 In prosecution of crimes: what are the essential requirements of due process?

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

 Elements of jurisdiction?
- The jurisdiction of the court in criminal cases is determined by the penalty imposable and not by the
penalty ultimately imposed.

Example:

From frustrated murder (RTC)  Slight Physical Injuries (MTC)

- Jurisdiction is determined by the penalty of the crime charged or which is imposable.

 Would you consider additional penalty for habitual delinquency in determining jurisdiction of the court?
 No, because habitual delinquency is not a crime but it is just an additional penalty.

 The nature of the offense charged?

- If the penalty is “more than” 6 years it is within the jurisdiction of the RTC. (if to consider only the
penalty imposable)
- If the penalty “does not” exceed 6 years it is within the jurisdiction of the MTC.

 In determining the jurisdiction of the court must consider the nature of the crime committed.
Example:
Crimes committed by public officer is within the jurisdiction of the “Sandiganbayan”.

 Territorial jurisdiction over the place of the commission of the crime, there are 3 elements. The absence of
one of these elements may be challenged by the accused at any stage of the proceedings on appeal.
Failure to comply the resulting judgment as a general rule is considered “null and void”.
GENERAL RULE: In matters of jurisdiction especially in criminal proceedings it may be questioned at any
stage of the proceedings in the lower courts or even CA “unless” there is already estoppel and laches.

 The requisites of the valid exercise of jurisdiction?

a. Jurisdiction over the subject matter, refers to the authority of the court to hear and determine a
particular criminal case.
b. Jurisdiction over the territory, action shall be instituted and tried in the court of the municipality or
territory wherein the offense was committed.
c. Jurisdiction over the person of the accused, the person charged with the offense must have been
brought in to its forum for trial, forcibly by warrant of arrest or upon voluntary submission to the
court.

- The question of jurisdiction over the case filed before a court is to be resolved on the basis of the law
on statute providing or defining tis jurisdiction. Jurisdiction of the court is determined by law.
- Jurisdiction of the court to try criminal action is determined not by the law enforced at the time of the
commission of the crime BUT by the law enforced at the time of the institution of the action.
Example:
When the crime of concubinage was committed it is within the jurisdiction of the RTC but when the
case was filed it is within the jurisdiction of the MTC.
 Jurisdiction over the territory?
  Offense must have been committed within the territorial jurisdiction of the court in criminal case,
should be instituted and tried in the place where the offense may be committed.

Example:

If the crime committed is in CDO it should be the courts of CDO which will have jurisdiction over the case.
“As a General Rule”

Exemption:

These may order a change in venue. (In Maute cases: Marawi should have jurisdiction over the case. But
can issue an request for transfer for example to be tried in cdo)

Exemption to the Exemption:

When the law otherwise provides, then the case can be filed elsewhere. (Sandiganbayan, even if the trial
committed in CDO it can be file by the Ombudsman in Sandiganbayan because it is within the jurisdiction
of the Sandiganbayan, because the law conferred jurisdiction.

Exemption to the Exemption to the Exemption:

In case of continuing crime, offenses committed by RA 937 “Human Security Act of 2007”.

 How jurisdiction is determined?

 In criminal cases, the complaint or information must be examined for the court to ascertain whether
the facts set out falls within the jurisdiction of the court in which it was filed.

By other means in conferring information.

Venue is also jurisdictional not like in civil case that it can be waived.

- Jurisdiction is also determined by the allegation of the complaint or information and not by the filing
which the court may after trial.

 Jurisdiction over the person of the accused?

 The person charged with the offense must have been brought to the presence of the court for trial
and acquired either by:

a. His arrest

b. Voluntary appearance in court.

- The issue of jurisdiction which may be release at any stage of the proceedings in lower court or even
in appeal.

People vs. Eduarte:

GENERAL RULE: The question of jurisdiction will be raised at any stage of the proceedings.

Exemption: the questions of jurisdiction may not be raised for the 1 st time on appeal where there has been
“estoppel and laches” on the party who raises the question.

Vera vs. People:

When the adverse party failed at any stages of the proceedings to raise the lack of jurisdiction only after that have
rendered an adverse decision. He’s conduct therefore precluded him from raising the nullity of decision from lack
of jurisdiction.

People vs. Monar:

When the adverse party expressly invoke the jurisdiction of the court and speculated only of fortunes of dedication
sound public policy barred him that the decision rendered against him by the court is a nullity because the court
has no jurisdiction over the case.

 Criminal jurisdiction of the courts:

MTC: When all offenses punishable with imprisonment not exceeding 6 years irrespective of the amount
of the fine because there are crimes which imposes not only imprisonment but also fines.

Also the jurisdiction is regardless of other imposable accessory or other penalties including the civil
liability irrespective of kind, nature, value or amount.

Example:

Simple seduction, regardless of civil liability support, acknowledgment of the offspring that may be
imposed under Article 345 RPC.

- Imposable accessory penalties that should not be considered in determination of jurisdiction.

- When the offense alleged is within the exclusive jurisdiction of MTC by reason of penalty it shall have
jurisdiction to try and decide the case even if civil liability.

- With regards to offenses involves damage to property through criminal negligence the MTC has
jurisdiction regardless of the value of the property. While the imposable penalty is destierro the case
falls within the jurisdiction of MTC. Considering the hierarchy of penalties under Article 71 RPC.

- In the absence of RTC judges in the province or cities. The MTC judge may hear and decide petition of
writ of habeas corpus on application.

RTC: in regular cases, offenses committed by public officers and employees in relation to their office
including those employed in the government or corporation where the penalty prescribed by law is
imprisonment exceeding 6 years or a fine exceeding 4,000 when the offenders position carries salary
grade of lower than Grade 27.

- Grade 27 and up  to Sandiganbayan if the crime is relation to their functions

- Have jurisdiction over special cases (if the penalty is lower. Libel within the RTC if it is committed in
relation to their office)

- Also have jurisdiction in drug cases.

FAMILY COURTS: When the accused is a minor “at the time” of the commission of the offense.

Example:

17 and 11 months committed a crime then at the trial already turned 18 years of age. It should be in the
jurisdiction of the family courts.

- Minor charged by RA 9165, involving violations of RA 7610 (anti child abuse act), involving violations
of RA 9208 (anti trafficking of persons), RA 9262 (VOWC), child pornography.
 SANDIGANBAYAN: violations of anti-graft and corrupt practices act, violation of chap 2 section 2 title 7
book 2 of RPC when one or more of the accused are the officials occupied positions in the government
whether permanent, acting at the time of the commission of the offense.

- Mayors, governors, members of the congress and officials with salary grade 27 and higher.

- All national or local official with salary grade 27 and higher.

- Violation of anti-money laundering act.

CHAPTER 2

 Prosecution of offenses?

 The purpose of a criminal action, in its purest sense, is to determine the penal liability of the accused
for having outraged the state with his crime and, if he be found guilty, to punish him for it.

In criminal proceedings, once the case is instituted it is always under the control of public prosecutor.

 How offenses instituted?

a. By filing the complaint of information directly with the MTC and MCTC.

b. By filing the complaint with the office of the prosecutor.

- Complaint for purposes of preliminary investigation refers to a complaint affidavit of the complaint.

- Complaint affidavit under preliminary investigation is different from those defined is sec 3 Rule 110
and these complaints which are filed in court.

- Complaint under preliminary investigation is filed before the proper officers, officers authorized by
law to conduct preliminary investigation.

 The following are the officers authorized to conduct preliminary investigation:

a. Provincial, National, Regional state prosecutor

b. DOJ

c. Ombudsman with respect to offenses falls under the jurisdiction of Sandiganbayan

d. Chief legal officer of the COMELEC regarding election offenses

e. Other special laws that may provide for some common authorities who may conduct preliminary
investigation for purposes of determining prima facie case against persons violating special laws.

- A complaint for an offense punishable by “less than 4 years 1 month and 1 day” may be filed directly
with the court but NOT with the RTC.

- In Metro Manila and other chartered cities the complaints are required to be filed with the office of
the city prosecutor UNLESS these cities provide otherwise.

 Preliminary Investigation is a condition precedent before the filing a case in court. There can be no
criminal proceedings in court UNLESS there is prior preliminary investigation.

GENERAL RULE: There should be preliminary investigation.

Exemption:

If the penalty attached to an offense is “less than 4 years 2 months and 1 day” there is no need of
preliminary investigation because it can immediately filed in court.

Exemption:

Even if the offense penalized by the penalty “ 4 years 2 months and 1 day” but the court which has
jurisdiction over the case is in Metro Manila or other chartered cities it cannot be directed to the court
because it should be filed within the city’s prosecutors office.