Criminal Procedure|Reference: Riano 2016
 Place where the offense was committed
 A constant awareness of the mandatory application of certain
fundamental postulates:
1. In every step of the litigation process, all parties are
entitled to both substantive and procedural due
process.
2. Criminal prosecutions involve the obligation of the
State to prove the elements of the crime charged
beyond reasonable doubt.
3. Compliance with the rules is not an end in itself. It
is merely a means of dispensing the ultimate
objective of every legal system, i.e. justice.
 A criminal offense is deemed to have been committed against the
entire social order, the complaint is filed in the name of the
“People of the Philippines”.
 Filing of a written complaint or information in court is a necessary
condition to the adjudication of a criminal action.
 If it is a complaint – it is a sworn written statement subscribed
by the persons mentioned in the Rules
 If it is an information – it is a written accusation subscribed by
the prosecutor
 Complaint or information contain certain matters vital to its
sufficiency:
 Name of the accused
 Name of the offended party
 Designation of the offense charged
 Cause of accusation
 Aggravating and qualifying circumstances
Criminal Procedure|April Lyn Villamor|DLSL JDLaw
 Date of the commission of the offense
 Complaint or information, the law requires, for the validity of the
judgment, that it be filed with the court which exercises jurisdiction
over the offense charged. Jurisdiction over the subject matter
as conferred by law. This means that it is the law, not the Rules of
Court, which designates the court which has jurisdiction over a
particular offense. That same jurisdiction is determined by the
allegations of the complaint or information (That means the cour
will have to examine the complaint or information for the purpose o
ascertaining whether or not the facts set out therein, as well as the
punishment provided for by law for such acts fall within its
jurisdiction).
 Jurisdiction over the territory is another type of jurisdiction to be
considered.
 Jurisdiction over the place of the commission of the offense
 Criminal action be filed in the place where the offense was
committed or where any of its essential ingredients occurred
 Jurisdiction over the person of the accused. For the court to
acquire this jurisdiction, the accused must have been validly
arrested or must have voluntarily submitted himself to the
jurisdiction of that court. Without this jurisdiction, no valid
judgment may be rendered against the accused.
Page 1
 Application of the substantive law principle that “every person
criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable.”
 When a criminal action is instituted, the civil action for the
recovery of the civil liability arising from the offense charged
shall also be deemed instituted with the criminal action.
 The rule is not absolute one because the implied institution of
the civil action will not apply when the offended party waives
the civil action.
 Reserves the right to institute the same separately, or
 Institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action
 Independent civil action is not deemed instituted with the
offense charged even if it arises from the same act or omission
constituting the said offense.
 It is entirely separate source of liability
 It proceeds independently of the criminal proceedings
and regardless of the results of the latter
 The rule cautions that the offended party cannot
recover damages twice for the same act or omission
charged in the criminal action
Concept of Criminal Procedure
 The network of laws and rules which governs the procedural
administration of justice.
 Rules and processes by which the criminal laws are enforced and
by which the State prosecutes persons who violate such laws.
 It is a procedural law, that provides or regulates the steps by
which one who committed a crime is to be punished (People vs.
Lacson 400 SCRA 267,306).
 Lays down the processes by which an offender is made to answer
for the crime he committed.
 Prescribe the methods and processes by which the offender is
made accountable for the crime.
Criminal Procedure|April Lyn Villamor|DLSL JDLaw
Goal of Criminal Procedure
 Protecting individual rights, reconciling constitutional and statutory
doctrines.
 Imposing task of balancing clashing societal interests primarily
between those of the government and those of the individual.
 Harmonizing the governmental functions of maintaining peace and
order and protecting the constitutional rights of its citizens.
System of Procedure
 Adversarial or Accusatorial System
 System of procedure in our jurisdiction
 It contemplates two contending parties before the court which
hears them impartially and renders judgment only after trial.
 The judge is not permitted to act as an inquisitor who pursues
his own investigation and arrives at his own conclusion ex
parte.
 The system has two-sided structure consisting of the
prosecution and the defense where each side tries to convince
the court that its position is the correct version of the truth.
 In this system, the court has a passive role and relies largely
on the evidence presented by both sides to the action in order
to reach a verdict.
 Inquisitorial System
 The court plays a very active role and is not limited to the
evidence presented before it.
 The court may utilize evidence gathered outside the court.
 A judge or a group of judges actively participates in the
gathering of facts and evidence instead of passively receiving
information or evidence from the parties.
 The judge steers the course of the proceeding by directing and
supervising the gathering of the evidence and the questioning
of the witnesses to the case.
 The counsels have less active roles.
Page 2
Liberal Interpretations of the Rules on Criminal Procedures
 Sec. 6, Rule 1, ROC: shall be “liberally construed in order to
promote their objective of securing a just, speedy and inexpensive
disposition of every action and proceeding”
 Cariaga v. People, 626 SCRA 231,236: “The Supreme Court, in
granting the petitioner’s prayer, held that since the appeal involved
a criminal case and the possibility of a person being deprived of
liberty due to a procedural lapse is great, a relaxation of the rule
was warranted. The Court emphasized the need to view rules of
procedure as tools to facilitate the attainment of justice, such that
any rigid a strict application thereof, which results in technicalities
tending to frustrate substantial justice, must always be avoided.”
Requisites before the Court can acquire jurisdiction over
criminal cases
1. Jurisdiction over the subject matter
2. Jurisdiction over the territory
3. Jurisdiction over the person of the accused
 Jurisdiction over the subject matter
 The authority of the court to hear and determine a
particular criminal case.
 Jurisdiction over the offense charged.
 Authority to hear and try a particular offense and impose
the punishment for it or that the offense is one which the
court, by law, authorized to take cognizance of (Antiporda
Jr. vs Garchitorena, 321 SCRA 551,558)
Criminal Procedure|April Lyn Villamor|DLSL JDLaw
 Jurisdiction over the person of the accused
 Authority of the court over the person charged.
 Requires that “the person charged with the offense must
have been brought into its forum for trial, forcibly by
warrant of arrest or upon his voluntary submission to the
court.
 It is the arrest of the accused of his voluntary submission
to the court which enables said court to acquire jurisdiction
over his person.
 Jurisdiction over the territory
 In criminal cases, venue is jurisdictional and a court is
bereft of jurisdiction to try an offense committed outside its
limited territory.
 The place where the crime is committed determines not
only the venue of the action but is essential element of
jurisdiction.
 Fundamental rule in criminal cases: The offense should
have been committed or any of its essential ingredients
should have taken place within the territorial jurisdiction of
the court.
 The territory where the court has jurisdiction to take
cognizance or to try the offense allegedly committed
therein by the accused.
 If the evidence adduced during the trial shows that the
offense was committed somewhere else, the court should
dismiss the action for want of jurisdiction.
 Venue of criminal cases either in the court of the
municipality or territory (Sec 15(a) and Sec 10, Rule 110,
ROC):
 Where the offense was committed
 Where any of its essential ingredients occurred
Page 3
Criminal Jurisdiction
 The authority to hear and try a particular offense and impose the
punishment for it (Antiporda v Garchitorena)
 The power to deal with the general subject involved in the action,
and means not simply jurisdiction over the particular case but
jurisdiction of the class of cases to which the particular case
belongs.
 Jurisdiction is a question of law, the right to act or the power and
authority to hear and determine a cause.
 The power and authority to hear and determine issues of
facts and of law
 The power to inquire into the facts,
 To apply the law,
 To pronounce the judgement
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION OVER THE SUBJECT MATTER
How jurisdiction is conferred
 It is the law that confers jurisdiction and not the rules.
 Cannot be conferred/acquired by:
 consent of any or all of the parties
 a waiver
 acquiescence of the court
 unilateral assumptions
 administrative policy of any trial courts
 an erroneous belief of the court that it had jurisdiction
 Conferment of jurisdiction cannot be presumed
 It must be clear from the provision of the law
 It must appear from the statute
 Absence a statutory grant, the assumption of jurisdiction
cannot be justified by convenience or assumed justice or
propriety (De Jesus v Garcia, 19SCRA 554,559)
Criminal Procedure|April Lyn Villamor|DLSL JDLaw
How jurisdiction is determined
 Jurisdiction over a criminal case is determined by the allegations
in the complaint or information
 The court must look into the allegations of the written
accusation for it to know whether or not, it has a jurisdiction
over the offense charged therein
 It is settled that the jurisdiction of the court in criminal cases is
determined by the allegations of the complaint or information
and not by the findings based on the evidence of the court
after trial (Mobilia Products v Umezawa, 452 SCRA 736, 761-
762)
 The allegations clearly indicate the alleged commission of the
crime of murder. Murder is a crime punishable under Art. 248
of the RPC and is within the jurisdiction of the RTC. Hence,
irrespective of whether the killing was actually justified or not,
jurisdiction to try the crime charged against the respondents is
vested upon the RTC by law (Rapsing v Ables. 684 SCRA
195, 200-201)
 Only the allegations in the complaint or information constitute the
guideposts in determining the jurisdiction of the court (disregarding
the defences of the accused or whatever evidence is presented
during the trial).
Use of Imposable Penalty
 In criminal prosecutions, jurisdiction is not determined by the
penalty actually imposed after trial but by the penalty imposable by
law on the offense.
 If the allegations of the information charge the accused with an
offense within the jurisdiction of the RTC because the imposable
penalty exceeds 6 years, that court has jurisdiction even if the
penalty imposed by said court, after trial, is imprisonment less
than six years.
Page 4
Statute applicable to a criminal action jurisdiction (Antiporda v Garchitorena)
 After voluntarily submitting a cause and encountering
 By the law in effect at the time of the commencement of a an adverse decision on the merits, it is too late for the
criminal action rather than by the law in effect at the time of the loser to question the jurisdiction or power of the court.
commission of the offense charged (People v Lagon, 185 SCRA
 Sound public policy bars one from doing so after their
442,446). Neither by the law in force during the arraignment of the
having procured that jurisdiction, speculating on the
accused (Palana v People, 534 SCRA 296, 302)
fortunes of litigation (People v Munar)
 In criminal cases, the jurisdiction of the court is determined by the
 Doctrine of estoppel is an exception and not the general rule. The
averments of the complaint or information, in relation to the law
reviewing court is not precluded from ruling that the lower court
prevailing at the time of the filing of the complaint or information,
had no jurisdiction over the case (Pangilinan v CA)
and the penalty provided by law for the crime charged at the time
 Estoppel in questioning the jurisdiction of the court is only
of its commission (Asistio v People GRNo200465)
brought to bear when not to do so will subvert the ends of
 To try a criminal case is determined by the law in force at the time
justice.
of the institution of the action (Palana v People)
 Whenever the question of jurisdiction is put to front, courts
should not lightly brush aside errors in jurisdiction especially
when it is liberty of an individual which is at stake.
Principle of adherence of jurisdiction/continuing jurisdiction

 Once a court has acquired jurisdiction, the jurisdiction continues

until the court has done all that it can do in the exercise of that
jurisdiction.
 Once the court acquires jurisdiction, it may not be ousted from the
case by any subsequent events
 Only recognizable exceptions to the rule when:
 There is an express provision in the statute
 The statute is clearly intended to apply to actions pending
before its enactment (People v Cawaling, Palana v People)

Objections on jurisdictional grounds

 Objection based on jurisdiction over the subject matter may be

raised motu proprio by the court at any stage of the proceedings
or on appeal
 Limitations on the right to raise issue of jurisdiction:
 A party cannot invoke the jurisdiction of the court to secure
affirmative relief against his opponent and after obtaining or
failing to obtain such relief, repudiate or question that same

Criminal Procedure|April Lyn Villamor|DLSL JDLaw Page 5

 CRIMINAL JURISDICTION OVER THE PERSON OF THE
ACCUSED
How jurisdiction is acquired
 In criminal proceedings, it is not sufficient for the court to acquire
jurisdiction over the subject matter
 The court also needs to acquire the jurisdiction over the person of
the accused
 It is acquired upon his arrest or apprehension, with or without
a warrant, or his voluntary appearance or submission to the
jurisdiction of the court (Valdepenas v People)
 Voluntary submission of the accused is accomplished either by:
 His pleading to the merits such as by filing a motion to quash,
 Or other pleadings requiring the exercise of the court’s
jurisdiction,
 Appearing for arraignment or entering trial
 May also be effected through some other acts as when he
enters into a counsel-assisted plea and actively participates in
the trial and presents evidence for the defense
 Also, by filing a motion for determination of probable cause
Objecting to the jurisdiction of the court
 Where the appearance is by motion for the purpose of objecting to
the jurisdiction of the court over the person, it must be for the sole
and separate purpose of objecting to said jurisdiction.
 The accused may make a special appearance before the court to
challenge the jurisdiction of the court over the person and such
appearance is not tantamount to estoppels or a waiver of the
objection.
Criminal Procedure|April Lyn Villamor|DLSL JDLaw
Being in the custody of the law
 Is not necessarily under the jurisdiction of the court
 It is required before the court can act upon the application for bail,
but is not required for the adjudication of other reliefs sought by
the defendant where the mere application constitutes a waiver of
the defense of lack of jurisdiction over the person of the accused
 One can be under the custody of the law but not under jurisdiction
 Example: When a person arrested by virtue of a warrant files a
motion before arraignment to quash the warrant.
 One can be subject to jurisdiction of the court but not yet in the
custody of the law
 Example: When the accused escapes custody after his trial
has commenced
 Being in the custody of the law signifies restraint in the person,
who is deprived of his own will and liberty, binding him to become
obedient to the will of the law
 Literally custody over the body of the accused (e.g. detention)
Page 6
Injunction to Restrain Criminal Prosecution prosecute the same. In such a situation, the rule loses its
discretionary character and becomes mandatory. (MBTC v
 The general rule, injunction will not be granted to restrain a Reynado)
criminal prosecution since public interest requires that criminal
acts be immediately investigated and prosecuted for the protection
of society (Reyes v Camilon)
 Exceptions (in extreme cases):
 When the injunction is necessary to afford adequate
protection to the constitutional rights of the accused.
 When it is necessary for the orderly administration of
justice or to avoid oppression or multiplicity of actions.
 When there is a prejudicial question which is subjudice.
 When the acts of the officer are without or in excess of
authority.
 Where the prosecution is under an invalid law, ordinance
or regulation.
 When double jeopardy is clearly apparent.
 Where the Court has no jurisdiction over the offense.
 Where it is a case of persecution rather than prosecution.
 Where the charges are manifestly false and motivated by
the lust for vengeance.
 When there is clearly no prima facie case against the
accused and a motion to quash on that ground has been
denied. (Brocka v Enrile)

Mandamus to Compel Prosecution

 Mandamus, as a rule, not lie to compel criminal prosecution.

 The Court has consistently ruled that mandamus is a remedial
measure for parties aggrieved which shall be issued when:
 Any tribunal, corporation, board, officer or person unlawfully
neglects the performance of an act which the law specifically
enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station.
 The writ of mandamus is not available to control discretion.
Neither may it be issued to compel the exercise of discretion.
 However, the moment the prosecution finds one to be so liable, it
becomes an inescapable duty to charge the accused and

Criminal Procedure|April Lyn Villamor|DLSL JDLaw Page 7

 RULE 110 – PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES
Purpose of the criminal action
 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 this sense, the parties to the action are the People of the
Philippines and the accused. The private offended party is
regarded merely as a witness for the state.
Role of the private offended party
 The interest of the private complainant or the private offended
party is limited to the civil liability, thus, in the prosecution of the
offense, the complainant’s role is limited to that of a witness for the
prosecution.
Who prosecutes criminal actions
 Sec. 5, Rule 110; Uy vs. People:
 A criminal action is prosecuted under the direction and
control of the public prosecutor. This is the general rule
and this applies to a criminal action commenced either by
a complaint or information.
 Rationale:
 Since a criminal offense is an outrage against the
sovereignty of the State, it is necessarily follows that a
representative of the State shall direct and control the
prosecution thereof (Chua vs Padillo).
 Crime is a breach of the security and peace of the
people at large (Baviera vs Paglinawan).
 Consequences of the rule:
 The public prosecutor, in the exercise of this functions,
has the power and discretion to :
 (a) determine whether a prima facie case exists
 (b) decide which if the conflicting testimonies
should be believed free from the interference or
Criminal Procedure|April Lyn Villamor|DLSL JDLaw
control of the offended party
 (c) subject only to the right against self-
incrimination, determine which witnesses to present
in court (Chua vs. Padillo)
 The prosecutor has the discretion of whether, what and
whom to charge the exercise of which depends on
factor which are best appreciated by prosecutors.
 Not even the SC can order the prosecution of a
person against whom the prosecutor does not find
sufficient evidence to support at least a prima facie
case.
 Only exception: there is an unmistakable
showing of grace abuse of discretion on the part
of the prosecutor (Chua vs. Padillo)
 The public prosecutor may turn over the actual
prosecution of the criminal case to the private
prosecutor but he may at any time, take over the actual
conduct of the trial.
 In the case of Pinote vs. Ayco, the Court held, that
the presence of a public prosecutor in the trial of
criminal cases is necessary to protect vital State
interests, foremost of which is its interest to vindicate
the rule of law, the bedrock of the peace of the people.
The act of allowing the presentation of the defense
witnesses in the absence of complainant public
prosecutor or a private prosecutor designated for the
purpose is a clear transgression of the Rules which
could not be rectified by subsequently giving the
prosecution a chance to cross-examine the witnesses.
 All criminal actions commenced by a complaint or information
shall be prosecuted under the direction and control of the
prosecutor.
 However, in Municipal Trial Courts or Municipal Circuit Trial
Courts when the prosecutor assigned thereto or to the case is
not available, the offended party, any peace officer, or public
Page 8
 officer charged with the enforcement of the law violated may
prosecute the case. This authority cease upon actual
intervention of the prosecutor or upon elevation of the case to
the Regional Trial Court. (This Section was repealed by
A.M. No. 02-2-07-SC effective May 1, 2002)
 Representation of the People of the Philippines by the
Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) in appeals before the
CA or the SC.
 In criminal cases, the Solicitor General is regarded as the
appellate counsel of the People of the Philippines and be
given the opportunity to be heard in behalf of the People.
 Where the appellate court failed to notify the Solicitor
General of its resolution on a petition filed by the
accused and to require it to file its comment, this failure
has deprived the prosecution of a fair opportunity to
prosecute and prove its case.
 Jurisprudence holds that if there is a dismissal of a criminal
case by the trial court or if there is an acquittal of the
accused, it is ONLY the OSG that may bring an appeal on
the criminal aspect representing the People.
 Rationale:
 The principle that the party affected by the
dismissal of the criminal action is the People and
not the petitioners who are mere complaining
witnesses.
 The People are therefore, deemed as ther eal
parties in interest in the criminal case and only the
OSG can represent them in criminal proceedings
pending in the CA.
 In view of the corollary principle that every action
must be prosecuted or defended in the name of the
Criminal Procedure|April Lyn Villamor|DLSL JDLaw
real party-in-interest who stands to be benefited or
injured by the judgment in the suit or by the part
entitle to the avails if the suit.
 An appeal of the criminal case not filed by the
People as represented by the OSG is
dismissible.
 A special civil action for certiorari may be filed
even without the intervention of the OSG, but
only to the end of preserving his interest in the
civil aspect of the case.
 The private complainant or the offended party may
question such acquittal or dismissal only insofar as the
civil liability of the accused is concerned (Bautista vs.
Cuneta-Pangilinan)
 Either the offended party or the accused may
appeal the civil aspect of the judgment despite the
acquittal of the accused. The real party in interest
in civil aspect of a decision are the offended party
and the accused.
 Generally, the public prosecutor has no interest in
appealing the civil aspect of decision acquitting the
accused.
 The acquittal ends the work of the public prosecutor
and the case is terminated as far as he is
concerned (Cruz vs CA)
 In the case of Carino vs. De Castro), the conformity of
the Asst City Prosecutor to the a petition for review
before the Court of Appeals is insufficient as the rule
and jurisprudence mandate that the same should be
filed by the Solicitor General who is solely vested with
the authority to represent the people in the Court of
Appeals or in the Supreme Court.
 Exceptions to the rule:
 All cases elevated to the Sandiganbayan and from
the Sandiganbayan to the SC, the Office of the
Page 9
 Ombudsman, through its special prosecutor, shall
represent the People of the Philippines, except in
cases filed pursuant to EO 1,2,14, 14-A.
 When a private prosecutor may prosecute a case even in
the absence of the public prosecutor
 A private prosecutor may prosecute the criminal action up
to the end of the trial, even in the absence of the public
prosecutor, if he is authorized to do so in writing.
 This written authorization shall be given by either the
Chief of the Prosecution Office or the Regional State
Prosecutor. And in order to be given effect must be
approved by the court.
 The private prosecutor cannot, for just any reason, be
authorized to prosecute the criminal case. The written
authorization to the private prosecutor shall be given
because of either of the following reasons:
 (a) the public prosecutor has a heavy work
schedule
 (b) there is a lack of public prosecutors
 Extent of the authority given to the private prosecutors
when duly authorized:
 Shall continue to prosecute the case up to the end
of the trial even in the absence of a public
prosecutor unless the authority is revoked or
otherwise withdrawn
Criminal Procedure|April Lyn Villamor|DLSL JDLaw
Intervention of the offended party in the prosecution of the
criminal action
 The underlying legal principle is the traditional theory that when a
person commits a crime, he offends two entities:
 (1) the society in which he lives in or the political entity, called
the State, whose law he has violated
 (2) the individual member of that society whose person, right,
honor, chastity or property was actually or directly injured or
damaged by the same punishable act or omission (Lee Pue
Liong vs Chua Pue Lee)
 The civil liability for a crime includes (Art. 104, RPC):
 (1) restitution
 (2) reparation of the damage caused
 (3) indemnification for consequential damages
 It is because of the existence of a civil liability involved in a
crime that the offended party is allowed to intervene in the
prosecution of the offense.
 Sec. 16, Rule 110: “Where the civil action for recovery of civil
liability is instituted in the criminal action pursuant to Rule 111, the
offended party may intervene by counsel in the prosecution of the
offense.”
 The appointment of a private prosecutor is done by the
offended party and is the mode by which he intervenes in the
prosecution of the offense.
 This intervention is only allowed where the civil action for the
recovery of the civil liability arising from the offense charged is
instituted in the criminal action pursuant to Rule111
 The offended party may not intervene if:
 (1) waives the civil action
 (2) reserves the right to institute it separately
 (3) institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action
 Reason: no civil liability which would supply a basis for the
intervention of the offended party.
Page 10
 The effect of the filing of an independent civil action on the
right of the offended party to intervene in the prosecution of
the offense
 The institution of an independent civil action does not deprive
the offended party of the right to intervene in the civil action
through a private prosecutor.
 It needs to be emphasized that the civil liabilities arising
from independent civil actions and a quasi-delict do not
arise from the felony or crime, and have distinct sources
from the law or the Civil Code. They are not covered by the
provision of the RPC declaring that persons liable for a
felony are also civilly liable. Such civil actions “may
proceed independently of the criminal proceedings and
regardless of the result of the latter” (Art 31, Civil Code)
 Direct consequences of the independent character of
actions (under Art. 32, 33, 34, 2176 of the Civil Code) even
if the civil action is filed separately:
 (1) the ex delicto civil liability in the criminal
prosecution remains.
 (2) the offended party may subject to the control of
the prosecutor still intervene in the criminal action,
in order to protect the remaining civil interest
therein. (Phil Rabbit Bus Lines vs People)
Criminal Procedure|April Lyn Villamor|DLSL JDLaw
Prosecution of “Private Crimes”
 Adultery and Concubinage
 Sec 5, Rule 110, RoC: “shall not be prosecuted except upon a
complaint filed by the offended spouse.”
 It should be the offended spouse who should file the
complaint.
 The erring spouse cannot, as a rule, be prosecuted upon
information filed by the prosecutor.
 The action cannot be instituted against one party alone. It
must be instituted against both guilty parties, unless one of
them is no longer alive.
 The offense of adultery and concubinage may not be instituted
if it is shown that the offended party has consented to the
offense or has pardoned the offenders. Since the rule does
not distinguish. The consent or pardon may be either
expressed or implied.
 Seduction, Abduction and Acts of Lasciviousness
 Sec 5, Rule 110, RoC: “shall not be prosecuted except upon a
complaint filed by the offended party or her parents,
grandparents or guardian, nor, in any case, if the offender has
been expressly pardoned by any of them.”
 Implied pardon is not contemplated under this
provision.
 If the offended party dies or becomes incapacitated before
she can file the complaint and she has no known parents,
grandparents or guardian, the State shall initiate the
criminal action in her behalf.
 In order of those who may file the complaint, the State
is the last and may only do so in the absence of the
persons mentioned.
 The offended party even if a minor, has the right to initiate the
prosecution of the offense, independently of her parents,
grandparents or guardian except if she is incompetent or
incapable of doing so.

Page 11
 Defamation
 Sec 5, Rule 110, RoC: Shall be brought at the instance of and
upon the complaint filed by the offended party. This rule
clearly provides that only the offended party can initiate the
criminal action.
 Rape
 RA 8353: the crime of rape was reclassified as a crime against
persons. Thus, prosecution for such crime may now be
commenced in court even by the filing of information by the
public prosecutor.
 It is filed in the name of the People of the People of the
Philippines against all persons who appear to be responsible
for the offense involved.
 Allegations in the information are crucial to the success or
failure of a criminal prosecution. It is for this reason that the
information is considered the battle ground in criminal
prosecutions (Neri vs. Sandiganbayan)
 Infirmity of signature in the information

Criminal Complaint  Such as lack of authority of the officer signing it, cannot be
 Complaint (Sec4, Rule 110, RoC) cured by silence, acquiescence, or even by express
 (1) is a sworn (under oath) written statement charging a consent (Cudia vs CA).
 Suck lack of authority on the part of the officer is a ground
person with an offense
 (2) subscribed by: for the quashal of the information (Sec 3d, Rule 117, RoC)
 If the original information was signed and filed by one who
 the offended party
had no authority to sign and file the same, the dismissal of
 any peace officer
the information would not be a bar to a subsequent
 other public officer
prosecution under subsequent valid information.
 (3) charged with the enforcement of the law violated
 Jeopardy does not attach where an accused pleads
 The complaint is not filed in the name of a private person,
guilty to a defective indictment.
natural or juridical. It is filed in the name of the People of the
Philippines and against all persons who appear to be
responsible for the offense involved.

Information

 Information (Sec4, Rule 110, Roc)

 (1) is an accusation in writing charging a person with an
offense
 (2) subscribed by the prosecutor
 (3) filed with the court
 It is not required to be “sworn”
 This is because the prosecutor is acting under the oath
of his office

Criminal Procedure|April Lyn Villamor|DLSL JDLaw Page 12

 Parts of the information
 A complaint or information is deemed sufficient if it
contains the following (Sec 6, Rule 110, RoC):
 (1) Name of the accused; if the offense is committed by
more than one person, all of them shall be included in
the complaint or information
 (2) Designation of the offense given by the statute
 (3) Acts or omissions complained of as constituting the
offense
 (4) Name of the offended party
 (5) Approximate date of the commission of the offense
 (6) Place where the offense was committed
 For an information to be sufficient, it must validly charge an
offense. It depends whether the material facts alleged in
the complaint or information shall establish the essential
elements of the offense charged (Miguel vs.
Sandiganbayan)
 An information is fatally defective when it is clear that it
does not really charge an offense or when it is clear that it
does not really charge an offense or when an essential
element of the crime has not been sufficiently alleged.
 In one drug case, prosecution was able to allege
the identity of the buyer and the seller, it failed to
particularly allege or identify the drugs sold. In
illegal sale of drugs, the drugs constitutes the very
corpus delicti of the offense (People vs. Posada,
People vs. Butial)
 Objections:
 Cannot be made for the first time on appeal objections
as to matters of form or substance
 The accused-appellant should move before
arraignment or during trial
 Either for a bill of particulars
Criminal Procedure|April Lyn Villamor|DLSL JDLaw
 For instance, he wants to know the exact date of
the commission of the allege offense
 He may move for the quashal of the information if it
does not conform to the prescribed form.
 If he fails to pursue either remedy, he is deemed to
have waived his objections to any formal defect in the
information.
 The evidence presented during the trial can cure the
defect in the information.
 Where the objection however is based on lack of
jurisdiction over the subject matter, the same may be
raised or considered motu proprio by the court at any
stage of the proceedings or on appeal (Fukuzume vs
People)
 How the nature of the offense is determined:
 The real nature of the criminal charge is determined
by the actual recital of the facts in the complaint or
information and not by the caption of the
information or the citation of the law allegedly
violated (De la Cuesta vs. Sandiganbayan), every
element of the offense must be stated in the
information.
 The requirement of alleging the elements of
the crime in the information is to inform the
accused of the nature of the accusation
against him so as to enable him to suitably
prepare his defense (People vs. Valdez).
 Even if the designation of the crime in the
information is defective, what is controlling
is the allegation of the facts in the
information that comprises a crime and
adequately describes the nature and cause
of the accusation against the accused.
Page 13
 Date of the commission of the offense:
 Sec 11, Rule 110, that is not necessary to state in
the complaint or information the precise date the
offense was committed.
 Exception: when it is a material element of
the offense
 The offense may be alleged to have been
committed on a date as near as possible to the
actual date of its commission.
 People vs. Delfin: In crimes where the date of the
commission is not a material element, like murder,
it is not necessary to allege such date with absolute
specificity or certainty in the information. The RoC
merely requires, for the sake of properly informing
an accused, that the date of commission be
approximated.
 How to state the name of the accused:
 Sec 7, Rule 110, RoC:
 (1) Must state the name and surname of the
accused, or any appellation or nickname by
which he has been or is known.
 (2) If his name cannot be ascertained, he
must be described under a fictitious name.
It must be accompanied by a statement that
his true name is unknown.
 (3) If later his true name is disclosed by him
or becomes known in some other manner,
his true name shall be inserted in the
complaint or information and in the records
of the case.
Criminal Procedure|April Lyn Villamor|DLSL JDLaw
 In criminal case, the task of the prosecution is
always twofold (People vs. Yao):
 (1) to prove beyond reasonable doubt the
commission of the crime charged
 (2) to establish with the same quantum of
proof the identity of the person or persons
responsible therefore, because even if the
commission of the crime is given, there can
be no conviction without the identity if the
malefactor being clearly ascertained.
 How to state the name of the offended party who is a
natural person
 The complaint or information must state the name
and surname of the offended party, or any
appellation or nickname by which a person has
been or is know.
 If there is no better way of identifying him, he must
be described under a fictitious name. If later on the
true name is ascertained, the court must cause
such true name to be insterted.
 How to state the name of the offended party who is a
juridical person
 It is sufficient to state its name, or any name or
designation by which it is known or by which it may
be identified, without need of averring that it is a
juridical person or that it is organized in accordance
with law.
Page 14
 Rule if the name of the offended party is unknown in
offenses against property
 The property must be described with such particularity
as to properly identify the offense charged (Sec12a,
Rule 110, RoC)
 As long as the criminal act charged in the complaint or
information can be properly indentified.
 If the subject matter of the offense is generic and not
identifiable:
 An error in the designation of the offended party is
fatal and would result in the acquittal of the
accused
 If the subject matter of the offense is specific and
identifiable:
 An error in the designation of the offended party is
immaterial
 Designation of the offense
 The following rules must be observed (Sec 8, Rule
110, RoC):
 (1) As a rule, that the name given to the offense by
statute shall be stated in the complaint or
information. If statute gives no designation, then
reference shall be made to the section or
subsection punishing it.
 (2) An averment of the acts or omissions
constituting the offense.
 (3) The complaint or information shall specify the
qualifying and aggravating circumstances of the
offense
 Effect of failure to designate the offense: Does not
vitiate the information if the facts alleged clearly recite
the facts constituting the crime charged.
 What controls is not the title of the information or
Criminal Procedure|April Lyn Villamor|DLSL JDLaw
the designation of the offense but the actual facts
recited in the information.
 The sufficiency of the an information is not negated
by an incomplete or defective designation of the
crime in the caption or other parts of the information
but by the narration of facts and circumstances
which adequately depicts a crime and sufficiently
apprises the accused of the nature and cause of
the accusation against him.
 Statement of the qualifying and aggravation
circumstances
 To be considered in imposing the penalty, the same
should be specified in the complaint or information.
 With the revision of the Rules of Criminal
Procedure, the prosecution became precluded from
establishing any act or circumstance not specifically
alleged in the information (People vs Abrencillo)
 The Court explained that every aggravating
circumstance must be alleged in the information.
The failure to state an aggravating circumstance,
even if duly proven at the trial, will not be
appreciated as such. It was therefore necessary on
the prosecution to state the aggravating
circumstance in the information so that if evidence
is introduced to that effect, the same may be
admitted (People vs. Feliciano)
 However, with the promulgation of the Revised
Rules, courts could no longer consider the
aggravating circumstances not alleged and proven
in the determination of the penalty and in the award
of damages. Thus, even if an aggravating
circumstances had been proven, but was not
alleged, courts will not award exemplary damages
(People vs. Dalisay).
Page 15

 Cause of accusation
 It is sufficient for the complaint or information to use
ordinary and concise language sufficient to enable a
person of common understanding to know the following
(Sec 9, Rule 110, RoC):
 (1) the offense being charged
 (2) the acts or omissions complained of as
constituting the offense
 (3) the qualifying and aggravating circumstances
 Duplicity of the offense
 Duplicity presupposes that there is a joinder of distinct
offenses in one complaint or information.
 General rule:
 A complaint or information must charge only one
offense. This means that a single complaint or
information must charge only one offense.
 More than one offense may however be charged
under one complaint or information when the law
prescribes a single punishment for various offenses
(Sec 13, Rule 110, RoC).
 An information which charges a person for violating
separate and distinct provisions of a single law, with
distinct penalties for each violation and committed through
the performance of separate acts, is defective because of
duplicity.
 Rule of duplicity is transgressed when in one information
the accused is charged with multiple murder, multiple
frustrated murder and multiple attempted murder (People
vs. De Los Santos)
 Where a single act violates two or more entirely distinct
and unrelated provisions of law, the prosecution of the
Criminal Procedure|April Lyn Villamor|DLSL JDLaw
accused for more than one offense in separate information
is justified (Loney vs. People)
 Purpose of the rule against duplicity:
 The rationale behind this rule prohibiting duplicitous
complaints or informations is to give the accused the
necessary knowledge of the charge against him and
enable him to sufficiently prepare for this defense. The
State should not heap upon the accused two or more
charges which might confuse him in his defense
(People vs. CA)
 Exception to the rule against duplicity:
 A complaint or information may contain two or more
offenses when the law prescribes a single punishment
for various offenses and in complex and compound
crimes treated under Art. 48 of the RPC. This provision
imposes a single penalty when as single act constitutes
two or more grave or less grave felonies. A single
penalty is also provided under the same provision
when an offense is a necessary means to commit the
other. The imposable penalty shall be that which
corresponds to the graver offense.
 The law likewise imposes a single penalty in the case
of a special complex crime.
 Waiver of duplicity of the offense
 Sec 3f Rule117 RoC, duplicity of the offense is a
ground for a motion to quash
 Should the information be defective because of
duplicity, an objection must be timely interposed by the
accused before trial, otherwise he is deemed to have
waived said defect. Consequently, the court may
convict him for as many offenses as are charged and
proved, and impose on him the penalty for each
offense (Sec 3 Rule 120 RoC).
 When two or more offenses are charged in a single
complaint or information, the accused must object to
Page 16
 the duplicity before trial. If he does not object, the court
may convict him of as many offenses as are charged
and proved, and impose on him the penalty for each
offense (Sec3 Rule 120 RoC).
Venue of Criminal Actions
 As a rule, the criminal action shall be instituted and tried in the
court of the municipality or territory (Sec 15a, Rule 110, RoC):
 (1) where the offense was committed, or
 (2) where any of its essential ingredients occurred
 Venue, an element of criminal jurisdiction
 One fundamental principle in criminal procedure is that a court
cannot exercise jurisdiction over a person charged with
offense committed outside its limited territory.
 Rules require that the complaint or information, to be deemed
sufficient, should state the place where the offense was
committed (Sec6, Rule 110, RoC)
 The rule is two-fold:
 (1) the jurisdiction of the courts is limited to well-defined
territories such that a trial court can only hear and try
cases involving crimes committed within its territorial
jurisdiction
 (2) laying the venue in the locus criminis is grounded on
the necessity and justice if having an accused on trial in
the municipality or province where witnesses and other
facilities for his defense are available.
 It is not enough to allege in the complaint or information the
place of the commission of the crime. Such place must also be
proven during trial.
 Civil case vs. Criminal case:
 Civil- ground for motion to dismiss, “the venue is
improperly laid”
 Criminal-ground for motion to quash, “court has no
jurisdiction over the offense charged”
Criminal Procedure|April Lyn Villamor|DLSL JDLaw
 When a court has jurisdiction to try offenses not committed
within its territorial jurisdiction
 The rule admits of certain exceptions:
 (1) Offense committed under Art. 2 RPC, the offense is
cognizable before the Phil Courts even if committed
outside the Phil territory. In this case, cognizable by the
court where the criminal action is first filed (Sec 15d Rule
110 RoC)
 (2) SC, pursuant to its constitutional powers, orders a
change of venue or place of trial to avoid miscarriage of
justice (Sec5[4] Art. VIII 1987 Constitution)
 (3) Where an offense is committed in a train, aircraft, or
other public or private vehicle in the course of the its trip. It
may be instituted and tried in the court of any municipality
or territory where said train, aircraft, or vehicle passed
during the trip. The crime may be instituted and tried in the
place of departure and arrival (Sec15b Rule 110 RoC)
 (4) 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 court of the first port of entry, or in the court
of the municipality or territory where the vessel passed
during the voyage (Sec15c Rule 11 RoC)
 Note that with respect to the crimes committed on
board a vessel, the place of departure and arrival
are not included as proper venues of the action.
 (5) Where the case is cognizable by Sandiganbayan, the
criminal action need not be filed and tried in the place
where the act was committed but generally, where the
court actually sits in Quezon City.
 The presiding justice shall authorize any divisions
of the court to hold sessions at any time and place
outside MM and where the interest of justice so
requires, outside the territorial boundaries of the
Phil.
 (6) Where the case is written defamation, the criminal
action need not necessarily be file in the RTC of the
Page 17
 province/city where the alleged libellous article first
published. It may be filed in:
 Public officer: the province/city where the offended  Venue of selected offenses
party held office at the time of the commission of  Perjury under Art. 183 RPC be filed: where the place of the
the offense testimony under oath is given or written sworn statement is
submitted, since the crime is committed through false
 Private individual: the province/city where he
testimony under oath.
actually resided at the time of the commission of
 Criminal action arising from illegal recruitment shall be filed
the offense
not only in the RTC of the province/city where the offense
 (7) On a matter pertaining to a defamatory material
was committed, but also be filed where the offended party
appearing on a website on the internet, the place where
actually resides at the time of the commission of the
the material first accessed cannot be equated with “printing
offense. The court where the criminal action is first filed
and first publication”. It hardly requires much imagination
shall acquire jurisdiction to the exclusion of the other
to see the chaos that would ensue in situations where the
courts.
website’s author or writer, a blogger or anyone who posts
 Violations of BP22 are categorized as transitory or
messages therein could be sued for libel anywhere in the
continuing crime. A suite on the check can be filed in any
Philippines that the private complainant may have
of the places where any of the elements of the offense
allegedly accessed the offending website.
occurred, that is, where the check is drawn, issued,
 (8) Merely alleging that “the newspaper is a daily
delivered or dishonored. As person charged with a
publication with a considerable circulation in the City of
transitory crime may be validly tried in any municipality or
Iloilo and throughout the region” does not establish that the
territory where the offense was in part committed. (Rigor
said publication was printed and first published in Iloilo City
vs. People)
(Foz vs. People)
 Estafa by postdating or issuing a bad check, may be
 (9) An information which merely alleged that the libellous
transitory offense. Its basic element of deceit and damage
article “was published in the Philippine Daily Inquirer,” a
may arise independently in separate places.
newspaper of general circulation in Baguio City, did not
 There are crimes which are transitory or continuing
sufficiently show Baguio City to be the proper venue of the
offenses because some acts material and essential to the
printing and first publication of the newspaper (Agustin vs.
crime occur in one province and some in another, in which
Pamintuan)
case, the rule is settled that the court of either province
 (10) Instead, the venue as a rule, the place where the
where any of the essential ingredients of the crime took
libellous article was printed and first published or where
place has – jurisdiction to try the case.
any of the offended parties actually resides at the time of
 Theft is not a continuing offense. The crime where it was
the commission of the offense (or where he held office at
consummated (the theft happened), the case can be
the time of the commission of the offense if the offended
instituted and tried is the place of consummation.
party is a public officer)

Criminal Procedure|April Lyn Villamor|DLSL JDLaw Page 18

Amendment or Substitution
 Amendment - is a correction of an error or an omission in a
complaint or an information
 Sec 1 Rule 10 RoC, it is effected by adding or striking out an
allegation or the name of any party or by correcting a mistaken
or inadequate allegation or description in any other respect, so
that the actual merits of the controversy may speedily be
determined, without regard to technicalities and in the most
and expeditious and inexpensive manner.
 No need for leave of court:
 If the amendment is made before the accused enters his
plea (before arraignment), the complaint or information
may be amended in form or in substance (Sec 14 Rule 110
RoC)
 When leave of court is required:
 Even if the amendment is made before plea:
 (a) the amendment downgrades the nature of the
offense charged
 (b) the amendment excludes any accused from the
complaint or information (Sec14 Rule 110 RoC)
 Above amendments also require a motion by the
prosecutor with notice to the offended party (Sec14, Rule
110 RoC)
 The court is mandated by the RoC to state its reasons
in resolving the motion of the prosecutor and to furnish
all parties, especially the offended party, of copies of its
order (Sec 14 Rule 110 RoC)
 Rule as to amendment made after plea of the accused
 After plea and during the trial, any formal amendment may
only be made under two conditions:
 (1) leave of court must be secured
 (2) amendment does not cause prejudice to the rights
of the accused.
 As a rule, amendment in substance is not allowed at this
stage.
Criminal Procedure|April Lyn Villamor|DLSL JDLaw

Case law has it that before the accused enters his plea, a
formal or substantial amendment of the complaint or
information may be made without leave of court. After the
entry of plea, only a formal amendment may be made
but with leave of court and if it does not prejudice the rights
of the accused. After arraignment, a substantial
amendment is prescribed except if the same is beneficial
to the accuse (Ricarze vs. CA)
 When an amendment is formal or substantial
 (1) new allegations which relate only to the range of the
penalty that the court might impose in the event of
conviction
 (2) an amendment which does not charge another offense
different or distinct from that charged in the original
 (3) additional allegations with do not alter the prosecution’s
theory of the case so as to cause surprise to the accused
and affect the form of defense he has or will assume
 (4) an amendment which does not adversely affect any
substantial right of the accused
 (5) an amendment that merely adds specifications to
eliminate vagueness in the information and not to introduce
new and material facts and merely states with additional
precisions something which is already contained in the
original information and which adds nothing essential for
conviction for the crime charged (Ricarze vs. CA)
 Substitution – a complaint or information may be substituted if it
appears at any time before judgment that a mistake has been
made in charging the proper offense.
 In such case, the court shall dismiss the original complaint or
information once the new once charging the proper offense is
filed provided the accused will not be placed in double
jeopardy (Sec14 Rule110 RoC)
Page 19
 Amendment
Formal/substantial
Before plea: can be effected
without leave of court
Only as to form, there is no need
for another preliminary
investigation and the retaking of
plea
Amended information: refers to
the same offense charged in the
original information or to an
offense which necessarily
includes or is necessarily
included in the original charge,
hence substantial amendments to
the information after the plea has
been taken cannot be made over
the objection of the accused, for
the original information would be
withdrawn, the accused could
invoke double jeopardy.
Criminal Procedure|April Lyn Villamor|DLSL JDLaw
Substitution
Substantial from the original
charge
Must be with leave of court as the
original information hast to be
dismissed
Another preliminary investigation
and the accused has to plead
anew to the new information
Substitution: Requires or
presupposes that the new
information involves a different
offense which does not include or
is not necessarily included in the
original charge, hence the
accused cannot claim double
jeopardy .
Page 20