You are on page 1of 30

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Rule 110 PROSECUTION of Offenses 1.

General Rule: MTC and RTC courts gain jurisdiction over the offense upon the filing of complaint by a complainant or an information by the prosecuting officer à Court gains jurisdiction over the person of the accused upon arrest or surrender; such jurisdiction once gained cannot be lost even if accused escapes (Gimenez vs. Nazareno) à Jurisdiction of the court over the offense is determined at the time of the institution of the action and is retained even if the penalty for the offense is later lowered or raised ( People vs. Lagon) 2. Complaint – sworn written statement charging a person with an offense, subscribed by the offended party, any peace officer or other public official charged with the enforcement of the law violated Information – accusation in writing charging a person with an offense, subscribed by the fiscal and filed with the court 3. Complaint and Information distinguished: Information Need not be sworn to Subscribed to by the fiscal

Complaint A sworn statement Subscribed by the offended party, any peace officer or other officer charged with the enforcement of the law violated May be filed either with the court or in the fiscal’s office generally to commence the preliminary investigation of the charges made 4.

Filed with the court

Cases where civil courts of equal rank are vested with concurrent jurisdiction: 1. Features stated in Art. 2, RPC

à Cognizable by proper court in which charge is first filed 1. Continuing crimes committed in different judicial regions 2. Offenses wherein any of the essential elements were committed in different territorial jurisdictions

3. Offenses committed aboard a train, vehicle, aircraft or vessel (see R110, §15) i. Railroad, train, aircraft

(1) Territory or municipality where vehicle passed (2) Place of departure (3) Place of arrival ii. Vessel

(1) First port of entry (2) Thru which it passed during voyage e. Libel and written defamation 5. Remedies of offended party when fiscal unreasonably refuses to file an information or include a person therein as an accused 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. In case of grave abuse of discretion, action for mandamus Lodge a new complaint against the offenders Take up matter with the Secretary of Justice Institute administrative charges against the erring fiscal File criminal charges under Art. 208, RPC (prosecution of offenses) File civil action under Art. 27, NCC for damages (PO refuses or neglects to perform official duty) Secure appointment of another fiscal Institute another criminal action if no double jeopardy is involved

6. Writs of injunction or prohibition to restrain a criminal prosecution are not available, EXCEPT 1. To afford adequate protection to constitutional rights of accused 2. Necessary for the orderly administration of justice or to avoid oppression or multiplicity of actions 3. Pre-judicial question which is sub judice 4. Acts of the officer are without or in excess of authority 5. Prosecution is under an invalid law, ordinance or regulation 6. Double jeopardy is clearly apparent 7. Court has no jurisdiction over the case 8. Case of persecution rather than prosecution 9. Charges are manifestly false and motivated by lust for vengeance 10. Clearly no prima facie case against the accused and MTQ on that ground had been denied 7. a. Institution of Criminal Actions: In RTC:

à By filing a complaint with the appropriate officer for the purpose of conducting requisite preliminary investigation therein. b. In Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts: à By filing the complaint or information directly with said courts, or a complaint with the fiscal’s office c. In Metropolitan Trial Courts à By filing the complaint ONLY with the office of the fiscal à In all 3 above cases, such institution shall interrupt the period of prescription of the offense charged (Rule 110, §1) d. Offenses subject to summary procedure

[i.e. (1) violation of traffic laws; (2) violation of rental laws; (3) violation of municipal or city ordinances; and (4) criminal cases where the penalty does not exceed 6 months or fine of P1000 or both, irrespective of other imposable penalties and civil liabilities] à The complaint or information shall be filed directly in court without need of a prior preliminary examination or preliminary investigation. à Zaldivia vs. Reyes – since a criminal case covered by the Rules of Summary Procedure shall be deemed commenced only when it is filed in court, then the running of the prescriptive period shall be halted on the date the case is actually filed in court and not on any date before that. à Reodica vs. CA – [clarifies Zaldivia above] Under Art. 91 of the RPC, the period of prescription shall be interrupted by the filing of the complaint or information. It does not distinguish whether the complaint is filed for preliminary examination or investigation only, or for an action on the merits. Thus, the filing of the complaint even with the fiscal’s office should suspend the running of the Statute of Limitations. The ruling in Zaldivia is not applicable to all cases subject to the Rules on Summary Procedure, since that particular case involved a violation of an ordinance. Therefore, the applicable law therein was not Art. 91 of the RPC, but Act No. 3326 (“An Act to Establish Periods of Prescription for Violations Penalized by Special Acts and Municipal Ordinances and to Provide when Prescription Shall Begin t o Run”), §2 of which provides that period of prescription is suspended only when judicial proceedings are instituted against the guilty party. 8. Contents of information a. Name of the accused à Information may be amended as to the name of the accused, but such amendment cannot be questioned for the first time on appeal ( People vs. Guevarra) à Error of name of the offended party: if material to the case, it necessarily affects the identification of the act charged. Conviction for robbery cannot be sustained if there is a variance between the allegation and the proof as to the ownership of the property stolen. b. Designation of offense by statute (or of section/subsection of statute violated) à Only one offense charged, EXCEPT where law prescribes a single punishment for various offenses. à If facts do not completely allege all the elements of the crime charged, the info may be quashed; however, the prosecution is allowed to amend the info to include the necessary facts ( People vs. Purisima) c. Acts or omissions complained of constituting the offense à Information need only allege facts, not include all the evidence which may be used to prove such facts (Balitaan vs. CFI) d. Name of offended party e. Approximate time of commission à Approximation of time is sufficient; amendment as to time is only a formal amendment; no need to dismiss case (People vs. Molero) à A significant discrepancy in the time alleged cannot be sustained since such would allow the prosecution to prove an offense distantly removed from the alleged date, thus substantially impairing the rights of the accused to be informed of the charges against him (People vs. Reyes) f. Place of commission

à Conviction may be had even if it appears that the crime was committed not at the place alleged, provided that the place of actual commission was within the court’s jurisdiction and accused was not surprised by the variance between the proof and the information à Qualifying and inherent aggravating circumstances need to be alleged as they are integral parts of the crime. If proved, but not alleged, become only generic aggravating circumstances.

or where first published) In exceptional cases. When amendment is only as to form 1. 3. even if minor. hence. à In crimes against chastity. 2. Does not involve a change in basic theory of prosecution 12. and 2. Leave of court is obtained. Crimes against chastity à With consent of the offended party. RPC (cognizable by proper court in which charge is first filed) Continuing offenses Piracy which is triable anywhere Libel (residence. 2. provided 1. Amendment of information and Substitution of information. include or is not included in the original substantial amendments to info after plea charge. in that order à Offended party. Felonies in Art. has right to initiate the prosecution of the case independently of parents. distinguished Amendment Substitution Involves either formal or substantial changes Necessarily involves a substantial change Without leave of court if before plea Needs leave of court as original information has to be dismissed Where only as to form. 4. Charge does not deprive accused of a fair opportunity to present his defense 3. to ensure fair trial and impartial inquiry 13. the provincial fiscal may sign the complaint on his own c. grandparents. Adultery and concubinage à Only offended spouse can be complainant à Both guilty parties must be included in complaint b. Neither affects or alters nature of offense charged 2. grandparents or guardian. After plea. the consent of the victim is a jurisdictional requirement –retraction renders the information void (People vs. guardian. grandparents or guardian may do so. her parents. or state as parens patriae. accused could invoke double jeopardy 10. Ocapan) à If complexed with a public crime. Defamation (consisting of imputation of offenses in [a] or [b]) à Complainant must be offended party .9. offended spouse. Exceptions to rule on venue 1. Amendment is not prejudicial to rights of accused 11. accused cannot claim double taken cannot be made over objections of jeopardy accused for if original info is withdrawn. à If offended party who is a minor fails to file the complaint. unless she is incompetent/incapable on grounds other than minority. amendment only as to matters of form. there is no need for Another preliminary investigation is entailed another preliminary investigation and and accused has to plead anew retaking of plea of accused Refers to the same offense charged or which Requires or presupposes that new info necessarily includes or is necessarily involves a different offense which does not included in original charges. hence. 5. Special cases (who may prosecute) a.

à Article 32 is a valid cause of a civil action for damages against public officers who impair the Constitutional rights of citizens (Aberca vs. complainant must ask fiscal if he wants to dismiss the case. Ver) à Even if the private prosecutor participates in the prosecution. Waiver 2. Motion to quash à May be filed after arraignment but before plea on the grounds provided by the rules (generally. if it appears there was a mistake in charging proper offense. failure is equivalent to a waiver à Exception: when existing laws prescribe a single punishment (complex crimes) Rule 111 Prosecution of Civil Action 1. the offended party is not barred from filing a separate civil action 2. Ocapan) b. the right to question it is waived (People vs. Duplicity of Offense (in information or complaint) à Defined as the joinder of separate and distinct offenses in one and the same information/complaint à Remedy: file a motion to quash. provided that the accused will not be placed in double jeopardy (substitution) à Fiscal determines direction of prosecution. Motion to dismiss à May be filed after plea but before judgment on most of grounds for motion to quash 16. Reservation of right to institute separate action 3. EXCEPT 1. 15. CA) d. Complaint filed in MTC or info filed in RTC where an essential ingredient of the crime took place (territorial jurisdiction) 1. court shall dismiss original info upon the filing of a corrected one.à The offended party may intervene in the prosecution of the criminal case because of her interest in it ( Banal vs. Civil action for recovery of civil liability impliedly instituted. Remedies a. Amendment as a matter of right before plea 2. General Rule: The injured party may file a civil action independent of the criminal proceeding to recover damages from the offender. if he is not given the chance to prove damages. the motion to dismiss must be addressed to the court which has discretion over the disposition of the case ( Republic vs. Tadeo) 14. Amendment upon discretion of the court after plea à Inclusion of other accused is only a formal amendment which would not be prejudicial to the accused and should be allowed (People vs. a flaw in the info) à If duplicity of offense charged is not raised in trial through a motion to quash info. deemed to have consented thereto. After plea and before judgment. Procedure 1. Sunga) à Objection to the amendment of an information or complaint must be raised at the time the amendment is made. Institution of civil action prior to criminal action . otherwise.

g. all criminal actions for violations of BP Blg. 34 and 2176 of NCC) Prejudicial civil action Civil case consolidated with criminal action Civil action not one intended to enforce civil liability arising from the offense ( e. Actual or compensatory damages – filing fees not required 2. The civil action involves an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the criminal action 2. and in short. If alleged. Moral. to simplify the work of the trial court. Filing fees: 1. 4. 33. 5. 3. The civil action involves an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the criminal action: and 2. 2. CA – past pronouncements of the SC that the requirement in Rule 111 that a reservation be made prior to the institution of an independent civil action is an “unauthorized amendment” to substantive law is now no longer controlling. Prejudicial question arises when 1. 22 shall be deemed to necessarily include the corresponding civil action. the primary purpose of the reservation requirement is to avoid multiplicity of suits. the attainment of justice with the least expense and vexation to parties-litigants. Petition to suspend the criminal action à May be filed upon existence of a prejudicial question in a pending civil action à Filed at any time before the prosecution rests 6..à NOTE: Under SC Circular 57-97. Independent civil action (Arts. to clear congested dockets. The resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action may proceed à Petition for suspension of criminal action is to be filed at any time before prosecution rests. temperate and exemplary – filing fees required 1. 3. 32. filing fees considered a first lien on the judgment Rule 112 Preliminary Investigation . Far from altering substantive rights. Remedies a. to prevent delays. Civil action suspended when criminal action filed. fees must be paid by offended party upon filing of complaint or information 1. The resolution of such issue will determine whether the criminal action will proceed or not à Requisites for a prejudicial question: 1. Extinction of penal action does not carry with it extinction of the civil unless the extinction proceeds from a declaration in a final judgment that the fact from which the civil might arise did not exist. à San Ildefonso Lines vs. If not alleged. action for legal separation against a spouse who committed concubinage) 4. EXCEPT 1. and no reservation to file such civil action separately shall be allowed or recognized. Reservation of right to institute separate civil proceedings to recover civil liability arising from crime à Must be made before prosecution presents evidence à Action instituted only after final judgment in criminal action b. à Final judgment in civil absolving defendant from civil liability not a bar to criminal action 7.

Investigating officer either dismisses complaint or asks by subpoena complainant and respondent to submit affidavits and counter-affidavits 1. 5. EXCEPT where the accused is lawfully arrested without a warrant and an inquest is conducted. Preliminary investigation – inquiry or proceeding to determine if there is sufficient ground to engender a well-founded belief that a crime cognizable by the RTC has been committed. but hold the case in abeyance and either: (1) conduct its own investigation. Provincial or city fiscals and their assistants Judges of MTC and MCTC National and regional state prosecutors Such other officers as may be authorized by law Duly authorized legal officers of COMELEC 1. 2. Court should not dismiss the info. and should be held for trial à A preliminary investigation is only necessary for an information to be filed with the RTC.1. If conducted prior to arrest i. would be enough to merit a conviction of the accused iv. Procedure a.. 2. The Ombudsman 2. unexplained and uncontradicted. Resultan) à Absence of a preliminary investigation is NOT a ground for a motion to quash the information. Sandiganbayan). and he finds that probable cause exists and that there is a need to place the accused under custody. in cases of ill-gotten wealth 5. an information filed without a preliminary investigation is defective but not fatal. if fiscal finds reasonable ground to believe that a crime has been committed and accused is probably guilty thereof à Prima facie evidence is that evidence which. in its absence. then he may issue a warrant of arrest . which is merely recommendatory (Tandoc vs. 4. it is the fiscal’s refusal to conduct a preliminary investigation when the accused demands one which is a violation of the rights of the accused (Doromal vs. If the investigating officer finds prima facie evidence. standing alone. he prepares an information and a resolution à i. complaints may be filed with the MTC without need of an information. or (2) require the fiscal to hold a reinvestigation. the accused may ask for one. 3.e. GENERAL RULE: The fiscal conducts the preliminary investigation before filing an information with the RTC. and that the respondent is probably guilty thereof. he recommends the dismissal of the complaint à If the investigating officer is an MTC judge. The PCGG. Complainant files complaint with (a) Provincial or city fiscal (b) Regional or state prosecutor (c) MTC or MCTC judge. 3. Who conducts Preliminary Investigation 1. Right to Preliminary Investigation à A personal right and may be waived à Waived by failure to invoke the right prior to or at least at the time of the plea 4. Otherwise. excluding MTC judge of Metro Manila or chartered cities (d) Other offices authorized by law 1.

1. Investigating officer forwards records to the city fiscal or chief state prosecutor 1.à Flores vs. of Justice should refrain from entertaining petitions for review or appeals from the decision of fiscal ( Crespo vs. injunction will not lie but may be granted in certain cases . RPC b. Motion for preliminary investigation à Filed when accused is arrested without warrant à Must be with assistance of counsel and after waiving Art. Records will not form records of the case proper à Court on its own or on motion may order production of record b. without making any finding of a necessity to place the accused in immediate custody to prevent a frustration of justice. 125. RPC and asks for a preliminary investigation. then the procedure for one prior to arrest is followed 1. Mogul. Velasquez vs. Sumaling – What differentiates the present rule from the previous one is that while before.” It is therefore error for the investigating judge to order the issuance of a warrant of arrest solely on his finding of probable cause. Motion for preliminary investigation à Filed within 5 days after accused learns an information against him has been filed without a preliminary investigation c. peace officer or fiscal without preliminary investigation. Motion for re-investigation d. arresting officer and witnesses (c) Fiscal either dismisses the complaint and orders the immediate release of the accused. it was mandatory for the investigating judge to issue a warrant for the arrest of the accused if he found probable cause. with the assistance of counsel. 125. Undersecretary of Justice) NOTE: Information may be filed by offended party. Petition for prohibition à Filed with appellate court to stop the criminal proceedings à Ordinarily. the court acquires jurisdiction giving it discretion over the disposition of the case and the Sec. 6. ousting the court of jurisdiction e. the rule now is that the investigating judge’s power to order the arrest of the accused is limited to instances in which there is a necessity for placing him in custody “in order not to frustrate the ends of justice. OR prepares and files an information à While fiscal has quasi-judicial discretion whether or not to file an information. once it is filed with the court. City fiscal or state prosecutor either dismisses the complaint or files the information in court à Decision prevails over decision of the MTC judge vii. If accused waives Art. on the ground that his rights to due process of law were violated. Appeal to DOJ à Filed upon denial of his motion for a preliminary investigation. If conducted after warrantless arrest 1. Remedies a. Inquest conducted as follows (a) Fiscal determines the validity of the arrest (b) Fiscal determines existence of prima facie evidence based on the statements of the complainant.

however. Villaraza) . à “Invitations” are not arrests and are usually not unconstitutional. needs only be the cause of the arrest (Umil vs. à Not all persons detained are arrested. Judge conducts ex parte preliminary examination to determine probable cause à In determining probable cause. made by an actual restraint of the person or by his submission to custody 2. Bondsman. only those detained to answer for an offense. 3. Ramos) c. for purpose of surrendering the accused 3. judge must: (1) Personally examine witness (2) Witness must be under oath (3) Examination must be reduced to writing (Luna vs. With warrant 1. When person to be arrested is committing. attempting or has committed an offense b. Felix) iii. Plaza) à In determining probable cause. When a person lawfully arrested escapes 2.” (RA 7438) à Warrants of arrest remain valid until arrest is effected. or the warrant is lifted à Arrest may be made at any time of the day or night 3. subversion ( Umil vs. Cruz-Pano) When the accused is deprived of his rights When the statute on which the charge is based is null and void When it will aid the administration of justice ( Tatad vs. 2. but in some cases may be taken as commands (Babst vs. Arrest – taking a person into custody in order that he may be bound to answer for the commission of some offense. Judge issues warrant of arrest à If without preliminary examination. Sandiganbayan) When multiplicity of suits will be avoided ( Guingona vs. not the crime finally charged. Ramos) à The continuing crime.à When prohibition proper to restrain criminal proceedings: 1. When person to be arrested is an escaped detainee (either serving sentence or with case pending) 1. 4. When an offense has just been committed and the person making the arrest has personal knowledge that the person to be arrested committed it à Warrantless arrest anytime for a continuing offense like rebellion. General Rule: No person may be arrested without a warrant. NBI). When strong-arm tactics are used for vindictive purposes ( Salonga vs. the practice of issuing an “invitation” to a person who is investigated in connection with an offense he is suspected to have committed is considered as placing him under “custodial investigation. Procedure a. the judge may rely on findings by responsible officer ( Lim vs. 5. City Fiscal) Rule 113 Arrest 1. Complainant files application with affidavits attached 2. considered irregular ( Bagcal vs. Warrantless arrests by a peace officer or a private person a. Accused attempts to leave country without court permission 4.

The person is in custody of an officer under process of law. Person is arrested 1. the information being the judicial process required by law (Ilagan vs. Person arrested may waive right to Art. Person arrested is brought to nearest police station or jail b. Requisites for a warrant of arrest: 1. Remedies a. Probable cause 2. Without warrant: 1.iv. Enrile) à Habeas corpus is no longer available after an information has been filed. to effect immediate release of the person detained à Filed when a person is being illegally detained (without judicial process). and 2. Chief of Police) 1. Cesar) 6. If peace officer is unable to serve warrant 10 days after issuance. Petition for writ of habeas corpus à Filed with any court. he must file a report and explanation with judge within 10 days v. Plaza) à If an arrest is improper. not habeas corpus (Ilagan vs. The court had jurisdiction to issue the process ( Luna vs. or warrantless arrest beyond period with no information filed) à Habeas corpus is not allowed when: 1. Specifically naming or particularly and sufficiently describing person to be arrested à John Doe warrants are void for being general warrants ( Pangandaman vs. Enrile) . 125 ( Sayo vs. Signed by judge 3. 125. the remedy is a motion for quashal of the warrant of arrest and/or a motion to quash the information. If warrant served (1) Person informed that he is being arrested (2) Informed of cause of his arrest (3) Officer may break door or window if admission to building is refused (4) Person physically restrained à For private citizens making an arrest à May not do so except to do some service to humanity or justice (5) No violence or unnecessary force may be used (6) Officer may summon assistance (7) Person who escapes after arrest may be immediately pursued vi. RPC and ask for preliminary investigation or inquest à Fiscal is not judicial authority contemplated under Art. or was illegally arrested (void warrant or unlawful warrantless arrest. Fiscal files info 5.

but the rights to be informed of these rights. Against self-incrimination 3.. Director of Prisons) b. conditioned upon his appearance before any court as required under the following conditions: 1. Test of voluntariness determined on a case-to-case basis 3. To counsel 4.à Habeas corpus is proper when a person is being restrained illegally. The rights may be waived. V. Motion to quash information à Filed with court when information against the person arrested has been filed à Must be made in a “special appearance” before the court questioning only its lack of jurisdiction over the person of the accused à Otherwise. Warning must not only be said. or they may be treated as verbal admission of the accused through the testimony of the witnesses (People vs. Bail – security given for the release of a person in custody of law.. accused had to prove involuntariness 1. not just to those charged with the offense ( Herras vs. i. It begins only after arrest 2. Revert to exclusionary rule: any involuntary confession is inadmissible 1. Voluntary confessions are admissible 2. thus granting it whatever jurisdiction it lacked over the person à Any irregularity in the arrest is cured when the petitioner submits himself to the jurisdiction of the court. may not be waived 4. Teehankee) . Undertaking effective upon approval and remains in force at all stages until promulgation of judgment. to warning. furnished by him or a bondsman. Villaraza) 7.V.g. e. Mendoza. by filing for bail (Bagcal vs. Present rules 1. To remain silent 2.e. but they may be used to impeach the credibility of the accused. unless sooner cancelled 2. Involuntary confessions were inadmissible only if they were false 2. “Rights to Counsel in Custodial Investigation” à Evolution of rights of the accused under custodial investigation 1. imprisoned past maximum penalty allowed by law (Gumabon vs. Miranda rule: the accused must be informed of his rights 1. Police investigations prior to arrest are not covered 3. All involuntary confession were inadmissible. Quashal of warrant of arrest à Filed with court which issued the warrant of arrest when the warrant of arrest is fatally flawed c. Bondsman shall surrender accused for execution of judgment à Bail applies to all persons detained. Molas) Rule 114 Bail 1. the voluntary appearance of the person arrested by filing a motion before the court would be deemed a submission to the authority of the court. Failure to appear despite notice to him or the bondsman will waive his right to be present and trial shall proceed in absentia 4. Definition of custodial investigation questioned 1.g.. Accused shall appear before court when required 3. Waiver of rights must not only be with counsel but must be in writing à Confessions made without assistance of counsel are inadmissible as evidence to incriminate the accused. officer must make sure the person arrested understands them specifically 5. e.

if the health or the life of the detainee is in danger (Dela Rama vs. Offense charged is not capital: Accused applies for bail (1) Where information against him was filed or where case is pending (2) Absent (1). which is unconstitutional ( Dela Camara vs.à Court has power to prohibit person out on bail from leaving the country (Manotoc. CA) à Bail implies delivery of the accused to the sureties who. à Right to bail traditionally unavailable to military personnel facing court martial. except those charged with capital offenses. reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment 2. Judge sets bail 1. in another branch of the same court within the province or city where he is held (3) If arrested in another province. MCTC. who are not in the same class as civilians (Comendador vs. When bail is a matter of right à Before or after conviction by MTC. with the MTC 1. reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment 4. If evidence is strong. with the Collector of Internal Revenue 3. Teehankee) . Accused may move to reduce bail. Bonoan) 2. In case he has applied for probation after final judgment. Procedure a. Enage) 3. Accused petitions for bail 2. file with the RTC (4) Absent (3). he may be allowed temporary liberty under his bail or recognizance 5. if cash. Prosecution presents evidence 1. i. People’s Court) à Excessive bail is tantamount to denial of bail. and hearing will be set 2. city or municipality. When bail is discretionary (application filed with court where case is pending) 1. vs. Teehankee) 1. Otherwise. Accused is released b. General Rule: All persons are entitled to bail as a matter of right. but during period to appeal subject to consent of bondsman 3. judge’s discretion is limited to determining strength of evidence and does not cover determining whether bail should be allowed ( Herras vs. de Villa) à Bail should be available regardless of other circumstances or the merits of the case. bail is denied 1. Provisional liberty under same circs. may seize him and imprison him until they can deliver him to court (US vs. Jr. Offense charged is capital: 1. Judge sets hearing to determine whether evidence of guilt is strong à Ex-parte hearing on bail is arbitrary and unacceptable ( Herras vs. Accused posts bail and deposits the same with the Municipal/City/Provincial Treasurer or. Upon conviction by RTC of an offense not punishable by death. judge sets bail and procedure for non-capital offense is followed à In capital crimes. Teehankee) 2. though not holding him prisoner. MJC à Before conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by death. Court may not force fiscal to produce evidence ( Herras vs.

3. Upon application with the court and due notice to the fiscal 1. Valera) 6. Youthful offender held for physical and mental examination. violated provisions of bail. or . Caught in flagrante Confessed to commission of offense unless repudiated (force and intimidation) Previously escaped. Substitution of info (see R110. Provisionally escaped. but NO BAIL was filed or accused is incapable of filing one 4. Accused has applied for probation and before the same has been resolved. evaded sentence. trial or appeal. criminal offense – not higher that 6 month imprisonment and/or P2000 fine. habitual delinquent or guilty of the aggravating circumstance of reiteration. Committed offense while on probation.à Evidence must be strong that the accused is guilty of the capital offense charged. a. or both) 1. the most usual condition in criminal cases being the appearance of the accused for trial 2. 5. Accused dies b. quasi-recidivist. Does not require signature of accused for trial 3. but not more than 20 years. Probability of flight. except: 1. Previously pardoned by municipal or city mayor for violation of ordinance for at least 2 times 10. and: 1. Cancellation of bail a. if unable to furnish bail 11. §14) 2. 2. without application of the Indeterminate Sentence Law or any modifying circumstance 3. Instances when accused may be released on recognizance: 1. 4. Does not require signature of accused to be valid 8. Accused is acquitted 2. Accused is a recidivist. Prosecution witnesses may be required to post bail to ensure their appearance at the trial. Committed offense while on parole or under conditional pardon 7. Accused surrenders back to custody 1. Recognizance 1. 3. or conditional pardon. Obligation of record entered into before some court of magistrate duly authorized to take it. 4. 2. parole. Court believes that material witness may not appear at the trial 9. Person has been in custody for a period equal to or more than the minimum of the imposable principal penalty. light felony. When bail cancelled or denied: after RTC imposes imprisonment exceeding 6 years. 2 (fails to report to clerk of court periodically under his recognizance) Recidivist. Offense charged is a violation of an ordinance. with the condition to do some particular act. Automatic cancellation 1. Case is dismissed 1. Accused is convicted and surrenders for execution of judgment 12. a light felony or criminal offense the imposable penalty to which does not exceed 6 months and or P2000 fine 2. Bail bond – an obligation under seal given by accused with one or more sureties and made payable to proper officer with the condition to be void upon performance by the accused of such acts as he may legally be required to perform 7. evaded sentence or jumped bail Violation of Sec. not just of any offense (Bernardez vs. When bail required under RA 6036 (violation of ordinance. habitual delinquent previously convicted for an offense to which the law or ordinance attaches an equal or greater penalty or for 2 or more offenses to which it attaches a lighter penalty 6.

Accused fails to appear before court when required à 30 days for bondsman to show cause why judgment should not be rendered against him b. produce the body or give reason for non-production AND 2. Accused waived the right to question any irregularity in the conduct of the preliminary investigation when he failed to do so before entering his plea ( People vs.5. Age and health of accused 6. When bail is forfeited a. Within 30 days. Rule 115 Rights of Accused 1. Notes: 1. 2. 8. Financial ability of accused to give bail. Dela Cerna) 3. 9. 4. not his conduct ( US vs. Villanueva). 3. 2. Provisional forfeiture 1. Fact that accused was a fugitive from justice when arrested. Posting bail waives the right to question any irregularity attending the arrest of a person ( Callanta vs. the obligee or the law ( US vs. Bonoan) 14. Undue risk that during appeal. Forfeiture of other bonds. Petition for bail. and 10. Bonoan) à Sureties exonerated if appearance made impossible by an act of God. Pendency of other cases in which the accused is under bond 17. Bondsman fails to satisfactorily explain to the court why accused did not appear when first required to do so à Sureties guarantee only appearance of the accused. Remedies 1. Felix) b. Right of the accused under the Rules a. Accused out on bail may be re-arrested if he attempts to depart from the Philippines without prior court permission (warrantless arrest allowed). Probability of accused appearing for trial. Bondsman fails to produce him within 30 days c. Explain satisfactorily the absence of the accused when first required to appear 15. when bail can be availed of as a matter of right 2. To be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt à In an appeal from a conviction. Character and reputation of accused. the accused shall again be presumed innocent until and unless his conviction is affirmed (Castillo vs. 5. To be informed of the nature and cause of charges . when the offense charged is a capital offense à For judge to set hearing for the determination of strength of evidence of guilt 16. this does not result in waiver of the inadmissibility of the articles seized incidentally to such illegal arrest. Weight of evidence against accused 7. Penalty of offense charged. Circumstances to be considered in fixing amount of bail: 1. However. Nature and circumstances of offense. Application for bail. he may commit another crime 13.

the right against self-incrimination takes the following form: 1. subject to cross-examination on matters covered by direct examination. entitling the accused to mandamus to compel dismissal of the case. Opida) à Right against self-incrimination and to counsel do not apply during custodial investigation ( People vs. With the same parties 3. Nicandro) à Confessions obtained through coercion are inadmissible ( People vs. the accused forfeits his rights to be notified of proceedings in the future and to adduce evidence in his behalf ( People vs. Same subject matter 4. Given in another proceeding 2. To confront and examine the witnesses against him. To have compulsory process to secure witnesses and evidence in his behalf h. impartial and public trial à Unreasonable postponements of trial amounts to a denial of the right to a speedy trial. including the right to use in evidence testimony of a witness 4. First jeopardy attached and terminated 3. Summers) à Being informed of rights means a meaningful transmission of information. Bagano) g. Double jeopardy 1. Opportunity to cross-examine à Prosecution has no privilege to withhold the identity of informers when such informer was crucial in the operation itself. Valid complaint or information 1. without which confession made by the accused is inadmissible (People vs. ocular inspection of the body may be allowed ( Villaflor vs. If he testifies. Crisologo) c. Not to be compelled to be a witness against himself 3. To testify as witness on his own behalf. failure to present the informer is a denial of the right to confront the witness which merits the reversal of the conviction (People vs. Accused may refuse to testify 2. Competent court with jurisdiction . arraignment and later proceedings must be in a language the accused understands (People vs. To due process b. Ayson) à During trial. out of or cannot with due diligence be found in the RP 1. First jeopardy must have attached prior to the first 2. To have a speedy. he may refuse to answer those questions which may incriminate him in ANOTHER offense c. To be present at every stage of proceedings. or to habeas corpus if he is detained i. not to be prejudiced by his silence 2. he waives this right and merits a trial in absentia. Against double jeopardy d. Against self-incrimination à Right is limited to testimonies. Rights of the accused under the Constitution a. To be heard by himself and counsel 3. Salas) 1. subject to waiver by bail à If an accused escapes.à The right must be substantially complied with. Who is deceased. To have the right of appeal 2.

Motion to dismiss à Both filed on the ground of violation of accused’s rights. The offense was made graver by supervening events 2. Necessarily includes or is included in the previous case 2. 14 1. Art. after arraignment. liberty or property without due process of law. Sandiganbayan) à No double jeopardy if first case was dismissed with consent of the accused ( Caes vs. III. or administrative bodies. Sec. City Court) à No double jeopardy where the trial was a sham since there was no competent court ( Galman vs. Sec. No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law. 1 No person shall be deprived of life. quasi-judicial. à Constitution. NOTES: à Constitution. Sec. Art. nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws. 17 No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself. and to have compulsory process to secure the attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence in his behalf. acquittal or termination without the consent of the accused c. à Constitution. . Art. to have a speedy. Accused had pleaded 3. impartial and public trial. However. In all criminal prosecutions. III.2. Art. Action ended in conviction. An attempt or frustration of the offense in previous case 1. 16 All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition of their cases before all judicial. Sec. III. The facts constituting the graver offense were only discovered after the filing of the earlier information à No double jeopardy if the new fact which justified the new charge arose only after arraignment and conviction (People vs. Relova) c. IAC) à There is double jeopardy if a person is charged twice under different penal statutes for the same acts (People vs. thereby ousting the court of jurisdiction 6. à Constitution. An offense lesser than that charged to which the accused pleaded guilty with the consent of the fiscal and the offended party 4. to meet the witnesses face to face. and shall enjoy the right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusations against him. Plea of guilty to a lesser offense without the consent of the fiscal and the offended party 5. Offense charged in later case is: 1. the accused shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved. Motion to quash 2. trial may proceed notwithstanding the absence of the accused provided that he has been duly notified and that his failure to appear is unjustifiable. Same as that in previous case 1. Exceptions to double jeopardy 1. 2. Remedies 1. III.

Case proceeds to pre-trial.à Constitution. 2. such right may be waived. counsel has at least 2 days to prepare for trial à People vs. conviction under offense charged for purposes of double jeopardy 5. court may still find the accused guilty of that lesser offense 1. If an act is punished by a law or ordinance. of his plea. Further. Procedure 1. and its consequences à Court requires prosecution to present evidence to prove guilt of accused and determine his degree of culpability. any person who is a resident of the province. Only when so demanded does denial thereof constitute reversible error and ground for new trial. accused must be given at least 15 days to prepare for trial. 3. 5. which shall commence within 30 days from receipt of Pre-Trial Order. Guilty to a capital offense à Court conducts searching inquiry to determine if accused was aware of the charges. and even if lesser offense is not included in offense charged. III. and accused may still establish presence of mitigating circumstances in his favor f. 2. Court gives counsel time to confer with accused at least an hour before arraignment à Period allowed for counsel de oficio to confer with accused must be substantially complied with. if not. Art. 6. Agbayani – the right for 2 days to prepare must be expressly demanded. Kinds of plea No plea – a plea of not guilty shall be entered Conditional plea of guilt – a plea of not guilty shall be entered Not guilty – case proceeds to trial or pre-trial Guilty to a lesser offense – if fiscal and offended party consents. 4. the manner of statement of such fact is immaterial (People vs. Accused given a copy of the information. trial or hearing. 3. e. of good repute for probity and ability to defend accused c. expressly or impliedly. Gonzaga) 1. à NOTE. HOWEVER. Guilty to a non-capital offense . depending on the plea à Statement in the judgment that the accused was arraigned and pleaded is sufficient. Even if info is not amended. 21 No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense. Rule 116 Arraignment and Plea 1. Court informs accused of his right to counsel and asks him if he wants one 2. Case goes to trial 2. j. case may be remanded for re-arraignment (People vs. Court appoints counsel de oficio if accused has none à If no such member of the available. Sec. under SC Circular 38-98 (implementing “Speedy Trial Act of 1997”). 4. which is read to him in a language he understands Accused is asked whether he pleads guilty or not guilty Accused files a motion to quash or makes plea Accused personally makes his plea Plea is entered into record If accused makes plea of not guilty. Info may be amended 1. conviction or acquittal under either shall constitute a bar to another prosecution for the same act. Cariaga) 2.

order the plea of not guilty à Plea of guilty waives only defects which may be taken advantage of by motion to quash or by plea in abatement.à Court receives evidence from the parties to determine penalty to impose à Plea of guilty not necessarily followed by conviction. that a Bill of Particulars is necessary to clarify the acts for which the accused is being charged b. Right to file a motion to quash b. Motion to quash à May be filed at anytime before plea is entered à Based on grounds provided by the rules c. Right to question any irregularity in the preliminary investigation 3. Remedies a. Right to question illegality of the arrest 2. Grounds . when it can be shown that the accused was not aware of the significance of pleading guilty to the charges Rule 117 Motion to Quash 1. cannot cure jurisdictional defects. even after a MTQ à Filed when the information is insufficient in form or is generally worded. No offense charged Lack of jurisdiction over the offense charged Extinction of the offense or of the penalty Double jeopardy 3. Motion to suspend arraignment à Filed when the accused seems mentally unsound or if there is a prejudicial question in a pending civil case d. A plea of not guilty may not be changed to guilty. Motion to quash – a hypothetical admission that even if all the facts alleged were true. trial court should consider the plea withdrawn and in its place. Entry of plea will waive 1. as doing so would only spare the prosecution of presenting evidence and still result in the conviction of the accused. 4. Upon receipt of exculpatory evidence (if accused pleaded guilty). all grounds not raised deemed waived Exception: The following grounds may be used in MTQ even after plea 1. Motion to withdraw an improvident plea of guilt à May be filed at any time before judgment of conviction becomes final. 4. 3. Effects a. Motion for specification à May be filed any time before plea. the accused still cannot be convicted due to other reasons 2. When to file Motion to Quash General Rule: Before entering plea. 3. 2. Improvident plea of guilty may be changed to not guilty any time before judgment is rendered c.

it is necessary to state that it was exempted from any amnesty existing at the time f. unless ground for dismissal is: (a) denial of right to speedy trial. More than one offense was charged.a. EXCEPT where law prescribes single punishment for various offenses e. no waiver considered even upon failure to move to quash on such ground 3. Information contains allegations which. and will not be a bar to a second prosecution. its dismissal without the consent of the accused cannot be pleaded as prior jeopardy. Accused would be put in double jeopardy à Bars another prosecution à No waiver à No double jeopardy if first case was dismissed with the consent of the accused ( Que vs. it is not necessary that it be defined by law. No jurisdiction over offense charged may be raised at any time. Asuncion) NOTE: Court will consider no other grounds other than those raised. Although failure to file a motion to quash the information is a waiver of all objections to it insofar as formal objections to pleadings are concerned. who should prepare informations for offenses committed within Pampanga but outside Angeles City. Court has no jurisdiction 1. Moreover. Rodriguez) c. Alagao) b. EXCEPT lack of jurisdiction over offense charged. then there was no valid information and there could be no double jeopardy (Caniza vs. since the complaint or information was insufficient because it was so defective in form or substance that conviction upon it could not have been sustained. à If the first case was dismissed due to a deficient information. No jurisdiction over person of the accused à The court gained jurisdiction over the person of the accused when he voluntarily appeared for the presuspension hearing (Layosa vs. or (b) insufficiency of evidence. sufficient in form and substance b. An information must be prepared and presented by the prosecuting attorney or someone authorized by law. only that it alleges that one offense was necessary to commit the other ( People vs. Cosico). No territorial jurisdiction 2. Before court of competent jurisdiction . the court does not acquire jurisdiction. not the City Prosecutor. d. if true. Officer who filed the information had no authority à Presentation of evidence cannot cure an invalid information ( People vs. If not. People) à Cudia vs CA – it should be the Provincial Prosecutor of Pampanga. would be a legal excuse or justification h. Information does not conform to prescribed form à For the info to charge a complex crime. Valid information or complaint. Facts alleged do not constitute an offense à May be raised at any time à No waiver à For charge to be complete. questions relating to want of jurisdiction may be raised at any stage of the proceedings. Criminal action or liability has been extinguished g. Requisites of Double jeopardy a. 4.

2. the party who induced it to adopt such theory will not be permitted. EXCEPT when the ground is: 1. Bar to offense charged. the principle of estoppel applies. If based on defect in info which can be cured. has no bearing thereon. Accused had pleaded d. then such could be proved in the trial à Upon denial of a MTQ. RTC and Sandiganbayan. à Under “Speedy Trial Act of 1997”. Trial à If there was really no basis for the info. these facts need not be proved by evidence in trial . and the case was heard and decided upon a given theory. except: 1. 2. simple and adequate remedy 7. Failure to charge an offense Lack of jurisdiction over the offense charged Extinction of the offense or of the penalty Double jeopardy Rule 118 Pre-Trial 1. pretrial is mandatory. if the lower court had jurisdiction. Remedies 1. but the case was tried and decided upon the theory that it had jurisdiction. attempt to commit the same or necessarily includes or is necessarily included à Conviction for physical injuries through reckless imprudence constitutes double jeopardy to the charge of damage to property through reckless imprudence. the parties are not barred on appeal. Double jeopardy OR 2. Plea bargaining – process whereby the accused and the prosecution in a criminal case work out a mutually satisfactory disposition of the case subject to court approval. for the same ‘must exi st as a matter of law. Failure to move to quash or to allege any ground therefor deemed a waiver of such grounds. The rule that jurisdiction is conferred by law. MTQ filed 2. Procedure 1. 3. Conviction. MCTC. It usually involves the defendant’s pleading guilty to a lesser offense or to only some of the counts of a multi-count indictment in return for a lighter sentence than that for the greater charge. If it had no jurisdiction. or dismissal or termination of case without consent of accused e. Extinction of criminal liability 6.à Doctrine of “Jurisdiction by Estoppel”: depends upon whether the lower court actually had jurisdiction or not. acquittal. However. Stipulation of facts à Facts which both parties and respective counsels agree on as evidenced by their signatures. on appeal. such. Quashing the info shall NOT be a bar to subsequent prosecution (accused has not pleaded yet). 4. and does not depend upon the will of the parties. from assailing such jurisdiction. in all criminal cases cognizable by the MTC. Here. mandamus or certiorari will only be granted if there is not other plain. for instance. implementing the “Speedy Trial Act of 1997”. 5. c. court shall order its amendment 3. and may not be conferred by consent of the parties or by estoppel’. the proper remedy is to go on trial and later to appeal. an accused may plea guilty to a lesser offense only if said offense is necessarily included in the offense charged. to assume an inconsistent position — that the lower court had jurisdiction. MeTC. if necessary. à Under SC Circular 38-98. Motion to dismiss – if certain grounds were not raised or denied in a MTQ 2. as that the court had no jurisdiction.

limits the trial to matters not yet disposed of. CA) 3. cannot cure defect (Fule vs. he must give the defendant the chance to cross-examine (Combate vs. and controls the course of action during the trial 4. may be examined by the judge handling the case 4. 4. To assail the admissibility of evidence which prove the elements of the offense charged 2. 3. Accused may move for discharge Prosecution rests Defense may. To assail the credibility of such evidence 3. under SC Circular 38-98. with or without leave of court. signed only by counsel. unless postponed for a just cause 5. To prove another version. which shall commence within 30 days from receipt of Pre-Trial Order. a later memo of confirmation. Prosecution witnesses. 7. Judge issues pre-trial order Rule 119 Trial 1. 2. 8. Procedure 1. Prosecution presents evidence à Presentation à Testimonies: direct examination à Cross-examination à Re-cross à Offer 1. 4.à Stipulation is inadmissible if unsigned by either accused or counsel. Accused may move that his witnesses be examined 2. 6. Procedure a. 6. §1) à HOWEVER. 9. Parties notified of date of trial 2 days before trial date (R119. accused must be given at least 15 days to prepare for trial. 5. San Jose) 2. In trial. 1. 2. Trial continues from day to day. the judge cannot base his decision simply on affidavits. file a demurrer to evidence Defense presents evidence Defense rests Prosecution presents rebuttal evidence Defense presents rebuttal evidence . if they would be unable to attend trial. possibly admitting certain evidence of the prosecution and adding other evidence to cast reasonable doubt à Even in summary procedure. 5. 7. Pre-trial order – binds the parties. counsel has at least 2 days to prepare In the pre-trial conference Plea bargaining Stipulation of facts Marking of evidence (does not imply conceding to its admissibility or credibility) Waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence Other matters which will promote a fair and expeditious trial e. the defense tries 1. 3. Judge must calendar pre-trial Either party may waive the pre-trial If court appoints counsel de oficio. Defense witnesses examined by any judge or lawyer 3.

4. Original case dismissed upon filing of proper information à Example: Charged with theft. Requisites to discharge of an accused as State Witness 1. Witness is really material and appears to the court to be so Party who applies for postponement has not been guilty of neglect Witness can be had at the time to which the trial has been deferred No similar evidence could be obtained 7.8. from means of trial. The prosecution can ask for the dismissal of the info in order to file a new one for estafa. Accused detained. 5. 3. Aninon) 8. Has to leave the RP with indefinite date of returning 6. 3. Motion to exclude public à Excluding parties. case is submitted for judgment 3. Application for examination of witnesses for accused before trial 1. cannot be revoked as long as he testified according to what was expected of him ( People vs. separate charges may be tried in one single case if the offenses charged arise form the same facts or form part of a series of similar offenses à Court allowed consolidation of rape cases substantially committed in the same manner ( People vs. Motion for separate trials à Filed by the fiscal to try several accused separately à Granted at the court’s discretion à May also be ordered by the court motu proprio b. 2. When mistake made in charging proper offense 1. no means to attend 5. Motion for continuance – filed to postpone trial for just cause d. 4. If Accused cannot be convicted of offense charged or offense necessarily included therein 2. appears that offense is estafa. 2. Sick or infirm. not discharged 3. counsels and court personnel . At trial. Resides more than 100 km. Application (prosecution) 1. Testimony of accused absolutely needed No other direct evidence available EXCEPT his testimony Testimony can be corroborated on material points Accused does not appear to be most guilty Accused has never been convicted of offense involving moral turpitude à Discharge of accused. David) c. Remedies a. 4. Motion to consolidate à Upon the court’s discretion. Trial is closed. No Double Jeopardy because no valid info in the first case. Sick or infirm 2. when not all the requisites were met. unable to attend trial 2. Requisites for postponement due to absence of a witness 1.

The offense charged 2. Motion to reopen à Filed after the case is submitted for judgment but before judgment is actually rendered à To allow either side to present additional evidence. à Discharge of the accused has the effect of acquittal. Accused may be convicted of 1. if demurrer denied 1. If the demurrer was made without leave of court. defense gets to present evidence 2. Written in official language Personally prepared and signed by the judge Contains facts proved Contains law upon which judgment is based . 3. Cruz) Rule 120 Judgment 1. penalty and civil liability will be imposed on him. If the demurrer was made with leave of court. his sworn statement shall be inadmissible in evidence. if such could not be found before à Granted on discretion of the judge à The accused cannot move to reopen the case to allow him to adduce evidence in his behalf when his failure to adduce them during the trial was his own fault ( People vs. however. Demurrer to evidence à May be made after the prosecution rests its case à If the court finds the prosecution’s evidence insufficient. Motion for discharge à Filed before the prosecution rests à Hearing to determine existence of requisites for discharge à Prosecution will present evidence and the sworn statement of the proposed state witness à Evidence adduced in this said hearing automatically form part of trial. defense is deemed to have waived the right to present evidence and the case is submitted for judgment à Case may also be dismissed motu proprio g. A lesser offense necessarily included in the offense charged à Accused cannot be convicted for an offense graver than that charged ( People vs.à May also be ordered by court motu proprio e. the case will be dismissed à Otherwise. he will be acquitted and the acquittal immediately becomes final and executory. Judgment – adjudication by the court that the accused is guilty or not guilty of the offense charged. 4. unless accused fails or refuses to testify against his coaccused in accordance with his statement (which formed the basis for his discharge) f. and the imposition of the proper penalty and civil liability provided by law on the accused 2. If the accused is found guilty. if court denies motion for discharge. Guevarra) 4. Contents 1. 2. 3. General Rule: If the accused is found not guilty.

remedy is to file: 1. judgment must state: 1. After lapse of period for perfecting an appeal. Before judgment had been final (otherwise double jeopardy). 2. Judge reads judgment in presence of accused If judgment is of acquittal It becomes final and executory It bars subsequent prosecution for the same offense c. 3. Motion for new trial 3. Only a judgment in conviction can be modified or set aside 1. or 3. or 3. Motion for reconsideration à Filed when there are errors of law or fact in the judgment à Shall require no further proceedings à Notice should be given to the fiscal c. Appeal à Filed within 15 days of promulgation of judgment à Period is interrupted by filing of a motion for new trial or reconsideration à On motion of accused or at its own instance with consent of the accused b. If judgment is of conviction. When sentence partially or totally satisfied or served. 2. 4. When judgment in a criminal case becomes final: 1. unless right to separate civil action has been reserved à In case of acquittal. 3. Basis of liability 5. judgment becomes final and is entered in the book of Judgments 6. 2. Before appeal had been perfected. EXCEPT in cases of automatic review where death penalty is imposed 4. To correct clerical errors in the judgment 8. or 2. unless acts alleged clearly did not exist 2. Remedies a. Notice of appeal à Or else. Motion for reconsideration 2.à In case of conviction. Accused has applied for probation 7. judgment must state: 1. 4. Procedure 1. Civil liability for damages. Accused has expressly waived in writing his right to appeal. Legal qualification of offense and aggravating and mitigating circumstances Level of participation Penalty imposed Civil liability for damages. Motion for new trial à Notice should be given to the fiscal .

Procedure for new trial 1. Only corroborative evidence is offered 3. due to unreliability of such recantations.à Filed on the following grounds: 1. irregularities are expunged from the record and/or new evidence is introduced. At the instance or with the consent of the accused 3. May be made at the instance of either party who can thereafter present additional evidence 2. Modification of Judgment à In New Trial. Alleged new evidence consists of recantations of prosecution witness. Prisoner admits commission of crime with which accused is charged (facility with which such confession can be obtained and fabricated) 4. Does not require consent of accused 3. Notes: à Suspension of sentence for youthful offenders – after conviction. In modification of judgment. 2. Reconsideration à Motion for recon is based on the grounds of errors of law in the judgment is court is not asked to reopen the case for further proceedings. EXCEPT if no other evidence to sustain conviction aside from recanted testimony 4. . 3. or a shorter period à Probation – disposition under which a defendant after conviction and sentences. Motion for new trial 1. New evidence has been found which could not have been found before and which could change the judgment 9. but to reconsider its findings or conclusions of law and make them conformable to the law applicable to the case on the judgment the court has to render anew. minor is committed to custody and care of DSWD or any training institution until reaches 21 years of age. Made by the court before judgment is rendered in the exercise of sound discretion 2. 5. no new hearings or proceedings of any kind or change in the record or evidence. Alleged new evidence is inherently improbable and could easily be concocted 5. New Trial vs. 4. Only impeaching evidence is sought to be introduced as the court had already passed upon issue of credibility 2. A simple modification is made on the basis of what is on the record. Error of law or irregularities have been made during trial which are prejudicial to the substantial rights of the accused ii. Motion for New Trial is denied if: 1. Filed after judgment is rendered but before the finality thereof 2. New Trial vs. Reopening of the case 1. Hearing shall be set and held All evidence not alleged to be in error shall stand New evidence will be introduced Old judgment may be set aside and a new one rendered 10. is released subject to conditions imposed by the court and to the supervision of a probation officer à Parole – the conditional release of an offender from a penal or correctional institution after he has served the minimum period of his prison sentence under the continued custody of the state and under conditions that permit his reincarceration if he violated the conditions of his release Rule 121 New Trial or Reconsideration 1. The prosecution can move only for the reconsideration of the judgment but cannot present additional evidence 3.

new evidence taken with the old Rule 122 Appeal 1. affirm. if original case was with RTC i. but refrain from entering judgment and then certify the case and the entire record thereof to the SC for review (R124. Filed with the CA or SC. or lesser penalty involving offenses committed on the same occasion. Effects of Granting Motion for New Trial or Reconsideration a. all other cases. by petition for review on certiorari à If death penalty. The only valid withdrawal of an appeal is where the accused decides to serve his sentence. Reopening of the Case à New trial presupposes that existence of a judgment to be set aside upon the granting of a new trial à In reopening. Effect of appeal by any of several accused . or dismiss the case à If RTC decided case in appellate jurisdiction: Petition for Review ii. New Trial vs. and with copy on adverse party à If CA is of opinion that penalty should be reclusion perpetua or higher. or modify judgment of RTC. and those affected are set aside. or remand case for new trial or re-trial. and the trial court loses its power to modify or set aside the judgment. 2. automatic review iii. 8. Based on error of law or irregularities during trial: à Proceedings and evidence not affected by irregularities stand. it shall render judgment imposing said penalty. With CA: notice of appeal with court. Motion for Reconsideration à Grounds are errors of law or fact in judgment. cannot be validly withdrawn to give way for a Motion for Recon or a Motion for New Trial. Based on newly discovered evidence: à Evidence already taken shall stand.6. although the hearing may have already been closed 7. no judgment has yet been rendered. Court may allow introduction of new evidence b. With SC: notice of appeal where penalty imposed is life imprisonment. or arising out of same occurrence where graver penalty of death is available but life imprisonment is imposed. §13) à CA may reverse. Withdrawal of appeal à May be made at any time before judgment on the appeal is rendered à Lower court judgment becomes final à Case remanded for execution of judgment à Once notice of appeal is filed. Filed with RTC. since the filing of the notice perfected the appeal. if original case was with MTC à Notice served to lower court and to adverse party b. which require no further proceedings. Procedure a.

à Warrantless searches are illegal. remedy is to petition for habeas corpus 1. it must meet the requirements set by law ( Burgos vs. Person clearly shows the intent to relinquish such right . Dismissal made upon motion or with express consent of the accused 2. Evidence gathered from an illegal search and seizure is inadmissible. CFI) à It is not the police action which is impermissible. if no objection is raised ( Stonehill vs. Dir. Shall not affect those who did not appeal. Querubin) à Evidence from an illegal search may be used as evidence. the case has to be remanded to the court of origin to determine the guilt or innocence of the accused 4. When serving sentence. When appeal by prosecution from order of dismissal of criminal case will not result in double jeopardy 1. When penalty is lowered and convict has already served more than the maximum period of the new penalty à Habeas corpus is available when a person is imprisoned beyond the maximum penalty imposed by law (Gumabon vs. Civil appeal by offended party shall not affect criminal aspect of judgment 3. but for the waiver to be effective: 1. General Rule: No search or seizure can be conducted unless it is authorized by a search warrant. The right must exist 2. When a later judgment is rendered acquitting others for similar circumstances à Otherwise. Diokno) à Right against unreasonable search and seizure may be waived. Chief of Staff) à Tapping conversations is equivalent to a search and seizure (US vs. Person must be aware of the right 3. EXCEPT if favorable and applicable to them 2. equal protection is violated 1. Dismissal is not an acquittal nor based upon consideration of the evidence or merits of the case 3. Rule 126 Search and Seizure 1. Villareal) à For a warrant to be valid. de Villa) à Court gains jurisdiction over items seized by a valid search warrant and returned to it.1. but the procedure and unreasonable character by which it is exercised (Guazon vs. certiorari lies and no double jeopardy since validity and not correctness of dismissal is being challenged. unreasonable and unconstitutional (Alvarez vs. Villareal) à Seizing objects to be used as evidence is equivalent to forcing one to be a witness against himself ( Uy Khetin vs. Filed when the law under which the accused was convicted is repealed or declared unconstitutional 2. Search warrant – an order in writing issued in the name of the People of the Philippines. signed by a judge and directed to a peace officer. Katz) 2. of Prisons) NOTE: When dismissal is capricious. Execution of judgment on appellant will be stayed upon perfection of appeal 3. commanding him to search for personal property described therein and bring it before the court à Cannot be issued to look for evidence (Uy Khetin vs. Question to be passed upon by the appellate court is purely legal so that if the dismissal is found incorrect. and such is not an unconstitutional deprivation of property ( Villanueva vs.

Procedure a.à No waiver against unreasonable search and seizure when one compromises the criminal proceedings (Alvarez vs. not affecting third persons (People vs. if to be served at night 4. Indicates time. thus. in the form of searching questions. Villareal) à Nature of goods may allow description to be general or not too technical (Alvarez vs. and that they belong to the same person. Requisites of a valid search warrant a. CA) c. When a search warrant may be said to particularly describe the thing to be seized 1. Probable cause is personally determined by the issuing judge à Hence. Sy Juco) à Affidavits submitted must state that the premises is occupied by the person against whom the warrant is issued. to be served anywhere in the country. Was not issued for more than 10 days prior to a search made pursuant thereto (search warrant becomes void after 10 days) h. CFI) b. cannot be said to have issued upon probable cause ( Asian Surety vs. Description is as specific as circumstances allow 2. Sy Juco) à When complainant’s knowledge is hearsay. Search warrant particularly describes or identifies the property to be seized à Property which men may lawfully possess may not be the object of a search warrant ( Uy Khetin vs. CFI) à There is no waiver of right when evidence of coercion is present (Roan vs. Issuing judge personally examined. CFI) e. signed by him à By any RTC. Gonzales) 3. attaches affidavits à Oath requires that the person taking it personally knows the facts of the case ( People vs. Particularly describes the place to be searched f. Complainant files application. It shall issue only for one specific offense à Otherwise. that the objects to be seized are fruits or means of committing a crime. affidavits of witnesses are necessary ( Alvarez vs. for an offense which occurred anywhere in the country (Malaloan vs. Issued upon probable cause à Probable cause – such facts and circumstances which would lead a reasonably prudent man to believe that a crime has been committed and the thing to be searched for and seized is in the place to be searched b. the appellant and his witness and took down their written depositions d. Diokno) g. Herrera) à Absence of specific offense makes impossible determination of probable cause ( Stonehill vs. Judge conducts ex parte preliminary examination of complainant and witnesses under oath to determine probable cause . Expresses a conclusion of fact by which the warrant officer may be guided 3. Things described are limited to those which bear a direct relation to the offense for which the warrant is issued 5.

May extend beyond arrestee to include premises and surrounding under his immediate control 1. Without consent of person searched When the search is incident to a lawful arrest Personal knowledge of the arresting person ( Posadas vs. 6. 4. and surrenders items seized to receiving court (not necessarily court which issued the warrant) à Items seized illegally must remain in custodia legis pending resolution of the case (Roan vs. Art. papers. sanitary and building regulations 8. Marti) Inspection of building and premises for enforcement of fire. CA) Limited to: (1) Immediate time of arrest (2) Immediate vicinity of the arrest (3) Weapons and things which may be used as proof of offense charged ( Nolasco vs. members of the family OR 2 witnesses of sufficient age and discretion residing in the same locality à Search may last for more than a day as long as it is part of the same search for the same purpose and of the same place (Uy Khetin vs. Gonzales) iv. 3. 5. III. reasonable check-points Private searches with no state action (People vs. and no search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable cause to be determined personally by the judge after examination under . 4. Return of property illegally seized 7. 2. Villareal) e. Judge issues search warrant good for 10 days d. 2 The right of the people to be secure in their persons.à Judge must ask probing questions. Properties used in the commission of the crime Fruits or proceeds thereof Property which may furnish the arrestee with a weapon against the arresting person Property which may be used as evidence at the trial 9. houses and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable. Gonzales) c. 2. Peace officer files return of search warrant and inventory. Gonzales) 6. Peace officer in presence of occupant. NOTES: à Constitution. 2. Person making the arrest may take from the arrestee 1. not just repeat facts in the affidavit ( Roan vs. Border searches (customs. mail and airport) Vessels and aircrafts for violation of Tariff and Customs Code. Sec. 4. 7. 3. Pano) iii. Subject in an offense which is mala prohibita cannot be summarily seized (Roan vs. 3. Peace officer leaves receipt with occupant at place searched f. 8. Remedies from an unlawful search 1. Motion to suppress as evidence the objects illegally taken 3. MTQ the warrant 2. When a search may be validly conducted without a warrant 1. EXCEPT dwelling houses Plain view Moving vehicle Hot pursuit Stop-and-frisk.

Sec. The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable except upon lawful order of the court. Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding section shall be inadmissible for any purpose in the proceeding. broker. Rule 127 Provisional Remedies in Criminal Cases 1. 3 1. removed or disposed of his property. or when public safety or order requires otherwise as prescribed by law. Accused resides outside the RP Reference: Remedial Law (Criminal Procedure) Memory Aid Ateneo Central Bar Operations 2001 . Attachment as provisional remedy in criminal cases 1. or any officer of a corporation. factor. Criminal action is based on a claim for money or property embezzled or fraudulently misapplied or converted to the use of the accused who is a public officer.oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce. III. Accused is about to abscond from RP 2. and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized. in willful violation of duty 3. 2. or an attorney. agent or clerk in a fiduciary capacity. Art. à Constitution. or is about to do so 4. Accused has concealed.