
it is a juridical person. [Sec. 12, Rule 110] statute must be stated in the complaint or
information with the averment of acts or
c. Date of commission omissions constituting the offense and the
attendant qualifying and aggravating
General rule: It is not necessary to state the circumstances. If there is no designation of the
precise date the offense was committed. The offense, reference shall be made to the section
offense may be alleged to have been or subsection of the statute punishing it. [Sec.
committed on a date as near as possible to 8, Rule 110]
the actual date of the commission.
Enough to describe with sufficient
Exception: When it is an essential element of particularity
the offense (e.g., abortion, bigamy) [Sec. 11, Specific acts of accused do not have to be
Rule 110] described in detail in the information, as it is
enough that the offense be described with
Variance in alleged date from proven in trial sufficient particularity to make sure the
General rule: Allegation in an information of a accused fully understands what he is being
date different from the one established during charged with [Guy v. People, G.R. No. 166794-
trial is not fatal to the prosecution. It is just 96 (2009)]
deemed supplanted by evidence presented
Page 367 of 525

Allegations in the complaint prevail: Purpose of requiring allegation of every

# Over the designation of the offense: The element
facts, acts or omissions alleged and not its 1. To enable the court to pronounce proper
title, determine the nature of the crime. The judgment
designation is only the prosecutor’s 2. To furnish the accused with information as
conclusion [People v. Magdowa, G.R. No. to enable him to make a defense
48457 (1941)] 3. As a protection against further prosecution
# Over reference to the section or for the same cause
subsection of the statute punishing the
Failure to allege:
crime: What is controlling and determines
# Any of the elements of the offense:
the nature and character of the crime
Accused cannot be convicted of the
charged are the facts alleged in the
offense charged, even if the missing
information. [Batulanon v. People, G.R. No.
elements have been proven during trial.
139857 (2006)]
Even a plea of guilty will not cure such
defect, nor justify conviction.
Conviction of a more serious crime than
# Qualifying and aggravating
alleged
circumstances: They are not considered
General rule: Accused may be convicted of a
crime more serious than that named in the title even if proven during trial [Viray v. People,
if such crime is covered by the facts alleged in G.R. No. 205180 (2013)]
the body of the information and its commission ○ If aggravating circumstances were not
is established by evidence [Buhat v. CA, G.R. alleged, they can still be the basis for
No. 119601 (1996)]] awarding exemplary damages under
Art. 2229 (by way of example or
Exception: Cannot be convicted under one act correction for public good) [People v.
when he is charged with the violation of another Dalisay, G.R. No. 188106 (2009)]
if the change:
# Involves change in the theory of the trial Note: The failure to allege such cannot be
# Requires a different defense cured by an amendment of the information
# Surprises the accused in any way [US v. after the accused entered his plea [People v.
Panlilio, G.R. No. L-9876 (1914)] Antonio, G.R. No. 142727 (2002)]]
7. Cause of the Accusation Rule on Negative Averments

General rule: Whenever an accused claims to
The acts or omissions complained of as be within the statutory exception, it is more
constituting the offense and the qualifying and logical and convenient that he should aver and
aggravating circumstances must be stated: prove the fact than that the prosecutor should
a. In ordinary and concise language; and anticipate such defense, and deny it [Cabrera
b. Not necessarily in the language used in the v. Marcelo, G.R. Nos. 157419-20 (2004)]
statute; but
c. In terms sufficient to enable a person of Exception: Where the exemptions are so
common understanding to know what incorporated in the language defining the crime
offense is being charged, as well as its that the ingredients of the offense cannot be
qualifying and aggravating circumstances accurately and clearly set forth if the exemption
[Sec. 9, Rule 110] were omitted, the indictment, to be sufficient,
must show that the person charged does not
Page 368 of 525

fall within the exemptions [People v. San Juan, d. Crimes susceptible of being committed in
G.R. No. L-22944 (1968)] various modes
i. The allegations in the information
When habitual delinquency is alleged would be regarded as a description
The information must specify: of only one offense and information
a. Date of the commission of the previous is not rendered defective [Jurado v.
crimes
Suy Yan, G.R. No. L-20714 (1971)]
b. The date of last conviction or release
e. Crimes of which another offense is an
[People v. Venus, G.R. No. 45141 (1936)]
ingredient
f. When a single act violates different
Where complex crime is charged
Allegations do not necessarily have to charge statutes [Loney v. People, G.R. No.
a complex crime as defined by law. It is 152644 (2006)]
sufficient that the information contains
allegations which show that one offense was a Remedy to duplicity of offense
necessary means to commit the other [People Accused must move for the quashal of the
v. Alagao, G.R. No. L-20721 (1966)] information before arraignment. [Sec. 1 and 3,
Rule 117]
8. Duplicity of the Offense;
Failure to file motion to quash
Exception Accused is deemed to have waived the
objection and may be convicted of as many
Duplicity of the offense is the joinder of two or offenses are charged and proved. [Sec. 3, Rule
more separate and distinct offenses in one and 120]
the same information or complaint [Loney v.
People, G.R. No. 152644 (2006)]
9. Amendment or Substitution
General rule: A complaint or information must of Complaint or Information
charge only one offense.
Amendment
Exception: Multiple offenses may be charged A change in either the form or substance of the
when the law prescribes a single punishment same offense in the Information. It is not a new
for various offenses [Sec. 13, Rule 110]: charge; it just supersedes the original
a. Complex crimes - E.g., Acts committed in Information but relates back to the date at
furtherance of rebellion are crimes in which the original information was filed
themselves but absorbed in the single [Teehankee Jr. v. Madayag, G.R. No. 103102
crime of rebellion [Enrile v. Salazar, G.R. (1992)]
No. 92163 (1990)]
Not all defects in an information may be cured
b. Special complex crimes
by an amendment. An Information which is void
c. Continuous crimes (Requisites:)
ab initio cannot be amended to obviate a
i. Plurality of acts performed ground for quashal. An amendment which
separately during a period of time operates to vest jurisdiction is impermissible
ii. Unity of penal provisions violated [Leviste v. Alameda G.R. No. 182677 (2010)]
iii. Unity of criminal intent [People v.
Ledesma, G.R. No. L-41522
(1976)]
Page 369 of 525

KINDS OF AMENDMENT Amendment as to General rule:

Formal Amendment Substantial form can only be Amendment as to
Amendment made under two substance at this
conditions: stage of the case is
Definition 1. With leave of court; proscribed [People
and v. Zulueta, G.R. No.
This merely states This consists of the 2. It does not cause L-4017 (1951)]
with additional recital of facts prejudice to the since:
precision constituting the rights of the 1. It violates the right
something which is offense charged accused [Sec 14, to be informed of
already contained and determinative Rule 110] the nature and
in the original of the jurisdiction cause of the
information, and of the court accusation during
which, therefore [Teehankee v. his plea [Buhat v.
adds nothing Madayag, G.R. No. People, G.R. No.
essential for 103102 (1992)] 119601 (1996)]
conviction for the 2. It violates the rule
crime charged on double jeopardy.
[Gabionza v. CA,
G.R. No. 140311 Exception:
(2001)] Amendment may be
allowed if it is
When Amendment should be made beneficial to the
accused, [People v.
Before plea or arraignment Janairo, G.R. No.
129254 (2007)]
General rule: Any formal or substantial
amendment, made before the accused Test Whether An Amendment Is Formal
enters his plea may be done without leave Whether or not a defense under the original
of court [Sec. 14, Rule 110] information would be equally available after the
amendment and whether or not any evidence
Exception: If the amendment downgrades the accused might have would be equally
the nature of the offense charged in, or applicable in one form as in the other [People
excludes any accused from, the v. Degamo, G.R. No. 121211 (2003), citing
complaint/information, it can be made only Teehankee v. Madayag, G.R. No. 103102
1. Upon motion of the prosecutor (1992)]
2. With notice to the offended party and
SUBSTITUTION OF INFORMATION
3. With leave of court
When it becomes manifest at any time before
judgment that a mistake has been made in
After plea and during trial 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
Page 370 of 525

case, the court shall commit the accused to Offense The amended Involves a
answer for the proper offense and dismiss the
involved information different
original case upon the filing of the proper
refers to the offense which
information [Sec. 19, Rule 119, ROC]
same offense does not
charged in the include those
Limitations of substitution
a. At any time before judgment [Sec. 14, Rule original provided in
110] information or the original
b. The accused cannot be convicted of the to an offense charge;
offense charged or of any other offense which is cannot invoke
necessarily included therein [Sec. 19, Rule included in the double
119] original jeopardy
c. The accused would not be placed in double charge; can
jeopardy [Sec. 14, Rule 110] invoke double
jeopardy
Amendment and Substitution
Distinguished Double Can be Cannot be
Amendment Substitution jeopardy invoked only if invoked.
as the new Substitution
Applicabi- The same Involves Defense information is presupposes
lity attempted, different a substantial that the new
frustrated, offense amendment information
necessarily and it was involves a
includes or done after the different
included plea offense which
offense does not
include or is
Scope Formal or Substantial not included in
substantial changes the original
changes charge.
Necessity Amendment Must be with

of leave of before plea leave of court [Teehankee Jr. v. Madayag, G.R. No. 103102,
court has been (1992)]
entered Can
be effected Variance between Allegation and Proof
without leave Variance Consequence
of court
Necessity When Another PI is When the offense The accused will

of new PI amendment is entailed and proved is LESS than be convicted of
and plea the offense charged the offense
Only as to accused has
form, no need to plead anew proved
for another PI [Sec. 4, Rule
and retaking 120]
of plea
Page 371 of 525

When the offense The accused will Those In the proper court of the
proved is GREATER be convicted of committed on first port of entry or of
than the offense the offense board a any municipality or
charged charged vessel in the territory through which
[Sec. 4, Rule course of its such vessel passed
120] voyage during its voyage, subject
to the generally accepted
When the offense The case should principles of international
proved is DIFFERENT be dismissed law [Sec. 15, Rule 110]
and NOT and a new
NECESSARILY Information Piracy, which May be instituted
INCLUDED/INCLUDES should be filed, has no anywhere [People v. Lol-
the offense charged charging the territorial lo and Saraw, G.R. No.
proper offense. limits 17958 (1922)]
[Sec. 14, Rule
110] Libel If one of the offended
parties is a private
individual:
10. Venue of Criminal Actions a. Where the libelous
article is printed and first
General rule: Venue is criminal cases is published, or
jurisdictional. In all criminal prosecutions, the b. Where said
action must be instituted and tried in the courts individual actually
of the municipality or territory where:
resides
a. The offense was committed, or
b. Any of its essential ingredients occurred
If one of the offended
[Sec. 15(a), Rule 110].
parties is a public official:
a. Where the official
Exceptions:
holds office at the time of
Crime Venue the commission of the
offense
Felonies Proper court where 1. If the office is in
under Art. 2, criminal action was first Manila, then CFI Manila
RPC filed [Sec. 15, Rule 110] 2. If the office is any
other city or province,
Those In the court of any then file where he holds
committed on municipality or territory office
a railroad where such train, aircraft, b. Where the libelous
train, aircraft, or other vehicle passed article is printed and first
or any other during its trip, including published
public or place of departure and
private vehicle arrival [Sec. 15, Rule
in the court of 110]
its trip
Page 372 of 525

Cases filed May be filed in the place 11. Intervention of Offended

under B.P. 22 where the check was Party
dishonored or issued. In
the case of a cross- General rule: An offended party has the right
check, in the place of the to intervene in the prosecution of a crime,
depositary or collecting where the civil action for recovery of civil
bank [People v. Grospe, liability is instituted in the criminal action [Sec.
G.R. No. L-74053-54, 16, Rule 110]
(1988)]
Note: Regardless of the intervention, the
Illegal The victim has the option prosecution of the case is still subject to the
recruitment to file the case in his control of the prosecutor [Ricarze v. People,
cases (R.A. place of residence or in G.R. No. 160451 (2007)]
8042 or the place where the
Exceptions:
Migrant crime was committed
a. Where, from the nature of the crime and the
Workers Act) [Sto Tomas v. Salac G.R.
law defining and punishing it, no civil
No. 152642 (2012)]
liability arises in favor of a private
offended party (e.g. treason, rebellion,
Violations of RTCs have jurisdiction
espionage and contempt) [Rodriguez v.
RA 10175 over any violation of the
Ponferrada, G.R. No. 155531-34 (2005)]
(Cybercrime provisions of the Act,
b. Where, from the nature of the offense, the
Prevention including any violation
private offended party is entitled to civil
Act of 2012) committed by a Filipino indemnity arising therefrom but he has
national regardless of the 1. Waived the same or
place of commission 2. Expressly reserved his right to
[Sec. 21] institute a separate civil action or
3. Already instituted such action
In exceptional SC has the power to [Rodriguez v. Ponferrada, G.R. No. 155531-34
circumstances order a change of venue (2005)]
to ensure a or place of trial to avoid
fair trial and miscarriage of justice
impartial [Sec. 5(4), Art. VII,
C. PROSECUTION OF
inquiry Constitution] CIVIL ACTION
Transitory or The courts of the
1. Rule on Implied Institution of
continuing territories where the
offenses essential ingredients of Civil Action with Criminal
the crime took place Action
have concurrent
jurisdiction. The first General rule: The civil action for the recovery
of civil liability arising from the offense charged
court taking cognizance
is deemed instituted with the criminal action.
of the case will exclude
the others [People v.
Grospe, G.R. No. L-
74053 (1988)]
Page 373 of 525

Exception: When the offended party: offended party from the accused, if any,
a. Waives the civil action EXCEPT, when enforcement of civil liability by
b. Reserves the right to institute it separately a separate civil action has been reserved or
c. Institutes the civil action prior to the waived. [Sec. 2, Rule 120, ROC]
criminal action; [Sec. 1, Rule 111]
b. Reservation of right to file civil
Civil liability of employer in a criminal action
action
At most, the employer can only be held When reservation shall be made
subsidiarily liable for the delict committed by 1. Before the prosecution starts to present its
his employee. [Art. 102, 103, RPC] The evidence, and
employer cannot be held vicariously liable, 2. Under circumstances affording the
under Art. 2180, in the criminal action. offended party a reasonable opportunity to
[Maniago v. CA, G.R. No. 101809 (1996)] make such reservation. [Sec. 1(2), Rule
111]
2. When Civil Action May
Proceed Independently Note: Failure of the court to adjudge as to civil
liability amounts to the reservation of the right
to a separate civil action.
a. Independent civil actions
Effect of reservation of right
Independent civil actions those that are
The prescriptive period of the civil action that
separate and distinct from and shall proceed
was reserved shall be tolled. [Sec. 2, Rule 111]
independently of the criminal action. Only a
preponderance of evidence shall be required in
When reservation to file separately not
such cases: [Sec. 3, Rule 111]
allowed
a. When the accused in a criminal
1. B.P. 22 cases [Sec. 1(b), Rule 111]
prosecution is acquitted on the ground that
2. Cases cognizable by the Sandiganbayan
his guilt has not been proved beyond
[Sec. 4, P.D. 1606, as amended by R.A.
reasonable doubt, a civil action for
10660]
damages for the same act or omission may
3. Tax cases [Sec. 7(b)(1), RA 9282]
be instituted [Art 29, NCC]
b. Cases involving violation of constitutional
Note: In such cases, only the civil liability
rights, defamation, fraud, physical injuries,
arising from the crime charged (cause of action
refusal or failure to render aid or protection
arising from the delict) is deemed instituted.
by the members of the police or the
[Sarmiento v. CA, G.R. No. 122502 (2002)]]
prosecuting attorney, quasi-delict) [Sec. 3,
Rule 111] [Art. 32, 33, 34, 35 and 2176,
NCC] c. Separate action filed by the
accused
Prohibition on double recovery
In no case may the offended party recover No counterclaim, cross-claim or third-party
damages TWICE for the same act or omission complaint may be filed by the accused in the
charged in the criminal action. [Sec. 3, Rule criminal case, but any cause of action which
111] could have been the subject thereof may be
litigated in a separate civil action [Sec. 1, Rule
Note: The judgment of the court must state the 111]
civil liability or damages to be recovered by the
Page 374 of 525

3. When Separate Civil Action Is 4. Effect of Death of the

Suspended Accused or Convicted On
Civil Action
When the civil action is filed before the
criminal action
General Rule: If the civil action is instituted Before Arraignment
before the institution of the criminal action,
such pending civil action, in whatever stage it The criminal case shall be dismissed
may be found, shall be suspended until final without prejudice to any civil action that
judgment of the criminal action has been the offended party may file against the
rendered. [Sec. 1, Rule 111] estate of the deceased [Sec. 4, Rule 111]
Exceptions: After arraignment and during pendency

a. In cases of independent civil actions of the criminal action
b. In cases where the civil action presents a
prejudicial question The civil liability is extinguished. But,
c. Where the civil action is not one intended a. An independent civil action enforcing
to enforce the civil liability arising from the liabilities under Art. 32, 33, 34, 35 and
offense 2176 may be continued against the
estate or legal representative of the
Note: Rules preclude a motu proprio accused, after proper substitution.
suspension by the judge of the civil action; it b. b. If the civil action has been reserved
must be by petition of the defendant [Yap v. and subsequently filed, the civil action
Paras, G.R. No. 101236 (1992)]] shall proceed after substitution of
parties. [Sec. 4, Rule 111]
Consolidation of civil with criminal action
Before judgment on the merits is rendered in During appeal
the civil action, such may be consolidated with
the criminal action in the court trying the
Civil and criminal liabilities are extinguished
criminal action, upon motion of the offended
[People v. Alison, G.R. No. L-30612 (1983)]
party. The evidence already adduced in the
civil action will be automatically reproduced in
Note: Only civil liability ex delicto is
the criminal action. [Sec. 2, Rule 111]
extinguished. A separate civil action may
be instituted based on other sources of civil
Note: There can also be no motu proprio
liability [People v. Culas, G.R. No. 211166
consolidation. It must be upon motion of the
(2017)]
offended party.
After judgment
When criminal action filed before

After the criminal action has been commenced, The civil liability is not extinguished. Claims
the separate civil action arising therefrom shall be filed against the estate of the
cannot be instituted until final judgment has accused under Rule 86 of the ROC. [Sec. 5,
been entered in the criminal action. [Sec. 1, Rule 86]
Rule 111]
Page 375 of 525

5. Prejudicial Question Suspension of the criminal action [Sec.

6, Rule 111]
Definition
It does not prescribe the dismissal of the
criminal action [Yap v. Paras, G.R. No.
One which arises in a case, where the 101236, (1992)]
resolution of which is a logical
antecedent of the issue involved therein Where filed
and the cognizance of which pertains to
another tribunal [People v. Consing, G.R. A petition for suspension of criminal
No. 148193 (2003)] action based upon the pendency of a
prejudicial question in a civil action is
There is a prejudicial question only when filed in either:
the matter that has to be priorly decided a. Office of the prosecutor (in the PI
by another authority is one where the stage);
cognizance of which pertains to that b. Court conducting the PI; or
authority and should not, under the c. Court where criminal action has been
circumstances, be passed upon by the filed for trial, at any time before the
court trying the criminal case [Rojas v. prosecution rests. [Sec. 6, Rule 111]
People, G.R. No. L-22237 (1974)]
Rationale
It is a question based on a fact distinct
and separate from the crime but so To avoid two conflicting decisions in the
intimately connected with it that it civil case and in the criminal case [Sy
determines the guilt or innocence of the Thiong Shiou v. Sy Chim, G.R. No.
accused [Ras v. Rasul, G.R. No. L-50411 174168 (2009)]
(1980)]
Example
Elements
The nullity and forgery of the prior deed
a. The previously instituted civil action of sale is based on the very same facts
involves an issue similar or which would be necessarily determinative
intimately related to the issue raised of the accused’s guilt or innocence in the
in the subsequent criminal action. case for estafa. If the first alleged sale is
b. The resolution of such issue void or fictitious, then there would have
determines whether or not the been no double sale and the accused
criminal action may proceed. [Sec. 7, would be declared innocent [Ras v.
Rule 111] Rasul, G.R. No. 50411 (1980)]
Effect
Page 376 of 525

Prejudicial question where administrative 3. If the amounts are not so alleged but
and criminal cases, but no civil case, any of these damages are
involved subsequently awarded by the court, the
In San Miguel Properties, Inc. v. Perez [G.R. filing fees based on the amount
No. 166836 (2013)] the SC held that the awarded shall constitute a first lien on
administrative case before the HLURB case the judgment. [Sec. 1, Rule 111]
raises a prejudicial question that sufficed to b. Estafa – offended party shall pay in full the
suspend the criminal proceedings since the filing fees based on the amount involved
action before the HLURB was “civil in nature” [See Sec. 20, Rule 141]
and could not be instituted elsewhere except in
the HLURB whose jurisdiction over the action
was exclusive and original. D. PRELIMINARY
INVESTIGATION
6. Rule on Filing Fees in Civil
Action Deemed Instituted 1. Nature of Right
With the Criminal Action
Definition
General rule: An inquiry or proceeding to determine
a. Actual Damages - no filing fees required whether there is sufficient ground to
b. Moral, exemplary, nominal, temperate engender a well-founded belief that a crime
damages: has been committed and the respondent is
1. If amount is specified in the probably guilty thereof, and should be held
complaint/information - the for trial [Sec. 1, Rule 112, as amended by
corresponding filing fees shall be paid A.M. No. 05-8-26-SC].
by the offended party upon the filing Nature
thereof in court. What it is What it is not
2. If amount is not specified in the 1. Merely Not a trial of the case
complaint/information, the filing fees inquisitorial, and on the merits” and
shall constitute a first lien on the it is often the only does not place the
judgment awarding such damages means of persons against
[Sec. 1, Rule 111] discovering the whom it is taken in
persons who jeopardy [Paderanga
Exceptions: may reasonably v. Drilon, G.R. No.
a. Violations for B.P.22 be charged with 96080 (1991)]
1. The offended party shall pay in full the a crime, to
filing fees based on the amount of the enable the
check involved, which shall be prosecutor to
considered as the actual damages prepare his
claimed. complaint or
2. Where the complaint or information information
also seeks to recover liquidated, moral, 2. This is a
nominal, temperate or exemplary substantive right.
damages, the offended party shall pay To deny the
additional filing fees based on the accused’s claim
amounts alleged therein. to a PI would be
to deprive him of
Page 377 of 525

the full measure

of his right to due An application for or admission to bail shall not
process [Duterte bar the accused from assailing the regularity or
v. questioning the absence of a PI of the charge
Sandiganbayan, against him provided that he raises the
G.R. No. 130191 challenge before entering his plea [Sec. 26,
(1998)] Rule 114]
Who determines probable cause
This is an executive function that the courts When right deemed waived [W-FI-ANG]
cannot interfere with in the absence of grave a. Express Waiver or by silence [Pilapil v.
abuse of discretion. [Salapuddin v. Court of Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 101978 (1993)]
Appeals, G.R. No. 184681 (2013)]. A b. Failure to Invoke it during arraignment
prosecutor cannot then be compelled by [People v. De Asis, G.R. No. 105581
mandamus to file a case against an alleged (1993)]; and
criminal, except when such prosecutor acted c. Consenting to be Arraigned and entering a
with grave abuse of discretion amounting to plea of Not Guilty without invoking the right
lack or excess of jurisdiction [Hegerty v. CA, to PI [People v. Bulosan, G.R. No. L-58404
409 SCRA 285 (2003)] (1988)]
Statutory basis of the right to The right cannot be raised for the first time on
preliminary investigation appeal [Pilapil v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
This is NOT a constitutional right; rather, the 101978 (1993)]
right thereto is of statutory character and
may be invoked only when specifically When right not deemed waived
created by statute. It is not a fundamental a. Failure to appear before the prosecutor
right and may be waived expressly or by during the clarificatory hearing or when
silence [Marinas v. Siochi, G.R. Nos. L- summoned, when the right was invoked at
25707 (1981)] the start of the proceeding [Larranaga v.
CA, G.R. No. 130644 (1998)]; or
Waiver of right b. When the accused filed an application for
The right to PI is a personal right which the bail and was arraigned over his objection
accused may waive either expressly or by and the accused demanded that PI be
implication but at all times must be conducted [Go v. CA, G.R. No. 101837
unequivocal. The waiver, whether express or (1992)]
implied, must be in a clear and unequivocal
manner [Larranaga v. CA. G.R. No. 130644 2. Purposes of Preliminary
(1998)] Investigation
Mere failure of a defendant and/or his counsel The following are the specific purposes of
to appear during PI cannot be construed as a preliminary investigation [IPA]:
waiver [Larranaga v. CA, G.R. No. 130644 a. To Inquire concerning the commission of a
(1998)] crime and the connection of the accused
with it. This is so that:
When the accused waives his right to PI, the i. the accused may be informed of the
fiscal may forthwith file the corresponding nature and character of the crime
information with the proper court [People v. charged against him, and,
Perez, G.R. No. L-15231 (1960)]
Page 378 of 525

ii. if there is probable cause for believing c. Other officers as Election Code.
him guilty, that the State may take the may be [Sec. 2(6), Art.
necessary steps to bring him to trial; authorized by IX-C,
b. To Preserve the evidence and keep the law Constitution;
witnesses within the control of the State; [Sec. 2, Rule 112, Section 265,
and as amended by A.M. BP881
c. To determine the Amount of bail, if the No. 05-8-26-SC] (Omnibus
offense is bailable. [Callo-Claridad v. Election Code),
Esteban, G.R. No. 191567 (2013)] as amended by
Section 43,
3. Who May Conduct RA9369] [
Determination of Existence of b. Ombudsman:
over cases
Probable Cause public officers
and employees
Probable cause
[Section 15[1],
Probable cause pertains to facts and
RA6770
circumstances sufficient to support a well-
(Ombudsman
founded belief that a crime has been
Act of 1989)]
committed and the accused is probably guilty
c. Presidential
thereof. [Shu v. Dee, G.R. No. 182573 (2014)]
Commission on
Good
Quantum of Evidence
Governance with
The quantum of evidence now required in PI is
assistance of the
such evidence sufficient to “engender a well-
OSG: over
founded belief” as to the fact of the commission cases
of a crime and the respondent's probable guilt
investigated by
thereof. A PI is not the occasion for the full and
it) [EO14,
exhaustive display of the parties’ evidence. (1986)]
[Estrada v. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 212140
(2015)]
JUDICIAL DETERMINATION v. EXECUTIVE
Hearsay evidence is admissible during PI [De
DETERMINATION OF PROBABLE CAUSE
Lima v. Guerrero, G.R. No. 229781 (2017),
Executive Judicial
citing Estrada v. Ombudsman, G.R. No. Determination Determination
212140 (2015)] Ascertains To ascertain
whether a whether a
Who May Conduct Preliminary criminal case warrant of
Investigation must be filed in arrest should
As Provided by the As Provided by court. The be issued
Rules of Court Law public against the
a. Provincial/city a. COMELEC: over Nature prosecutor is accused [Sec.
prosecutors and all election given a broad 2, Art. III,
their assistants offenses discretion to Constitution]
b. National and punishable determine
regional state under the whether
prosecutors Omnibus probable cause
exists and to
Page 379 of 525

charge those within the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan,

whom he but also those within the jurisdiction of regular
believes to courts as well [Uy v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
have 105965-70 (2001)]
committed the
crime. [People A person under PI by the Ombudsman is
v. Borje, Jr.,
entitled to file a motion for reconsideration of
G.R. No.
the adverse resolution, under Sec. 7 of the
170046 (2014)]
Rules of Procedure of the Ombudsman. To
deny the accused of his right to file a motion for
Made by Prosecutor Judge
whom
reconsideration would also deprive him of his
Determination Determination
right to a full preliminary investigation [Sales v.
of PC to hold a of PC for the Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 143802 (2001)]
person for trial arrest of the
[Sec. 1, Rule accused Procedure for Preliminary Investigation
Purpose
112, as [Baltazar v. Filing of the complaint, which
amended by People, G.R. a. Shall state the address of the
A.M. No. 05-8- No. 174016 respondent
26-SC] (2008)] b. Shall be accompanied by the affidavits
Sufficient Set of facts and of the complainant and his witnesses,
ground to circumstances and other supporting documents to
engender a which would establish probable cause. The affidavits
well-founded lead a shall be subscribed and sworn to before
belief that a reasonably any prosecutor or government official
crime has been discreet and authorized to administer oath or if absent
committed, and prudent man to
or unavailable, before a notary public,
that the believe that the
each of whom must certify that he
respondent is offense
personally examined the affiants and
probably charged in the
that he is satisfied that they voluntarily
guilty thereof Information or
Standard and should be any offense executed and understood their
held for trial included affidavits.
[Sec. 1, Rule therein has c. Shall be in such number of copies as
112, as been there are respondents, plus 2 copies for
amended by committed by the official file
A.M. No. 05-8- the person [Sec. 3(a), Rule 112, as amended by A.M.
26-SC] sought to be No. 05-8-26-SC]
arrested ↓
[Baltazar v. Action of the investigating officer
People, G.R. a. Within 10 days after the filing of the
No. 174016 complaint, the investigating officer shall
(2008)] either:
1. Dismiss the complaint, if he finds no
Determination of Probable Cause made by ground to continue the investigation;
the Ombudsman or
The Ombudsman is authorized to conduct PI 2. Issue a subpoena to the respondent,
and to prosecute all criminal cases involving attaching the complaint and
public officers and employees, not only those supporting affidavits and documents
Page 380 of 525

[Sec. 3(b), Rule 112, as amended by Determination

A.M. No. 05-8-26-SC]. Within ten (10) days after the investigation,
the investigating officer shall determine
Respondent has the right to examine the whether or not there is sufficient ground to
evidence submitted by complainant which hold the respondent for trial [Sec. 3(f), Rule
he may not have furnished and to copy 112, as amended by A.M. No. 05-8-26-SC].
evidence at his expense [Sec. 3(b), Rule
112, as amended by A.M. No. 05-8-26-SC]. Note: Not receiving a copy of affidavits of a co-
↓ respondent does not deny a respondent his
Respondent’s counter-affidavit right to due process, since the Rules of
It must be made within ten (10) days from Procedure of the Office of the Ombudsman
receipt of subpoena with the complaint and only require that a respondent be furnished a
must comply with the same requirements as copy of the complainant’s affidavit and other
a complaint. Respondent is not allowed to supporting documents. [Estrada v.
file a motion to dismiss in lieu of counter- Ombudsman, G.R. No. 212140-41 (2015)]
affidavit [Sec. 3(c), Rule 112, as amended
by A.M. No. 05-8-26-SC]. 4. Resolution of the
Investigating Prosecutor
If the respondent cannot be subpoenaed, or
if subpoenaed, does not submit counter-
If he finds probable cause to hold respondent
affidavits within the ten (10) day period, the
for trial, he shall prepare the resolution and
investigating officer shall resolve the
information and shall certify under oath in the
complaint based on the evidence presented
information that [E-RG-I-CE]:
by the complainant [Sec. 3(d), Rule 112, as
a. He, or as shown by the record, an
amended by A.M. No. 05-8-26-SC] This
authorized officer has personally Examined
situation would have the effect of an ex-parte
the complainant and his witnesses;
investigation [Riano 210, 2016 Ed.].
b. There is Reasonable Ground to believe
↓
that a crime has been committed and the
Clarificatory hearing
accused is probably guilty thereof;
The investigating officer may set a hearing if
c. The accused was Informed of the
there are facts and issues to be clarified from
complaint and of the evidence against him;
a party or a witness. The parties can be
and
present at the hearing but without the right
d. He was given opportunity to submit
to examine or cross-examine. They may,
Controverting Evidence
however, submit to the investigating officer
questions which may be asked to the party
If he finds no probable cause, he shall
or witness concerned [Sec. 3(e), Rule 112,
recommend the dismissal of the complaint
as amended by A.M. No. 05-8-26-SC].
[Sec. 4, Rule 112, as amended by A.M. No. 05-
8-26-SC]
The hearing shall be held within 10 days
from submission of the counter-affidavits
Note: Notwithstanding the absence of a
and other documents or from the expiration
certification as to the holding of a PI (not the
of the period for their submission. It shall be
actual PI), the information is, nonetheless,
terminated within five (5) days [Sec. 3(e),
considered valid for the reason that such
Rule 112, as amended by A.M. No. 05-8-26-
certification is not an essential part of the
SC].
information itself and its absence cannot vitiate
↓
Page 381 of 525

it as such [Alvizo v. Sandiganbayan, GR. No. [Sec. 4, Rule 112, as amended by A.M. No. 05-
101689 (1983)] 8-26-SC]
5. Review Remedies to review the resolution of the

investigation officer
Within five (5) days from the resolution, the 1. Filing an appeal with the investigating
investigating officer shall forward the case to officer.
the provincial/city/chief state prosecutor, or
to the Ombudsman or his deputy in cases Note: The appeal does not prevent the filing of
cognizable by the Sandiganbayan in the the corresponding information in court based
exercise of its original jurisdiction. on the finding of probable cause in the
↓ appealed resolution, unless the Secretary of
Within ten (10) days from receipt of the Justice directs otherwise, but the appellant and
resolution, the Prosecutor/Ombudsman the prosecutor shall see to it that, pending
shall act on the resolution and shall resolution of the appeal, the proceedings in
immediately inform the parties of such court are held in abeyance [Section 9, DOJ
action. Circular No. 70 (2000)].
↓
No complaint/information may be filed or 2. Petition for review to the SOJ, who may
dismissed by an investigating prosecutor review the resolutions of his subordinates
without the prior written authority or approval in criminal cases despite the information
of the provincial/city/chief state prosecutor, being filed in court [Community Rural Bank
or Ombudsman or his deputy. of Guimba v. Talavera, A.M. No. RTJ-05-
1909 (2005); see also DOJ Circ. No. 70].
Where the investigating prosecutor
recommends the dismissal of the complaint Note: The party filing a petition for review is
but the prosecutor/Ombudsman or his allowed to file a motion for the suspension of
deputy disapproves his recommendation, the arraignment [Sec. 11(c), Rule 116].
the latter, may by himself, file the information
or direct another assistant/state prosecutor 3. If the SOJ decision is adverse to the
to do so without conducting a new PI. appealing party, such decision is
↓ appealable administratively before the
If upon petition by a proper party under such Office of the President and the decision of
rules as the Department of Justice may the latter may be appealed before the CA
prescribe or motu proprio, the Secretary of pursuant to Rule 43 [De Ocampo v. Sec. of
Justice reverses or modifies the resolution of Justice, G.R. No. 147932 (2006)]
the provincial or city prosecutor or chief state
prosecutor, he shall direct the prosecutor Note: Under Memorandum Circular No. 58
concerned either to file the corresponding (2003), no appeals from or petitions for review
information without conducting another of decisions/orders/resolutions of the Secretary
preliminary investigation, or to dismiss or of Justice on preliminary investigations shall be
move for dismissal of the complaint or entertained by the Office of the President,
information with notice to the parties. The except those involving offenses punishable by
same rule shall apply in preliminary reclusion perpetua to death [Angeles v. Gaite,
investigations conducted by the officers of G.R. No. 176596 (2011)].
the Office of the Ombudsman.
Page 382 of 525

4. The resolution of the Secretary of Justice When warrant of arrest shall not issue
may also be reviewed by the Court of A warrant of arrest shall not issue if the
Appeals through a petition for certiorari accused is already under detention pursuant to
under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court, solely a warrant issued by the municipal trial court or
on the ground that the SOJ committed if the complaint or information was filed
grave abuse of discretion amounting to pursuant to Sec. 6, Rule 112 (When accused
lack of jurisdiction [Argovan v. San Miguel lawfully arrested without warrant) or is for an
Corporation, G.R. No. 188767, (2013)]. offense penalized by fine only. The court shall
then proceed in the exercise of its original
5. In criminal cases, the ruling of the jurisdiction [Sec. 5(c), Rule 112, as amended
Ombudsman shall be elevated to the by A.M. No. 05-8-26-SC]
Supreme Court by way of Rule 65, solely
under the ground of grave abuse of 7. Cases Not Requiring
discretion [Villanueva v. Ople, G.R. No.
Preliminary Investigation nor
165125 (2005)].
Covered By the Rule on
6. When Warrant of Arrest May Summary Procedure
Issue If the complaint is filed directly with the
prosecutor involving an offense punishable by
The PI conducted by the judge which is
an imprisonment of less than 4 years, 2
properly called preliminary examination is for
months and 1 day, the procedure outlined in
the determination of probable cause for the
Sec. 3(a), Rule 112, as amended by A.M. No.
issuance of warrant of arrest [P/Supt. Cruz v.
05-8-26-SC shall be observed. The prosecutor
Judge Areola, A.M. No. RTJ-01-1642 (2002)]
shall act on the complaint based on the
affidavits and other supporting documents
When the RTC/MTC may issue a Warrant of
submitted by the complainant within ten (10)
Arrest
days from its filing [Sec. 8(a), Rule 112, as
a. Within 10 days from the filing of the
complaint or information, the judge shall
personally evaluate the resolution of the
Sec. 3(a), Rule 112, as amended by A.M. No.
prosecutor and its supporting evidence.
05-8-26-SC states that:
b. He may immediately dismiss the case if the
a. The complaint shall state the address of
evidence on record clearly fails to establish
the respondent and shall be accompanied
probable cause.
by affidavits of the complainant and his
c. If he finds probable cause, he shall issue
witnesses, as well as other supporting
a warrant of arrest or a commitment order
documents to establish probable cause.
when the complaint or information was filed
b. They shall be in such number of copies as
pursuant to Sec. 7 of Rule 112, as
there are respondents, plus 2 copies for the
amended by A.M. No. 05-8-26-SC.
official file. The affidavits shall be
d. In case of doubt on the existence of
subscribed and sworn to before any
probable cause, the judge may order the
prosecutor or government official
prosecutor to present additional evidence
authorized to administer oath, or, in their
within 5 days from notice and the issue
absence or unavailability, before a notary
must be resolved by the court within 30
public, each of whom must certify that he
days from the filing of the complaint or
personally examined the affiants and that
information. [Sec. 5(a), Rule 112, as
Page 383 of 525

he is satisfied that they voluntarily Remedies of the accused if there was no PI

executed and understood their affidavits. a. Call the attention of the court to the
deprivation of the required PI before
If the complaint or information is filed with entering his plea [Larranaga v. CA. G.R.
the MTC/MCTC for an offense covered by No. 130644 (1998)]
this section b. After the filing of the complaint/information
a. The procedure in Sec. 3(a) quoted above in court without a PI, the accused may
shall be observed. within 5 days from the time he learns of its
b. If within 10 days after the filing of the filing, ask for a PI with the same right to
complaint of information, the judge finds no adduce evidence in his defense as
probable cause after personally evaluating provided in Rule 112 [Sec. 6, Rule 112, as
the evidence, or after personally examining amended by A.M. No. 05-8-26-SC]
in writing and under oath the complainant c. File a certiorari, if refused and such refusal
and his witnesses in the form of searching is tainted with grave abuse of discretion
questions and answers, he shall dismiss [Riano 186, 2016 Ed.]
the same.
c. He may, however, require the submission The trial court, instead of dismissing the
of additional evidence, within 10 days from information, should hold in abeyance the
notice, to determine further the existence of proceedings and order the public prosecutor to
probable cause. conduct a PI [Villaflor v. Vivar, G.R. No. 134744
d. If the judge still finds no probable cause (2001)]
despite the additional evidence, he shall,
within 10 days from its submission or The right cannot be raised for the first time on
expiration of said period, dismiss the case. appeal [Pilapil v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
e. When he finds probable cause, he shall 101978 (1993)]
issue a warrant of arrest, or a commitment
order if the accused had already been Restraining preliminary investigation
arrested, and hold him for trial. General rule: The power of the Fiscal to
f. However, if the judge is satisfied that there investigate crimes committed within his
is no necessity for placing the accused jurisdiction will, ordinarily, not be restrained.
under custody, he may issue summons
instead of a warrant of arrest. Exceptions: Extreme cases may exist where
[Sec. 8(b), Rule 112, as amended by A.M. No. relief in equity may be availed of to stop a
05-8-26-SC] purported enforcement of a criminal law where
it is necessary:
8. Remedies of Accused If There a. For the orderly administration of justice;
b. To prevent the use of the strong arm of the
Was No Preliminary
law in an oppressive and vindictive
Investigation manner;
c. To avoid multiplicity of actions;
Effect of denial of right d. Since there is a prejudicial question which
The absence of a PI does not impair the validity is sub judice
of an information or render it defective. Neither e. When the acts of the officer are without or
does it affect the jurisdiction of the court or in excess of authority
constitute a ground for quashing the f. Since double jeopardy is clearly apparent
information [Villaflor v. Vivar, G.R. No. 134744 g. When the court has no jurisdiction over the
(2001)] offense
Page 384 of 525

h. When the case of one of persecution rather presence of his

than prosecution counsel;
i. When the charges are manifestly false and 2. he may apply for
motivated by the lust for vengeance bail;
j. When there is clearly no prima facie case 3. the investigation
against the accused and a motion to quash must be
on that ground has been denied terminated within
k. To afford adequate protection to 15 days from its
constitutional rights [Hernandez v. Albano, inception
G.R. No. L-19272 (1967)] [Sec. 6, Rule 112, as amended by A.M. No. 05-
l. In proper cases, because the statute relied 8-26-SC]
upon is unconstitutional, or was “held
invalid” [Ladlad v. Velasco, G.R. No. Procedure
172070-72 (2007)] An inquest is considered commenced upon
receipt by the Inquest officer from the law
9. Inquest enforcement authorities of the
complaint/referral documents which should
Inquest include:
Is an informal and summary investigation 1. Affidavit of arrest, investigation report,
conducted by a public prosecutor in criminal statement of the complainant and
cases involving persons arrested and detained witnesses, all of which must be subscribed
without the benefit of a warrant of arrest issued and sworn to before him;
by the court for the purpose of determining 2. Other supporting evidence gathered by the
whether said persons should remain under police in the course of the latter's
custody and correspondingly be charged in investigation of the criminal incident
court [Leviste v. Alameda, G.R. No. 182677 involving the arrested or detained person.
(2010), citing Sec. 1, DOJ Circ. No. 61 (1993)] [Sec. 3, DOJ Circ. No. 61 (1993)]
In the absence of an inquest prosecutor, the The inquest proceedings must be terminated
offended party or peace officer may directly file within the period prescribed under the
the complaint in court [Sec. 6, Rule 112, as provisions of Art. 125, RPC. [Sec. 3, DOJ Circ.
amended by A.M. No. 05-8-26-SC] No. 61 (1993)]
Remedy of a person arrested without a Crime or offense Period to deliver

warrant punishable by: person arrested to
After the filing of proper judicial
Before the authorities:
the complaint but
complaint or Light penalties or 12 hours
before
information is filed
arraignment their equivalent
The accused may ask The accused may Correctional 18 hours
for PI. ask for PI within 5 penalties or their
Requisites: days after he learns equivalent
1. he must sign a of the filing of the Afflictive or capital 36 hours
waiver of the complaint or penalties or their
provisions of information equivalent
Article 125 of
RPC, in the
Page 385 of 525

General rule: No peace officer or person has

E. ARREST the power or authority to arrest anyone without
a warrant except in those cases expressly
authorized by law [Umil v. Ramos, G.R. No.
81567 (1991)]
1. Arrest, How Made
Exceptions:
Definition
a. In flagrante delicto [Sec. 5(a), Rule 113]
Arrest is the taking of a person into custody in
b. Hot pursuit arrest [Sec. 5(b), Rule 113]
order that he may be bound to answer for the
c. Arrest of escaped prisoner [Sec. 5(c), Rule
commission of an offense [Sec. 1, Rule 113]
113]
d. Other lawful warrantless arrests
How made
1. If a person lawfully arrested escapes or
a. by actual restraint of a person to be
is rescued, any person may
arrested;
immediately pursue or retake him
b. by his submission to the custody of the
without a warrant at any time and in any
person making the arrest [Sec. 2, 1st par.,
place within the Philippines [Sec. 13,
Rule 113]
Rule 113]
2. For the purpose of surrendering the
Application of actual force, manual touching of
accused, the bondsmen may arrest
the body, physical restraint or a formal
him or, upon written authority endorsed
declaration of arrest is not required. It is
on a certified copy of the undertaking,
enough that there be an intent on the part of
cause him to be arrested by a police
one of the parties to arrest the other and an
officer or any other person of suitable
intent on the part of the other to submit, under
age and discretion [Sec. 23, Rule 114]
the belief and impression that submission is
3. An accused released on bail may be re-
necessary [Sanchez v. Demetriou, G.R. No.
arrested without the necessity of a
111771 (1993)]
warrant if he attempts to depart from
the Philippines without permission of
No violence or unnecessary force shall be used
the court where the case is pending
in making an arrest [Sec. 2, 2nd par., Rule 113]
[Sec. 23, Rule 114]
An arrest may be made on any day and at any
Note: A legitimate warrantless arrest
time of the day or night [Sec. 6, Rule 113]
necessarily includes the authority to validly
search and seize from the offender (1)
2. Arrest without Warrant, When dangerous weapons, and (2) those that may be
Lawful used as proof of the commission of an offense
[People v. Montilla, G.R. No. 123872, (1998)]
Page 386 of 525

In flagrante delicto Hot pursuit arrest Arrest of escaped prisoner

arrest
A peace officer or a A peace officer or a private A peace officer or a private
private person may, person may, without person may, without warrant,
without warrant, arrest warrant, arrest a person arrest a person when the
a person when, in his when an offense has just person to be arrested is a
presence, the person been committed and the prisoner who has escaped
to be arrested: officer or private person has 1. from a penal
1. Has committed probable cause to believe, establishment or place
2. Is actually based on personal where he is serving final
committing, or knowledge of facts or judgment or temporarily
3. Is attempting to circumstances that the confined while his case is
commit an offense person to be arrested has pending; or
Definition
[Sec. 5(a), Rule committed it [Sec. 5(b), 2. While being transferred
113] Rule 113] from one confinement to
another [Sec. 5(c), Rule
113]
Escapee may be immediately

pursued or re-arrested
without a warrant at any time
and in any place within the
Philippines [Sec. 13, Rule
113]
[OA-PVAO] [C-PK] N/A
1. The person to be 1. An offense has just
arrested must been Committed.
execute an Overt - There must be a
Act indicating that large measure of
he has just immediacy
committed, is between the time the
actually offense was
committing, or is committed and the
attempting to time of the arrest. If
Requisites
commit a crime, there was an
and appreciable lapse of
2. Such overt act is time between the
done in the arrest and the
Presence or within commission of the
the View of the crime, a warrant of
Arresting Officer arrest must be
[Zalameda v. secured [People v.
People, G.R. No. del Rosario, G.R.
183656 (2009); No. 127755 (1999);
Page 387 of 525

People v. Laguio, People v. Agojo ,

G.R. No. 128587 G.R. No. 181318
(2007)]. (2009)]; and
2. The person making the
“In his presence” arrest has probable
means: cause to believe, based
1. He sees the on Personal
offense, even Knowledge of facts and
though at a circumstances, that the
distance, or person to be arrested
2. He hears the has committed it.
disturbances
created by the
offense and
proceeds at once
to the scene
[People v.
Evaristo, G.R. No.
93828 (1992)]
“Reliable information” Personal knowledge does Rationale
alone, absent any not require actual At the time of arrest, the
overt act indicative of a presence at the scene escapee is in continuous
felonious enterprise in while a crime was being commission of a crime (i.e.,
the presence and committed; it is enough that evasion of service of
within the view of the evidence of the recent sentence). [Parulan v.
arresting officers, are commission of the crime is Director of Prisons, G.R. No.
not sufficient to patent and the police officer L-28519 (1968)]
constitute probable has probable cause to
Notes
cause that would justify believe based on personal
an in flagrante delicto knowledge of facts or
arrest [People v. circumstances, that the
Molina, G.R. No. person to be arrested has
133917 (2001)] recently committed the
crime [Pestilos v.
Generoso, G.R. No.
182601 (2014)]
Where a warrantless arrest is made under the accordance with Sec. 7 of Rule 112 [Sec. 5,
in flagrante and hot pursuit exceptions, the 2nd par., Rule 113]
person arrested without a warrant shall be
forthwith delivered to the nearest police station General rule: PI is required to be conducted
or jail and shall be proceeded against in before a complaint/information is filed for an
offense where the penalty prescribed by law is
Page 388 of 525

at least 4 years, 2 months and 1 day, without

regard to the fine [Sec. 1, Rule 112, , as
Exception: When a person is lawfully arrested

without a warrant involving an offense that
requires a PI, a complaint/information may be
filed without conducting the PI if the necessary
inquest is conducted.
RULES ON ILLEGALITY OF ARREST
Effect
The legality of the arrest affects only the
jurisdiction of the court over the person of the
accused [People v. Nuevas, G.R. No. 170233
(2007)]
Waiver
Any objection involving the arrest or the
procedure in the court’s acquisition of
jurisdiction over the person of an accused must
be made before he enters his plea; otherwise
the objection is deemed waived. Accordingly,
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, provided that it was raised before he
enters his plea. [Sec. 26, Rule 114]
A waiver of the right to question an illegal

warrantless arrest does not also mean a waiver
of the inadmissibility of evidence seized during
an illegal warrantless arrest [People v. Nuevas,
G.R. No. 170233 (2007)]
When invalid arrest is cured

1. When the accused voluntarily submits to
the jurisdiction of the trial court [Dolera v.
People, G.R. No. 180693 (2009); People v.
Alunday, G.R. No. 181546 (2008)]
2. By the filing of an information in court and
the subsequent issuance by the judge of a
warrant of arrest [Sanchez v. Demetriou,
G.R. No. 111771 (1993)]
Page 389 of 525

3. Method of Arrest
By Officer without By Private Person
By officer with Warrant
Warrant (Citizen’s Arrest)
1. Execute the warrant General rule: The 1. The private person
within 10 days from its officer shall inform the shall inform the
receipt. In case of his person to be arrested person to be arrested
failure to execute the of: of the intention to
warrant, the head of the 1. His authority; and arrest him and the
office to whom the 2. The cause of the cause of the arrest
warrant was issued shall arrest except in the same
state the reasons cases as those for
therefor. [Sec. 4, Rule Exceptions: arrest by an officer
113] 1. When the person to without a warrant
2. General Rule: The be arrested is [Sec. 9, Rule 113]
officer shall inform the engaged in the 2. The private person
person to be arrested of commission of the must deliver the
the cause of the arrest offense; arrested person to
and the fact that a 2. When he is pursued the nearest police
warrant has been issued immediately after station or jail, and he
for his arrest. its commission; shall be proceeded
3. When he has against in
Exception: This does not escaped, flees or accordance with
Duties of the apply: forcibly resists Sec. 7, Rule 112
Arresting a. When the person to be before the officer [Sec. 5, Rule 113]
Person arrested flees; has the opportunity Otherwise, the
b. When he forcibly resists to so inform him; or private person may
before the officer has 4. When the giving of be held liable for
opportunity to so inform such information illegal detention [Art.
him; will imperil the 125, RPC]
c. When the giving of such arrest.
information will imperil [Sec. 8, Rule 113]
the arrest [Sec. 7, Rule
113]
3. The officer need not have

the warrant in his
possession at the time of
the arrest but after the
arrest, if the person
arrested so requires, the
warrant shall be shown to
him as soon as
practicable [Sec. 7, Rule
113]
Page 390 of 525

4. Arrest the accused and

deliver him to the nearest
police station or jail
without unnecessary
delay [Sec. 3, Rule 113];
5. No violence 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 [Sec. 2, 2nd
par., Rule 113].
1. To orally summon as many persons as he deems N/A
necessary to assist him in effecting the arrest [Sec.
10, Rule 113]
2. To break into building or enclosure when the
following concur:
a. The person to be arrested is or is reasonably
believed to be in said building;
Rights of the b. He has announced his authority and purpose of
arresting entering therein; and
Officer c. He has requested and been denied admittance.
[Sec. 11, Rule 113]
3. To break out from the building/enclosure when
necessary to liberate himself [Sec. 12, Rule 113];
4. To search the person arrested for dangerous
weapons or anything which may have been used or
constitute proof in the commission of an offense
without a warrant [Sec. 13, Rule 126]
Page 391 of 525

4. Requisites of a Valid Warrant 1. was filed pursuant to Sec. 6 of Rule 112

or
of Arrest
2. is for an offense penalized by fine only
[Sec. 5(c), Rule 112, as amended by
Essential requisites
A.M. No. 05-8-26-SC]
The warrant must:
a. Be issued upon probable cause
Note: If complaint or information is filed with the
determined personally by the judge after
MTC judge, and the judge finds probable
examination under oath or affirmation of
cause, he shall issue a warrant of arrest, or a
the complainant and the witnesses he may
commitment order if the accused had already
produce; and
been arrested. However, if the judge is
b. Particularly describe the person to be
satisfied that there is no necessity for placing
arrested
the accused under custody, he may issue
[Sec. 2, Art. III, Constitution]
summons instead of a warrant of arrest [Sec.
8(b), Rule 112, as amended by A.M. No. 05-8-
When Issued
26-SC]
A judge issues a warrant of arrest upon the
filing of the information by the public prosecutor
and after personal evaluation by the judge of 5. Determination of Probable
the prosecutor’s resolution and supporting Cause For Issuance of
evidence [Sec. 5(a), Rule 112, as amended by Warrant of Arrest
A.M. No. 05-8-26-SC]
Probable cause, in connection with the
The judge does not have to personally examine issuance of a warrant of arrest, assumes the
the complainant and his witnesses. existence of facts and circumstances that
Established doctrine provides that it is would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent
sufficient for the fiscal to provide supporting man to believe that a crime has been
documents regarding the existence of probable committed and that it was likely committed by
cause: the person sought to be arrested [People v.
a. If the judge finds probable cause, he shall Tan, G.R. No. 182310 (2009)] [See D.3, supra]
issue a warrant of arrest, or
b. If he finds no probable cause, he may
disregard the fiscal’s report and require the
submission of supporting affidavits of F. BAIL
witnesses
[People v. Gray, G.R. No. 180109 (2010); AAA
v. Carbonell, G.R. No. 171465 (2007)] 1. Nature
When warrant of arrest is not necessary Definition
A warrant of arrest shall not issue Bail is the security given for the release of a
a. if the accused is already under detention person in custody of the law, furnished by him
pursuant to a warrant issued by the or a bondsman, to guarantee his appearance
municipal trial court in accordance with before any court as required under the
Sec. 5(b) of Rule 112; or conditions hereinafter specified [Sec. 1, Rule
b. if the complaint or information 114]
Page 392 of 525

Purpose 2. When a Matter of Right;

a. To relieve an accused from imprisonment
Exceptions
until his conviction and yet secure his
appearance at the trial [People v. Hon.
Bail is a matter of right
Donato, G.R. No. 79269 (2011) & Enrile v.
a. Before or after conviction, but pending
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 213847 (2016)]
appeal, by the first-level courts;
b. To honor the presumption of innocence
b. Before conviction by RTC of an offense not
until his guilt is proven beyond reasonable
punishable by death, reclusion perpetua, or
doubt [Sec. 14, Art. III, Constitution]; and
life imprisonment
c. To enable him to prepare his defense
[Sec. 4, Rule 114]
without being subject to punishment prior
to conviction [Cortes v. Judge Catral, A.M.
Bail on offenses where minors are accused
No. RTJ-97-1387 (1997)]
For purposes of recommending the amount of
bail, the privileged mitigating circumstance of
A person is allowed to petition for bail as soon
minority shall be considered [Sec. 34, R.A
as he is deprived of his liberty by virtue of his
9344]
arrest or voluntary surrender. An accused need
not wait for his arraignment before filing a
Where a child is detained, the court shall order
petition for bail [Serapio v. Sandiganbayan,
a. the release of the minor on recognizance to
G.R. No. 148468 (2003)]
his/her parents and other suitable person;
b. the release of the child in conflict with the
Requirement of custody
law on bail; or
General rule: Custody of the law is required
c. the transfer of the minor to a youth
before the court can act on an application for
detention home/youth rehabilitation center
bail [Miranda v. Tuliao, G.R. No. 158763
(2006)]
Exception: When the offense involved is a
capital offense, admission to bail may only be
Exceptions: Custody is not required in cases
denied when evidence of guilt is strong [Sec. 5,
of witnesses posting bail:
Rule 114]
a. When bail is required to guarantee the
appearance of a material witness [Sec. 14,
Capital offense
Rule 119];
A capital offense is an offense which under the
b. When bail is required to guarantee the
law existing at the time of commission and of
appearance of a prosecution witness in
the application for admission to bail is
cases where there is substitution of the
punishable by death [Sec. 6, Rule 114]
information [Sec. 14, Rule 110]
The capital nature of the offense is determined
Forms of Bail
by the penalty prescribed by law and not the
1. Corporate surety
one actually imposed [Riano, 335, 2016 Ed.,
2. Property bond
citing Bravo v. De Borja, G.R. No. L-65228
3. Cash deposit
(1985)]
4. Recognizance
Note: R.A. 9346 (An Act Prohibiting the
Imposition of Death Penalty in the Philippines)
enacted on June 24, 2006 (which repealed
Page 393 of 525

R.A. 8177 and R.A. 7659) prohibited the 3. When a Matter of Discretion
imposition of the death penalty.
Upon conviction by the RTC of an offense not
Generally not applicable to extradition punishable by death, reclusion perpetua, or life
proceedings imprisonment, admission to bail is
General rule: Right to bail is available only in discretionary [Sec. 5, Rule 114]
criminal proceedings and does not apply to
extradition proceedings because extradition The application for bail may be filed in and
courts do not render judgments of conviction or acted upon by the RTC despite the filing of
acquittal [Gov. of USA v. Purganan and notice of appeal, provided that it has not
Jimenez, G.R. No. 148571 (2002)] transmitted the original record to the appellate
court [Sec. 5, Rule 114]
Exception: Only upon clear and convincing
evidence: If the RTC decision changed the nature of the
a. That once granted, the applicant will not be offense from non-bailable to bailable, the
flight risk or will not pose danger to the application for bail can only be filed with and
community; and resolved only by the appellate court [Sec. 5,
b. That there exists special humanitarian and Rule 114]
compelling circumstances [Gov. of USA v.
Purganan and Jimenez, G.R. No. 148571 If the conviction by the trial court is for a capital
(2002)] offense, the accused convicted of a capital
offense is no longer entitled to bail, and can
Exception to the exception: When the only be released when the conviction is
accused is a minor, he is entitled to bail reversed by the appellate court [Sec. 13, Article
regardless of whether the evidence of guilt is III, Constitution]
strong
If the penalty imposed by the trial court is
Note: Bail is a matter of discretion in extradition imprisonment exceeding 6 years, the accused
proceedings [Govt. of HK Special shall be denied bail or his bail shall be
Administrative Region v. Olalia, G.R. No. cancelled upon showing by the prosecution,
153675 (2007)] with notice to the accused, of any of the
following [Sec. 5, Rule 114]:
When not available a. Recidivism, quasi-recidivism, or habitual
Right to bail is not available: delinquency or commission of a crime
a. After a judgment of conviction has become aggravated by reiteration of the accused
final; if he applied for probation before b. The accused previously escaped from
finality, he may be allowed temporary legal confinement, evaded sentence or
liberty under his bail; violated bail conditions without valid
b. After the accused has commenced to serve justification
his sentence [Sec. 24, Rule 114] c. Commission of offense while under
c. To military personnel accused under probation, parole or conditional pardon
general courts martial [Comendador v. de d. Probability of flight;
Villa, G.R. No. 93177 (1991)] e. Undue risk of the commission of another
crime during the pendency of the appeal
[Sec. 5, Rule 114]
Page 394 of 525

Upon conviction of the RTC, the bail posted be granted bail if it is shown that: (1) the
earlier as a matter of right loses its force and detainee will not be a flight risk or a danger to
the accused must file a new and separate the community; and (2) there exist special,
petition for bail. humanitarian, and compelling circumstances.
The SC further explained that bail for the
In deportation proceedings, bail is provisional liberty of the accused, regardless of
discretionary upon the Commissioner of the crime charged should be allowed
Immigration and Deportation [Harvey v. independently of the merits charged, provided
Defensor-Santiago, G.R. No. 82544 (1990)] his continued incarceration is injurious to his
health and endanger his life.
Note: In Enrile v. People [G.R. No. 213847
(2015)], the Court ruled that an accused should
COURT Before Conviction After Conviction Where to File

Pending Action
MTC (before the

MTC Right Right records are elevated;
else, RTC)
Discretionary if the penalty
imposed by the trial court
does not exceed 6 years.
However, if the penalty RTC (before the
Non- imposed exceeds 6 years or records are elevated;
Right
capital if the prosecution proves that except if offense is
RTC the circumstances downgraded, then CA
enumerated in Sec. 5, Rule
114 exist, bail will be denied
or cancelled.
Discretionary, when
Capital evidence of guilt is Cannot be granted bail N/A
not strong
Page 395 of 525

4. Hearing of Application for Bail the Philippines, or otherwise unable to testify

[Sec. 8, Rule 114]
in Capital Offenses
Where application for bail is filed
In general
General rule: The application may be filed with
At the hearing of an application for bail filed by
the court where the case is pending.
a person in custody for the commission of an
offense punishable by reclusion perpetua or life
Exceptions:
imprisonment, the prosecution has the
a. If the judge of the court where the case is
burden of showing that evidence of guilt is
pending is absent or unavailable, the
strong [Sec. 8, Rule 114]
application may be filed with any
RTC/MTC/MeTC/MCTC judge in the
Evidence of guilt in the Constitution and the
province, city or municipality;
Rules refers to a finding of innocence or
b. Where the accused is arrested in a \the
culpability, regardless of the modifying
case is pending, the application may be
circumstances [Bravo v. De Borja, G.R. No. L-
filed with any RTC of the said place, or, if
65228 (1985)]
no judge is available, then with any
MeTC/MTC/MCTC judge in the said place.
Duties of judge hearing the petition for bail
c. When a person is in custody but not yet
when capital offenses are involved
charged, he may apply with any court in the
a. In all cases whether bail is a matter of right
province or city/municipality where he is
or discretion, notify the prosecutor of the
held
hearing of the application for bail or require
[Sec. 17, Rule 114, as amended by A.M. No.
him to submit his recommendation [Sec.
05-8-26-SC]
18, Rule 114]
b. Where bail is a matter of discretion,
Note: Where the grant of bail is a matter of
conduct a hearing of the application for bail
discretion, or the accused seeks to be released
regardless of whether or not the
on recognizance, the application may only be
prosecution refuses to present evidence to
filed in the court where the case is pending, on
show that the guilt of the accused is strong
trial, or appeal [Sec. 17, Rule 114, as amended
for the purpose of enabling the court to
by A.M. No. 05-8-26-SC]
exercise its sound discretion [Sec. 7-8,
Rule 114]
When bail is filed with a court other than where
c. Decide whether the guilt of the accused is
the case is pending, the judge who accepted
strong based on the summary of evidence
the bail shall forward it, together with the order
of the prosecution
of release and other supporting papers, to the
d. If the guilt of the accused is not strong,
court where the case is pending, which may,
discharge the accused upon the approval
for good reason, require a different one to be
of the bail bond [Sec. 19, Rule 114].
filed [Sec. 19, Rule 114]
Otherwise, the petition should be denied.
[Gacal v. Infante, A.M. No. RTJ- 04-1845
(2011)] 5. Guidelines in Fixing Amount
of Bail
Note: Evidence presented during the bail
hearing are automatically reproduced at the The considerations are primarily, but not
trial, but upon motion of either party, the court limited, to the following factors:
may recall any witness for additional a. Financial ability of the accused
examination unless the latter is dead, outside b. Nature and circumstances of the offense
Page 396 of 525

c. Penalty for the offense charged repudiates the same in a sworn statement
d. Character and reputation of the accused or in open court as having been extracted
e. Age and health of the accused through force or intimidation;
f. Weight of the evidence against the c. When accused is found to have previously
accused escaped legal confinement, evaded
g. Probability of the accused appearing at the sentence, or jumped bail;
trial d. When accused is found to have violated
h. Forfeiture of other bail Section 2, R.A. 6036, which provides that
i. Fact that accused was a fugitive from the violation of the accused of the sworn
justice when arrested statement (required instead of bail) binding
j. Pendency of other cases where the himself, pending final decision of his case,
accused is on bail to report to the Clerk of the Court hearing
[Sec. 9, Rule 114] his case periodically every two weeks shall
justify the court to order his immediate
The amount should be high enough to assure arrest, if the failure of the accused to report
the presence of the accused when required but is not justified;
no higher than is reasonably calculated to fulfill e. When accused is a recidivist or habitual
this purpose. [Yap Jr. v. CA, G.R. No. 141529 delinquent or has been previously
(2001)] convicted for an offense to which the
law/ordinance attaches an equal/greater
6. When Bail Not Required penalty or for two/more offenses to which it
attaches a lighter penalty
When bail is not required f. When accused committed the offense
a. When a person has been in custody for a while on parole or under conditional
period equal to or more than the possible pardon;
maximum imprisonment of the offense g. When accused has previously been
charged pardoned for violation of municipal/city
b. If the maximum penalty is destierro, he ordinance for at least two times [Sec. 1,
shall be released after 30 days of R.A. 6036].
preventive imprisonment [Sec. 16, Rule
114]. 7. Increase or Reduction of Bail
c. In cases where a person is charged with
violation of a municipal/city ordinance, a After the accused is admitted to bail, the court
light felony and/or criminal offense, the may, upon good cause, increase or decrease
penalty of which is not higher than 6 the amount [Sec. 20, Rule 114]
months imprisonment and/or a fine of
P2,000, or both, where it is established that Increased bail
he is unable to post the required cash or The accused may be committed to custody if
bail bond [Sec. 1, R.A. 6036]. NOTE: The he does not give bail in the increased amount
title of R.A. 6036 reads “arresto mayor” within a reasonable period [Sec. 20, Rule 114]
instead of “6 months”.
Reduced bail
When bail is nonetheless required A person in custody for a period equal to or
a. When accused was caught committing the more than the minimum of the principal penalty
offense in flagrante; prescribed for the offense charged may be
b. When accused confesses to the released on a reduced bond [Sec. 16, Rule
commission of the offense unless he later 114]
Page 397 of 525

8. Forfeiture and Cancellation of Automatic cancellation

a. Upon acquittal of the accused
Bail b. Upon dismissal of the case, or
c. Upon execution of judgment of conviction
Forfeiture of bail
[Sec. 22, Rule 114]
When the presence of the accused out on bail
is required by court or Rules of Court and he
failed to appear, his bail shall be declared 9. Application not a Bar to
forfeited and the bondsmen are given 30 days Objections on Illegal Arrest,
within which to: Lack of or Irregular
a. Produce their principal
Preliminary Investigation
b. Show cause why no judgment should be
rendered against them for the amount of
An application or an admission to bail shall not
their bail
bar the accused from challenging or
c. Produce the body of their principal or give
questioning the:
the reason for his non-production; and
a. Validity of his arrest
d. Explain why the accused did not appear
b. Legality of the arrest warrant
before the court when first required to do
c. Regularity of PI, or
so [Sec. 21, Rule 114].
d. Absence of PI
Failing in items (3) and (4) above, a judgment
Provided, that the accused raises them before
shall be rendered against the bondsmen, jointly
entering his plea.
and severally, for the amount of the bail. The
court shall not reduce or otherwise mitigate the
The court shall resolve the objections as early
liability of the bondsmen, unless the accused
as practicable but not later than the start of the
has been surrendered or is acquitted [Sec. 21,
trial of the case [Sec. 26, Rule 114]
Rule 114]
For the purpose of surrendering the accused,

the bondsmen may arrest him or, upon written
G. ARRAIGNMENT AND
authority endorsed on a certified copy of the PLEA
undertaking, cause him to be arrested by a
police officer or any other person of suitable Arraignment
age and discretion [Sec. 23, Rule 114] It is the stage where issues are joined and
without which the proceedings cannot advance
CANCELLATION OF BAIL further or, if held, will otherwise be void [People
v. Albert, G.R. No. 114001 (1995)].
Application by bondsmen
The accused must be informed of:
Upon application of the bondsmen with due
1. The reason for the indictment
notice to the prosecutor, bail may be cancelled 2. The specific charges the accused is bound
upon: to face
a. Surrender of the accused; or 3. The corresponding penalty for the charges
b. Proof of his death [Sec. 22(1), Rule 114].
In order to cancel a bail on the ground of

surrender, the surrender must be voluntary.
[Esteban v. Alhambra, G.R. No. 135012
(2004)]
Page 398 of 525

Rationale
prosecution to prove his guilt and the
Its importance is based on the constitutional
precise degree of culpability [Sec. 3,
right of the accused to be informed. It is at this
Rule 116]
stage that the accused, for the first time, is
given the opportunity to know the precise
If the accused does not enter any plea or
charge that confronts him [Kummer v. People,
makes a conditional plea, a plea of not guilty
G.R. No. 174461 (2013)]
is entered by the court [Sec. 1(c), Rule 116]
Plea
Pertains to the matter which the accused, on
his arraignment, alleges in answer to the Arraignment
charge against him
WHERE MADE: Arraignment is made before
1. How Made the court where the complaint or information
was filed or assigned for trial. [Sec. 1(a), Rule
Procedure of Arraignment 116]
The court shall issue an order directing the HOW AND BY WHOM MADE: The
public prosecutor to submit the record of the arraignment shall be made in open court by the
PI to the branch Clerk of Court for the latter judge or clerk by furnishing the accused with a
to attach the same to the record of the case. copy of the complaint or information, reading
↓ the same in the language or dialect known to
him, and asking him whether he pleads guilty
The court shall inform the accused of his or not guilty. The prosecution may call at the
right to counsel and ask him if he desires to trial witnesses other than those named in the
have one. Unless the accused is allowed to complaint or information [Sec. 1(a), Rule 116]
defend himself in person or has employed
counsel of his choice, the court must assign When held
a counsel de oficio to defend him. [Sec. 6, General rule: The accused should be
Rule 114] arraigned within 30 days from the date the
↓ court acquires jurisdiction over his person [Sec.
1(g), Rule 116]
a. If the accused pleads not guilty, either:
1. The accused admits the act or Exceptions: Unless a shorter period is
omission charged in the complaint or provided by special law or Supreme Court
information but interposes a lawful circular [Sec. 1(g), Rule 116]
defense, the order of trial may be a. When an accused is under preventive
modified. [Sec. 11(e), Rule 119] detention, his case should be raffled within
2. He raises a negative defense, that is, 3 days from filing and accused shall be
he denies the charge, in which case arraigned within 10 days from receipt by
regular trial proceeds. the judge of the records of the case [RA
b. If the accused pleads guilty: 8493 (Speedy Trial Act)];
1. For a non-capital offense, the court b. Where the complainant is about to depart
may receive evidence to determine from the Philippines with no definite date of
the penalty to be imposed [Sec. 4, return, the accused should be arraigned
Rule 116] without delay [R.A. 4908]
2. For a capital offense, the court shall
conduct a searching inquiry into the
voluntariness and full
comprehension of the consequences
of his plea and shall require the
Page 399 of 525

Instances that are excluded in computing understand the charge against him and
the 30 day period for arraignment to plead intelligently. In such case, the
1. Time of the pendency of the motion to court shall order his mental
quash examination and, if necessary, his
2. Time of the pendency of the motion for a confinement for such purpose;
bill of particulars 2. Existence of a prejudicial question;
3. Other causes justifying suspension of the 3. A petition for review of the resolution
arraignment [Sec. 1(g), Rule 116] of the prosecutor is pending at either
the DOJ Secretary or the Office of the
If the accused is under preventive detention President for a period of suspension
The pre-trial conference of his case shall be not exceeding 60 days from filing of
held within 10 days after arraignment. petition with the reviewing office. [Sec.
11, Rule 116]
Presence of the offended party c. Motion to quash the complaint or
The private offended party shall be required to information: on any of the grounds under
appear in the arraignment for the purpose of: Sec. 3, Rule 117 in relation to Sec. 1, Rule
a. Plea bargaining 117
b. Determination of civil liability, and d. Challenge the validity of the arrest or
c. Other matters requiring his presence legality of the warrant or assail the
regularity or question the absence of PI of
The court may allow the accused to enter a the charge [Sec. 26, Rule 114]
plea of guilty to a lesser offense which is If the accused does not question the legality of
necessarily included in the offense charged the arrest or search, this objection is deemed
with the conformity of the trial prosecutor alone waived [People v. Racho y Raquero, G.R. No.
when the offended party failed to appear 186529 (2010)]
despite due notice.
[Sec. 1(f), Rule 116; Part B(2), A.M. No. 03-1- Specific rules
09-SC] a. Accused must personally appear during
arraignment and enter his plea; counsel
Duty of the court before arraignment cannot enter plea for the accused. [Sec.
The court shall: 1[b], Rule 116]
a. Inform the accused of his right to counsel; b. Accused is presumed to have been validly
b. Ask him if he desires to have one; and arraigned in the absence of proof to the
c. Must assign a counsel de officio to defend contrary. [see Sec. 3(m), Rule 131]
him, unless the accused: c. If the accused has not been validly
1. Is allowed to defend himself in person; arraigned, the judgment is void. [Riano
or 394, 2016 Ed., citing Taglay v. Daray, G.R.
2. Has employed a counsel of his choice No. 164258, (2012)]. Note that trial in
[Sec. 6, Rule 116] absentia may be conducted only after valid
arraignment. [Sec. 14(2), Art. III,
Before arraignment and plea, the accused Constitution]
may avail of any of the following: d. If accused went into trial without being
a. Motion for bill of particulars: to enable arraigned, subsequent arraignment will
him to properly plead and prepare for trial cure the error provided that the accused
[Sec. 9, Rule 116] was able to present evidence and cross
b. Motion to suspend arraignment: upon examine the witnesses of the prosecution
motion by the proper party, the arraignment during trial.
shall be suspended in the ff. cases:
1. Accused appears to be suffering from If an information is amended in substance
unsound mental condition which which changes the nature of the offense (not
effectively renders him unable to fully merely as to form), arraignment on the
Page 400 of 525

amended information is mandatory. 3. When Accused May Enter a

[Teehankee v. Madayag, G.R. No. 103102
(1992)] Plea of Guilty to a Lesser
Offense
2. When a Plea of Not Guilty
DURING ARRAIGNMENT
Should Be Entered Requisites
a. The lesser offense is necessarily included
a. When the accused so pleaded in the offense charged
b. When he refuses to plead or makes a b. The plea must be with the consent of both
conditional plea [Sec. 1(c), Rule 116] the offended party and the prosecutor
c. [Sec. 2, Rule 116]
Conditional Plea of Guilty – A plea entered
by the accused subject to the proviso that a In case of failure of the offended party to
certain penalty be imposed upon him. It is appear despite due notice, the court may allow
equivalent to a plea of not guilty. [People v. the accused to enter a plea of guilty to a lesser
Madraga, G.R. No. 129299, (2000)] offense which is necessarily included in the
offense charged with the conformity of the trial
c. When he pleads guilty but presents prosecutor alone {Sec. 1(f), Rule 116]
exculpatory evidence [Sec. 1(d), Rule 116]
d. Where the plea of guilty was compelled by AFTER ARRAIGNMENT BUT BEFORE
violence or intimidation [Riano 402, 2016 TRIAL
Ed., citing People v. Baetiong, 2 Phil. 126] After arraignment but before trial, the accused
e. When the plea is indefinite or ambiguous may still be allowed to plead guilty to said
[Riano 403, 2016 Ed., citing People v. lesser offense after withdrawing his plea of not
Strong, G.R. No. L-38626 (1975)] guilty. No amendment of the complaint or
information is necessary [Sec. 2, Rule 116]
Plea as Admission of Material Facts
General Rule: A plea of guilty is a judicial AFTER TRIAL HAS BEGUN
confession of guilt. It is an admission of After the prosecution has rested its case, a
material facts alleged in the Information, change of plea to a lesser offense may be
including the circumstances alleged. [People v. granted by the judge, with the approval of the
Comendador, G.R. No. L-38000 (1980)] prosecutor and the offended party if the
prosecution does not have sufficient evidence
Exceptions: to establish the guilt of the accused for the
a. When the accused did not fully understand crime charged. The judge cannot on its own
the meaning and consequences of his plea grant the change of plea [People v. Villarama,
G.R. No. 99287 (1992)]
Note: In such case, there is a necessity of a re-
arraignment and retaking of his plea [People v.
Nuelan, G.R. No. 123075 (2001)] 4. Accused Pleads Guilty to
b. Where the information is insufficient to Capital Offense; What the
sustain conviction of the offense charged. Court Should Do
[People v. Lopez, G.R. No. 1063, (1947)]
c. Where the information does not charge an Conditions that the trial court must observe to
offense, any conviction thereunder being obviate an improvident plea of guilty by the
void accused:
d. Where the court has no jurisdiction a. Searching inquiry into the voluntariness
[Cadimas v. Director of Prisons, G.R. No. and full comprehension of the
L-9725, (1955)] consequences of the pleas; and
Page 401 of 525

b. Require prosecution to present evidence to 3. Under what conditions he was detained

prove the guilt and precise degree of and interrogated during the
culpability of the accused; investigations.
c. Accused may present evidence in his b. Ask the defense counsel a series of
behalf questions as to whether he had conferred
[Sec. 3, Rule 116] with, and completely explained to, the
accused the meaning and consequences
Note: A plea of guilty to a capital offense does of a plea of guilty.
not result to an immediate rendering of c. Elicit information about the personality
judgment [Riano, 407, 2016 Ed.] profile of the accused (age, socio-
economic status, and educational
5. Searching Inquiry background) which may serve as a
trustworthy index of his capacity to give a
A “searching inquiry” means more than free and informed plea of guilty.
informing cursorily the accused that he faces a d. Inform the accused the exact length of
jail term but so also, the exact length of imprisonment or nature of the penalty
imprisonment under the law and the certainty under the law and the certainty that he will
that he will serve time at the national serve such sentence.
penitentiary or a penal colony [People v. Bello, e. Inquire if the accused knows the crime with
G.R. No. 130411-14 (1999)] which he is charged and fully explain to him
the elements of the crime which is the basis
The procedure in Sec. 3, Rule 116, when the of his indictment.
accused pleads guilty to a capital offense, is f. All questions posed to the accused should
mandatory. [Riano 407, 2016 Ed., citing be in a language known and understood by
People v. Oden, G.R. No. 155511-22 (2004)] the latter.
g. The trial judge must satisfy himself that the
The plea must be clear, definite and accused, in pleading guilty, is truly guilty.
unconditional. It must be based on a free and The accused must be required to narrate
informed judgment. the tragedy or reenact the crime or furnish
its missing details [People v. Pastor, G.R.
A plea of guilty to a capital offense can be held No. 140208 (2002)]
null and void where the trial court has
inadequately discharged the duty of conducting 6. Improvident Plea of Guilty to a
the prescribed "searching inquiry” [People v. Capital Offense
Durango, G.R. Nos. 135438-39 (2000)]
An improvident plea is one without proper
Rationale information as to all the circumstances
This is to enjoin courts to proceed with more affecting it; based upon a mistaken assumption
care where the possible punishment is in its or misleading information/advice [Black’s Law
severest form and to avoid improvident pleas Dictionary]
of guilt [People v. Samontanez, G.R. No.
134530 (2000)] Effect of an Improvident Plea
General rule: Plea of guilty should not be
Guidelines for conducting a search inquiry accepted should not be held to be sufficient to
a. Ascertain from the accused himself: sustain a conviction in the following cases:
1. How he was brought into the custody of 1. If the accused does not clearly and fully
the law understand the nature of the offense
2. Whether he had the assistance of a charged
competent counsel during the custodial 2. If he is not advised as to the meaning and
and preliminary investigations, and effect of the technical language often used
Page 402 of 525

in formal complaints and information in information: WON the facts alleged which are
qualifying the acts constituting the offense, hypothetically admitted would establish the
or essential elements of the crime defined by law.
3. If he does not clearly understand the
consequences by way of a heavy and even 3. Evidence aliunde or matters extrinsic of the
a capital penalty flowing from his admission information are not to be considered.
of his guilt of the crime [People v. De EXCEPT when admissions made by the
Ocampo Gonzaga, G.R. No. L-48373 prosecution [People v. Dela Rosa, G.R.
(1984)] No. L-34112 (1980)],
Exception: If the accused appears guilty Note: A motion to quash based on double
beyond reasonable doubt from the evidence jeopardy or extinction of the criminal action or
adduced by the prosecution and defense liability, may, by their nature, be based on
matters outside of the allegations of the
When improvident plea may be withdrawn information or complaint [Riano]
At any time before judgment of conviction
becomes final, the court may permit an Form and contents
improvident plea of guilty to be withdrawn and 1. In writing
be substituted by a plea of not guilty [Sec. 5, 2. Signed by the accused or his counsel, and
Rule 116] 3. Distinctly specify the factual and legal
grounds
The withdrawal of a plea of guilty is not a matter [Sec. 2, Rule 117]
of right of the accused but of sound discretion
of the trial court [People v. Lambino, G.R. No. When filed
L-10875 (1958)] General rule: At any time before entering his
plea, the accused may move to quash the
The reason for this is that trial has already complaint or information [Sec. 1, Rule 117]
begun and the withdrawal of the plea will
change the theory of the case and put all past Exception: When the grounds relied upon the
proceedings to waste. motion are:
1. Failure to charge an offense
Moreover, at this point, there is a presumption 2. Lack of jurisdiction over the offense
that the plea was made voluntarily. charged
3. Extinction of the offense or penalty
4. Accused has been previously convicted, or
H. MOTION TO QUASH in jeopardy of being convicted, or acquitted
of the offense charged
Nature of motion to quash (MTQ) They shall not be deemed waived if the
1. Mode by which an accused assails the accused failed to file MTQ or to allege them in
validity of a criminal complaint or the motion. [Sec. 9, Rule 117]
information filed against him for
insufficiency on its face in point of law or Need not be resolved before issuing
defects which are apparent in the face of warrant of arrest
the information [Riano 328, 2011 Ed.] The judge had no positive duty to first resolve
the MTQ before issuing a warrant of arrest.
2. Hypothetical admission of the facts alleged Sec. 5(a), Rule 112 required the judge to
in the information evaluate the prosecutor's resolution and its
supporting evidence within a limited period of
Note: Fundamental test in determining only 10 days [De Lima v. Guerrero, G.R. No.
sufficiency of the material averments in an 229781 (2017)]
Page 403 of 525

1. Grounds Note: In cases covered by the Rules on

Summary Procedure, MTQ is allowed only if
In general made on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction over
a. Facts charged do not constitute an offense; the subject matter or failure to comply with
b. Court trying the case has no jurisdiction barangay conciliation proceedings [Sec. 19,
over the offense charged; Rules on Summary Procedure]
c. Court trying the case has no jurisdiction
over the person of the accused; a. Facts charged do not constitute
d. officer who filed the information had no an offense
authority to do so;
e. The information does not conform Where it is clear that the information does not
substantially to the prescribed form; (e.g. if really charge an offense, the case against the
there is no certification) accused must be dropped immediately [Dela
f. More than one offense is charged, except Chica v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 144823
when a single punishment for various (2003)]
offenses is prescribed by law;
g. Criminal action or liability has been The prosecution shall be given by the court an
extinguished; opportunity to correct the defect by
h. Averments which, if true, would constitute amendment. The motion shall be granted if the
a legal excuse or justification; prosecution fails to make the amendment, or
i. Accused has been previously convicted or the complaint or information still suffers from
acquitted of the offense charged, or the the same defect despite the amendment [Sec.
case against him was dismissed or 4, Rule 117]
otherwise terminated without his express
consent. b. Court has no jurisdiction over
[Sec. 3, Rule 117] the offense charged
The following grounds are exclusive. [Galzote In a criminal prosecution, the place where the
v. People, G.R. No. 164682 (2011)] offense was committed not only determines
venue, but is an essential element of
Waiver of Grounds jurisdiction [Sec. 15, Rule 110; Lopez v. City
General rule: Failure of the accused to assert Judge, G.R. No. L-25795 (1966)]
any ground on a MTQ before he pleads, either
because he did not file MTQ or failed to allege In private crimes, the complaint of the offended
said ground in the MTQ shall be deemed a party is necessary to confer authority to the
waiver of any objections court [Donio-Teves v. Vamenta Jr., G.R. No. L-
38308 (1984)]
Exceptions [OJ-AL-CJA]:
a. Facts charged do not constitute an Offense c. Court has no jurisdiction over
b. Court trying the case has no Jurisdiction
the person of the accused
over the offense charged
When the accused files a MTQ based on this
c. Criminal Action or Liability has been
ground, he must do so only on this ground. If
Extinguished
he raises other grounds, he is deemed to have
d. Accused has been previously Convicted, or
submitted his person to the jurisdiction of the
in Jeopardy of being convicted, or
court [Sanchez v. Demetriou, G.R. No. L-
Acquitted of the offense charged
11171-77 (1993)]
[Sec. 9, Rule 117]
e. Officer who filed information had no
authority to do so [Quisay v. People, G.R.
No. 216920 (2016)]
Page 404 of 525

d. Officer who filed the Vague or broad allegations are generally not
information had no authority to grounds for a MTQ. The correct remedy is to
do so file for a bill of particulars [Sec. 9, Rule 116;
Enrile v. People, G.R. No. 213455 (2015)]
Authority to file and prosecute criminal cases is
The accused may, before arraignment, move
vested in:
for a bill of particulars to enable him properly to
1. Prosecutor
plead and prepare for trial. The motion shall
a. Prosecutor must have territorial
specify the alleged defects of the complaint or
jurisdiction to conduct PI of the offense
information and the details desired [Sec. 9,
[Cudia v. CA, G.R. No. 110315 (1998)]
Rule 116]
b. Prior written authority or approval of the
provincial or city prosecutor or chief
state prosecutor or the Ombudsman or f. More than one offense is
his deputy must first be obtained [Sec. charged
4, Rule 112]
2. Any peace officer, or public officer charged General rule: A complaint or information must
with the enforcement of the law, in charge only one offense [Sec. 13, Rule 110]
Municipal Trial Courts or Municipal Circuit
Trial Courts when the prosecutor assigned Exceptions:
thereto or to the case is not available [Sec. 1. When the law prescribes a single
5, Rule 110] punishment for various offenses [Sec. 13,
3. Commission on Elections regarding Rule 110]
violations of election laws [Sec. 2(6), Art. 2. Complex and compound crimes, except
IX-C, Constitution] where one offense was committed to
4. By the graft investigating officer for any conceal another
information filed in the Sandiganbayan, 3. An offense incidental to the gravamen of
with prior approval of the Ombudsman the offense charged
5. By duly deputized prosecutors and legal 4. A specific crime set forth in various counts,
officers of the COMELEC for election each of which may constitute a distinct
offenses [Sec. 265, Art. XXII, Omnibus offense
Election Code] 5. If the accused fails to object; the court may
convict as many as are charged and
Lack of authority of the officer is not cured by proved and impose on him the penalty for
silence, acquiescence, express consent or each (Rule 120, Section 3) [People v.
even by amendment. [Cudia v. CA, G.R. No. Villamor, G.R. No. 124441 (1998)]
110315 (1998)]
g. Criminal action or liability has
e. Complaint or information does been extinguished
not conform substantially to the
prescribed form When criminal liability is extinguished:
1. Death of the accused, but liability for
The formal and substantial requirements are pecuniary penalties is extinguished only if
provided for in Secs. 6-12, Rule 110. death occurs before final judgment;
2. Service of sentence, which must be by
General rule: Lack of substantial compliance virtue of a final judgment and in the form
renders the accusatory pleading nugatory. prescribed by law;
3. Amnesty;
Exception: Mere defects in matter of form may 4. Absolute pardon;
be cured by amendment [Sec. 4, Rule 117] 5. Prescription of the crime;
6. Prescription of the penalty;
Page 405 of 525

7. Pardon in private offenses 1. Upon demurrer to evidence; [Riano 439,

[Art. 89, Revised Penal Code] 2016 Ed., citing People v. Tan, G.R. No.
167526 (2010)]
h. Contains averments that if true 2. Due to violation of right to speedy trial
would constitute a legal excuse (even if dismissal was upon motion of the
accused or with his express consent)
or justification
[Riano 439-440, 2016 Ed., citing Andres v.
Cacdac, G.R. No. L-45650 (1982)]
Examples:
1. Justifying circumstances [Art. 11, RPC]
2. Exempting circumstances [Art. 12, RPC] Dismissal Acquittal
3. Absolutory causes
Basis for Does not Always
i. Accused has been previously
action decide the based on the
convicted or acquitted of the case on the merits.
offense charged, or the case merits.
against him was dismissed or Defendant’s
otherwise terminated without Does not guilt was not
his consent determine proven
innocence or beyond
i. Double jeopardy guilt reasonable
doubt
See Double Jeopardy below.
Does Double Double
double jeopardy will jeopardy
ii. Dismissal without express
jeopardy not always always
consent
attach? attach attaches
This refers only to dismissal or termination
of the case. It does not Refer to Part the See Provisional Dismissal below.
conviction or acquittal [People v. Labatete,
G.R. No. L-12917 (1960)] 2. Distinguish Motion to Quash
If consent is not express, dismissal will be from Demurrer to Evidence
regarded as final (i.e., with prejudice to refilling)
[Caes v. IAC, G.R. Nos. 74989-90 (1989)] Motion to Demurrer to
quash evidence
The dismissal of a criminal case resulting in
acquittal made with the express consent of the When Filed before Filed after the
accused or upon his own motion will not place filed entering plea prosecution
the accused in double jeopardy, except in the [Sec. 1, Rule has rested its
following cases: 117] case [Sec. 23,
i. Insufficiency of the prosecution’s Rule 119]
evidence
ii. Denial of the right to a speedy trial Basis Insufficiency of Based upon
[Almario v. CA, G.R. No. 127772 (2001)] for grant the complaint the
or or information insufficiency of
When dismissal constitutes acquittal denial on its face the evidence
Dismissal constitutes acquittal when it is adduced by the
granted: prosecution
Page 406 of 525

[Sec. 23, Rule before

119] judgment”
Grounds Grounds are Ground is

stated in Sec. “insufficiency of
3, Rule 117 evidence” to
convict [Sec.
23, Rule 119]
Leave of Does not May be filed

court require a prior either with
leave of court leave or without 3. Effects of Sustaining the
[Sec. 1, Rule leave of court Motion to Quash
117] [Sec. 23, Rule
119] a. Filing another complaint or
Effect of Court may Grant is information
grant order the filing deemed an
of a new acquittal and General rule: Court may order that another
complaint or would preclude complaint or information be filed [Sec. 5, Rule
information the filing of 117)
[Sec. 4, Rule another
117] information or Exception: If MTQ was based on the following:
appeal by the 1. Criminal action or liability has been
prosecution extinguished
2. Double jeopardy.
Effect of The accused General Rule: b. Discharge of the accused

denial proceeds with Accused does
trial. If not lost his right General rule: If in custody, the accused shall
convicted, he to present not be discharged unless admitted to bail [Sec.
can appeal evidence 5, Rule 117] The order granting the MTQ must
and assign as state either release of the accused or
error the Exception: if cancellation of his bond.
denial of the demurrer was
MTQ. filed without Exception: The accused, if in custody, shall be
leave of court discharged if:
[Sec. 23, Rule 1. No order is made; or
119] 2. Having been made, no new information is
filed within
Remedy If the court, in The order a. The time specified in the order; or
denying the denying the b. Such further time as the court may
motion to motion for allow for good cause
quash acts leave to file a [Sec. 5, Rule 117]
with grave demurrer “shall
abuse of not be Exception to the exception: The accused
discretion, reviewable by shall not be discharged if he is in custody for
then certiorari appeal or by another charge [Sec. 5, Rule 117]
or prohibition certiorari
lies
Page 407 of 525

c. Amendment of the complaint or extinguishme

information nt of liability
or double
General rule: The court shall order that an jeopardy
amendment be made:
1. If the MTQ is based on an alleged defect of Remedy to Appeal after Appeal the
the complaint or information which can be be availed the trial order
cured by amendment of
2. If the MTQ is based on the ground that the
facts charged do not constitute an offense Consequen Arraignment Amend
[Sec. 4, Rule 117] ce of order information if
possible
Exception: Prosecution is precluded where
the ground for quashal would bar another Note: The remedy for an order denying a MTQ
prosecution for the same offense. is to go to trial, without prejudice to reiterating
the special defenses invoked in their MTQ
The prosecution may appeal from the order of [Serana v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 162059
quashal to the appellate court. (2008)]
If the information was quashed because it did

not allege the elements of the offense charged,
4. Exception to the Rule that
but the facts so alleged constitute another Sustaining the Motion is Not a
offense under a specific statute, the Bar to Another Prosecution
prosecution may file a complaint for such
specific offense where dismissal is made prior General rule: Grant of the MTQ will not be a
to arraignment and on MTQ [People v. bar to another prosecution for the same
Purisima, G.R. No. L-42050-66 (1978)] offense
Order Order Exception: It will bar another prosecution

denying granting when the MTQ is based on
MTQ MTQ a. The criminal action or liability has been
extinguished; or
Nature of Interlocutory Final Order b. The accused has been previously
Order convicted, or in jeopardy of being
convicted, or acquitted of the offense
Appealable Not Immediately charged
? appealable appealable [Sec. 6, Rule 117]
absent a but subject to
showing of rules on 5. Double Jeopardy
GAD. If there double
is GAD, then jeopardy
Double jeopardy presupposes that a first
file petition
jeopardy has already attached prior to the
for certiorari
second and that the first has been terminated
Is the main Does not Disposes of because he has already been: (1) convicted;
case dispose of the case (2) acquitted; or (3) the case against him
decided on the case upon its terminated or dismissed without his express
the merits? upon its merits when consent.
merits the ground is
the The right against double jeopardy prohibits the
prosecution for a crime of which he has been
Page 408 of 525

previously convicted or acquitted [Caes v. IAC, Effect

G.R. No. 74989-90 (1989)] The conviction or acquittal of the accused or
the dismissal of the case shall be a bar to
Purpose of the Rule against Double another prosecution
Jeopardy a. for the offense charged, or
It guarantees that the state shall not be b. for any attempt to commit the same or
permitted to make repeated attempts to convict frustration thereof, or
an individual for an alleged offense, thereby c. for any offense which necessarily includes
subjecting him to embarrassment, expense or is necessarily included in the offense
and ordeal and compelling him to live in a charged in the former complaint or
continuing state of anxiety and insecurity. information
Primarily, it prevents the State from: [Sec. 7, Rule 117]
1. Suing criminal processes as instrument to
harass the accused and wear him out by Double Jeopardy does not apply to these
the multitude of cases cases
2. Successively retrying the defendant in the 1. Administrative Cases
hope of securing a conviction The dismissal of the criminal case does not
3. Successively retrying the defendant in the result in the dismissal of the administrative
hope of securing a greater penalty case because there exists a difference
between the 2 remedies.
RULE OF DOUBLE JEOPARDY
2. When the same criminal act gives rise to
Requisites to successfully invoke double two or more separate and distinct offenses
jeopardy
a. A first jeopardy must have attached; 3. Preliminary investigation (PI)
b. The first jeopardy must have been validly A PI is merely inquisitorial. It is executive in
terminated; and character and is not part of the trial; hence,
c. The second jeopardy must be for the same a PI is not a trial to which double jeopardy
offense or the second offense necessarily attaches.
includes or is necessarily included in the
offense charged in the first information, or 4. When the first offense was committed
is an attempt to commit the same or a under the RPC and the second was
frustration thereof committed under a special penal law
[People v. Espinosa, G.R. Nos. 153714-20
(2003)] 5. When two offenses are punished by two
separate penal laws
Requisites for first jeopardy to attach
a. Valid indictment
b. Before a competent court;
c. Arraignment
d. A valid plea entered, and
e. The accused has been convicted or
acquitted, or the case dismissed or
otherwise validly terminated without his
express consent
[People v. Honrales, G.R. No. 182651 (2010)]
However, a dictated, coerced, and scripted

verdict of acquittal is a void judgment. It neither
binds nor bars anyone [Galman v.
Page 409 of 525

KINDS OF DOUBLE JEOPARDY

Double jeopardy for the same Double jeopardy when an act
offense punished by a law and an
ordinance
General Rule There is identity between the two There can still be double jeopardy
offenses not only when the although the first offense is
second offense is exactly the punishable under an ordinance,
same as the first, but also when while the second is punishable
the second offense is an attempt under a law [Art. III, Sec. 21,
to or frustration of or is necessarily CONST.]
included in the offense charged in
the first information. [Teehankee
Jr. v. Madayag, G.R. 103102
(1992)].
Exception a. The graver offense When an offense penalized by

developed due to supervening ordinance is, by definition, different
facts arising from the same act or from an offense penalized under a
omission constituting the former statute. [People v. Relova, G.R.
charge; No. L-45129 (1987)]
b. The facts constituting the
graver charge became known or
were discovered only after a plea
was entered in the former
complaint or information;
c. The plea of guilty to the
lesser offense was made without
the consent of the prosecutor and
of the offended party except when
offended party failed to appear
during such arraignment. [Sec 7,
Rule 117]
Test Whether or not evidence that

proves one likewise proves the
other. [People v. Ramos, G.R. No.
L-15958 (1961)]
Page 410 of 525

6. Provisional Dismissal moves for the provisional (sin perjucio)

dismissal of the case; or both the
Provisional dismissal prosecution and the accused move for a
Provisional dismissal is dismissal without provisional dismissal of the case [Sec. 8,
prejudice to its being refiled or revived [Los Rule 117]
Baños v. Pedro, G.R. No. 173588 (2009)] b. The offended party is notified of the motion
for the provisional dismissal of the case
Cases are provisionally dismissed where there c. The court issues an order granting the
has already been arraigned and the accused motion and dismissing the case
consented to a provisional dismissal. provisionally
d. The public prosecutor is served with a copy
Requisites for a provisional dismissal of the order of provisional dismissal of the
1. There must be express consent of the case
accused; and [People v. Lacson, G.R. No. 149453 (2003)]
2. There must be notice to the offended party
[Sec. 8, Rule 117] A case may be revived by
a. Refiling of the information
Time-bar Rule b. Filing of a new information for the same
Dismissal becomes permanent: offense or one necessarily included in the
a. One year after issuance of the order original offense charged
without the case having been revived for
offenses punishable Requirement of Preliminary Investigation
1. by imprisonment not exceeding 6 upon Revival of Case
years, or General rule: Upon revival of the case, there
2. by fine of any amount, or is no need for a new PI
3. by both
b. Two years after issuance of the order Exceptions:
without the case having been revived for a. If the original witnesses have recanted their
offenses punishable by imprisonment of testimonials or have died
more than 6 years b. If the accused is charged under a new
[Sec. 8, Rule 117] criminal complaint for the same offense
c. If the original charge is upgraded
Note: The periods are reckoned from the date d. If the criminal liability is upgraded from
or the order of dismissal accessory to principal
Exception to the periods: The State may

revive beyond the periods provided there is a I. PRE-TRIAL
justifiable necessity for the delay.
The Court is not mandated to apply Sec. 8 Its main objective is to achieve an expeditious
retroactively simply because it is favorable to resolution of the case. This proceeding is
the accused. [People v. Lacson, G.R. No. mandatory in criminal cases and is conducted
149453 (2003)] before trial [Sec. 1, Rule 118]
What to file?
Motion for permanent dismissal [Prof. Sanidad]
The following are conditions sine qua non for

the application of the time-bar rule
a. The prosecution, with the express
conformity of the accused, or the accused
Page 411 of 525

1. Matters to Be Considered lesser offense is without the consent of the

offended party and the prosecutor [People v.
During Pre-Trial De Luna, G.R. No. L-77969 (1989); Sec. 7(c),
Rule 117, see Sec. 2, Rule 116]
Coverage
All criminal cases cognizable by the With Sec. 23 of R.A. 9165 being declared
Sandiganbayan, RTC, MeTC, MTCC, MTC unconstitutional in Estipona Jr. v. Lobrigo [G.R.
and MCTC [Sec. 1, Rule 118] No. 226679 (2017)], offenses involving
dangerous drugs may now be the subject of
Period plea bargain [see DOJ Circular No. 61 (2017)]
General rule: The court shall order a pre-trial
conference after arraignment and within 30 Stipulation of facts
days from the date the court acquires General Rule: Stipulation of facts is allowed in
jurisdiction over the person of the accused. criminal cases
Exception: A shorter period may be provided Exception: Circumstances that qualify a crime
by special laws or SC circulars [Sec. 1, Rule and increases its penalty to death cannot be
118] the subject of stipulation [People v. Sitao, G.R.
No. 146790 (2002)]
Things considered
a. Plea bargaining Marking for identification of evidence
b. Stipulation of facts No evidence may be presented and offered
c. Marking for identification of evidence during trial other than those identified and
d. Waiver of objections to admissibility of marked during the pre-trial, except when
evidence allowed by the court for good cause shown.
e. Modification of the order of trial if accused
admits the charge but interposes a lawful Proffer of exhibits is not allowed. It ought to be
defense (reverse trial) done at the time a party closes the presentation
f. Other matters that will promote a fair and of evidence. [People v. Santiago, G.R. No. L-
expeditious trial of the civil and criminal 80778 (1989)]
aspects of the case [Sec. 1, Rule 118]
Role of the judge before pre-trial
Plea bargaining During the pre-trial, the judge shall be the one
Plea bargaining has been defined as "a to ask questions on issues raised therein and
process whereby the accused and the all questions must be directed to him to avoid
prosecution work out a mutually satisfactory hostilities between the parties [Item B.7, A.M.
disposition of the case subject to court No. 03-1-09-SC]
approval" [Estipona Jr. v. Lobrigo, G.R. No.
226679 (2017)]
2. What the Court Should Do
It usually involves the defendant pleading guilty When Prosecution and
to a lesser offense or to one or some of the Offended Party Agree to the
counts of a multi-count indictment in return for
a lighter sentence than that for the graver Plea Offered by the Accused
charge [People v. Mamarion, G.R. No. 137554
(2003)] The Court shall:
a. Issue an order which contains the plea
The conviction of the accused of the lesser bargaining arrived at
offense precludes the filing and prosecution of b. Proceed to receive evidence on the civil
the offense originally charged in the aspect of the case; and
information, except when the plea of guilty to a
Page 412 of 525

c. Render and promulgate judgment of Note: The accused is not required to attend
conviction, including the civil liability or (unless ordered by the court) and is merely
damages duly established by the evidence required to sign the written agreement arrived
[Item B.5, A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC] at in the pre-trial conference, if he agrees to the
contents of such. The complainant is also not
General rule: Court approval is required. required to appear during pre-trial. It is the
prosecutor who is required to appear at the pre-
Exception: Agreements not covering matters trial [People v. Judge Tac-An, G.R. No. 148000
referred to in Sec. 1, Rule 118 (supra), need (2003)]
not be so approved [Item B.8, A.M. No. 03-1-
09-SC] The court may impose proper sanctions or
penalties, if counsel for the accused or the
Effect prosecutor to enforce the mandatory character
The stipulations become binding on the parties of the pre-trial in criminal cases:
who made them. They become judicial a. Does not appear at the pre-trial
admissions of the fact or facts stipulated conference; and
[Bayas v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 143689-91 b. Does not offer an acceptable excuse for his
(2002)]) lack of cooperation [Sec. 3, Rule 118]
3. Pre-Trial Agreement 5. Pre-Trial Order

Requirements Pre-trial order shall:
a. Reduced in writing; a. Be issued by the trial judge;
b. Signed by the accused and counsel; b. Be issued within 10 days after the
c. With approval of court if agreements cover termination of the pre-trial
matters in Sec. 1, Rule 118 c. Contain the following:
[Sec. 2, Rule 118] 1. Actions taken
2. Facts stipulated
Effects: 3. Evidence marked
1. Constitutional right to present evidence is 4. Admissions made
waived [Rivera v. People, G.R. No. 163996 5. Number of witnesses to be presented;
(2005)] and
2. If the requisites are not followed – 6. Schedule of trial
admissions shall be inadmissible as
evidence [Item I-B[8], A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC Effect
(2004)] a. Binds the parties
b. Limits the trial to those matters not
All proceedings during pre-trial shall be: disposed of; and
1. Recorded c. Controls the course of the action during
2. Transcripts prepared trial, unless modified by the court to prevent
3. Minutes signed by the parties and their manifest injustice
counsel [Sec. 4, Rule 118]
4. Non-Appearance during Pre- The procedure is substantially the same in civil

cases, except that any modification of the pre-
Trial trial order in civil cases must be made before
the trial. No such limitation is provided for in
Who must be present during pre-trial criminal cases.
1. Counsel of accused
2. Prosecutor
Page 413 of 525

APPLICATION OF JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT proceedings, from arraignment to promulgation

RULE of the judgment [Sec. 1(c), Rule 115].
a. The Judicial Affidavit Rule shall apply to all
criminal actions: Instances where presence of accused is
1. Where the maximum of the imposable mandatory [AP]:
penalty does not exceed six years; a. At Arraignment; [Sec. 1(b), Rule 116]
2. Where the accused agrees to the use b. At the Promulgation of judgment, unless
of judicial affidavits, irrespective of the the conviction is for a light offense [Sec. 6,
penalty involved; or Rule 120]
3. With respect to the civil aspect of the
actions, whatever the penalties Waiver of right to be present
involved are. General rule: The accused may waive his
b. The prosecution shall submit the judicial presence at the trial pursuant to the stipulations
affidavits of its witnesses not later than five set forth in his bail [Sec. 1(c), Rule 115]
days before the pre-trial, serving copies of
the same upon the accused. The Exception: Unless his presence is specifically
complainant or public prosecutor shall ordered by the court for purposes of
attach to the affidavits such documentary identification [Sec. 1(c), Rule 115]
or object evidence as he may have,
marking them as Exhibits A, B, C, and so Exception to the exception: The presence of
on. No further judicial affidavit, the accused is no longer required when he
documentary, or object evidence shall be unqualifiedly admits in open court after
admitted at the trial. arraignment that he is the person named as
c. If the accused desires to be heard on his defendant in the case on trial [Carredo v.
defense after receipt of the judicial People, G.R. No. 77542, March 19, 1990]
affidavits of the prosecution, he shall have
the option to submit his judicial affidavit as Other instances of waiver [WE]
well as those of his witnesses to the court a. The absence of the accused Without
within ten days from receipt of such justifiable cause at the trial of which he had
affidavits and serve a copy of each on the notice
public and private prosecutor, including his b. When an accused under custody Escapes
documentary and object evidence until custody over him is regained
previously marked as Exhibits 1, 2, 3, and [Sec. 1(c), Rule 115]
so on. These affidavits shall serve as direct
testimonies of the accused and his 2. Suspension on Account of
witnesses when they appear before the
court to testify. Absence of Witnesses
[Sec. 9, AM 12-8-8-SC]
Effect of Absence of Witness
Any period of delay resulting from the absence
or unavailability of an essential witness shall be
J. TRIAL excluded in computing the time within which
trial must commence [Sec. 3, Rule 119]
1. Instances When Presence of Requisites for exclusion of the period of

delay: [AUE]
Accused is Required by Law
a. Witness is Absent or Unavailable
● “Absent”: whereabouts are unknown
Right of the Accused to be Present
or cannot be determined by due
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall
diligence
have the right to be present and defend in
person and by counsel at every stage of the
Page 414 of 525

● “Unavailable”: whereabouts are Purpose of Right to Speedy Trial

known but presence for trial cannot be The rights of the accused to a speedy trial and
obtained by due diligence speedy disposition of the case are meant to
b. Witness must be Essential [Sec. 3(b), prevent the oppression of the accused by
Rule 119] holding criminal prosecution, suspended over
● “Essential”: indispensable, him for an indefinite time, and to prevent delays
necessary, or important in the highest in the administration of justice. [Corpuz v.
degree [Riano 530, 2011 Updated Ed., Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 162214 (2004)]
citing 5 Black’s Law Dictionary 490]
Important Periods to Observe
Motion for Bail: A remedy to secure 1. Between acquisition of jurisdiction over the
appearance of a material witness person of the accused to arraignment and
Either party may file a motion for bail with pre-trial:
proof/under oath that a material witness will a. Detained accused: Within 10 days
testify when required. When the court is b. Non-detained accused: Within 30 days
satisfied of such, it may order the witness to [A.M No 15-06-10-SC, III No 8]
post bail. 2. Between receipt of pre-trial order to trial:
Within 30 days [Sec. 1, Rule 119]
Effect of refusal to post bail 3. Periods of delay excluded from the
If the material witness refuses to post bail, the computation [Sec. 3, Rule 119]
court shall commit him to prison until he
complies or is legally discharged after his Factors to consider when assessing denial
testimony has been taken. [Sec. 14, Rule 119] of right to speedy trial [DRAP]
a. Duration of the delay
3. Trial in absentia b. Reason therefor
c. Assertion of the right or failure to assert it,
Requisites for Trial in Absentia [ANU] and
a. Accused has been Arraigned d. Prejudice caused by such delay
b. He was duly Notified of trial [Corpuz v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 162214
c. His failure to appear is Unjustified (2004)]
[Bernardo v. People, G.R. No. 166980 (2007)]
Remedy
Purpose Motion to dismiss on the ground of denial of his
This is to speed up disposition of cases. right to speedy trial. [Sec. 9, Rule 119]
[People v. Agbulo, G.R. No. 73875 (1993)]
Dismissal on the ground of violation of the
right to speedy trial has an effect similar to
4. Remedy When Accused is not that of acquittal
Brought to Trial within the The dismissal shall be subject to the rules on
Prescribed Period double jeopardy. [Sec. 9, Rule 119]
Right to Speedy Trial: A Constitutional Waiver of Right to Speedy Trial

Right Failure of the accused to move for dismissal
No provision of law on speedy trial and no rule prior to trial shall constitute a waiver of the right
implementing the same shall be interpreted as to dismiss on the ground of denial of his right to
a bar to any charge of denial of the right to speedy trial [Sec. 9, Rule 119]
speedy trial guaranteed by Sec. 14(2), Art. III,
Constitution [Sec. 10, Rule 119] When there is no violation of the right to
speedy trial
There is no violation of the right where the
delay is imputable to the accused. When the
Page 415 of 525

accused resorts to tactical maneuvers, he b. The prosecution files the motion before
waives his right to speedy trial. [People v. Resting its case
Jardin, G.R. Nos. L-33037-42 (1983)] c. The prosecution is required to present
evidence and the sworn statement of each
Right to Speedy Trial v. Right to Speedy proposed state witness at a Hearing in
Disposition of Cases support of the discharge
Right to Speedy d. The court is Satisfied that the conditions
Right to Speedy required by the Rules are present. [Sec.
Disposition of
Trial 17, Rule 119]
Cases
Reckoning Point
Requisites as to the Testimony to be a State
First day of trial Date when the case
Witness [ANCoMM]
is submitted for
a. Absolute necessity for the testimony of the
decision accused whose discharge is requested
Application • He alone has the knowledge of the
N/A When considering crime, and not when his testimony
delay for the purpose would simply corroborate or strengthen
of dismissal on the the evidence in the hands of the
ground of violation of prosecution [Flores v. Sandiganbayan,
right to speedy G.R. No. L-63677 (1983)];
disposition, delay b. There is No other direct evidence available
“pre-trial” may be for the proper prosecution of the offense,
considered (i.e., except the testimony of the said accused
c. The testimony can be substantially
delay during
Corroborated in its material points
preliminary
d. The accused does not appear to be the
investigation) Most guilty
[Cosculluela v. e. The accused has not, at any time, been
Sandiganbayan, convicted of any offense involving Moral
G.R. No. 191411 turpitude [Sec. 17, Rule 119]
(2013)]
6. Effects of Discharge of
Burden of proof
a. The accused has the burden of proving the
Accused as State Witness
ground of denial of right to speedy trial for
the motion. Effects of Discharge as State Witness
b. The prosecution has the burden of going a. Evidence adduced in support of the
forward with the evidence to establish the discharge shall automatically form part of
exclusion of time under Sec. 3, Rule 119. the trial [Sec. 17, Rule 119]
[Sec. 9, Rule 119] • Note: If the motion to discharge is
denied, the sworn statement is
inadmissible as evidence.
5. Requisites for Discharge of b. Discharge operates as an acquittal and a
the Accused to Become a bar to further prosecution for the same
State Witness offense [Sec. 18, Rule 119]
Exception: When the accused fails or refuses
Requisites for Discharge to be Proper to testify against his co-accused
[TRHS]
a. Two or more persons are jointly charged Notes:
with the commission of any offense. ● Any error in asking for and in granting the
discharge cannot deprive the one
Page 416 of 525

discharged of the acquittal and the days from receipt of demurrer to

constitutional guaranty against double evidence. [A.M No 15-06-10-SC, III No
jeopardy [People v. Verceles, G.R. No. 13 (d)]
130650 (2002)] 2. Without Leave of Court: If despite the
● Subsequent amendment of the information denial of the motion for leave, the accused
does not affect discharge [People v. Taruc, insists on filing the demurrer to evidence,
G.R. No. L-14010 (1962)] the previously scheduled dates for the
accused to present evidence shall be
7. Demurrer to Evidence cancelled. [A.M No 15-06-10-SC, III No 13
(d)]
What is a Demurrer
A demurrer to evidence is a motion to dismiss Test of Sufficiency of Prosecution’s
due to the insufficiency of the evidence Evidence:
presented by the prosecution to overturn the The evidence of the prosecution must prove
presumption of innocence in favor of the beyond reasonable doubt the:
accused. [Riano 490, 2016 Ed.] a. Commission of the crime; and
b. Precise degree of participation of the
Dismissal on the Grounds of Insufficiency accused
of Evidence [Singian, Jr.v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos.
a. May be initiated by the court motu proprio, 195011-19 (2013)]
after giving the prosecution the opportunity
to be heard; or Effect of granting demurrer
b. Upon demurrer to evidence filed by the The court dismisses the action on the ground
accused of insufficiency of evidence [Sec. 23, Rule 119]
[Sec. 23, Rule 119] This amounts to acquittal of the accused
[People v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 164577
How Demurrer to Evidence is Made (2010)]
1. With Leave of Court:
● Oral Motion: After the prosecution has Note: The order granting the demurrer is not
rested its case, the court shall inquire appealable but may be reviewed via certiorari
from the accused if he desires to move under Rule 65 [People v. Sandiganbayan, G.R.
for leave of court to file a demurrer to No. 164577 (2010)]
evidence or proceed with the
presentation of his evidence. If the Effect of denial of motion for leave to file
accused orally moves for leave of court demurrer
to file a demurrer to evidence, the court a. Accused may choose between
shall orally resolve the same [A.M No 1. Filing the demurrer even without leave,
15-06-10-SC, III No 13 (d)] or
● Written Motion: It must specifically 2. Adducing evidence for his defense
state its grounds. Filed within a non- [Sec. 23, Rule 119]
extendible period of 5 days after the b. Order denying the motion for leave or order
prosecution rests its case. Prosecution denying the demurrer itself, is not
may then oppose within a non- reviewable by appeal or by certiorari before
extendible period of 5 days from judgment [Sec. 23, Rule 119];
receipt. [Sec. 23, Rule 119]
● If leave of court is granted, the Procedure if there are several accused
demurrer must be filed within a non- If there are 2 or more accused and only one
extendible period of 10 days from the presents a demurrer without leave of court:
date leave of court is granted, and the ● the court may defer resolution until
corresponding comment shall be filed decision is rendered on the other accused.
within a non-extendible period of 10
Page 417 of 525

If it can be shown from the decision that the Grant of No appeal is

resolution on the demurrer was rendered not demurrer allowed because
only on the basis of the prosecution’s evidence entitles the grant is
but also on the evidence adduced by his co- plaintiff to tantamount to
accused, then the demurrer is deemed appeal and if acquittal
resolved
dismissal is
reversed,
Right of the accused to present evidence Appeal
after demurrer is denied the
Filed defendant is
Filed with deemed to
without
leave have waived
leave
of court his right to
of court
present
Waives the
May adduce evidence
right to
Right to evidence in Cannot be Court may on its
present
Present his defense done by own initiative
evidence
Evidence [Sec. 23, court motu dismiss the
[Sec. 23,
Rule 119] Motu proprio action after
Rule 119]
Purpose is to proprio giving
determine Submits the prosecution an
whether or case for opportunity to be
not the judgment on heard
Purpose demurrer the basis of
was filed the evidence 8. Guidelines on Continuous
merely to for the Trial (A.M. No. 15-06-10-SC)
stall the prosecution
proceedings a. Applicability
Demurrer in a Civil Case v. Criminal Case Cases to which the Guidelines Apply
Civil Criminal 1. Newly filed criminal cases, including those
Case Case governed by Special Laws and Rules, in
Failure of Insufficiency of the First and Second Level Courts, the
plaintiff to evidence Sandiganbayan and the Court of Tax
Premise show that he Appeals as of Sept 1, 2017
2. Pending criminal cases with respect to the
is entitled to
remainder of the proceedings
relief
Requires no May be filed with Note: These guidelines are not applicable to
Leave of
leave of or without leave cases covered by the Rule on Summary
Court
court of court Procedure
Denial of Accused may
demurrer lose his right to b. Prohibited and Meritorious
does not present Motions
Right to
make the evidence if he
present
defendant filed the Prohibited Motions [JPreReQBAS]
evidence
lose his right demurrer The following motions are prohibited and shall
to present without leave of be denied outright before the scheduled
evidence court
Page 418 of 525

arraignment without need of comment and/or information, or to exclude an accused

opposition: originally charged therein, filed by the
1. Motion for Judicial determination of prosecution as a result of a reinvestigation,
probable cause reconsideration, and review
2. Motion for Preliminary Investigation: 2. Motion to Quash Warrant of Arrest
a. When it is filed beyond the 5-day 3. Motion to Quash Search Warrant under
reglementary period in inquest Sec. 14 of Rule 121 or motion to suppress
proceedings under Sec. 6, Rule 112 evidence
b. When required under Sec. 8, Rule 112, 4. Motion to dismiss on the ground that
or allowed in inquest proceedings and criminal case is a Strategic Lawsuit against
the accused failed to participate in the Public Participation (SLAPP) under Rule 6
preliminary investigation despite due of the Rules of Procedure for
notice Environmental Cases
3. Motion for Reinvestigation of the
prosecutor recommending the filing of c. Arraignment and Pre-Trial
information once the information has been
filed before the court: Schedule of Arraignment and Pre-Trial
a. If the motion is filed without prior leave ● If accused is detained: within 10 calendar
of court days from receipt of case
b. When preliminary investigation is not ● If accused is not detained: within 30
required under Sec. 8, Rule 112, and calendar days from acquiring jurisdiction
c. When the regular preliminary over the person
investigation is required and has been
actually conducted and the grounds Notice of Arraignment and Pre-Trial
relied upon in the motion are not Notice shall be sent to the accused, his
meritorious, such as issues of counsel, private complainant or complaining
credibility, admissibility of evidence, law enforcement agent, public prosecutor, and
innocence of the accused, or lack of witnesses whose names appear in the
due process when the accused was information for purposes of plea bargaining,
actually notified, among others arraignment and pre-trial. [A.M No 15-06-10-
4. Motion to Quash Information when the SC, III No 8(b)]
ground is not one of those stated in Sec. 3,
Rule 117 Waiver of Reading of the Information
5. Motion for Bill of particulars that does not The court may allow a waiver of the reading of
conform to Sec. 9, Rule 116 the information if:
6. Motion to suspend Arraignment based on a. There are multiple cases,
grounds not stated under Sec. 11, Rule b. There is personal examination of the
116 accused by the court,
7. Petition to Suspend criminal action on the c. Full understanding and express consent of
ground of Prejudicial question, when no the accused and his counsel,
civil case has been filed, pursuant to Sec. d. Such consent is expressly stated in both
7, Rule 111 the minutes/certificate of arraignment and
order of arraignment,
Meritorious Motions [WASSlapp] e. The court shall explain the waiver to the
Motions that allege plausible grounds accused in a language/dialect known to
supported by relevant documents and/or him and ensure his full understanding of
competent evidence, except those that are the consequences [A.M No 15-06-10-SC,
already covered by the Revised Guidelines, III No 8(c)]
are meritorious motions, such as:
1. Motion to Withdraw information, or to
downgrade the charge in the original
Page 419 of 525

Plea Bargaining Except in Drug Cases Marking of Evidence

If the accused desires to enter a plea of guilty The documentary evidence of the prosecution
to a lesser offense, plea bargaining shall and the accused shall be marked. [A.M No 15-
immediately proceed, provided the private 06-10-SC, III No 8(f (iii))]
offended party in private crimes, or the
arresting officer in victimless crimes, is present Pre-Trial Order
to give his consent with the conformity of the The Pre-trial Order shall immediately be served
public prosecutor to the plea bargaining. upon the parties and counsel on the same day
Thereafter, judgement shall be immediately after the termination of the pre-trial. [A.M No
rendered in the same proceedings. [A.M No 15-06-10-SC, III No 8(f (iv))]
15-06-10-SC, III No 8(d (i))]
d. Trial and Memoranda
Plea of Guilty to the Crime Charged in the
Information TRIAL
If the accused pleads guilty to the crime
charged in the information, judgement shall be Examination of witnesses
immediately rendered except in those cases The court shall encourage the accused and the
involving capital punishment. [A.M No 15-06- prosecution to avail of:
10-SC, III No 8(d (ii))] a. For the accused: Application for
examination of witness for the accused
Where No Plea Bargaining or Plea of Guilty before trial [Sec. 12 and 13, Rule 119]
Takes Place b. For the prosecution: Conditional
If the accused does not enter a plea of guilty, Examination of Witness for the prosecution
the court shall immediately proceed with the [Sec. 15, Rule 119; A.M No 15-06-10-SC,
arraignment and the pre-trial. [A.M No 15-06- III No 13 (a)]
10-SC, III No 8(d (iii))]
Arraignment and Preliminary Conference of Absence of counsel de parte

Mediatable Cases Subject to the Rule on In the absence of the counsel de parte, the
Summary Procedure hearing shall proceed upon appointment by the
The arraignment and preliminary conference court of a counsel de officio. [A.M No 15-06-10-
shall be held simultaneously and the court shall SC, III No 13 (b)]
take up all the matters required under Sec. 14,
Rule on Summary Procedure during the Oral Offer of Evidence
preliminary conference. [A.M No 15-06-10-SC, • How made: the offer of evidence, the
III No 8(e)] comment/objection thereto, and the court
ruling shall be made orally.
Absence of parties in the pre-trial o If exhibits are attached to the record: In
The court shall proceed with the pre-trial making the offer, the counsel shall cite
despite the absence of the accused and/or the specific page number of the court
private complainant, provided: record where the exhibits being offered
a. They were duly notified, and are found. The court shall ensure that
b. The counsel for the accused and public all exhibits offered are submitted to it
prosecutor are present. [A.M No 15-06-10- on the same day of the offer.
SC, III No 8(f (i))] o If the exhibits are not attached to the
record: the party making the offer must
Stipulations submit the same during the offer of
Proposals for stipulations shall be done with evidence in open court.
the active participation of the court itself and • When made: on the same day after the
shall not be left alone to the counsels. [A.M No presentation of his last witness, the
15-06-10-SC, III No 8(f (ii))] opposing party is required to immediately
Page 420 of 525

interpose his oral comment/objection o Exception: Case is covered by Special

thereto. Thereafter, the court shall make a Rules and other laws which provide for
ruling on the offer of evidence in open court a shorter period [A.M No 15-06-10-SC,
[A.M No 15-06-10-SC, III No 13 (c)] III No 16(a)]
Presentation of Rebuttal and Sur-rebuttal Resolution of motion for reconsideration of

Evidence judgment of conviction or motion for new
If the court grants the motion to present rebuttal trial
evidence, the prosecution shall immediately A motion for reconsideration of judgment of
proceed with its presentation after the defense conviction or motion for new trial filed within 15
has rested its case, and orally rest its case in days from promulgation shall be resolved
rebuttal after the presentation of its last rebuttal within a non-extendible period of 10 calendar
witness. Thereafter, the accused shall days from the submission of the comment of
immediately present sur-rebuttal evidence, if the prosecution. With or without comment, the
there is any, and orally rest the case after the court shall resolve the motion within the 10-day
presentation of its last sur-rebuttal witness. period. [A.M No 15-06-10-SC, III No 16(b)]
Thereafter, the court shall submit the case for
decision. [A.M No 15-06-10-SC, III No 13 (e)]
One day examination of witness rule K. JUDGMENT

The court shall strictly adhere to the rule that a
witness has to be fully examined in one day.
[A.M No 15-06-10-SC, III No 13 (f)] Judgment is the adjudication by the court that
the accused is guilty or not guilty of the offense
MEMORANDA charged and the imposition on him of the
proper penalty and civil liability, if any [Sec. 1,
Submission of Memoranda Rule 120]
• Submission of memoranda is discretionary
on the part of the court 1. Requisites of a Judgment
• Format:
o Does not exceed 25 pages Requisites
o Single spaced a. Written in the official language
o Legal sized paper Note: If given verbally, it is incomplete
o Size 14 font [People v. Catolico, G.R. No. L-31260
• Period to submit shall be non-extendible (1972)]
and shall not suspend the running of the
period of promulgation of the decision. With b. Personally and directly prepared by the
or without memoranda, the promulgation judge
shall push through as scheduled. [A.M No c. Signed by the judge
15-06-10-SC, III No 14] d. Contains clearly and distinctly a statement
of the facts and the law upon which
e. Promulgation judgment is based
[Sec. 1, Rule 120]
Schedule of Promulgation
• Date of promulgation shall be announced There is sufficient compliance if the decision
in open court and included in the order summarizes the evidence of both parties,
submitting the case for decision synthesizes the findings and concisely narrates
• Date shall not be more than 90 calendar how the offense was committed.
days from the date the case is submitted
for decision
Page 421 of 525

Jurisdictional requirements fails to object to it before trial, the court may

a. Jurisdiction over the subject matter convict him of as many offenses as are
b. Jurisdiction over the territory charged and proved, and impose on him the
c. Jurisdiction over the person of the accused penalty for each offense, setting out separately
[Riano, 499, 2016 Ed., citing Cruz v. CA, G.R. the findings of fact and law in each offense
No. 123340 (2002) and Antiporda v. [Sec. 3, Rule 120]
Garchitorena, G.R. No. 133289 (1999)]
Variance between allegation and proof
Judge who renders decision (Variance Doctrine)
The judge who presided over the entire trial General rule: The defendant can be convicted
would be in a better position to ascertain the only of the crime with which he is charged
truth or falsity of the testimonies. But the judge [Riano 504, 2016 Ed.]
who only took over can render a valid decision
by relying on the transcript. It does not violate However, a minor variance between the
due process [People v. Badon, G.R. No. information and the evidence does not alter the
126143 (1999)] nature of the offense, nor does it determine or
qualify the crime or penalty, so that even if a
2. Contents of Judgment discrepancy exists, this cannot be pleaded as
a ground for acquittal [People v. Noque, G.R.
No. 175319 (2010)]
a. Conviction
Exception: Accused shall be convicted if:
The judgment of conviction shall state [LQ-P-
a. Offense proved which is included in the
Pe-CD]:
offense charged (offense proved is lesser)
1. The Legal Qualification of the offense
– some or all of the ingredients of the
constituted by the acts committed by the
offense charged constitutes the offense
accused and the aggravating/mitigating
proved
circumstances which attended its
commission
Example: Murder includes homicide;
2. The Participation of the accused in the
Serious physical injuries includes less
offense, whether as principal, accomplice
serious or slight physical injuries; Robbery
or accessory after the fact
includes theft [Riano]
3. The Penalty imposed upon the accused
4. The Civil liability or Damages caused by his
b. Offense charged which is included in the
wrongful act/omission to be recovered from
offense proved (offense charged is lesser)
the accused by the offended party, if there
– essential ingredients of the offense
is any, unless the enforcement of the civil
charged constitute or form part of the
liability by a separate civil action has been
ingredients of the offense proven
reserved/waived.
[Sec. 2, Rule 120]
Example: Less serious physical injuries are
included in serious physical injuries; Acts of
The penalty should not be imposed in the
lasciviousness are included in rape; Theft
alternative. There should be no doubt as to the
is included in robbery [Riano]
offense committed and the penalty for it.
Where a complex crime is charged and the
Judgment for two or more offenses
evidence fails to support the charge as to one
Also known as duplicitous complaint or
of the component offenses, the accused can be
information [Prof. Sanidad]
convicted of the one which is proven [People v.
Llaguno, G.R. No. 91262 (1998)]
When two or more offenses are charged in a
single complaint or information but the accused
Page 422 of 525

Exception to the exception: Where there are appeal, in his name and not in the name of
facts that supervened after the filing of the the People.
information which change the nature of the
offense. The Court is not precluded from expressing
disapproval of certain acts
b. Acquittal General rule: The court has authority to
express disapproval of certain acts even if
The judgment of acquittal shall state whether: judgment is for acquittal.
1. The evidence of the prosecution absolutely
failed to prove the guilt of the accused; or Exception: The court is not permitted to
2. Merely failed to prove his guilt beyond censure the accused in a judgment for acquittal
reasonable doubt. – no matter how light, a censure is still a
punishment.
In either case, the judgment shall determine if
the act or omission complained from which the 3. Promulgation of Judgment;
civil liability might arise did not exist.
[Sec. 2, Rule 120]
Instances of Promulgation of
Judgment in Absentia
Acquittal Dismissal IN GENERAL
Promulgation of judgment is an official

Effect Terminates the case
proclamation or announcement of the decision
Decision on Not on the of the court [Pascua v. Court of Appeals, G.R.
the merits merits but no No. 140243 (2000), citing Jacinto, Sr. 521,
Decision is based on a finding that Commentaries and Jurisprudence on the
based on finding that accused is Revised Rules of Court [Criminal Procedure],
the accused not guilty 1994 Ed.]
is not guilty
Requisites
a. There must be a court legally organized or
Effect of Acquittal on Civil Liability constituted; and there must be a judge, or
General Rule: Acquittal based on failure to judges, legally appointed or elected and
prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt does not actually acting, either de jure or de facto
extinguish the civil liability arising from his acts. [Luna v. Rodriguez, G.R. No. 12647
[Lontoc v. MD Transit, G.R. No. L-48949 (1917)]
(1988)] b. Said judgment must be duly signed and
promulgated during the incumbency of the
Exception: Acquittal extinguishes civil liability judge who penned it [Payumo v.
only when the judgment includes a declaration Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 151911 (2011)]
that the facts from which the civil liability might c. The judgment is promulgated by reading it
arise did not exist [Lontoc v. MD Transit, G.R. in the presence of the accused and any
No. L-48949 (1988)] Thus: judge of the court in which it was rendered
1. The court may nonetheless hold the [Sec. 6, Rule 120]
accused civilly liable in favor of the
offended party, or it may deny the award of Failure to promulgate
civil damages expressly or impliedly by Where there is no promulgation of judgment,
being silent on the matter. no right to appeal accrues. Merely reading the
2. The losing party may appeal the ruling on dispositive portion of the decision is not
the civil liability, as in any other ordinary sufficient [Pascua v. CA, G.R. No. 140243
(2000)]
Page 423 of 525

Notice for promulgation copy at the accused’s last known address or

The proper clerk of court shall give notice to the through counsel [Sec. 6, Rule 120]
accused personally or through his bondsman
or warden and counsel, requiring him to be c. If the accused is confined or
present at the promulgation of the decision. If detained in another province or
the accused was tried in absentia because he
city
jumped bail or escaped from prison, the notice
to him shall be served at his last known
The judgment may be promulgated by the
address [Sec. 6, Rule 120] executive judge of the RTC having jurisdiction
over the place of confinement or detention
PROMULGATION IN CERTAIN
upon request of the court which rendered the
CIRCUMSTANCES
judgment. The court promulgating the
judgment shall have authority to accept the
a. When the judge is absent or notice of appeal and to approve the bail bond
outside the province or city pending appeal; provided, that if the decision of
the trial court convicting the accused changed
The judgment may be promulgated by the clerk the nature of the offense from non-bailable to
of court [Sec. 6, Rule 120]. bailable, the application for bail can only be
filed and resolved by the appellate court [Sec.
b. Where Presence of Accused Is 6, Rule 120]
Required; Exceptions
d. Promulgation when a judge is
General rule: Presence of the accused is no longer a judge
mandatory in the promulgation of judgment.
A judgment promulgated after the judge who
Exception: If the conviction is for a light signed the decision has ceased to hold office is
offense, the judgment may be pronounced in not valid and binding. In like manner, it cannot
the presence of his counsel or representative be promulgated after the retirement of the
[Sec. 6, Rule 120] judge [Nazareno v. CA, G.R. No. 111610
(2002)]
If the judgment is for conviction and the failure
of the accused to appear was without justifiable
4. Instances when Judgment
cause, he shall lose the remedies available in
the Rules against the judgment and the court Becomes Final
shall order his arrest.
Modification of judgment
However, within 15 days from promulgation of A judgment of conviction may, upon motion of
judgment, he may surrender and file a motion the accused, be modified or set aside before
for leave of court to avail of these remedies. He the judgment becomes final or before appeal is
shall state the reasons for his absence. If he perfected [Sec. 7, Rule 120, Rules of Court]
proves his absence was for a justifiable cause,
he shall be allowed to avail of the remedies
within 15 days from notice [Sec. 6, Rule 120; When does judgment become final
People v. De Grano, G.R. No. 167710 (2009)] a. After the lapse of the period for perfecting
an appeal;
Effect of failure of the accused to appear at b. When the sentence has been
the scheduled date of promulgation partially/totally satisfied or served;
Promulgation is made by recording the c. The accused has waived in writing his right
judgment in the criminal docket and serving a to appeal;
d. When the accused has applied for
probation; and
Page 424 of 525

of the accused. [Aguilar v. Court of

Note: Appeal and Probation are mutually Appeals, G.R. No. 114282 (1995)]
exclusive remedies. It is implicit in an
application for probation that there is an Irregularities must be with such
admission of guilt. [Prof. Bautista] seriousness as to affect prejudicially the
substantial rights of the accused. [Sec.
e. Judgment also becomes final when 2(a), Rule 121; Tabobo v. People, G.R.
judgment is an acquittal [People v. No.220977 (2017)]
b. New and material evidence has been
Exception: where the death penalty is discovered which the accused could not
imposed [Sec. 7, Rule 120] with reasonable diligence have discovered
and produced at the trial and which if
After finality, the TC is divested of authority to introduced and admitted would probably
amend/alter the judgment, except to correct change the judgment
clerical errors. See Quirino v. PNB [G.R. No. L-
9159 (1957)] See Part L.3 of this (Criminal Procedure)
reviewer
Remedies of the Accused against a [Sec. 2, Rule 121]
Judgment of Conviction
1. Modification of judgment [Sec. 7, Rule 120] 2. Grounds for Reconsideration
2. Reopening of proceedings [Sec. 24, Rule
119] The court shall grant reconsideration on the
3. Motion for new trial [Sec. 1, Rule 121] ground of errors of law or fact in the judgment,
4. Motion for reconsideration [Sec. 1, Rule which requires no further proceedings [Sec. 3,
120] Rule 121]
5. Appeal from judgment [Rule 122]
3. Requisites Before a New Trial
L. NEW TRIAL OR May be Granted on Ground of
RECONSIDERATION Newly Discovered Evidence
The evidence
1. Grounds for New Trial a. Was discovered after the trial
b. Could not have been discovered and
a. Errors of law or irregularities prejudicial to produced at the trial even with the exercise
the substantial rights of the accused have of reasonable diligence
been committed during the trial c. Is material, not merely cumulative/
corroborative/impeaching; and
General rule: Errors of the defense d. Is of such weight that it would probably
counsel in the conduct of the trial is neither change the judgment if admitted
an error of law nor an irregularity [Ceniza- [Tadeja v. People, G.R. No. 145336 (2013)]
Manantan v. People, G.R. No. 156248
(2007)] The accused has the burden of proving item (b)
above [US v. Torrente, G.R. No. 1001 (1922)]
Exception: They become an error of law or
irregularity when acquittal would, in all The determinative test is the presence of due
probability, have followed the introduction or reasonable diligence to locate the thing to be
of certain testimony which was not used as evidence in the trial [Briones v. People,
submitted at the trial under improper or G.R. No. 156009 (2009)]
injudicious advice of incompetent counsel
Page 425 of 525

Interest of justice as gauge for introduction goes into the

of new evidence jurisdiction,
In People v. Almendras [G.R. No. 145915 the entire
(2003)], the court ruled that a motion for a new proceeding is
trial may be granted on a ground not void and
specifically provided in the rules, provided that
must be set
it is sought in the interest of justice. In that
aside.
case, the relief of a new trial was granted to a
client who has suffered by reason of his/her Evidence
counsel’s gross mistake and negligence. already
adduced
Form of motion for reconsideration & new shall stand
trial and the
The court
a. Must be in writing newly-
will allow
b. Must state the grounds on which it is based discovered
c. If based on newly-discovered evidence, introduction
Newly- and such
motion must be supported by: of other
discovered other
1. the affidavits of the witnesses by whom such
evidence evidence
such evidence is expected to be given, evidence in
shall be
or the interest
taken and
2. duly authenticated copies of of justice.
documents which are proposed to be considered
introduced in evidence together with
Notice of the motion shall be given to the the evidence
prosecutor already in the
[Sec. 4, Rule 120] record.
[Sec. 6, Rule 121]
4. Effects of Granting a New
Applying the Neypes doctrine in criminal
Trial or Reconsideration cases
The Neypes doctrine allows a fresh period of
In general 15 days within which to file the notice of appeal
a. The original judgment set aside or vacated; in the RTC, counted from receipt of the order
and denying a MNT or MR. Neypes v. CA [G.R. No.
b. A new judgment is rendered accordingly 141534 (2005)] declared that:
[Sec. 6, Rule 121]
“Henceforth, this ‘fresh period rule’ shall also
Other effects of granting new trial or apply to Rule 40 governing appeals from the
reconsideration depending on ground Municipal Trial Courts to the Regional Trial
Action of Courts; Rule 42 on petitions for review from the
Ground Effect
the court Regional Trial Courts to the Court of Appeals;
All Rule 43 on appeals from quasi-judicial
Errors of law proceedings The court agencies to the Court of Appeals and Rule 45
or and evidence will allow governing appeals by certiorari to the Supreme
irregularities affected shall introduction Court.”
committed be set aside of additional
during the and taken evidence in The “fresh period rule” enunciated in Neypes
trial anew. the interest also applies to criminal actions, particularly to
Sec. 6 of Rule 122 [Yu v. Tatad, G.R. No.
If error or of justice.
170979 (2011)
irregularity
Page 426 of 525

M. APPEAL
1. Effect of an Appeal
An appeal in a criminal proceeding throws the whole case open for review and it becomes the duty of
the appellate court to correct an error as may be found in the appealed judgment WON it is made the
subject of assignment of errors [People v. Calayca, G.R. No. 121212 (1999)]
2. Where to Appeal
For cases decided by Appeal to
Regional Trial Court
MTC/MeTC/MCTC
[Sec. 2(a), Rule 122]
Court of Appeals or Supreme Court (in proper
RTC cases provided by law)
[Sec. 2(a), Rule 122]
RTC or MTC/MeTC/ MCTC (if it is government
Sandiganbayan
duty-related, i.e., filed under E.O. 1, 2, 4 and 14-
[Sec. 4 (c) PD 1606 as amended by RA 8249]
A)
Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
[Sec. 2(a), Rule 122]
3. How Appeal Taken

The right to appeal is not a natural right nor a part of due process but merely a statutory privilege and
may be exercised only in the manner and in accordance with the provisions of the law [Estarija v.
People, G.R. No. 173990 (2009)]
Period to File
Decided by Appeal to Mode
Appeal
RTC (1) Filing of notice Within 15 days from
MTC/MeTC/MCTC
[Sec. 3(a), Rule 122] of appeal with the (a) promulgation of
Court of Appeals court which the judgment, or (b)
[Sec. 3(a), Rule 122] rendered the order from notice of the
RTC (original appealed from, and final order appealed
jurisdiction) (2) serving a copy from.
thereof to the
adverse party The period to appeal
RTC (appellate Court of Appeals Petition for review shall be suspended
jurisdiction) [Sec. 3(b), Rule 122] (Rule 42) from the time a MNT
RTC (where penalty Court of Appeals (1) Filing of notice or MR is filed until
imposed is [Sec. 3(c), Rule 122] of appeal with the notice of the order
(a) reclusion court which overruling the
perpetua, (b) life motion has been
Page 427 of 525

imprisonment, or (c) rendered the order served upon the

where a lesser appealed from, and accused or his
penalty is imposed (2) serving a copy counsel.
but for offenses thereof to the
committed on the adverse party [Sec. 6, Rule 122]
same occasion or
which arose out of
the same
occurrence that
gave rise to the more
serious offense
RTC (where penalty Court of Appeals Automatic Review Automatic Review;

imposed is death [Sec. 3(d), Rule 122] as provided in Sec. hence, no period to
penalty) 10, Rule 122 file appeal
Note: R.A. 9346 now

prohibits the
imposition of the
death penalty
Supreme Court Petition for review Within 15 days from
[Sec. 3(e), Rule 122] on Certiorari [Rule notice of
45] judgment/final
order/denial of
Court of Appeals
Note: Should only motion for new trial
(where penalty is
raise questions of or motion for
not the Death
law and should raise reconsideration.
Penalty, reclusion
the errors of the CA
perpetua, or life
(not the RTC’s) An extension of 30
imprisonment)
[Batistis v. People, days may be
G.R. No. 181571 granted, subject to
(2009)] the court’s discretion
[Sec. 2, Rule 45].
Court of Appeals Supreme Court Filing of Notice of Automatic review
(where penalty is the [Sec. 13(c), Rule 122] Appeal with the
Death Penalty, Court of Appeals
reclusion perpetua,
or life imprisonment
All other appeals to the SC Petition for review
on certiorari [Rule
45
Page 428 of 525

Who may appeal shall file seven (7) copies of his brief with the
clerk of court which shall be accompanied by
General rule: Any party may appeal from a proof of service of two (2) copies thereof
judgment or final order [Sec. 1, Rule 122] upon the appellee [Sec. 3, Rule 124]
↓
Exceptions:
Brief for the appellee
a. A party may not appeal if the accused will
Within thirty (30) days from receipt of the
be placed in double jeopardy by such
brief of the appellant, the appellee shall file
action [Sec. 1, Rule 122];
seven (7) copies of the brief of the appellee
b. If the judgment is for conviction and the
with the clerk of court which shall be
accused fails to appear during
accompanied by proof of service of two (2)
promulgation without justifiable cause, he
copies thereof upon the appellant [Sec. 4,
would lose the remedy to appeal [Sec. 6,
Rule 124]
Rule 120]
↓
a. Procedure in the lower courts Reply to appellee’s brief
(MeTC/MTC/MCTC and RTC) Within twenty (20) days from receipt of the
Brief of the appellee, the appellant may file
General rule: The procedure to be observed in a reply brief traversing matters raised in the
the MeTC/MTC/MCTC shall be the same as former but not covered in the brief of the
that in the RTC. appellant [Sec. 4, Rule 124]
Exceptions: With the use of the word “may”, filing a reply

1. Where a particular provision applies only to is optional.
either of said courts;
2. Criminal cases governed by the Revised Extension of time for filing briefs
Rules on Summary Procedure
[Sec. 1, Rule 123] General rule: Extension of time for the filing of
briefs is not allowed.
b. Procedure in the Court of
Appeals Exception: Extension may be granted for good
and sufficient cause and only if the motion for
extension is filed before the expiration of the
(1) PARTIES AND TITLE
time sought to be extended [Sec. 5, Rule 124].
In all criminal cases appealed to the CA, the
The court may grant as many extensions as
party appealing shall be called the “appellant”
and the adverse party the “appellee” but the may be asked [Gregorio v. CA, G.R. No. L-
43511 (1976)]
title of the case shall remain as it was in the
court of origin (i.e., People v. John Doe) [Sec.
(3) DISMISSAL OF APPEAL FOR
1, Rule 124]
ABANDONMENT OR FAILURE TO
PROSECUTE; GROUNDS
(2) BRIEFS
(a) Appellant fails to file his brief within the
Brief for the appellant
prescribed time
Within thirty (30) days from receipt by the
The CA may, upon motion of the appellee or
appellant or his counsel of the notice from
motu proprio and with notice to the appellant in
the clerk of court of the Court of Appeals that
either case, dismiss the appeal if the appellant
the evidence, oral and documentary, is
fails to file his brief with the time prescribed,
already attached to the record, the appellant
Page 429 of 525

except where the appellant is represented by 2. In case of automatic review [People v.

a counsel de oficio [Sec. 8, Rule 124] Cornelio, G.R. No. L-1289 (1971)]
If failure to file brief on time is the ground, (4) PROMPT DISPOSITION OF APPEAL
appellant must be given notice to give him
opportunity to reason out why his appeal Appeals of accused who are under detention
should not be dismissed [Baradi v. People, shall be given precedence in their disposition
G.R. No. L-2658 (1948)] over other appeals. The Court of Appeals shall
hear and decide the appeal at the earliest
However, dismissal is proper despite lack of practicable time with due regard to the rights of
notice: the parties. The accused need not be present
1. If appellant has filed a MFR or motion to set in court during the hearing of the appeal [Sec.
aside the order dismissing the appeal, in 9, Rule 124]
which he stated the reason why he failed to
file his brief on time and the appellate court (5) REVERSAL OR MODIFICATION OF
denied the motion after considering reason JUDGMENT ON APPEAL
[Baradi v. People, G.R. No. L-2658 (1948)]
2. If the appeal was dismissed without notice General rule: No judgment shall be reversed
but appellant took no steps to have the or modified.
appeal reinstated. Such action amounts to
abandonment [Salvador v. Reyes, G.R. Exception: When the CA, after an examination
No. L-2606 (1949)] of the record and of the parties’ evidence, is of
the opinion that error was committed and such
(b) Appellant escapes, jumps bail, or flees error injuriously affected the appellant’s
The CA may also, upon motion of the appellee substantial rights
or motu proprio, dismiss the appeal if the [Sec. 10, Rule 124]
appellant escapes from prison/confinement,
jumps bail or flees to a foreign country during When it involves credibility of witnesses,
the pendency of the appeal [Sec. 8, Rule 124] appellate courts will not generally disturb the
TC’s findings [People v. Cabiling, G.R. No. L-
Likewise, when accused flees after the case 38091 (1976)]
has been submitted for decision, he is deemed
to have waived his right to appeal [People v. Ratio: The TC is in a better position to decide
Ang Gioc, G.R. No. L-48547 (1941)] the question, having seen and heard the
witnesses themselves [People v. Cabiling,
However, the appeal will not be dismissed G.R. No. L-38091 (1976)]
despite escape
1. In one exceptional case, the appellant took (6) SCOPE OF THE CA’S JUDGMENT
advantage of a mass jailbreak (because,
according to his counsel de oficio he was The CA may:
innocent and wanted to elude an unjust 1. Reverse/affirm/modify the judgment;
punishment) but was recaptured two hours 2. Increase/reduce the penalty imposed by
after, the SC ruled that these the TC;
circumstances were not sufficient to justify 3. Remand the case to the RTC for new trial
dismissal of the appeal which, upon the or retrial;
conclusion arrived at by the Court on the 4. Dismiss the case [Sec. 11, Rule 124]
merits, would entail a clear miscarriage of
justice [People v. Valencia, G.R. No. L- (7) CA’S POWER TO RECEIVE EVIDENCE
1369 (1949)]
Page 430 of 525

The CA has power to try cases and conduct 2. The motion shall conform to Sec. 4, Rule
hearings, receive evidence and perform any 121 [Sec. 14, Rule 124];
and all acts necessary to resolve factual issues 3. If the CA grants a MNT, it may either:
in cases: a. Conduct the hearing and receive
1. Falling within its original jurisdiction; evidence;
2. Involving claims for damages arising from b. Refer the trial to the court of origin
provisional remedies; [Sec. 15, Rule 124]
3. Where the court grants a new trial based
only on the ground of newly-discovered
evidence
[Sec. 12, Rule 124] Motion For New Trial
RTC [Rule 121] CA [Rule 124]
CA’s trials and hearings must be continuous Grounds
and completed within three months, unless a. Errors of law or a. Newly-
extended by the Chief Justice. [Sec. 9, BP 129 irregularities discovered
as amended by RA 7902] prejudicial to the evidence
substantial rights material to his
(8) POST-CA JUDGMENT of the accused defense
have been
Certification or appeal of cases to the SC committed
Whenever the CA finds that the penalty of during the trial;
death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment b. New and
should be imposed in a case, the court, after material
discussion of the evidence and the law evidence has
involved, shall render judgment imposing the been discovered
penalty of death, reclusion perpetua, or life
When Filed
imprisonment as the circumstances warrant.
Filed after Filed after appeal
However, it shall refrain from entering the
judgment and forthwith certify the case and judgment, but from lower court is
elevate the entire record thereof to the before finality of perfected but before
Supreme Court for review [Sec. 13, Rule 124] conviction judgment
Case remanded?
Judgment transmitted and filed in the TC CA can either
When the CA’s entry of judgment is issued, a No. Cannot remand conduct the
certified true copy of the judgment shall be to lower court in its evidentiary hearing
attached to the original record. These shall be exercise of appellate by itself, or it will
remanded to the clerk of the court from which jurisdiction remand the case to
the appeal was taken [Sec. 17, Rule 124]
the court of origin
Motion for New Trial during the pendency of
Reconsideration of CA judgment
appeal
MFR may be filed within 15 days from notice of
1. Appellant may file MNT on the ground of
the CA judgment or final order, with copies
newly discovered evidence material to his
served on the adverse party, setting forth the
defense any time:
grounds in support thereof. The mittimus shall
a. After the appeal from the lower court
be stayed during the MFR’s pendency [Sec.
has been perfected; but
16, Rule 124]
b. Before the CA judgment convicting him
becomes final;
Page 431 of 525

Note: This is not available to the State in case in the judgment appealed from, whether or not
the CA reverses the conviction of the accused they were assigned as errors [People v.
since double jeopardy shall have attached. Olfindo, G.R. No. L-22679 (1924)]
[Villareal v. Aliga, G.R. No. 166995 (2014)]
It may examine the judgment as to the
General rule: No party shall be allowed a qualification of the crime and the degree of the
second MFR of a judgment or final order [Sec. penalty imposed [Macali v. Revilla, G.R. No. L-
16, Rule 124; Sec. 11, BP 129] 25308 (1926)]
Exception: Where the first MFR resulted in a It may also assess and award civil indemnity
reversal or substantial modification of the [Quemuel v. CA, G.R. No. L-22794 (1946)]
original decision or final resolution. In this case,
the party adversely affected by the Modes by which a case may reach the SC
reversal/modification may himself file a MFR of Automa Ordinary Petition for
the latest judgment of the court, because with tic appeal Review on
respect to him, said motion is a first pleading of review Certiorari
that nature Automati It is available It is available
c review when: when
Note: Again, this is not available to the State if
is not a a. In cases a. The
the first MFR resulted in setting aside of
matter of where the constitution
judgment of conviction. [Villareal v. Aliga, G.R.
No. 166995 (2014)] right on CA ality or
the part imposes validity of
Applicable Civil Procedure Rules of the reclusion any treaty,
Provisions of Rules 42, 44-46 and 48-56 accused, perpetua, executive
relating to procedure in the CA and the SC in but a life agreement,
original and appealed civil cases, shall be matter of imprisonme law,
applied to criminal cases insofar as they are law. nt or a ordinance
applicable and not inconsistent with the lesser or executive
provision of this Rule [Sec. 18, Rule 124] It is penalty, it order or
available shall render regulation is
c. Procedure in the Supreme when the and enter in question
Court RTC judgment [Sec.
decision imposing 5(2)(a), Art.
Uniform procedure is such VIII, 1987
appeale penalty. Constitution
General rule: The procedure in the SC in
d to CA The ]
original and in appealed cases shall be the
same as in the CA. and the judgment b. When
latter is may be validity of
Exception: The Constitution or law otherwise of the appealed to law is
provides. opinion the SC by questioned
[Sec. 1, Rule 125] that the notice of by an
penalty appeal with accused
What the SC may do on review imposed the CA. convicted
In a criminal case, an appeal to the SC throws should [Sec. 13 (c), under it by
open the whole case for review and it becomes be Rule 124] the TC, the
its duty to correct such errors as may be found death. SC cannot
Page 432 of 525

CA b. The penalty review the review commissio 2487

judgmen of reclusion evidence or [Sec. n of the (1904)]
t is perpetua or pass upon 13(a), offense or c. When the
imposed death is any other Rule due to the jurisdiction
but no imposed on question of 124] presence of of any
entry of some of the law which modifying inferior
judgmen defendants may appear circumstan court is in
t is and a on the ces, in issue
made; lesser record, but which case d. When only
instead, penalty on will only the decision an error or
the case the other confine on the non- question of
is co- itself to the life convicts law is
certified defendants, question of is directly involved
and the on account the appealable [Sec. 6(a),
entire of their in/validity of to the SC Rule 45]
record is varying that law [People v.
elevated degree of [Trinidad v. Carino
to the SC participatio Sweeney, (2002)]
for n in the G.R. No.
Effect of erroneous mode of appeal 4. Effect of Appeal by Any of

In the case of People v. Resuello [GR No. L-
30165 (1969)], the contention of the adverse Several Accused
party that the ordinary appeal filed by appellant
be dismissed because the proper remedy is General rule:
petition for review on certiorari (only questions a. An appeal taken by one or more of several
of law were involved) was rejected. The SC accused shall not affect those who did not
said that in cases similarly situated, and as long appeal.
as the steps formally required for the perfection b. The appeal of the offended part from the
of an appeal were taken in due time, appeal civil aspect shall not affect the criminal
may be given due course, without prejudice to aspect of the judgment or order appealed
requiring the appellant to file the necessary from
petition for review on certiorari which is also a c. Upon perfection of the appeal, the
form of appeal. execution of the judgment or final order
appealed from shall be stayed as to the
Decision if opinion is equally divided appealing party
When the Supreme Court en banc is equally [Sec. 11, Rule 122]
divided in opinion or the necessary majority
cannot be had on whether to acquit the Effect of appeal by any of several accused
appellant, the case shall again be deliberated An appeal taken by one or more of several
upon and if no decision is reached after re- accused shall not affect those who did not
deliberation, the judgment of conviction of the appeal, except, insofar as the judgment of the
lower court shall be reversed and the accused appellate court is favorable and applicable to
acquitted [Sec. 3, Rule 125] the latter. [People v. Valdez, G.R. No. 175602
(2013)]
Page 433 of 525

5. Grounds for Dismissal of A search warrant is not a criminal action nor

does it represent a commencement of a
Appeal criminal prosecution even if it is entitled like a
criminal action. It is not a proceeding against a
When appeal by the people will not lie person but is solely for the discovery and to get
The People/State cannot appeal when it will possession of personal property. [Worldwide
put the accused in double jeopardy. The Web Corporation v. People, G.R. No. 161106
constitutional mandate against double (2014)]
jeopardy prohibits not only a subsequent
prosecution in a new and independent cause Constitutional safeguard
but extends also to appeal in the same case by No search warrant or warrant of arrest shall
the prosecution after jeopardy had attached issue except upon probable cause to be
[Republic v. CA, G.R. No. L- 41115 (1982)] determined personally by the judge after the
examination under oath/affirmation of the
Rationale complaint and the witness he may produce,
A verdict of that nature is immediately final and and particularly describing the place to be
to try on the merits, even in an appellate court, searched, and the things/persons to be seized
places the accused in double jeopardy [Central [Sec. 2, Art. III, Constitution]
Bank v. CA, G.R. No. 41859 (1989)]
Under the exclusionary rule, any evidence
Dismissal of case upon filing of demurrer by obtained in violation of this is inadmissible for
the accused was held to be final even though any purpose in any proceeding [Sec. 3, 2nd
based on erroneous interpretation of the law. par., Art. III, Constitution]
Hence, an appeal therefrom by the prosecution
would constitute double jeopardy [People v. As a rule, the Constitution mandates that a
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 174504 (2011), search and seizure must be carried out through
citing People v. Nieto, 103 Phil. 1133] or on the strength of a judicial warrant
predicated upon the existence of probable
Where the TC has jurisdiction but mistakenly cause. [Comerciante v. people, G.R. No.
dismisses the complaint/information on the 205926 (2015)]
ground of lack of it, the order of dismissal is
unappealable [People v. Duran, G.R. No. L-
13334 (1960)]
N. SEARCH AND
SEIZURE
1. Nature of Search Warrant
Nature
It is an order in writing; issued in the name of
the People of the Philippines; signed by a
judge; and directed to a peace officer,
commanding him to search for personal
property described in the warrant and bring it
before the court [Sec. 1, Rule 126]
Page 434 of 525

Directed upon acts of the government, not Exceptions:

private persons a. Search incidental to a lawful arrest;
The constitutional protection is directed against b. Consented search;
the acts of the government and its agents, not c. Search of moving vehicle;
private persons [People v. Marti, G.R. No. d. Checkpoints;
81561 (1991)] e. Plain view;
f. Stop and frisk;
General rule: Search of property is g. Customs search;
unreasonable unless it has been authorized by h. Other exceptions, such as exigent
a valid search warrant. circumstance
2. Distinguish From Warrant of Arrest

Search warrant Warrant of arrest
Order in writing issued in the name of
Order directed to the peace officer to
the People of the Philippines, signed
execute the warrant by taking the
Nature and by the judge and directed to the peace
person stated therein into custody that
purpose officer to search personal property
he may be bound to answer for the
described therein and to bring it to
commission of the offense
court [Sec. 1, Rule 126]
Sec. 2, Art. III of the Constitution does
not mandatorily require the judge to
The judge must personally examine in personally examine the complainant
the form of searching questions and and her witnesses. Instead, he may opt
answers, under oath, the complainant to personally evaluate the report and
Determination
and witnesses he may produce on supporting documents submitted by
of Probable
facts personally known to them and the prosecutor or he may disregard the
cause
attach to the record their sworn prosecutor’s report and require the
statements, together with the affidavits submission of supporting affidavits of
submitted [Sec. 5, Rule 126] witnesses [People v. Grey,, G.R. No.
180109 (2010), citing Soliven v.
Makasiar, G.R. No. L-82585 (1988)]
It must particularly describe the place
to be searched and the things to be It must particularly describe the person
Form seized [Sec. 2, Art. III, Constitution], to be arrested [Sec. 2, Art. III,
which may be anywhere in the Constitution]
Philippines [Sec. 4, Rule 126]
The warrant must direct that it be
served in the day time, unless the
When affidavit asserts that the property is on No such limitation under Sec. 2, Art. III,
executed the person or in the place ordered to be Constitution and Rule 113
searched, in which case a direction
may be inserted that it be served at any
Page 435 of 525

time of the day or night [Sec. 9, Rule

126]
Does not expire
Valid for 10 days from its date [Sec. 10,
Rule 126]
The 10-day period referred to in Sec. 4,
Rule 113 refers to the time within which
Validity The lifetime of the search warrant also
the head of the office to whom the
ends when a return has already been
warrant of arrest was delivered for
made [Mustang Lumber v. CA, G.R.
execution shall cause the warrant to be
No. 104988 (1996)]
executed.
3. Application for Search f. Violations of the Anti-Money Laundering

Act of 2001
Warrant; Where Filed g. Violations of the Tariff and Customs Code,
and
General rule: It may be filed in any court within h. Other relevant laws that may hereafter be
whose territorial jurisdiction the crime was enacted by Congress and included herein
committed. by the Supreme Court.
Exception: For compelling reasons, which Issuance and form of search warrant
must be stated in the application, it may also be If the judge is satisfied of the existence of facts
filed: upon which the application is based or that
a. If the place of the commission of the crime there is probable cause to believe that they
is known, any court within the judicial exist, he shall issue the warrant, which must be
region where the crime was committed substantially in the form prescribed the Rules
b. Any court within the judicial region where [Sec. 6, Rule 126]
the warrant shall be enforced
Thus, the search warrant must be in writing and
However, if the criminal action has already contain
been filed, the application shall only be made a. Name of person against whom it is directed
in the court where the criminal action is pending b. Offense for which it was issued
[Sec. 2, Rule 126] c. The place to be searched, and
d. The description of the specific things to be
Under A.M. No. 03-8-02-SC, Executive Judges seized
and, whenever they are on official leave of e. A directive to law enforcement officers to
absence or are not physically present in the search and seize and for them to bring in
station, the Vice-Executive Judges of Manila court the things seized
and Quezon City RTCs shall have authority to f. Signature of the judge issuing it
act on applications for search warrants
involving The absence of such requisites will cause the
a. Heinous crimes search warrant’s downright nullification [Santos
b. Illegal gambling v. Pryce Gases, Inc., G.R. No. 165122 (2007)]
c. Illegal possession of firearms and
ammunitions
d. Violations of the Comprehensive
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2000
e. Violations of the Intellectual Property Code
Page 436 of 525

4. Probable Cause for Issuance Searching questions and answers

Searching questions are such questions which
of Search Warrant have the tendency to show the commission of
a crime and the perpetrator thereof [Luna v.
Probable cause means the existence of such Plaza, G.R. No. 27511 (1968)]
facts and circumstances which would lead a
reasonably discreet and prudent man to In search cases, the application must be
believe that an offense has been committed, supported by substantial evidence
and that objects sought in connection with a. That the items sought are in fact seizable
the offense are in the place sought to be by virtue of being connected with criminal
searched [People v. Breis., G.R. No. 205823 activity; and
(2015)] b. That the items will be found in the place to
be searched
This probable cause must be shown to be [People v. Tuan, G.R. No. 176066 (2010)]
within the personal knowledge of the
complainant or the witnesses he may produce A search warrant issued by a judge who did not
and not based on mere hearsay. The probable ask searching questions but only leading ones
cause must refer only to one specific offense and in a general manner is invalid [Uy v. BIR,
[Roan v. Gonzales, G.R. No. 71410 (1986)] G.R. No. 129651 (2000)]
Note: Probable cause to arrest does not Although there is no hard-and-fast rule
necessarily involve a probable cause to search governing how a judge should conduct his
and vice-versa. investigation, it is axiomatic that the
examination must be probing and exhaustive,
5. Personal Examination by not merely routinary, general, peripheral,
Judge of the Applicant and perfunctory or pro forma. The judge must not
simply rehash the contents of the affidavit but
Witnesses must make his own inquiry on the intent and
justification of the application [Yao v. People,
The Rules require the judge to comply with a G.R. No. 168306 (2007)]
specific procedure in the conduct of the
examination of the complainant and the Examination under oath
witnesses he may produce The judge must examine under oath or
a. The examination must be personally affirmation the complainant and the witness he
conducted by the judge; may produce [Sec. 2, Art. III, Constitution]
b. The examination must be in the form of
searching questions and answers; Oath includes any form of attestation by which
c. The complainant and the witnesses shall a party signifies that he is bound in conscience
be examined on those facts personally to perform an act faithfully and truthfully.
known to them; [Alvarez v. CFI, G.R. No. 45358 (1937)]
d. The statements must be in writing and
under oath; and Mere affidavits of the complainant or his
e. The sworn statements of the complainant witnesses are not sufficient. The examining
and the witnesses, together with the judge has to take depositions in writing of the
affidavits submitted, shall be attached to complaint or his witnesses, and attach the
the record. same to the record [Prudente v. Judge Dayrit,
[Sec. 5, Rule 126] G.R. No. 82870 (1989)]
Page 437 of 525

6. Particularity of Place to Be thing under a warrant describing another" and

gives the officer executing the warrant the
Searched and Things to Be discretion over which items to take [Worldwide
Seized Web Corporation v. People, G.R. No. 161106
(2014)]
Warrant issued must particularly describe the
place to be searched and the things to be Where the language used is too all-embracing
seized [Sec. 2, Art. III, Constitution] as to include all the paraphernalia of petitioner
in the operation of its business, the SW is
Particularity of place to be searched constitutionally objectionable [Columbia
Description of the place to be searched is Pictures v. Flores, G.R. No. 78631 (1993)]
sufficient if the officer with the search warrant
can, with reasonable efforts, ascertain and Exceptions:
identify the place intended [People v. Veloso, Where, by the nature of the goods to be seized,
G.R. No. L-23051 (1925)] their description must be rather general, it is not
required that a technical description be given,
The search warrant does not require the name for this would mean that no search warrant
of the person who occupies the described could issue [People v. Rubio, G.R. No. L-35500
premises. The search warrant is issued for the (1932)]
search of specifically described premises only
and not for the search of a person [Quelnan v. The general description of the documents
People, G.R. No. 166061 (2007)] listed in the search warrant does not render it
void if it is severable, and those items not
7. Personal Property to be particularly described may be cut off without
destroying the whole [Uy v. BIR, G.R. No.
Seized 129651 (2000)]
What may be seized The rule does not require that the property to
a. Personal property subject of the offense; be seized should be owned by the person
b. Personal property stolen/embezzled and against whom the search warrant is directed. It
other proceeds/fruits of the offense; is sufficient that the person against whom the
c. Personal property used or intended to be warrant is directed has control of possession of
used as the means of committing an the property sought to be seized [Burgos v.
offense Chief of Staff, G.R. No. L-64261 (1984)
[Sec. 3, Rule 126]
The scope of the search warrant is limited to

personal property. It does not issue for seizure
of immovable properties [see Sec. 3, Rule 126]
General rule: Things to be seized must be

described particularly. General search
warrants are not allowed. [Sec. 2, Art. III,
Constitution]
A general warrant is defined as "a search or

arrest warrant that is not particular as to the
person to be arrested or the property to be
seized." It is one that allows the "seizure of one
Page 438 of 525

8. Exceptions to the Search Warrant Requirement

a. Search Incidental to Lawful Arrest
b. Consented Search
c. Search of a Moving Vehicle
d. Checkpoints; Body Checks in Airport
e. Plain View
f. Stop and Frisk
g. Enforcement of Customs Law
h. Other Exceptions
1. Exigent and Emergency Circumstances
2. Buy-Bust Operation
3. Private Searches
Items (1) to (3), (5) to (7) and (8)(a) are enumerated in Veridiano v. People [G.R. No. 200370 (2017)]
The other items are sanctioned by the SC in other cases. See the discussion below.
Requisites Notes
Search Even without a warrant, the person arrested When an arrest is made, it is
Incidental to may be searched for: reasonable for the arresting officer to
Lawful Arrest 1. Dangerous weapons search the person arrested in order to
2. Anything which may have been used in remove any weapon that the latter
the commission of an offense, or might use in order to resist arrest or
3. Anything which may constitute proof in the effect his escape. Otherwise, the
commission of the offense [Sec. 13, Rule officer’s safety might well be
126] endangered, and the arrest itself
frustrated.
The arrest must precede the search;
generally, the process cannot be reversed. In addition, it is entirely reasonable for
Nevertheless, a search substantially the arresting officer to search for and
contemporaneous with an arrest can precede seize any evidence on the arrestee’s
the arrest if the police have probable cause to person in order to prevent its
make the arrest at the outset of the search [Sy concealment or destruction [People v.
v. People, G.R. No. 182178 (2011) citing Calantiao, G.R. No. 203984 (2014),
People v. Racho (erroneously referred to as citing Valeroso v. CA, G.R. No.
Rancho), G.R. No. 186529 (2010)] 164815 (2009)]
The rule assumes that the arrest is legal. If the

arrest is illegal, then the search is illegal and
as a result, the things seized are inadmissible
as evidence [People v. Aruta, G.R. No.
120195 (1998)]
Where a search is first undertaken, and an

arrest was effected based on evidence
produced by such search, both search and
arrest are illegal [Lui v. Matillano, G.R. No.
141176 (2004)]
Page 439 of 525

Jurisprudence requires that in case of Relevant to the determination of

consented searches or waiver of the consent are the following
constitutional guarantee against obtrusive characteristics of the person giving
searches, it must first appear that: consent and the environment in which
1. The right exists; consent is given:
2. The person involved had knowledge, 1. The age of the defendant;
either actual or constructive, of the 2. Whether he was in a public or
existence of such right; and secluded location;
3. The said person had an actual intention to 3. Whether he objected to the
relinquish the right. search or passively looked on;
[People v. Nuevas, G.R. No. 170233 (2007)] 4. The education and intelligence of
the defendant;
Consent to a search is not to be lightly 5. The presence of coercive police
inferred, but must be shown by clear and procedures;
convincing evidence. It is the State which has 6. The defendant's belief that no
the burden of proving, by clear and positive incriminating evidence will be
testimony, that the necessary consent was found;
obtained and that it was freely and voluntarily 7. The nature of the police
given [Valdez v. People, G.R. No. 170180 questioning;
(2007)] 8. The environment in which the
questioning took place; and
9. The possibly vulnerable
subjective state of the person
consenting.
[Caballes v. CA, G.R. No. 136292
(2002)]
Search of a When a vehicle is stopped and subjected to an Peace officers may lawfully conduct
Moving extensive search, such a warrantless search searches of moving vehicles without
Vehicle should be constitutionally permissible only if need of a warrant as it is impracticable
Consented the officers conducting the search have to secure a judicial warrant before
Search reasonable or probable cause to believe, searching a vehicle since it can be
before the search, that either: quickly moved out of the locality or
1. the motorist is a law-offender; or jurisdiction in which the warrant may
2. they will find the instrumentality or be sought [People v. Tuazon, G.R.
evidence pertaining to a crime in the No. 175783 (2007)]
vehicle to be searched
[Caballes v. CA, G.R. No. 136292 (2002)] However, these searches would be
limited to visual inspection and the
vehicles or their occupants cannot be
subjected to physical or body
searches, except where there is
probable cause to believe that the
occupant is a law offender or the
contents of the vehicles are
instruments or proceeds of some
criminal offense.
to privacy
Page 440 of 525

Checkpoints; Searches conducted in checkpoints are valid Routine inspections are not regarded
Body Checks as long as they are warranted by the as violative of an individual’s right
in Airport exigencies of public order and conducted in a against unreasonable search
way least intrusive to motorists. 1. Where the officer merely draws
aside the curtain of a vacant
Although the general rule is that motorists and vehicle which is parked on the
their vehicles as well as pedestrians passing public fair grounds
through checkpoints may only be subjected to 2. Officer simply looks into a vehicle
a routine inspection, vehicles may be stopped 3. Officer flashes a light therein
and extensively searched when there is without opening car’s doors
probable cause which justifies a reasonable 4. Occupants not subjected to a
belief of the men at the checkpoints that either physical search
the motorist is a law offender or the contents 5. Inspection is limited to visual
of the vehicle are or have been instruments of search or visual inspection, or
some offense [People v. Vinecario, G.R. No. 6. Routine check is conducted in a
141137 (2004)] fixed area
[Caballes v. CA, G.R. No. 136292
(2002)]
Plain View 1. Police must have prior justification to a Limitations
Situation prior valid intrusion i.e., based on the valid 1. It may not be used to launch
warrantless arrest in which the police are unbridled searches and
legally present in the pursuit of their official indiscriminate seizures
duties 2. It does not extend to a general
2. Evidence was inadvertently discovered by exploratory search made solely to
the police who have a right to be where find evidence of defendant’s guilt
they are [People v. Musa, G.R. No. 96177
3. Evidence must be immediately and (1993)]
apparently illegal (i.e., drug
paraphernalia) Rationale
4. Plain view justified mere seizure of The doctrine is a recognition of the
evidence without further search fact that when the police come across
[People v. Martinez, G.R. No. 191366 (2010)] immediately recognizable
incriminating evidence not named in
the warrant, they should not be
required to close their eyes to it,
regardless of whether it is evidence of
the crime they are investigating or
evidence of some other crime. The
doctrine is also a recognition of the
fact that it would be needless
inconvenience to require the police to
obtain another warrant [US v. Gray,
484 F.2d 352 (6th Cir., 1978)]
Stop and Stop and frisk is a limited protective search of Dual purpose of stop-and-frisk
Frisk outer clothing for weapons [Malacat v. CA, 1. The general interest of effective
Situation G.R. No. 123595 (1997)] crime prevention and detection
and
Where a police officer observes unusual 2. The more pressing interest of
conduct, which leads him reasonably to safety and self-preservation
Page 441 of 525

conclude in the light of his experience that which permit the police officer to
criminal activity may be afoot, and that a take steps to assure himself that
person with whom he is dealing may be armed the person with whom he deals is
and presently dangerous, he is entitled to not armed with a deadly weapon
conduct a stop and frisk search. that could unexpectedly and
fatally be used against the police
officer.
[Malacat v. CA, G.R. No. 123595
(1997)]
Stop and Frisk v. Search Incidental

to Lawful Arrest
The latter happens when one is
caught in flagrante delicto, the former
is done in order to prevent a crime
from occurring [People v. Cogaed,
G.R. No. 200334 (2015)]
Enforcement For the enforcement of customs duties and General rule: The CMTA does not
of Customs tariff laws, the Collector of Customs is require a warrant for such searches
Law authorized to effect searches and seizure
[General Travel Services v. David, G.R. No. L- Exception: In the search of a dwelling
19259 (1966)] house, a search warrant is required
[Sec. 220, CMTA]
The Customs Modernization and Tariff Act
(CMTA) authorizes customs officers to: Note: RTCs are devoid of any
1. Enter, pass through or search any land, competence to pass upon the validity
enclosure, warehouse [Sec. 219, CMTA] or regularity of seizure and forfeiture
2. Inspect/search/examine any vessel or proceedings conducted by the Bureau
aircraft and any of Customs and to enjoin or otherwise
trunk/package/box/envelope or any interfere with these proceedings. It is
person on board, or stop and examine any the Collector of Customs, sitting in
vehicle/beast/person suspected of seizure and forfeiture proceedings,
holding/conveying any dutiable/prohibited who has exclusive jurisdiction to hear
article introduced into the Philippines and determine all questions touching
contrary to law [Sec. 221, CMTA] on the seizure and forfeiture of
dutiable goods [Asian Terminals, Inc.
v. Bautista-Ricafort, G.R. No. 166901
(2006)]
Page 442 of 525

Other exceptions c. File a motion to quash the

illegal warrant
Exigent and emergency circumstances
In one case, there was a prevailing general This remedy is employed if search is not yet
chaos and disorder because of an ongoing conducted.
coup, and the raid of the office/building was
precipitated by an intelligence report that said Who may file
office was being used as HQ by the RAM. The 1. Person who will potentially be injured;
raiding team had no opportunity to apply for 2. Person to be searched;
warrant as the court then was closed [People 3. Owner of the property to be searched.
v. de Gracia, G.R. Nos. 102009-10 (1994)]
Where to file
9. Remedies From Unlawful 1. Motions to quash a search warrant and/or
Search And Seizure to suppress evidence obtained thereby
may be filed in and acted upon only by the
Who may avail court where the action has been
Only the party whose rights have been instituted.
impaired thereby; the objection to an unlawful 2. If no criminal action has been instituted,
search and seizure is purely personal and motion may be filed in and resolved by the
cannot be availed of by third parties [Stonehill court that issued the warrant.
v. Diokno, G.R. No. L-19550 (1967); Santos v. 3. If such court failed to resolve the motion,
Pryce Gases Inc., G.R. No. 165122 (2007)] and a criminal case is subsequently filed in
another court, the motion shall be resolved
by the latter court.
a. Employ any means to prevent
[Sec. 14, Rule 126]
the search
Grounds
Without a search warrant, the officer cannot A motion to quash a search warrant may be
insist on entering a citizen’s premises. If he based on grounds extrinsic of the search
does so, he becomes an ordinary intruder. warrant, such as (1) the place searched or the
property seized are not those specified or
The person to be searched may resist the described in the search warrant; and (2) there
search and employ any means necessary to is no probable cause for the issuance of the
prevent it, without incurring any criminal liability search warrant [Abuan v. People, G.R. No.
[People v. Chan Fook, G.R. No. L-16968 168773 (2006)]
(1921)]
Failure to file motion to quash
b. File criminal action against Where no MTQ the search warrant was filed in
officer or resolved by the issuing court, the interested
party may move in the court where the criminal
A public officer/employee who procures a case is pending for the suppression as
search warrant without just cause is criminally evidence of the personal property seized under
liable under Art. 129, RPC, on search warrants the warrant if the same is offered therein for
maliciously obtained and abuse in the service said purpose. [Malaloan v. CA, G.R. No.
of those legally obtained. 104879 (1994)]
Page 443 of 525

d. File a motion to return things The judge may be held liable for
seized a. Knowingly rendering an unjust interlocutory
order [Art. 206, RPC]
The venue where the motion will be filed b. Inexcusable negligence or ignorance [Art.
follows the same rules as in a motion to quash. 205, RPC]
An accused may file a motion to suppress It may also result in civil liability for
evidence if he is not among the persons who a. Violation of rights and liberties [Art. 32(9),
can file a motion to quash. CC]
b. Malicious prosecution and acts referred to
General rule: Goods seized by virtue of an Art. 32 [Art. 2218, CC]
illegal warrant must be returned.
Malice or bad faith is not required.
Exception: The illegality of the search warrant
does not call for the return of the things seized, Not only official actions, but all persons who are
the possession of which is prohibited by law responsible for the violation are liable for
[Castro v. Pabalan, G.R. No. L-28642 (1976)] damages [MHP Garments v. CA, G.R. No.
86720 (1994)]
e. Motion to suppress evidence
Waiver of immunity against unreasonable
search and seizure
This refers to a motion to suppress as evidence
The constitutional immunity against
the objects illegally taken pursuant to the
unreasonable searches and seizure is a
exclusionary rule, which states that any
evidence obtained through unreasonable personal right that may be waived
expressly/impliedly only by the person whose
searches and seizures shall be inadmissible for
right is being invaded or one who is expressly
any purpose in any proceeding
authorized to do so in his behalf [Pasion v.
Locsin, G.R. No. L-45950 (1938)]
CIVIL AND CRIMINAL LIABILITY FROM
UNREASONABLE SEARCH AND SEIZURE
The following offenses may result from Requisites
a. It must appear that the right exists
unreasonable search and seizure
b. The person involved had knowledge
a. Violation of domicile [Art. 128, RPC]
(actual or constructive) of the existence of
b. Search warrant maliciously obtained [Art.
such right
129, RPC]
c. Searching domicile without witnesses [Art. c. The person had an actual intention to
relinquish the right
130, RPC]
d. Unjust interlocutory order [Art. 206, RPC] [Pasion v. Locsin, G.R. No. L-45950 (1938)]
The public officer or employee may be held 10. Cybercrime Warrants

liable for:
a. Entering without authority; against the will; a. Scope and Applicability
refuses to leave
b. A search warrant procured without just The rule provides for the procedure in the
cause or if with just cause, exceeds his application and grants of warrants and related
authority or uses unnecessary severity of orders involving preservation, disclosure,
force interception, search, seizure, and/or
c. Conducting the search without the required examination of computer data.
witnesses.
Page 444 of 525

b. General Provisions City have the special authority to act on

applications and issue warrants which shall be
VENUE FOR FILING A CRIMINAL ACTION enforceable nationwide and outside the
Philippines.
i. Violation of Section 4 (Cybercrime
offenses) and/or Section 5 (Other iv. Application for a warrant for
offenses) of RA 10175 (Cybercrime violation of all crimes defined, and
Prevention Act of 2012 hereinafter penalized by RPC and other
“RA 10175”) special laws if committed using
Information Communication
General Rule: The criminal action shall be filed Technology (ICT) shall be filed
before the designated cybercrime court of the with the regular courts or other
province or city: specialized RTC in the places:
1. Where the offense or any of its elements is
committed, or 1. Where the offense or any of its elements is
2. Where any part of the computer system committed, or
used is situated, or 2. Where any part of the computer system
3. Where any of the damage caused to a used is situated, or
natural or juridical person took place 3. Where any of the damage caused to a
natural or juridical person took place
Note: The court where the criminal action was
first filed shall acquire jurisdiction to the Effectivity of Warrants
exclusion of other courts. General Rule: Not exceeding 10 days from its
issuance
ii. All other crimes committed using
Information and Communication Exception: The issuing court may, upon
Technology (ICT) motion, extend its effectivity based only on
justifiable reasons for a period not exceeding
General Rule: The criminal action shall be 10 from the expiration of the original period.
filed before the regular or specialized courts
as the case maybe. Contempt
The responsible law enforcement authorities
VENUE FOR FILING AN APPLICATION FOR shall be subject to action for contempt in case:
CYBERCRIME WARRANT 1. Failure to timely file the return for any of the
issued warrants under this Rule
iii. Violation of Section 4 and Section 2. Failure to duly turn-over to the court’s
5 of RA 10175 custody any of the items disclosed
intercepted, searched, seized, and/or
General Rule: Application shall be filed before examined
the designated cybercrime courts of the
province or the city where: c. Preservation of Computer Data
1. Where the offense or any of its elements is
committed, or General Rule: Data should be kept, retained,
2. Where any part of the computer system and preserved by a service provider for a
used is situated, or minimum period of 6 months from:
3. Where any of the damage caused to a 1. The date of transaction in the case of traffic
natural or juridical person took place data and subscriber’s information;
2. The date of receipt of order from law
Note: Cybercrime courts in Quezon City, City enforcement requiring its preservation in
of Manila, Makati City, Pasig City, Cebu City, the case of content data
Iloilo City, Davao City, and Cagayan De Oro
Page 445 of 525

Exception: Contents of Application for WDCD

1. A one-time extension for another 6 1. The probable offense involved
months may be ordered 2. Relevance and necessity of the computer
The data is preserved until the final data or subscriber’s information sought to
termination of a case once the data that is be disclosed for the purpose of
preserved, transmitted or stored by the investigation
service provider is used as evidence in a 3. Names of the individuals or entities whose
case. computer data or subscriber’s information
are sought to be disclosed, including the
The receipt by the service provider of names of the individuals of the individuals
transmittal of document to the Office of the or entities who have control, possession, or
Prosecutor shall be deemed a notification access thereto, if available;
to preserve data until the final termination 4. Particular description of the computer data
of the case. or subscriber’s information sought to be
disclosed
CYBERCRIME WARRANTS UNDER THIS 5. Place where the disclosure of computer
RULE data or subscriber’s information is to be
1. Warrant to Disclose Computer Data enforced, if available;
(WDCD) [Sec. 4] 6. Manner or method by which the disclosure
2. Warrant to Intercept Data (WICD) [Sec. 5] of the computer data or subscriber’s
3. Warrant to Search, Seize and Examine information is to be carried out, if available;
Computer Data (WSSECD) [Sec. 6] and
4. Warrant to Examine Computer Data 7. Other relevant information that will
(WECD) [Sec 6.9] persuade the court that there is a probable
cause to issue a WDCD.
d. Disclosure of Computer Data
Return on the WDCD
Warrant to Disclose Computer Data (WDCD)
It is an order in writing issued in the name of Duty of Law Enforcement Officer:
the People of the Philippines, signed by the Within 48 hours from implementation or after
judge, upon application of law enforcement the expiration of the effectivity of the WDCD,
authorities, authorizing the latter to issue an whichever comes first, the law enforcement
order to disclose and accordingly, require any officer shall:
person or service provider to disclose or submit 1. Submit a return on the WDCD to the court
subscriber’s information, traffic data, or that issued it; and
relevant data in his/her or its possession or 2. Simultaneously turn over the custody of the
control. disclosed computer data or subscriber’s
information thereto
Disclosure of Computer Data
1. The person or service provider must The officer is allowed to retain a copy of the
disclose or submit the subscriber’s copy of the disclosed data or subscriber’s
information, traffic data or relevant data in information subject of the WDCD without the
his/her or its possession or control within need of court intervention, provided:
72 hours from receipt of an Order; 1. It will be utilized for case build-up or
2. The Order must be in relation to a preliminary investigation purposes
complaint officially docketed and assigned 2. The details are kept strictly confidential,
for investigation; and and the retained copy shall be labelled as
3. The disclosure must be necessary and such
relevant for the purpose of investigation. 3. The retained copy shall be turned over
upon filing of a criminal action involving the
disclosed computer data or subscriber’s
Page 446 of 525

information, or upon order of the issuing be intercepted for the purpose of

court if no criminal action is filed. investigation
3. Names of the individuals or entities whose
Duty of the Issuing Judge: computer data or subscriber’s information
It is the duty of the issuing judge to: are intercepted, including the names of
1. Ascertain if the return has been made, and the individuals of the individuals or entities
2. If no return was made, summon the officer who have control, possession, or access
to whom the WDCD was issued, and thereto, if available;
require him/her to explain why no return 4. Particular Description of the computer data
was made, without prejudice to any action or subscriber’s information sought to be
of contempt intercepted;
5. Place where the disclosure of computer
e. Interception of Computer Data data or subscriber’s information is to be
enforced, if available;
Interception refers to [LRMS-DI]: 6. Manner or method by which the disclosure
1. Listening to, of the computer data or subscriber’s
2. Recording, information is to be carried out, if available;
3. Monitoring, or and
4. Surveillance of the content of
communications, including procuring of the Return on the WICD
content data:
a. Directly, through access and use of a Duty of Law Enforcement Officer:
computer system, or Within 48 hours from implementation or after
b. Indirectly through the use of the expiration of the effectivity of the WICD,
electronic eavesdropping or tapping whichever comes first, the law enforcement
devices, at the same time that the officer shall:
communication if occurring. 1. Submit a return on the WDCD to the court
that issued it; and
Warrant Required 2. Simultaneously turn over the custody of the
Interception may be carried out only by virtue disclosed computer data or subscriber’s
of a court issued warrant, duly applied for by information thereto
law enforcement authorities.
Duty of the Issuing Judge:
Warrant to Intercept Computer Data (WICD) It is the duty of the issuing judge to:
It is an order in writing issued in the name of 1. Ascertain if the return has been made, and
the People of the Philippines, signed by a 2. If no return was made, summon the officer
judge, upon application of law enforcement to whom the WDCD was issued, and
authorities, authorizing the latter to carry out require him/her to explain why no return
any or all of the activities of interception (see was made, without prejudice to any action
above). of contempt
Contents of Application for WICD Notice to Person Intercepted after Filing of

The application shall state the essential facts Return Required
similar to WDCD, except that the subject
matter is the communication or computer data Duty of Law Enforcement
sought to be intercepted. It should state [O-RN- The law enforcement officer has the duty to
NDPM]: notify the person whose communication or
1. The probable Offense involved computer data have been intercepted of the
2. Relevance and Necessity of the computer activities conducted pursuant to the WICD:
data or subscriber’s information sought to
Page 447 of 525

1. Within 30 days from the filing of the return, that the reasons for the off-site search are
attaching a copy of the return to the notice; stated in the initial return
or
2. From the lapse of 48-hour period to file Remedy of Person whose devices have
the return, if no return was filed. The notice been searched and seized off-site
shall state the details of the interception The concerned individual may, upon motion,
activities, including the contents of the seek the return of the said items from the court
intercepted communication or computer issuing the WSSCED provided that a forensic
data. image of the data subject of the WSSECD has
already been made.
Remedy of the Person Involved
Within 10 days from notice, the person whose What Activities are Allowed During the
communication or computer data have been Implementation of the WSSECD
intercepted may challenge, by motion, the 1. Interception of communications and
legality of the interception before the issuing computer data may be conducted during
court. the implementation of the WSSECD which
shall:
f. Search, Seizure, and a. limited to communications and
Examination of Computer Data computer that are reasonably related to
the subject matter of WSSECD; and
Warrant to Search, Seize and Examine b. the activities are fully disclosed which
Computer Data (WSSECD) shall be duly explained in the initial
It is an order in writing issued in the name of return.
the People of the Philippines, signed by a 2. Law enforcement may order any person
judge, upon application of law enforcement who has knowledge of the functioning of
authorities, authorizing the latter to search the the computer data therein, to provide
particular place for items to be seized and/or necessary information to enable the
examined. undertaking of the search, seizure and
examination
Content of Application for a WSSECD
The content shall state the essential fact similar Initial Return of WSSECD
to WDCD except that the subject matter is the The authorized law enforcement shall submit
computer data sought to be searched, seized within 10 days from issuance of WSSECD an
and examined, and all other items related initial return which contains:
thereto. 1. A list of all items that were seized, with a
detailed identification of the devices of the
Further, it shall contain an explanation of the computer system seized;
search and seizure strategy to be 2. Statement on whether a forensic image of
implemented taking into account the nature of the computer data was made on-site, and
the computer data involved, the computer or if not, the reason for making forensic image
computer system’s security features, and/or off-site;
other relevant circumstances. 3. Statement on whether the search was
conducted on-site, and not, the reasons for
Off-site and On-site Principle conducting the search and seizure off-site;
General rule: Law enforcement shall endeavor 4. Statement on whether interception was
to first make a forensic image of the computer conducted during the implementation of the
data on-site as well as limit their search to the WSSECD, together with (a) a detailed
place specified in the warrant. identification of all the interception activities
that were conducted; (b) the hash value/s
Exception: Off-site search may be conducted of the communications or computer data
provided that a forensic image is made, and intercepted; and (c) an explanation of the
Page 448 of 525

said item’ reasonable relation to the forensic examination the computer data
computer data subject of WSSECD; contained therein.
5. List of all the actions taken to enforce the
WSSECD, from the time the law Content of WECD
enforcement officers reached the place to It shall state the essential facts similar to
be seized until they left the premises with WDCD except that the subject matter is the
the seized items and reached the place computer sought to be examined.
where the items seized were stored and
secured for examination; and The application shall disclose the
6. A reasonable estimation of how long the circumstances surrounding the lawful
examination of the items seized will be acquisition of the computer device or computer
concluded and the justification therefor. system containing the said computer data.
Period to Examine Seized Items After Initial Initial and Final Return of WECD
Return The initial and final return of WECD shall be
The Court shall issue an order fixing the period similarly governed by the procedures under
to conclude the examination of all the items WSSECD.
seized. The period may be extended not
exceeding 30 days, upon motion, for g. Custody of Computer Data
justifiable reasons.
Upon filing of the return for WDCD or WICD,
or the final return for a WSSECD or WECD
Final Return on the WSSECD with the issuing court, the following are likewise
Within 48-hours after the expiration of the submitted:
period to examine seized items after the initial 1. All computer data shall be simultaneously
return, the law enforcement officer shall: deposited in a sealed package with the
1. Submit a final return in the WSSECD to issuing court;
the issuing court; and 2. A complete and verified inventory of all the
2. Simultaneously turn-over the custody of other items seized
the seized computer data, as well as all 3. Affidavit of the duly authorized law
other items seized and/or the enforcement.
communications or computer data
intercepted in relation thereto. Duty of the Prosecutor When Criminal
Action is Instituted
Warrant to Examine Computer Data (WECD) Within 10 days from the time of the criminal
It refers to a warrant applied for by law action is instituted, it is the duty of the
enforcement authorities before searching a prosecutor, or his/her duly authorized
computer device or computer system (for the representatives, once a criminal action is
purpose of obtaining for forensic examination instituted, to file a motion before the issuing
the computer data) which was obtained via a court to:
lawful warrantless arrest or by any other lawful 1. Move for the immediate transmittal of the
method. records, and
It is available when: 2. Move for the transfer of the intercepted,
1. The law enforcement authority acquires disclosed, searched, seized, and/or
possession of a computer device or examined computer data and items,
computer system; including the complete and verified
2. Through a lawful warrantless arrest, or inventory thereof to the court
other lawful method; Within 5 days, the court shall act upon the
3. The law enforcement authority shall first motion filed.
apply for WECD before searching for
Page 449 of 525

Access and Use of Computer Data How Destruction of Computer Data is Made
General Rule: The package containing the 1. Made in the presence of the Branch Clerk-
computer data deposited in the issuing court of-Court, or in his/her absence, in the
shall not presence of any other person duly
1. be opened, or designated by the court to witness the
2. the recordings replayed, or same
3. its contents revealed, or, 2. The accused or the person from whom the
4. in any manner as used as evidence items were seized, or his/her
representative or counsel, or law
Exception: The court may grant so upon filing enforcement agency may be allowed to
a motion for the purpose stating: witness.
1. the relevance of the computer data sought
to be opened, replayed, revealed, or used Provided, they appear during the
as evidence; and scheduled date of destruction upon written
2. the names of the persons who will be notice to them by the Branch Clerk of
allowed to have access thereto, if the Court.
motion is granted. 3. Within 24 hours from the destruction of
3. Must include proof of service of copies sent data, the Branch Clerk of Court or the
to the person/s whose computer data is witness duly designated by court shall
subject of the motion. issue a sworn certification as to the fact
of destruction
Within 10 days from receipt of notice thereof, 4. The Branch Clerk of Court shall file the said
the person must file comment thereto. After certificate with the same court
which, the court shall rule on the motion, unless 5. The storage device or other items turned
a clarificatory hearing is needed. over to the court’s custody shall be
destroyed by:
h. Destruction of Computer Data a. Shredding
b. Drilling of four holes through the
Duty of Service Providers and Law device,
Enforcement Authorities to Destroy c. Prying the platters apart, or
The service providers and law enforcement d. Other means that will sufficiently make
authorities, as the case maybe, shall it inoperable.
immediately and completely destroy the
computer data subject of preservation and O. PROVISIONAL
examination upon expiration of the periods
provided in Sec. 13 and 15 of RA 10175.
REMEDIES IN CRIMINAL
1. Sec 13: Service providers preserve the CASES
data for a minimum of 6 months, unless a
one-time extension of another 6 months is 1. Nature
ordered by the law enforcement authority,
or in the event that that the data was used Provisional remedies in civil actions, insofar as
as evidence in which case the data is they are applicable, may be availed of in
preserved until the final termination of the connection with the civil action deemed
case. instituted with the criminal action [Sec. 1, Rule
2. Sec 15: After lapse of the time period 127]
specified in the warrant, unless the court
granted extension of time to complete If the civil action is suspended on account of
examination for no longer than 30 days filing of the criminal action, the court with which
(from the time of the court’s approval). the civil case is filed is not thereby deprived of
its authority to issue auxiliary writs that do not
Page 450 of 525

go into the merits of the case [Ramcar, Inc v. [Sec. 2, Rule 127]
de Leon, G.R. No. L-1329 (1947)]
Issuance and implementation
Provisional remedies are not available The writ may be issued ex parte before
when acquisition of jurisdiction over the accused
a. Offended party has waived the civil claim [Cuarter v. CA, G.R No. 102448 (1992))
b. Offended party has reserved the civil claim
c. Offended party has already instituted a However, it may be implemented only after
separate civil action acquisition of jurisdiction over the person of the
d. Criminal action carries with it no civil accused [Gonzalez v. State Properties, G.R.
liability. No. 140765 (2001)]
Note: If civil action has been waived, reserved, A public prosecutor has the authority to apply
or instituted separately, the provisional remedy for preliminary attachment to protect the
applicable should be applied for in the separate interest of the offended party, particularly
civil action instituted [Riano 571, 2011 Updated considering that the corresponding civil liability
Ed.] of the culprits is to be determined therein, no
reservation having been made of the right to
2. Kinds of Provisional enforce it in a separate civil action [Santos v.
Judge Flores, G.R. No. L-18251 & L-18252
Remedies (1962)]
The accused may present evidence to prove No notice to the adverse party or hearing on
his defense and damages, if any, arising from the application is required before a writ of
the issuance of a provisional remedy in the preliminary attachment may issue as a hearing
case [Sec. 11(b), Rule 119] would defeat the purpose of the provisional
remedy. The time which such hearing would
a. Preliminary attachment take could be enough to enable the defendant
to abscond or dispose of his property before a
When proper writ of attachment may issue [Mindanao
The offended party may have the property of Savings and Loan Assoc. v. CA, G.R. No.
the accused attached as security for the 84481 (1989)]
satisfaction of any judgment that may be
recovered from the accused in the following b. Injunction
cases:
1. When the accused is about to abscond General rule: Criminal prosecution may not be
from the Philippines stayed or restrained by injunction, preliminary
2. When the criminal action is based on a or final.
claim for money or property embezzled or
fraudulently misapplied or converted to the Exceptions:
use of the accused who is a 1. To afford adequate protection to the
public/corporate officer, attorney, factor, constitutional rights of the accused
broker, agent or clerk, in the course of his 2. When necessary for the orderly
employment as such, or by any other administration of justice or to avoid
person in a fiduciary capacity, or for a willful oppression or multiplicity of actions;
violation of duty 3. When there is a pre-judicial question which
3. When the accused has concealed, is sub judice
removed or disposed of his property, or is 4. When the acts of the officer are without or
about to do so in excess of authority
4. When the accused resides outside the 5. Where the prosecution is under an invalid
Philippines law, ordinance or regulation
Page 451 of 525

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 the lust for vengeance
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 Supreme Court to prevent the
threatened unlawful arrest of petitioners
[Brocka v. Enrile, G.R. No. 69863 (1990)]
Page 452 of 525

Criminal Procedure CLJ 6 Notes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Criminal Procedure CLJ 6 Notes

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Criminal Procedure CLJ 6 Notes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

U.P.

LAW BOC CRIMINAL PROCEDURE REMEDIAL LAW

III. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

1. Jurisdiction over Subject Matter and Jurisdiction over Person of the

Jurisdiction over Jurisdiction over Territorial jurisdiction

Definition The authority of the court… The place of the

How Conferred by law; Acquired through: The offense should

Page 354 of 525

of any trial court G.R. No. L-2760

How to Jurisdiction is N/A Jurisdiction is

Applicable Jurisdiction is N/A N/A

Page 355 of 525

the actual penalty

Waiver of Cannot be waived by Right to object may be Cannot be waived by

Principle of adherence of Exception: When subsequent legislation:

Page 356 of 525

2. Requisites for Exercise of 3. Offenses involving damage to property

3. Jurisdiction of Criminal Concurrent original jurisdiction with RTCs over

Page 357 of 525

Page 358 of 525

d. Military Courts 10. Where the charges are manifestly false

Page 359 of 525

By filing the a. Filed directly Criminal cases required to be filed with

Page 360 of 525

6. Defamation outrage in silence rather than go through with

Adultery and Concubinage Seduction, Abduction, Acts of Defamation, which

Who Can File

Offended Spouse Offended party, it includes: Offended Party

Page 361 of 525

Page 362 of 525

of their children e. File criminal action against the prosecutor

Page 363 of 525

Rule in Cases filed before MTCs/MCTCs

Page 364 of 525

Limitations on the court’s control 5. Sufficiency of Complaint or

Page 365 of 525

[NOTE: The complaint contemplated under Waiver of objection to sufficiency

Page 366 of 525

Page 367 of 525

Allegations in the complaint prevail: Purpose of requiring allegation of every

7. Cause of the Accusation Rule on Negative Averments

Page 368 of 525

Page 369 of 525

KINDS OF AMENDMENT Amendment as to General rule:

Page 370 of 525

Necessity Amendment Must be with

Necessity When Another PI is When the offense The accused will

Page 371 of 525

Page 372 of 525

Cases filed May be filed in the place 11. Intervention of Offended

Page 373 of 525

Page 374 of 525

3. When Separate Civil Action Is 4. Effect of Death of the

Exceptions: After arraignment and during pendency

When criminal action filed before

Page 375 of 525

5. Prejudicial Question Suspension of the criminal action [Sec.

Page 376 of 525

Page 377 of 525

the full measure