Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
General matters
Distinguish jurisdiction over subject matter from jurisdiction over person of the accused
Jurisdiction over the SJJbject
1.
rv
bl.bm
';--
2.
The following are the basic uisites before a court can acquire jurisdiction over
criminal cases: (1) juri sdiction over the SJJ.bject matter; (2) jurisdiction over the
territory; and (3) jurisdiction over the person of t!:te accused.
The cou rt acquires juri sdiction over the ubject matter if the offense, by virtue of
the penalty prescribed or its nature, is one which the court is by law authorized to t!
_ke cowizance of. It is the power to and deJermine...s:a.sfS of the general
class to which the proceedin g in question belong and is confef(ed by the
2.
SQMerejgn authority which organizes the court and defines its powers. It is
conferred by law,W.by the consent of the parties.
For jurisdiction over the territory to be acquired the offense must have been
3.
committed or any of its essential elements took place within the ,1pritorial
jurisdiction of the court. It
the commission was Wlt spesifically charged, the place may be shown by
evidence. It is the I
which a court has jurisdiction to act judicially and outside of wbich its
judicial acts are null .and void.
4.
For jurisdiction over the person of the accused the rson charged with
the offense IJ)htst have been brought to its presence for hiaiftordbly by warrant
of rrest or pon his voluntary submis sion to th e court. It may be deemed
waived if the accused fails to mak e a seasonab l e objection thereto. Similarly,
one
who desires to object to the jurisdiction of the court over his person must
appear in court.
Jurisdiction of criminal courts
1.
The Municipal Trial Court (MTC), under Republic Act 7691 (R.A. 7691), has
exclusive original jurisdiction over offenses punishable with imprisonment not
exceeding six (6) years regardless of the .fine. and other accessory penalties and
civil liability. Under Batas Pambansa 129 (BP 22), before the amendments
introduced by R.A. 7691, the jurisdiction of the MTC was for offenses not
exceeding four (4) years and two (2) months and 1 day/or a fine not exceeding
P4,000.00.
2.
In cases where the only penalty provided by law is a fine. the MTC has e?
fClusive original jurisdiction over offenses punishable with a fine not exceeding
P4, 000.00.
3.
The MTC also has exclusive original jurisdiction over all violations of city
or municipal ordinances committed within its respective territorial jurisdiction.
The MTC also ]$fs a special jurisdiction to hear and decide petitions for a writ of
() habeas corpus or applications for bail in the province or city w.here .the RTC judges
are.absent.
4.
In addition, the followin-" cases should also be filed with the MTC: Cases
involving llf..22; and bYOffenses involving damage to property through
criminal negligence (B.E.. 129 as amended by R.A. 7691).
5.
The RTC shall exercise original jurisdiction over criminal cases not within the
jurisdiction of any court, tribunal or body. This is because the RTC is a court of
general jurisdiction.
6.
The following are cases under the exclusive original jurisdiction of the
Sandiganbayan: (a) violation of RA 3019 as amended (Anti Graft and Corrupt
Pr ctices Act) and RA 1379 (,An Act Declaring Forfeiture in favor of the state any
property found to have been WJ.lawfully acquired by Public Officer or Employee
and providing for the procedure therefore, which prescribes the penalties for
violation thereof); (b) other es or felonies, whether simple or complexed
with other crimes, committed by public officials and employees mentioned in
Sec. 4 (a) PD 1606 as amended by RA 7975 in relation to their office; (c) crimes
mentioned in Chapter 2 Section 2 Title VII Book 2 of the Revised Penal Code i.e.
Art. 210: y, Art. 211: Indirect Bribery, Art. 212: Cormption of Public
Officials.
,...
2.
3.
A query that is of ten involved at this junctur e is why the rule makes
reference only to the Municipal Trial Court and the Municipal Circuit Trial as
the courts in which offenses may be prosecuted by the direct filing of the
information or complaint. The Regional Trial Court and the Metropolitan Trial
Court (MeTC) arc not mentioned in the rule.
4.
The
is obvious. There is no direct filing of an information or complai.Q.t with
the Regional Trial Court bequse its jurisdiction covers offenses which require
preliminary investigation.
A preliminary investigation is to be
conducted for offenses where the penalty prescribed by law )s at least four {4)
years, two (2) months and one (1) day (Sec. 1, Rule 112, Rul es of Court). The
Regional Trial Court has jur djction over an offense punishable with
impris<}nmcnt of more than six (6) years, way above the minimum penalry for an
offense that requires a preliminary investig?tion. On the other hand, the
Municipal Trial Court has e.xclusive jurisdiction over offenses punishable with
imprisonment not exceeding six (6) years (Sec. 32[2], Judi ciary Reorganization
Act of1980 [BP 129]).
5.
There is likewise no direct filing with the Mchopolitao Trial Court because
in Manila , including other chartered cities, the complaint, as a rule, shall
be filed with the office of the prosecutor, unless otherwise 12rovjded by their
.charters (Sec. 1, Rule 110, Rules of Court). The rule is that in chartered cities, the
complaint shall be filed with the prosecutor but in case of a s;onflict between a
city charter and a provision of the Rules of Court, the former. being substantive
law, shall prevail .
Who may file them, crimes that cannot be prosecuted de officio
1.
2.
3.
If the offended dies or b mes incapacitated before she can file the
complaint, and she has no lsnown parents, parents or guardian, the S1il1e
shall initiate the criminal a.ctian in her behalf (Sec. 5, Rule 110, Rules of Court).
5.
Also, under Section 5 of Rule 110, the offended party, even if a minor, has the
right to initiate the prosecution of the off ense, independently of her parents,
grandparents or guardian except if she is incompetent or incapable of doing so
(Sec. 5, Rule 110, Rules of Court).
6.
Where the minor faUs to initiate the prosecution of the offense, the
complaint may be filed by the minor's parents, grandparents or.guardian in the
successive order mentioned. This right to ..fik.the complaint shall be exclusive of
all other persons t with respect to the .,W!e under the conditions in the
immediately preceding paragraph (Sec. 5,Rule 110, Rules of Court).
7.
8.
public crime, the latter should prevail, public interest being always paramount to
wivate interest.
9.
Under Section 27 of Re
10.
The defamation under this rule (Sec. 5, Rule 110, Rules of Court) consists
only in the imputation of the offenses of adultery, concubinage, .seduction,
ab,duction
and acts of lasciviousness (Sec.5, Rule 110, Rules of Court).
;:;
11.
The criminal ru:.fum for defamation und er the rule shall be at the instance
of the offended party only and upon a complaint filed by said offended party i.e.,
only the offended party can file the complaint (Sec. 5, Rule 110, Rules of Court).
12.
J(JVI4
l.
.6-fr- '-:5
1.
2.
Cause of accusation
1.
1.
The general rule is that a complaint or information must charge only one
offense. More than one offense may however, be charged when the law
prescribes a single punishment for various offenses (Sec. 13, Rule 110, Rules of
Court).
.;
2.
object the court ma y cgnvict him of as many offenses as are charged and proved,
aQ,d impose on him the penalty for each offense (Sec. 3, Rule 120, Rules of Court).
Amendment or substitution of complaint or information
;.'-LvJ
e,
W/ol-L
J.---
The general rule is that any amendment, formal or substantial, befor,e the
1.
accused enters his plen may be done without leave of court (Sec. 14, Rule 110,
e. ecqvY
d
amendment before plea , wh ich <fowngrades the nature of the ffense charged in
or exclu des any accused from the compla int or infor mation can be ma;ie only_
;f:lt VtflfM/IolGl
oon motion bv the prosecutor , with notice to the of!ended party and w ith leave
of court (Ibid).
After the accused enters his plea onlx formal amendment provided that
2.
dt.J..PJ..
leave of court is obtained and such amendment is not prejudicial to the rights of..!) (.,
the accused. Exception: when a ct supervenes which ;hanges the nature of the
.J,,.. .J-JJ 3
trr"
'fC" ,LEf+
aYJl'c}-
JJ.
in c ng the proper offense, the court shall dismiss the original complaint
or information upon the filing of a ne w one charging the proper offense,
provided
5.
J.shall
J not be placed in double jeopardy
How/ver n
rendered;
th&. acc!JSCd cannot be convicted of the offense charged or any
other offense necessarily includ ed therein; and c) The accused would not be
placed in double jeopardy (Sec.14, Rule 110, Rules of Court).
6.
:1. '
determinative of the jurisdic tion of the court (Almeda v. Villnluz, G.R. No. L-31665,
cup}
'b
stood, would no
l nger be available after the nmendment is made; and b) hen any ev idence the
a
c
00JVhere the
offense was committed under Artlc)E{2 of the Revised Penal Code; Min cases of
piracy - "hostes humani generis "; EC} Where an offense is committed on a railroad
train, in an aircraft! or in any other public or private vehicle while in the course
of its trip, the criminal action may be in:atityted and tried in the court of any
municipality or territory where such train, aircraft or other7ehide passed during
such trip, its pla,e of departure or its place of arrival; 1({1) where an offense is
committed on board a vessel in the course of its voyage, the criminal action may
be instituted and tried in the proper_court of the first port .of entry or .of-ans
municipality or territory through which the vess.el passed during such voyage
subject t9 the generally a septed principles pf international law; (e) the Supreme
CouFt has the power under the C
of trial to avoid a miscmz tice; in cases of written defamation under
RA A363 or Jibe}; and
g))-
rl under B P 22.
2.
As a rule, the criminal y&on shall be instltuted and tried in the yourt of the
municipality or territory (a) wh
th e offense was committed, or (f)) where
an
tial in redients occurred .This rule is however, subject to existing
laws (Sec. 1 (a), Rule 110, Rules of
Court).
3.
..
during its trip, including the place of its departure and arrival. Note that this rule
applies when the offense is committed in the course of the trip of the train,
aircraft or vehicle (Sec. 15(b), Rule 110, Rules of Court).
Where an offense is committed on board a vessel, the criminal action shall be
instituted and tried in (a) the court of the first port of entry, or (b) the
municipality or territo.ry where the vessel passed during its voyage. This rule
applies when the offense is committed during the voyage of the vessel and is
subject to the generally accepted principles of international law (Sec. 15(c), Rule
110, Rules of Court).
4.
5.
V\"+
(Vl.\eY"V
CA'v;,l
caR
( vt!-Wed.
The offended party may intervene in the prosecution of the offense. This
1.
right to intervene presupposes that civil action is instituted with the criminal
action (Sec. 16, Rule 110, Rules of Court). In other words, if there is no civil action
instituted with the criminal action because the same has been_ waill..ed , filed
a
of the_criminal action or filed separately, such intervention cannot be
dime.
2.
If however, - the ciyil action for damages filed separately from the crim.in.al
action is based upon an independent civil action under Articles 32, 33, 34 or 2176
of the Civil Code, the right to intervene is not lost because the subject of the suit
does not arise from the crime. The c vil action to recover civil liability arising
from the offense charged is"not the one separa"tely filed (Philippine Rabbit vs.
People, 427 SCRA 456).
Prosecution of civil action
When a criminal action is instituted, the civil action for the recovery of the
civil liability is @emed instituted. But the phraseology of the present rule
indicates that it is on\y the civil liabilitl{ arising from the offense charged which is
deemed instituted with the criminal acfon (Sec. 1, Rule 111, Rules of Court). The
exceptiops to the foregoing rule are: a{ when the offended party waives the
civil
action; .6) who/' the offended party reserve s his right to institute a separate
civil action; and /.) when the offended party institutes a civil ,action prior
to the criminal action.
/
2.
3.
No reservation to file the civil action separa tely shall be allowed in:
a
able by the Sandiganbayan ; and c) ta x cases.
The civil actions which have sources apart from the crime like quasideli.cts (culpa aquilimw ) and independent civil actions under Articles 32, 33, 34
and 2176 of the New Civil Code are not d eemed jnstih1ted with the criminal
action and may be brou ht separately by the offended party. They shall proceed
independently of the criminal action and require only a preponderance of
evidence (Sees . 1 and 3 of Rule 111, Rules of Court). They need n ot be
reserved (Neplum vs. Orbeso, 384 SCRA 466). The rulin gs in Maniag o vs . CA,
253 SCRA 674,
-0
..:"I
sy6
,.
\'f.,
and
Ildefonso Lines, Inc. vs. CA, 289 SCRA 568, are
cases
rerred reservation even incases of quasi-delicts and independent civil
actions. When separate civil action is suspended
After the filing of the criminal action, the civil action which has been reserved
cannot be instituted until final judgment .has been. rendered in the criminal
action (Sec. 2 Rule 111, Rules of Court). If the civil action is instituted bfore the
filing of the criminal action and the criminal action is subsequently commenced,
the pending civil action shall be suspended until final judgment in th@Crirninal action has been rendered.
1.
Acguittal in a criminal case does not bar the filing of the civil case in the following
circun:'stances: (1) the acquittal is based on reasonable doubt, if the civil case has
been reserved; (2) the ecision contains a declaration that the liability of the
CJCCUsed is not criminal but poly civil in nature; and (3) the civil liability js not
derived from or based on the criminal act of which the accused is aQJUitted (Sapiera
v. CA, G.R. No. 128927, September 14, 1999)
3.
Extinction of the penal action does not_carry with it the extinction of the
civil action, unless the extinction proceeds from a declaration in a final judgment
that the fact from which the civil liability might arise did not exist.
ing are the effects of the death of accuse or convict on a civil action a) after arraignment and
during the pendency of the criminal action such death extinguishes the civil
liability arising from delict, except where civil liability is predicated on other
sources of obligations such as law, contract, quasi contract and quasi-delict
(Sec.4, Rule 111, Rules of Court); (b) before arraignment, the case shall be
dismissed without prejudice to any civil action the offended party may file
against the estate of the deceased; (c) pending appeal of his conviction such
death extinguishes his criminal liability as well as the civil liability based
solely thereon; (d) prior to final judgment death terminates his criminal
liability and only the civil liability directly arising from and based solely on the
offense committed; (e) after final appeal the pecuniary liabilities of the
accused are not extinguished . Claims shall be filed against the estate of the
accused.
Prejudicial question
Prejudicial Question is one which arises in a case, the resolution of which is
1.
a logical antecedent of the issue involved therein and the cognizance of which
pertains to another tribunal. The following are its elements:
vil
action
,!!lUSt be instituted prior to the criminal a':!!on; b) the civil action involves an
issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the subsequent criminal
action; and c) the resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal
action may proceed (Sec. 7, Rule 111, Rul es of Court).
Rule on filing fees in civil action deemed instituted with the criminal action
Filing fees apply when damages are being claimed by the offended party.
1.
be paid and shall simply constitute a first lien on the judgment awarding
such dama ges (Sec. 1(b), Rule 111, Rules of Court)
.
Preliminary investigation
Nature of right
1. The holdin g
of
prelimin ary
investigation
is
not
required
by
the
Constitution. It is not a fundamental right and is not among those rights granted
in the Bill of Rights. The right thereto is of a statutory character and may be
invoked only when specif ically created by statute (Marinas vs. Siochi, 104
SCRA 423). But while the right is statutory rather than constitutional, since it
'
1.
2.
A preliminary investigation is not a trial but is, in certain cases, the initial step
towards the criminal prosecution of a person. It is a m-ere inquiry or a
proceeding which do not involve - the examination of witnesses by way of direct
or cross-examinations . Its purpose is not to dete e the guilt of the respondent
beyond reasonable doubt, but to determine (d)whether or not a crime has been
committed, and the respondent is probably guilty of said crime.
3.
The purposes of preliminary investigation are the following: (a) for the
investigation prosecutor to determine if a crime has been committed; (b) to
protect the accused from the inconvenience, expense and burden of defending
himself in a formal trial unless the reasonable probability of his guilt shall have
been first ascertained in a fairly summary proceeding by a competent officer; (c)
to secure the innocent against hasty, malicious and oppressive prosecution, and
to protect him from an open and public accusation of a crime, from trouble,
expenses _ and anxiety of public trial; (d) to protect the state from having to
conduct useless and expensive trials.
Under A.M. No. 05-8-26-SC effective October 3, 2005, only the following
may conduct preliminary investigations : (a) Provincial or City Prosecutors
and their assistants; (b) National and Regional State Prosecutors; and (c) other
officers as may be authorized by law.
1.
If the investigating prosecutor finds cause to hold the respondent for trial,
he shall prepare the resolution and information. He shall certify under oath in
the information that he, or as shown by the record, an authorized officer, has
personally examined the complainant and his witnesses; that there is
reasonable ground to believe that a crime has been committed and that the
accused is
probably guilty thereof; that the accused was informed of the complaint and of
the evidence submitted against him; and that he was given an opportunity to
submit controverting evidence. Otherwise, ne shall recommend dismissal of the
complaint.
Within 5 days from his resolution, he shall forward the record of the case
to the provincial or city prosecutor or chief state prosecutor, or to the
Ombudsman or his deputy in cases of offenses cognizable by the Sandiganbayan
in the exercise of its original jurisdiction. They shall act on the resolution within
10 days from their receipt thereof and shall immediately inform the parties of
such action.
complaint or information may be filed or dismissed by an
investigating prosecutor without the prior written authority or approval of the
provincial or city prosecutor or chief state prosecutor or the Ombudsman or his
deputy .
re
A warrant of arrest may be issued by the Regional Trial Court within 10 days
from the filing of the complaint or information; the jud ge shall personally
evaluate the resolution of the prosecutor and its supporting evidence: (1) he may
immediately dismiss the case if the evidence on record clearly fails to establish'
probable cause; (b) if he finds probable cause, he shall issue a warrant of arrest,
or a commitment ord er if the accused has already been arrested pursuant to a
warrant issued by th e judge who conducted the preliminary investigation or
when the complaint or information was filed when the accused w as lawfully
arrested without warrant.
In case of doubt on the existence of probable cause, the judge may order
the prosecutor to presen t additiona l evidence within 5 days from notice and the
issue must be resolved by lhe court within 30 days from filing of the complaint
or information (Sec. 5, Rule 112, Rules of Cqurt).
,I,.
2.
.;
When required, the preliminary investigation of cases falling under the original
jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Trial Court (MTC), shall be conducted by the
prosecutor . The procedure for the issuance of a warrant of arrest by the judge
shall be the same as in RTC (Sec. 5, Rule 112, Rules of Court, as amended by A.M .
No. 05-8-26-SC).
A warrant of arrest shall
d. Raise lack of preliminary investigatiol'l as error on appeal (US v. Banzuela, G.R. No.
10172, 1915)
e. File for prohibition (Conde v. CFI, G.R. No. L-21236, October 1, 1923)
Inquest
1.
Arrest
Arrest, how made
Arrest is the taking of a person into custody in order that he may be bound to
1.
answer for the commission of the offense (Sec. 1, Rule113, Rul es of Court).
2.
The following arc the modes of effecting arrest: a) by an actual restraint of the
person to be arrested; and b) by his submission to the custody of the person
making the arrest.
1.
2.
Method of arrest
By officer with warrant
1.
When making an arrest by virtue of" w< rrant, the officer shall inform
the person to be arrested of the cause of the arrest, except when he flees or
forcibly resists before the officer has opportunity so to inform him or when the
giving of such information will imperil the arrest. The officer need not have the
warrant in his possession at the time of the arrest but afler the arrest, if the
person arrested so requires, the warrant shall be shown to him as soon as
practicable (Sec. 7, Rule 113, Rules of Court).
By officer without warrant
1.
When making an arrest without a warrant, the office r shall inform the
person to be arrested of hi s authority and the cause of the arrest, unlrss the Jntter
is either engaged in the commission of an offense or is pursued immedi a tely a
fter
""[[!:Q"'I!:..:,-:: ...
"";':'""'!"""111"- ""r'"';""":"-
-..,...
..--:.:.'--
- ....t; "?.
'1
its commission or has escaped, or flees or forcibly resists before the officer has
the opportunity so to inform him, or when the giving of such information will
imperil the arrest (Sec. 8,Rule 113, Rules of Court).
By private person
1.
When making an arrest, a private person when making an arrest shall
inform the person to be arrested of the intention to arrest him and cause of the
arrest, unless the later is either engaged in the commission of an offense, or is
pursued immediately after its commission or has escaped, or flees or forcibly
resists before the person making the arrest has opportunity so to inform him, or
when the giving of such information will imperil the arrest (Sec. 9, Rule 113,
Rules of Court).
Requisites of a valid warrant of arrest
1.
The law provides that in order for an arrest to be valid the following
requisites should be present: (1) issued upon probable cause which must be
determined personally by a judge after examination under oath or affirmation of
the complainant and the witnesses he may produce; (2) after evaluation of
prosecutor's report and the evidence adduced during the preliminary
investigation (Soliven v. Makasiar, G.R. No. l-82585, Nov. 14, 1988); (3) the
warrant must particularly described the person to be arrested; (4)should be
given in connection with specific offense or crime.
2.
Probable cause as basis for the issuance of a warrant of arrest is that which,
based on facts and circumstances obtaining, would lead a reasonable discreet
and prudent man to believe that an offense has been committed by the
person sought to be arrested. A finding of probable cause needs only to rest on
evidence showing that more likely than not a crime has been committed and was
committed by the suspect. Probable cause requires less than evidence which
would justify conviction. It is not a pronouncement of guilt (Webb v. De Leon,
247 SCRA 653).
2.
Judges of the Regional Trial Court and inferior courts need not personally
examine the complainant and witnesses in the determination of probable cause
for the issuance of the warrant of arrest (Soliven v. Makasiar, G.R. No. L-82585,
Nov. 14, 1988). He is only required to personally evaluate the report and the
supporting documents su bmitted by the fiscal and on the basis thereof he may
dismiss, issue warrant, or require further affidavits.
Bail
Nature
1.
There are certain constitutional principles on bail, namely: (a) the general
rule that all persons sha ll, before conviction, be bailable by sufficient sureties,
except those charged with offense punishable by reclusion perpetun or higher
when evidence of guilt i s stron g; (b) the principle that the suspension of the
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus does not impair the right to bail; and; (c) the
principle that excessive bail shall not be required (Sec. 13, Art. Til, Const itution of
the Philippines).
2.
The constitut ional provtsiOn on bail makes reference to the word "conviction". It
suggests that bail applies to those arrested for the violation of criminal laws.
Does it apply to extradition proceedings? One case held, generally NO! However,
it was ruled that there is no logic to confine bail to criminal proceedings . Bail
should be made available in all cases where there is deprivation of liberty prior
to or during trial. Although not a matter of right in extradition proceedin gs, bail
may be granted if: (a) the extraditce is not a fJight risk; and (b) there are specia l,
humanitarian and compelling reasons (Gove.rnment of the U.S. vs. Purgnnnn, 389
SCRA 623).
3.
Bail is the security given for the release of a person in the custod y of the law
(Sec. 1, Rule 114, Rules of Court). Note the word, "custody". This means that
bail is not available to those who arc free. It would be incongruous for someone
to apply for bail if he is not in the custody of the law. However, there is an
instance where a person who is not under the custody of the law may be
required to post bail. Under Sec. 14 of Rule 119, if a material wih1ess will not
testify when required, the court, may, upon motion of either party, order the
w itness to post bail. If he refuses, he shall be committed to prison until he
complies or is legally discharged after his testimony .
Bail is a matter of right (a) before or after conviction by the Municipal Trial
Court, and (b) before conviction by the Regional Trial Court of an offense not
punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment. After conviction by
the Regional Trial Court of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua
or life imprisonment, bail is a matter or discretion (Sections 4 and 5, Rule 114,
Rules of Court).
When a matter of discretion
1.
speedy method
evidence of guilt as is practicable and consistent with the purpose of the hearing
which is merely to determine the weight of the evidence for purposes of bail (A6-
At the hearing of an application for bail, the prosecution has the burden
of showing that evidence of guilt is strong. The evidence presented during the
bail hearing is automatically reproduced at the trial (Sec. 8, Rule 114, Rules of
Court).
Guideline
1.
No bail shall be required when the law or these rules so provide (Sec. 16
Rule 114, Rules of Court).
2.
Instances when the law or rules provide that no bail is required: (a) RA
6036 - offenses charged is violation of an ordinance, light felony or a criminal
offense, the imposab'le-t.-pel.lalty wherefore does not exceed 6 months of
imprisonment and/or fine o/ P2,000; (bfPD 603 as amended - in cases of a
.J
youthful offender held for physic,_I or mental examination, trial or appeal, if
unable to furnish bail and undetthe circumstances; (c) where the accused has
applied for probation and before the same has been resolved but no bail was
filed by the accused because he is incapable of filing one, in which case he may
be released on recognizance; and b) when a person has been in custody for a
period equal to or more than the possible maximum imprisonment prescribed for
the offense charged, he shall be released immediately, without prejudice to the
continuation of the trial or the proceedings on appeal. If the maximum penalty to
which the accused may be sentenced is destierro, he shall be released after 30
days of preventive imprisonment (Sec. 16, Rule 114, Rules of Court).
2.
1.
Court, his bondsmen may be notified to produce him before the court on a given
date and time. If the accused fails to appear in person as required, his bail shall
be declared forfeited and the bondsmen are given 30 days with in which to
produce their principal and to show cause why no judgment should be rendered
against them for the amount of their bail. Within the said period , the bondsmen
must: (i) produce the body of their principal or give the reason for his non
production; and (ii) expla in why the accused did not appear before the court
when first required to do so; and b) Failing in these two requisites, a judgment
shall be rendered against the bondmen, jointly and severally, for the amount of
the bail. The court shall not reduce or otherwise mitigate the liability of the
bondsmen, unless the accused has been surrendered or is acquitted (Sec. 21,
Rule 114, Rules of Court).
2.
Enumerated arc the rules that govern the cancellation of a bail bond: a)
upon application of the bondsmen filed with due notice to the prosecutor, the
bail may be cancelled upon surrender of the accused or proof of his death; b) the
bail shall be deemed automatically cancelled upon acquittal of the accused ,
dismissal of the case, or execution of the judgment of conviction; and c) in all
instances, the cancellation shall be without prejudice to any liability on the bail
(Sec. 22, Rule 114, Rules o_fCourt).
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
therefore, or from assailing the regularity or questioning the absence of a
preliminary investigation of the charge against him, provided that he raises them
before entering his plea. The court shall resolve the matter as early as practicable
but not later than the start of the trial of the case (Sec. 26, Rule 114, Rules of
Court).
Supreme Court Circular No. 39-97 dated June 19, 1997limits the authority
to issue hold departure orders to the regional trial courts in criminal cases within
2.
Where it appears that the accused had the propensity to evade or disobey
lawful orders, the issuance of a hold departure order is warranted (Agpalo, Ruben,
Handbook in Criminal Procedure, 2"d Edition, p. 300).
1.
2.
Section 1, Rule 115 of the Rules of Court enumerates the rights of the
accused "at the trial."
It provides that "In all criminal prosecutions the accused shall be entitled
to the following rights:"(a) to be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved;
(b) to be informed of the nature and cause of accusation against him; (c) to be
present and defend in person and by counsel at every stage of the proceedings,
from arraignment to promulgation of the judgment; (d) to testify as witness in
his own behalf but subject to cross-examination on matters covered by direct
examination. His silence shall not in any manner prejudice him; (e) to be exempt
from being compelled to be a witness against himself; (f) to confront and cross
examine the witnesses against him at the trial; (g) to have compulsory process
issued to secure the attendance of the witnesses and production of other
evidence in his behalf; (h) to have speedy, impartial, and public trial; (i) to
appeal in all cases allowed and in a manner prescribed by law.
Among the rights of the accused is the right against self-incrimination - the
right to be exempt from being compelled to be a witness against himself (Sec.
1[e], Rule 115). This right is a right against testimonial compulsion and prohibits
the use of physical or moral compulsion to extort communications from the
accused (People vs. Ayson, 175 SCRA 216). Common reason then suggests that a
corporation cannot invoke the right because it is not a natural person that can
testify.
The right does not apply to the physical examination of the accused like
ultraviolet ray examination to determine presence of ultraviolet powder in the
hands (People vs. Tranca, 235 SCRA 455). It does not prohibit photographing,
fingerprinting and paraffin testing of the accused (Alih vs. Castro, 151 SCRA
279). Taking of hairstrands of the accused is not a violation of the right
(People vs. Rondero, 320 SCRA 383), or taking of blood sample (People vs.
Yatar, 428 SCRA 504).
3.
Every person under investigation for an offense shall have the right to have a
"competent and independent counsel preferably of his own choice." Included in
this right is the right to be informed of his right to counsel (Sec. 12 (1), Art . II,
1.987 Constitution of the Philippines; Sec. 2 (b), R.A. 7438).
2.
The right of a person under interrogation "to be informed" implies the correlative
obligation on the part of the police investigator to explain and contemplate and
effective communication that results in an understanding of what is conveyed
(People vs. Guillermo, 420 SCRA 326).
Arraignment and plea
An arraignment is that stage where, in the mode and manner r quired by the
Rules, an accused, for the first time, is granted the opporhmity to know the
precise charge that confronts him (Brig Gen. [Ret] Jose Ramiscal, Jr. vs.
Sandiganbayan and People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 172476-99, September
15,2010).
2.
1.
the accused so pleaded; b) when he refuses to plead; c) where in admitting the act
charged, he sets up matters of defense or with lawful justification; d) when he
enters a conditional plea of guilty; e) where, after plea of guilty, he introduces
evidence of self-defense or other exculpatory circumstances; and f) when the plea
is indefinite or ambiguous .
When may accused enter a plea of guilty to a lesser offense
1.
1)\
tl
1v-
\\.\a attempted homicide, the accused may plead guilty to the lesser offense of slight
dh
1).'<J5 _
prosecutor
-)'-.
physical injuries; but where the offense charge is estafa, he cannot plead guilty to
theft. Theft is not included in estafa). ere must be consent of the
and the private offended party (Sec. 2, Rule 116, Rules of Court). This is the reason
) ?,
_,J r the notice to be given to the private offended party of the date of
Jt"llrraignment. He is supposed to appear for purposes of plea bargaining (Sec. 1 (/),
1
J!;,
Rule 116, Rules of Court).
( .:\.
After arraignment bu before trial, the accused may still be allowed to
\JI plead guilty to lesser offense after withdrawing his plea of not guilty. No
amendment of complaint or information is necessary (Sec. 2, Rule 116, Rules of
Court).
Accused plead guilty to capital offense, what the court should do
1.
If the accused pleads guilty to a capital offense, the court is not authorized to
render judgment merely on the basis of the plea of guilty. The court is
mandated to conduct first. a searching inquiry to determine the voluntariness
of the plea and whether or not the accused fully comprehends the consequences
of his plea. Furthermore, the court shall require the prosecutor to prove the guilt
of the accused and the degree of his culpability. This is true even if the accused
has already entered a plea of guilty (Sec. 3, Rule 116, Rules of Court). Where the
offense is not capital, reception of the evidence is discretionary on the court to
2.
Searching inquiry
1.
imprisonment or nature of the penalty under the law and the certainty that he
will serve such sentence; 5) inquire if the accused knows the crime with which he
is charged and to fully explain to him the elements of the crime which is the basis
of his incident; 6) all questions posed to the accused should be in a language
known and understand by the latter; and 7) the trial judge must satisfy himself
that the accused, in pleading guilty, is truly guilty (People vs. Toncayao 433
SCRA 513).
Improvident plea
1.
Where the trial court failed to conduct the prescribe "searching inquiry" into
the vo tariness of the accused 's plea of guilty and full comprehension
thereof, Afle plea of guilty is deemed made improvidently and rendered
inefficacious (People vs. Gumimba, 517 SCRA 25).
()lAw '""rrl. /
J> cA
.... btJ:th: rw
.etrre Ar
Section 3, Rule 117, of the Rules of Court provide the grounds for a
motion to quash: the facts charged do not constitute an offense; b) the court
trying the case has no jurisdiction over the offense charged; etrJi.e court trying the
case has no jurisdiction over the person of lhe accused; c!)4hat the officer who
filed the information had no auth rity to do so; that it does not conform
substantially to t e prescribed form; tJ{that more than one offense is charged
except when a single punishment for various offenses is prescribed by law; g)
that the criminal action or liability has been .extinguished; h) that it contains
.......,....... stitute a legal excuse for justification; and i)
that the accused has bee
charged, or of the case <:&ains
without his express consent.
-
Motion to quash contemplates an initial action originating from the accused. The
right to file a motion to quash belongs only to the accused (People vs. Nitafan ,
302 SCRA 424). Demurrer to evidence is an objection by one of the parties in
an action to the effect that the evidence his adversary produced is
insufficient in point of law, whether e or not, to make out a case or sustain the
issue. The party demurring challenges the sufficiency of the whole evidence to
sustain a verdict. (Katigbak vs. Sandiganbayan, 405 SCRA 558)
Effects of sustaining the motion to quash
'.A
J'fAri
QIJ
'Jf.J
1JJ
\.bt : do
- ,. h).,e-av-vvt
'J
1. If the ground is neither under (a), (d), (e), and (f) of Sec. 3, Rule 117 of the
Rules of Court, the court may order that another information be filed or an
:mendment thereof be made, as the case may be, within a definite period .If_such
ot\o1\ within
rder is not made, or if having been made, another information is not filed
the time specified in the order, or within such time as the court may
11
#l
cM.t.
2.
t(
Ll
egJI, n
(g), (h), (i) of Sec. 3, Rule 117 of the Rules of
ourt, the court must state, in its order granting the motion, the release of the
accused if he is in custody or the cancellation of his bond if he is on bail.
Exception to the rule that sustaining the motion is not a bar to another prosecution
1.
V'a
..J A
/
Double jeopardy
The elements constituting_j.ouble jeopardy: (a) the accused has been
convicted or acquitted or th e against him was dismissed or terminated
without his express consent; (b) the court has jurisdiction; (c) there is a valid
complaint or information; (d) there was plea to the charge upon a ent (e)
the accused is cQ_arged anew for an offense constihiting a!l'"attemet "'-or a
atiop of the previous offense charged or for an offense that necessarily
includes or is necessarily included in the former charge (Sec. 7, Rule 117, Rules of
J f{ rkaY1(fJ
Court).
Provisional dismissal
1.
c:::::::::
2.
:;
The case of People vs. Lacson, 400 SCRA 267(April1, 2003), has modified the
requisites for a provisional dismissal, to wit: (a) the prosecution with the
expressed consent of the accused moves for a provisional dismissal of the case;
or both the accused and the prosecution move for the provisional dismissal (b)
the offended party is notified of the motion for prov isional dismissal of the
case;(c) the court issues an order granting the motion and dismissing the
case provisionally; and the public prosecu tor is served with a copy of the
order of provisional dismissal.
'tffl'P- )..
;:r_
Note also that under S of Rule 117, the one -year and two- year time
line shall be counted from .xh"e date of the issuance of the order of di issal". In
People Lncson the reckoning period starts from "the service of the order of
dismissal on the public prosecutor who has control of the prosecution'.
Accordingly, the publ ic prosecutor cmmot be expected to comply with the
timeline unless he is served with a copy of the order of dismissal.
lt
r.- 2 p..s
Pre-trial
Matters to be considered during pre-trial
The following are matter that need to be considered during the pre-hial:
1.
of the evidences of
the criminal and civil aspects of the case (Sec. 1, Rule 118, Rules of Court).
The agreements made on the above matters in order to be binding need
approval of the court (Sec. 2, Rule 118, Rules of Court).
What the court shoqld do when prosecution and offended party agree to the plea offered by
the accused
At arraignment the accused, with the consent of the offended party and
1.
prosecutor, may be allowed by the trial court to plead guilty to a lesser offense
which is necessarily i.n'cluded in the offense charged. After arraignment but
before trial, the accused may still be allowed to pl ead gu ilty to said lesser
offense after withdrawing his plea of not guilty. No amendment of the
complaint or information is necessary (Sec.2, Rule 116, Rules of Court).
Pre-rrialagreement
1.
sanctions, an acceptable excuse for the absence must be offered to the satisfaction
of the court (Sec.3, Rule 18, Rules of Court).
Pre-trial order
1.
The pre-trial order shall be issued by the court after the pre-trial conferen e.
This order shall contain the following: <4a recital of the actions
taken; (b)-the facts stipulated ; and (c)--the evidences marked (Sec. 4, Rule 118,
Rules of Court).
(('y
.4_
- tMa.- T(c--J"-ivrJJ.ArL3
2.
_. L .11
""
The pre-trial order shall (a) bind the parties and shall limit the trial to matters
not disposed of; and (b) control the course of the proceedings during the trial,
unless modified by the court to prevent manifest injustice (Sec. 4, Rule 118,
Rules of Court).
Referral of some cases for court annexed mediati n and judicial dispute resolution
1.
Trial
Instances when presence of accused is required by law
Itt''
: :::ru
::f ;: i; : :;:::,:
::
. cJI'. '
\D".
10,
i}'
" ..\.
L.'
tV
Jir
to
"\)
v r :r
b s
( .;
..
1.
the court to be so; b) that the party who applies has been guilty of no neglect; c)
that the witnesses can be had at the time to which the trial is deferred and
incidentally that no similar evidence could be obtained; nnd d) that an affidavit
Pc
= ==
tA
.i.mple means that he waives his right to meet the wjtnesses face to face, among
others. The following are the requirem ents for trial in absentia: a) the accused has
,been arraigned; b) he has been duly notified of the trial; and c) his failure to
appear was unjustified (Sec. 14 (2), Art. III, 1987 Constitution of the Philippines).
Remedy when accused is not brought to trial within the prescribed period
1.
The remedy of the accused is to file a motion lo dismiss the information on the
ground of denial of his right to speedy trial. Failure of the accused to move for
dismissal prior to trial shall constitute a waiver of his right to dismiss under
(Section 9 of Rule 119). The dismissal shall be subject to the rules on double
jeopardy. So if the dismissal is with prejudice, the case cannot be revived
anymore. But if the dismissal is without prejudice, the revival of the case is
proper .
There are instances when two or more accused are jointly charged with
the commission of an offense. One or more of them may be discharged so they
may be witnesses for the state. Before an accused is discharged as a state witness,
the following requisites must be complied with:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
ttJ
or'v (Y\ ttT"' \
dence adduced in support of the discharge shall automatically form
r .' '"
,-11
/1
.
;
}ir \
!:.:_ate witness
JOI!o ,
part of the trial. If the court denies the motion to discharge the accused as state
witne his sworn statement shall be inadmissible in evidence. ge of
accused QPerates as acquittal and bar to further prosecution for the sam ffense
(Sec. 17 and 18, Rule 119, Rules of Court).
Demurrer to evidence
1.
The court may demur to the evidence on its own initiative or motu propio
but after giving the prosecution an opportunity to be heard . The accused may
also file a demurrer to the evidence with or without leave of court (Sec. 23, Rule
ktl
Judgment
Sec. 1, Rul;JlO of the Rules of Court provide for the following req isi: s
of a judgment: a)in writing; b) ttrule official language; c) personally and directly
prepared and signed by the judge; and d) with a concise statement of the fact and
the law on which it is based.
Jj..J
Ctn
Contents of judgment
1.
2.
2.
The court promulgating the jud gment shall ha ve authority to accept the notice
of appeal of the accused and approve the bail bond but if the decision of the trial
court changed the nature of the offense from bailable to non-bailable, the
application for bail can only be resolved by the appellate court (Sec. 6, Rule 120,
Rules of Court).
3.
_/0GJ
of /
L\)Q.lV{/(-
fl
1"\
fJ1t..olA
orapplied for
,
fN
(n
1.
The grounds for a new trial are: a) That errors of law or
irregularities
rrx--% prejudicial to the substantial rights of the accused have been committed
Br
during
(;I
<
t]w trial; and b ew and material evidence has been discovered which
the
\ tJ-tW fj.
produced
(t
t\t.W ,Q >'\'\a,{,...
Requisites before a new trial may be granted on ground of newly discovered evidence
,.....
c}lS a(
tt'l
1.
the following requisites are present: aytllat the evidence was discovere
.,t. i.
material, not
't .
a
e
tri ith the exercise of reasonable diligen.c. e; c) th is
- JJ'j!'!"""'
cJ,
Ill\f
after
irregularities
u ,d'Wf
the
f'JV"'
(J.
\
the
committed during the trial, all proceedings and evidence not affected by
commission of such errors and irregularities shall stand, BUT those
affected thereby shall be set aside and taken anew. The court may, in
the interest of
justice, allow the introduction of additional evidence;
p.r.
J.
e"\
,.IJN e taken and considered together with the evidence already in the record;
v''
a
the
accordingly
The Court deems it practical to allow a fresh period .of 15 days within
which to file the notice of appeal counted from -receipt of the order
dismissing a motion for a new trial or motion for recon sideration .
2.
The period for appeal is interrupted from the time a motian for new trial or
reconsideration is filed until notice of the order overruling the motion has been
served upon the accused or his counsel at which time the balance of the period
begins to run (Neypes vs. CA, G.R. No. 141524, September 14, 2005)..
3.
While Neypes involved the period to appeal in civil cases, the Court's
pronouncement of a "f resh period" to appeal should equally apply to the period
for appeal in criminal cases under Section 6 of Rule 122 of the Revised Rules
of Criminal Procedure, for the following reasons:
First, BP 129, as amended, the substantive law on which the Rules of
Court is based, makes no distinction between the periods to appeal in a civil case
and in a criminal case. Section 39 of BP 129 categorically states that "[t]he period
for appeal from final orders, resolutions, awards, judgments, or decisions of any
court in all cases shall be fifteen (15) days counted from the notice of the final
order, resolution, award, judgment, or decision appealed from." Ubi lex non
distinguii nee nos distinguere debemos. When the law makes no distinction, we (this
Court) also ought not to recognize any distinction. 17
Second, the provisions of Section 3 of Rule 41 of the 1997 Rules of Civil
Procedure and Section 6 of Rule 122 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure,
though differently worded, mean exactly the same. There is no substantial
difference between the two provisions insofar as legal results are concerned - the
appeal period stops running upon the filing of a motion for new trial or
reconsideration and starts to run again upon receipt of the order denying said
motion for new trial or reconsideration. It was this situation that Neypes
addressed in civil cases. No reason exists why this situation in criminal cases
cannot be similarly addressed.
Third, while the Court did not consider in Neypes the ordinary appeal
period in criminal cases under Section 6, Rule 122 of the Revised Rules of
Criminal Procedure since it involved a purely civil case, it did include Rule 42 of
the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure on petitions for review from the RTCs to the
Court of Appeals (CA), and Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure
governing appeals by certiorari to this Court, both of which also apply to appeals
in criminal cases, as provided by Section 3 of Rule 122 of the Revised Rules of
Criminal Procedure (Judith Yu vs. Hon. Rosa Samson-Tatad, G. R. No. 170979,
February 9, 2011).
Appeal
Effect of an appeal
1.
Anappeal in a criminal case opens the whole case for review and this
includes the review of the penalty, indemnity, and the damages involved.
Consequenlly, on appeal, the appellate court may increase the penalty,
indemnity, or the damages awarded by trial court, although the offended party
had not appealed from said award, and the party who sought a r view of the
decision was the accused.
Where to appeal
1.
The appeal to the RTC is by way of notice of appeal filed with the MfC which
rendered the judgment or final order and serving a copy thereof upon the
adverse party (Sec. 3, Rule 122, Rules of Court).
2.
The appeal to the CA is by way of notice of appeal filed with the RTC which
rendered the judgment or final order and serving a copy thereof upon the adverse
party. This mode applies where the judgment of the RTC was rendered in the
exercise of its original jurisdiction If the judgment of the RTC was in the
exercise of its appellate jurisdiction, the appeal shall be by a petition for review
under Rule 42 to theCA (Sec.3, Rule 121, Rules of Court).
3.
4.
-v
e. Death penalty: automatic review by the Court of Appeals (A.M. No. 00-5-03-SC,
October 15, 2004).
f. Other appeals to the Supreme Court: by petition for review on certiorari.
Effect of appeal by any of several accused
a.An appeal taken by one or more of several accused shall not affect those who did
not appeal, except insofar the judgment of the appellate court is favorable
and apJ>licab!e to the latter; \)
..... ____
A L A
1
-----
---- -= -
---
'--:"' ----
-'
appe l of the offended party from the civil aspect shall not affect the criminal
aspect of the jud gmen t or order appealed f rom;
c. Upon perf ection of the appeal, the execu tion of the judgment or final order
appealed from shall be s!.:red as to the appealing P
. 1 f
1
Groun dS for dlSffilSSa 0 appea
fi'/A
1.
V! !-
b..,J -\16
c.
()i
1.
of the Philippines, signed by a j udge and directed to a peace off icer, commanding him to
search for per sonal property described therein and bring it before the court (Sec. 1, Ru
le
126, Rules of Court).
SW
-lri.J.J(
&
. .
- t
1.
--7
At), VJ
.kvl
itN db PP
J..h
cl
}:Jv
.!,t ot ilD\q rfh..?t 'OM
COMMhJJDI
tb (
f'lK: f
ht'm
answer for the comm ission of the offense. Search Warrant is an Order in writing
in the name of the RP signed by the judg e a n d d i rected to the peace officer to
search person al property described therein and to bring it to court. (Sec.1, Rule
2.
3.
4.
place
to
searched.
..r
be
,.,
5.
\\0..''""-1b
_.n:
r(J$A
eonduct an examination
fA
territorial jurisdiction
,{\
cf' <J".
()Y'
....
Court). The exceptions to the general rule are: ompelling reasons, it can be
filed with the court within whose judicial region the offense wls committed or
where the warrant is to be ser
if the criminal action has already been
filed, the application for search warrant an onlJ( he m de in the court where
g; c) in case of search warrants involving heinous
crimes, illegal gambling, illegal possession of firearms and ammunitions as well
as violations of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002, the
Intellectual Property Code, the Anti- Money Laundering Act of 2001, the Tariff
and Customs Code, the Executive Judges and, whenever they are official leave
of absence or are not physically present in the station, the e-Executive Judges
of the RTC of manila shall have authority to act on applications filed by the
NBI, PNP and the
Anti-Crime Task Force (ACTAF) (Sps. Marimla vs. People of the Philippines, G.R.
No
1.
(A.
;:e
1.
his
witnesses to deter
2.
n TTIJ
n 1.r -------
-----
. .
searches and seizures" may not be made - that abuses may not be committed
(Stonehill vs. Diokno, G.R. No. L-19550, June 19, 1967).
2.
law which the warrant officer may be guided in making the search and seizure;
and c) when the things described are limited to those which bear direct relation
to the offense for which the warrant is being issued.
Perso al prop:::
4b
S"
tf'
offense; b) stolen or embezzled and other proceeds or fruits of the offense; c) the
means used or intended to be used for c.QJ:nmitting an offense.
Sec. 13of Rule 126 specifically enumerates the allowable scope of a search
incident to a lawful arrest. The provision limits the search to the following: (a)
dangerous weapon s; (b) anything which may h ave been used in the conunission
of the offense; (c) anything which constitute proof in the commission of the
offence.
b)
1/
1.
Consented search. /
The consent to a warrantless search must be voluntary, that is, it must be
unequivocal, specific and intelligently given, uncontaminated by any duress or
coercion. Consent to a search is not to be lightly inferred, but must be shown by
clear and convincing evidence (Valdez vs. People, 538 SCRA 611, November 23,
2007).
Searches conducted on checkpoints are valid for as long as they are warranted by
the exigencies of public order and are conducted in a way least intrusive to
motorist. For as long as the vehicle is neither searched nor its occupants
subjected to body sea rch, and the inspection of the vehicle is limited to
1.
belief that the person detained has weapons concealed about him (Valdez vs.
People, 538 SCRA 611, November 23, 2007).
1.
1.
The following are the remedies for an unlawful search and seizure: a) a
motion to quash the search warrant; b) motion to suppress as evidence the
objects illegally taken (exclusionary rule - any evidence obtained through
unreasonable searches and seizures shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any
proceeding); and c) replevin, if the objects are legally possessed.
Provisional remedies
Nature
1.
2.
The offended party may have the property of the accused attached as
security for the satisfaction of any judgment in the civil aspect of the case. The
reasons to support the rttlachment are the following:
(a)
(b)
(c)
or is about to do so;
(d)