You are on page 1of 82

Criminal Procedure Part 1 Procedure in Trial Courts

1. JURISDICTION IN CRIMINAL CASES A. Introduction 1. Criminal Jurisdiction defined Criminal jurisdiction is the authority to hear and try a particular offense and impose the punishment for it.1 2. Elements 2.1 The nature of the offense and/or penalty attached thereto; and 2.2 Commission of the offense within the territorial jurisdiction of the court. The non-concurrence of either of these two 2! elements may "e challen#ed "y an accused at any sta#e of the proceedin#s in the court "elow or on appeal. $ailin# in one of them% a jud#ment of con&iction is null and &oid.2 '. (e)uisites for its &alid e*ercise+ 1. Jurisdiction o&er the su"ject matter;, -hilippine courts ha&e no common law jurisdiction or power% "ut only those e*pressly conferred "y the Constitution and statutes and those necessarily implied to ma.e the e*press effecti&e./ The )uestion of jurisdiction of the court o&er the case filed "efore it is to "e resol&ed on the "asis of the law or statute pro&idin# for or definin# its jurisdiction. 0 The jurisdiction of a court to try a criminal action is determined not "y the law in force at the time of the commission of offense "ut "y the law in force at the time of the institution of the action.1 2nce &ested% jurisdiction cannot "e withdrawn or defeated "y a su"se)uent &alid amendment of the information.3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

People v. Mariano, No. L-40527, June 30, 1976, 71 SCR 600. Manila Railroa! Co. v. ""orne# $eneral, 20 P%il. 523 &1911'( ). S. v. Ja#*e, 24 P%il. 90 &1913'. Re#e+ v. ,ia-, 73 P%il. 4.4 &1941'. /elun"a v. C%ie0, P%ilippine Con+"a1ular#, No. L-71.55, Januar# 20, 19.., 157 SCR 147. People v. Mariano, supra, no"e 1. ,e La Cru- v. Mo#a, No. L-65192, pril 27, 19.., 160 SCR .3.. People v. C%upe2o, $. R. L-1956., Mar2% 31, 1964, 10 SCR 640.

2. Jurisdiction o&er the territory where the offense was committed; and ,. Jurisdiction o&er the person of the accused. C. Jurisdiction 4etermined "y 5lle#ations of Complaint or Information The a&erments in the complaint or information identify the crime char#ed and determine the court "efore which it must "e tried.6 To determine the jurisdiction of the court in a criminal case% the complaint or information must "e e*amined to ascertain if the facts set out therein and the penalty prescri"ed "y law fall within the jurisdiction of the court re#ardless of the court7s findin#s after the trial. 8 4. Jurisdiction 2&er Comple* Crimes Jurisdiction o&er the whole comple* crime is lod#ed with the trial court ha&in# jurisdiction to impose the ma*imum and most serious penalty imposa"le of an offense formin# part of the comple* crime.19 :here the imposa"le penalty for the physical injuries char#ed would come within the jurisdiction of the municipal trial court% while the fine for the dama#e to the property% would fall on the Court of $irst Instance now the (e#ional Trial Court!% the jurisdiction of the court to ta.e co#ni;ance of the case must "e determined not "y the correspondin# penalty for the physical injuries char#ed "ut "y the fine imposa"le for the dama#e to property resultin# from the rec.less imprudence.11 E. Crimes -unisha"le "y Destierro :here the imposa"le penalty is destierro such as that imposed in the case of concu"ina#e in the crime of concu"ina#e as defined in 5rticle ,,/ of the (e&ised -enal Code% the case falls within the e*clusi&e jurisdiction of the <unicipal Trial Court% considerin# that in the hierarchy of penalties under 5rticle 31 of the (e&ised -enal Code% destierro follows arresto mayor which in&ol&es imprisonment.12

. 9 10 11 12

People v. Ma3allane+, $. R. No. 11.013-4, 42"o1er 11, 1995, 249 SCR 212. 5ua#a v. Polo, $. R. No. 75079, Januar# 26, 19.9, 169 SCR 471. Cu#o+ v. $ar2ia, $. R. No. 46934, pril 15, 19.., 160 SCR 302. People v. Mala1anan, No. L-1647., u3u+" 31, 1961, 2 SCR 11.5. People v. 6!uar"e, $. R. No. ..232, 7e1ruar# 26, 1990, 1.2 SCR 750.

-2-

2. TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION
1. General Rule 5 criminal case should "e instituted and tried in the place where the offense was committed or any of its essential in#redients too. place.1, E*ceptions+ 1. =nder the 1863 Constitution% the >upreme Court may order a chan#e of &enue or place of trial to a&oid a miscarria#e of justice.1/ 2. :hen the law pro&ides otherwise ? e.g., -residential 4ecree @o. 1191% (e&isin# -residential 4ecree @o. 1/61 Creatin# a >pecial Court to "e .nown as ASandiganbayanA and for other purposes% as amended "y -residential 4ecree @o. 1611. ,. Case under the (e&ised (ules of Criminal -rocedure% (ule 119% >ection 10 "!% c! and d!. 2. Juri dic!ion O"er !#e Per on o$ Accu ed Jurisdiction o&er the person of the accused is ac)uired either "y his/her arrest or &oluntary appearance in court.10 %. Criminal Juri dic!ion O$ Munici&al Trial Cour! 'Re&u(lic Ac! )*+1 Sec!ion 2 Amendin, Sec!ion %2 o$ -a!a -l,. 12+. 1. Biolations of city or municipal ordinances committed within their respecti&e territorial jurisdictions 2. 5ll offenses punisha"le with imprisonment not e*ceedin# si* 1! years irrespecti&e of the amount of the fine% and re#ardless of other imposa"le accessory or other penalties% includin# the ci&il lia"ility arisin# from such offenses or predicated thereon% irrespecti&e of .ind% nature% &alue or amount thereof ,. 2ffenses in&ol&in# dama#e to property throu#h criminal ne#li#ence re#ardless of the &alue of the property E*ceptions+ 1. Cases fallin# within the e*clusi&e ori#inal jurisdiction of the a! (e#ional Trial Court% and "! the Sandiganbayan

13 14 15

People v. Mer2a!o, 65 P%il. 665 &193.'( Manila Railroa! Co. v. ""orne# $eneral, supra, no"e 2. r". /888, Se2. 5 94:. Repu1li2 v. Sun3a, No. L-3.634, June 20, 19.., 162 SCR 191 2i"in3 Cre+po v. Mo3ul, No. L-53373, June 30, 19.7, 151 SCR 462.

-3-

E*amples+ i! Ci"el is punisha"le "y prision corrreccional in its minimum and ma*imum period or fine or "ail (e&ised -enal Code% 5rticle ,0/!. 5rticle ,19% howe&er% of the same code as amended% pro&ides that the criminal and ci&il action for dama#es in cases of written defamation shall "e filed in the court of first instance% etc.11 ii! Jurisdiction o&er Election 2ffenses
>EC. 216. Jurisdiction of courts. The re#ional trial court shall ha&e the e*clusi&e ori#inal jurisdiction to try and decide any criminal action or proceedin#s for &iolation of this Code% e*cept those relatin# to the offense of failure to re#ister or failure to &ote which shall "e under the jurisdiction of the metropolitan or municipal trial courts. $rom the decision of the courts% appeal will lie as in other criminal cases. 13

iii! 5rticle D Jurisdiction 2&er 4an#erous 4ru#s Cases


>EC. ,8. Jurisdiction. The Court of $irst Instance% Circuit Criminal Court% and Ju&enile and 4omestic (elations Court shall ha&e concurrent ori#inal jurisdiction o&er all cases in&ol&in# offenses punisha"le under this 5ct+ Provided% That in cities or pro&inces where there are Ju&enile and 4omestic (elations Courts% the said courts shall ta.e e*clusi&e co#ni;ance of cases where the offenders are under si*teen years of a#e. 16

Thus% the aforementioned e*ception refers not only to >ection 29 of 'atas 'l#. 128 pro&idin# for the jurisdiction of (e#ional Trial Courts in criminal cases% "ut also to other laws which specifically lod#e in (e#ional Trial Courts e*clusi&e jurisdiction o&er specific criminal cases% e.g., a! 5rticle ,19 of the (e&ised -enal Code% as amended "y (epu"lic 5ct 1268 and /,1, on written defamation or li"el; "! Intellectual -roperty Code (epu"ic 5ct @o. 628,!% which &ests upon (e#ional Trial Court e*clusi&e jurisdiction o&er the cases therein mentioned re#ardless of the imposa"le penalty; and c! more appropriately for the case at "ar% >ection ,8 of (epu"lic 5ct. @o. 1/20% as amended "y -residential 4ecree @o. //% which &ests on Courts of $irst Instance% Circuit Criminal Courts% and the Ju&enile and 4omestic (elations Courts concurrent e*clusi&e ori#inal jurisdiction o&er all cases in&ol&in# &iolations of said 5ct.18 2. Cases which fall under the ori#inal and e*clusi&e jurisdiction of the $amily Courts (ep. 5ct @o. 6,18! ,. Cases which fall under the ori#inal and e*clusi&e jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan under (epu"lic 5ct 62/8 The Sandiganbayan has e*clusi&e and ori#inal jurisdiction cases where the accused are those enumerated in su"section a, >ection / and% #enerally% national and local officials classified as Erade A23A and hi#her under the Compensation and -osition Classification 5ct of 1868 (ep. 5ct @o. 1306!. Its jurisdiction o&er other offenses or felonies committed "y pu"lic officials and employees in relation to their office is no lon#er determined "y the prescri"ed penalty% viz., that which is hi#her than prision correccional or imprisonment for si* 1! years or a fine of -hp 1%999; it is enou#h that they are committed "y those pu"lic officials and employees enumerated in su"section a, >ection / a"o&e. Fowe&er% it retains
16 17 1. 19

People v. Me"ropoli"an ;rial Cour" o0 <ue-on Ci"#, 5r. 32, $.R. No. 12326, ,e2e*1er 16, 1996, 265 SCR 645. 4*ni1u+ 6le2"ion Co!e, Se2. 1.4. Morale+ v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, $. R. No. 126623, ,e2e*1er 12, 1997, 2.3 SCR 211. Morale+ v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, supra, no"e 1..

-4-

its e*clusi&e ori#inal jurisdiction o&er ci&il and criminal cases filed pursuant to or in connection with E*ecuti&e 2rder @os. 1% Creatin# the -residential Commission on Eood Eo&ernment!; 2 (e#ardin# the $unds% <oneys% 5ssets% and -roperties Ille#ally 5c)uired or <isappropriated "y $ormer -resident $erdinand E. <arcos% <rs. Imelda (. <arcos% Their Close (elati&es% >u"ordinates% 'usiness 5ssociates% 4ummies% 5#ents% or @ominees!; 1/ 4efinin# the jurisdiction 2&er Cases In&ol&in# the Ill-#otten :ealth of $ormer -resident $erdinand E. <arcos% <rs. Imelda (. <arcos% <em"ers of Their Immediate $amily% Close (elati&es% >u"ordinates% Close and/or 'usiness 5ssociates% 4ummies% 5#ents% and @ominees; and 1/-5 5mendin# E.2. @o. 1/! 29 =nder (epu"lic 5ct @o. 62/8% the Sandiganbayan partly lost its e*clusi&e ori#inal jurisdiction in cases in&ol&in#+ 1. Biolations of (epu"lic 5ct @o. ,918 5nti-Eraft and Corrupt -ractices 5ct as amended!; 2. (epu"lic 5ct @o. 1,38 5n 5ct 4eclarin# $orfeiture in $a&or of the >tate 5ny -roperty $ound to Fa&e 'een =nlawfully 5c)uired "y any -u"lic 2fficer or Employee and -ro&idin# for the -roceedin# Therefor!; and ,. Chapter II% >ection 2% Title BII of the (e&ised -enal Code. 5rticle 219 , 4irect 'ri"ery; 5rticle 211% Indirect 'ri"ery; and 5rticle 212 , Corruption of -u"lic 2fficials!. Admini !ra!i"e Circular No. /+0+1
>u"ject+ Euidelines in the implementation of (epu"lic 5ct @o. 3181% Entitled A5n 5ct E*pandin# the Jurisdiction of the <etropolitan Trial Courts% <unicipal Trial Courts and <unicipal Circuit Trial Courts% 5mendin# $or the -urpose 'atas -am"ansa 'l#. 128% 2therwise Gnown as the Judiciary (eor#ani;ation 5ct of 1869.A $or the #uidance of the 'ench and the 'ar% the followin# #uidelines are to "e followed in the implementation of (epu"lic 5ct @o. 3181% entitled A5n 5ct E*pandin# the Jurisdiction of the <etropolitan Trial Courts% <unicipal Trial Courts% and <unicipal Circuit Trial Courts% 5mendin# for the -urpose Batas Pambansa Blg. 128% 2therwise Gnown as the HJudiciary (eor#ani;ation 5ct of 1869) *** ,. The criminal jurisdiction of the <etropolitan Trial Courts% <unicipal Trial Courts% and <unicipal Circuit Trial Courts under >ection ,2 2! of '.-. 'l#. 128% as amended "y (.5. 3181% has "een increased to co&er offenses punisha"le with imprisonment not e*ceedin# si* 1! years irrespecti&e of the amount of the fine. 5s a conse)uence% the (e#ional Trial Courts ha&e no more ori#inal jurisdiction o&er offenses committed "y pu"lic officers and employees in relation to their office% where the offense is punisha"le "y more than four /! years and two 2! months up to si* 1! years. /. The pro&isions of >ection ,2 2! of '.-. 'l#. 128% as amended "y (.5. @o. 3181% apply only to offenses punisha"le "y imprisonment or fine% or "oth% in which case the amount of the fine is disre#arded in determinin# the jurisdiction of the court. Fowe&er% in cases where the only penalty pro&ided "y law is a fine% the amount thereof shall determine the jurisdiction of the court in accordance with the ori#inal pro&isions of >ection ,2 2! of '.-. 128 which fi*ed the ori#inal e*clusi&e jurisdiction of the <etropolitan Trial Courts% <unicipal Trial Courts% and <unicipal Circuit Trial Courts o&er offenses punisha"le with a fine of not more than -hp /%999. If the amount of the fine e*ceeds -hp /%999% the (e#ional Trial Courts shall ha&e jurisdiction% includin# offenses committed "y pu"lic officers and employees in relation to their office% where the amount of the fine does not e*ceed -hp 1%999. Fowe&er% this rule does not apply to offenses in&ol&in# dama#e to property throu#h criminal ne#li#ence which are under the e*clusi&e ori#inal jurisdiction of the <etropolitan Trial Courts%

20

People v. Ma3allane+, supra, no"e ..

-5-

<unicipal Trial Courts% and <unicipal Circuit Trial Courts% irrespecti&e of the amount of the imposa"le fine.

1. Ca e Go"erned (2 !#e Summar2 Rule 'Re"i ed Rule on Summar2 Procedure. 1. Biolations of traffic laws% rules and re#ulations; 2. Biolations of the (ental Caw; ,. Biolations of the municipal or city ordinances; /. 2ffenses committed "y the pu"lic officers and employees in relation to their office% includin# those employed in #o&ernment-owned-or-controlled corporations% where the penalty prescri"ed "y law is imprisonment of not e*ceedin# si* 1! months% or a fine of not e*ceedin# -hp 1%999 or "oth; 0. 5ll other criminal cases where the penalty prescri"ed "y law for the offense char#ed does not e*ceed si* 1! months imprisonment% or a fine of not e*ceedin# -hp 1%999% or "oth% irrespecti&e of other imposa"le penalties% accessory or otherwise% or of the ci&il lia"ility arisin# therefrom. 1. 2ffenses in&ol&in# dama#e to property throu#h criminal ne#li#ence where the imposa"le fine does not e*ceed -hp 19%999. 3. Ca e Go"erned (2 !#e Re,ular Rule 1. The re#ular rules are as follows+ 1.1 2ffenses committed "y pu"lic officers and employees in relation to their office% includin# those employed in #o&ernment-owned-or-controlled corporations% whether simple or comple*ed with other crimes% where the penalty prescri"ed "y law imprisonment e*ceedin# si* 1! years or a fine e*ceedin# -hp /%999 when the offender7s position is "elow those enumerated a"o&e. 1.2 5ll other offenses where the imposa"le penalty prescri"ed "y law is imprisonment e*ceedin# si* 1! years or a fine e*ceedin# -hp 1%999 "ut no more than -hp /%999 or "oth% re#ardless of other imposa"le accessory% or other penalties% includin# the ci&il lia"ilty arisin# from such offense or predicated thereon% irrespecti&e of .ind% nature% &alue or amount thereof. 21 1., 2ffenses in&ol&in# dama#e to property throu#h criminal ne#li#ence only% where the imposa"le fine e*ceeds -hp 19%999.22 2. @otes 2.1 AImposa"le -enaltiesA refers to the penalty prescri"ed "y law for the offenses char#ed and not the penalty actually imposed on the accused after the plea of #uilty on trial.

21 22

5P 5l3. 129, Se2. 32. Su**ar# Rule+, Se2. 1.5, in rela"ion "o 5P 5l3. 129, Se2. 32.

-6-

2.2 5ny circumstances which may affect criminal lia"ility must not "e considered. The jurisdiction in court in a criminal case is determined "y the penalty imposa"le% not the penalty ultimately imposed.2, E*amples+ i! Juan is char#ed with serious physical injuries resultin# in deformity under 5rticle 21,% para#raph , of the (e&ised -enal Code which prescri"ed a penalty of prision correccional in its medium and ma*imum periods ran#in# from si* 1! months and one 1! day to four /! years and two 2! months. The fact that the <unicipal Court is of the opinion that the penalty to "e imposed should only "e arresto mayor would not place the case under the >ummary (ules. ii! If Juan is char#ed under 5rticle 21, para#raph 2 of the (e&ised -enal Code with the person injured ha&in# lost the use of an arm% the penalty prescri"ed for such offense is prision correccional in its medium and ma*imum periods ran#in# from two 2! years% four /! months and one 1! day to si* 1! years. The case falls under the jurisdiction of the (e#ional Trial Court. The fact that the (e#ional Trial Court Jud#e is of the opinion that the penalty to "e actually imposed should only "e two 2! years and four /! months would not di&est the (e#ional Trial Court of its jurisdiction since it is the penalty prescri"ed "y law that determines jurisdiction. 2., AImposa"le accessory penaltiesA refers to the accessory penalties accompanyin# 1! prision correccional prescri"ed in 5rticle /1% (e&ised -enal Code (-C!; 2! arresto mayor prescri"ed in 5rticle /2 and ,! confiscation and forfeiture of the proceeds and instruments of the crime prescri"ed in 5rticle /0% (-C. 2./ 2ther imposa"le penalties The additional penalty for ha"itual delin)uency is not considered in determinin# which court shall ha&e jurisdiction o&er a criminal case "ecause such delin)uency is not a crime.2/ 2.0 Ci&il lia"ility irrespecti&e of &alue or amount :here the offense char#ed is within the e*clusi&e competence of the municipal trial court "y reason of the penalty imprisonment% etc.!% it shall ha&e jurisdiction to try and decide the case e&en if the ci&il lia"ility such as actual% compensatory% etc.! claimed e*ceeds -hp 29%999.20 2.1 Ci&il lia"ility irrespecti&e of .ind of nature :here the offense char#ed is within its e*clusi&e competence "y reason of the penalty prescri"ed therefor% a municipal trial court shall ha&e jurisdiction to try and decide the cases irrespecti&e of the .ind or nature of the ci&il lia"ility arisin# from the said offense.

23 24 25

$uevarra v. l*o!ovar, $. R. No. 75256, Januar# 26, 19.9, 169 SCR 476. 5. P. 5l3. 129; El Pueblo de Filipinas v. San Juan, 69 P%il. 347 &1940'.

5. P. 5l3. 129, Se2. 32( )ni"e! S"a"e+ v. 5ernar!o, 19 P%il. 265 &1911'( Le3a!o+ v. ,e $u-*an, $. R. No. 35.25, 7e1ruar# 20, 19.9, 170 SCR 357.

-7-

E*ample+ 5 municipal trial court has jurisdiction o&er a case of simple seduction defined and penali;ed under 5rticle ,,6 of the (e&ised -enal Code% as amended% with arresto mayor, re#ardless of the ci&il lia"ility% such as support and ac.nowled#ment of the offsprin#% that may "e imposed under 5rticle ,/0 of the same code. *. Dama,e !o Pro&er!2 T#rou,# Criminal Ne,li,ence 5rticle ,10 of the (e&ised -enal Code% as amended% pro&ides that when criminal ne#li#ence shall ha&e resulted only in dama#e to property of another% the offender shall "e punished "y a fine ran#in# from an amount e)ual to the &alue of the said dama#es to three ,! times such &alue% which shall in no case "e less than -hp 20. 5ccordin#ly+ 1. :here the amount or &alue of the dama#e to property alle#ed in the complaint or information does not e*ceed -hp ,%,,,.,,% the municipal trial court shall try and decide the case o"ser&in# the >ummary (ules. @ote+ Three ,! times the said &alue does not e*ceed -hp 19%999. 2. :here the amount or &alue of the dama#e to property alle#ed in the complaint or information is one ran#in# from -hp ,%,,/ to -hp 1%111.11% a municipal trial court shall try and decide the case o"ser&in# (e#ular (ules. @ote+ Three ,! times the said &alue e*ceeds -hp 19%999. The >ummary (ules are not applica"le to 'atas 'l#. 22 where the penalty of imprisonment prescri"ed e*ceeds the procedural limit of si* 1! months pro&ided in the >ummary (ules. ). S&ecial Juri dic!ion in Cer!ain Ca e In the a"sence of all (e#ional Trial Jud#e in a pro&ince or city% any <etropolitan Trial Jud#e% <unicipal Trial Jud#e% <unicipal Circuit Trial Jud#e may hear and decide petitions for a writ of habeas corpus or applications for "ail in criminal cases in the pro&ince or city where the a"sent (e#ional Trial Jud#es sit.21

26

5P 5l3. 129, Se2. 35.

-8-

3. Prosecution o O enses
1. In !i!u!ion O$ Criminal Ac!ion 1. -rosecution of offenses is instituted either "y complaint or information. The complaint or information shall "e in writin#% in the name of the -eople of the -hilippines and a#ainst all persons who appear to "e responsi"le for the offense in&ol&ed. 23 5 complaint is a sworn written statement char#in# a person with an offense% su"scri"ed "y the offended party% any peace officer% or other pu"lic officer char#ed with the enforcement of the law &iolated.265n information is an accusation in writin# char#in# a person with an offense% su"scri"ed "y the prosecutor and filed with the court. 28 2. Criminal actions shall "e instituted as follows+ 2.1 $or offenses where a preliminary in&esti#ation is re)uired pursuant to section 1 of (ule 112% "y filin# the complaint with the proper officer for the purpose of conductin# the re)uisite preliminary in&esti#ation. ,9 E*cept as pro&ided in section 3 of (ule 119% a preliminary in&esti#ation is re)uired to "e conducted "efore the filin# of a complaint or information for an offense where the penalty prescri"ed "y law is at least four /! years% two 2! months and one 1! day without re#ard to the fine. ,1 2.2 $or all other offenses% "y filin# the complaint or information directly with the <unicipal Trial Courts and <unicipal Circuit Trial Courts% or the complaint with the office of the prosecutor. In <anila and other chartered cities% the complaint shall "e filed with the office of the prosecutor unless otherwise pro&ided in their charters. ,2 The institution of the criminal action shall interrupt the runnin# of the period of prescription of the offense char#ed unless otherwise pro&ided in special laws. ,, ,. :ho must prosecute criminal actions 5ll criminal actions commenced "y a complaint or information shall "e prosecuted under the direction and control of the prosecutor. Fowe&er% in <unicipal Trial Courts or <unicipal Circuit Trial Courts when the prosecutor assi#ned thereto or to the case is not a&aila"le% the offended party% any peace officer% or pu"lic officer char#ed with the enforcement of the law &iolated may prosecute the case. This
27 2.

Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 110, Se2. 2. Ibid, Se2. 3. 29 Ibid, Se2. 4. 30 Ibid, Se2. 1. 31 Ibid, Rule 112, Se2. 1. 32 Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 110, Se2. 1. 33 Ibid.

-9-

authority shall cease upon actual inter&ention of the prosecutor or upon ele&ation of the case to the (e#ional Trial Court.,/ /. Inter&ention of 2ffended -arty :here the ci&il action for reco&ery of ci&il lia"ility is instituted in the criminal action pursuant to (ule 111% the offended party may inter&ene "y counsel in the prosecution of the offense.,0 0. -rosecution of -ri&ate Crimes The crimes of adultery and concu"ina#e shall not "e prosecuted e*cept upon a complaint filed "y the offended spouse. The offended party cannot institute criminal prosecution without includin# the #uilty parties% if "oth are ali&e% nor% in any case% if the offended party has consented to the offense or pardoned the offenders. The offenses of seduction% a"duction and acts of lasci&iousness shall not "e prosecuted e*cept upon a complaint filed "y the offended party or her parents% #randparents or #uardian% nor% in any case% if the offender has "een e*pressly pardoned "y any of them. If the offended party dies or "ecomes incapacitated "efore she can file the complaint 4 and she has no .nown parents% #randparents or #uardian% the >tate shall initiate the criminal action in her "ehalf. The offended party% e&en if a minor% has the ri#ht to initiate the prosecution of the offenses of seduction% a"duction and acts of lasci&iousness independently of her parents% #randparents% or #uardian% unless she is incompetent or incapa"le of doin# so. :here the offended party% who is a minor% fails to file the complaint% her parents% #randparents% or #uardian may file the same. The ri#ht to file the action #ranted to parents% #randparents% or #uardian shall "e e*clusi&e of all other persons and shall "e e*ercised successi&ely in the order herein pro&ided% e*cept as stated in the precedin# para#raph. @o criminal action for defamation which consists in the imputation of any of the offenses mentioned a"o&e shall "e "rou#ht e*cept at the instance of and upon complaint filed "y the offended party. The prosecution for &iolation of special laws shall "e #o&erned "y the pro&isions thereof.,1 2. Di !inc!ion (e!5een con!rol o$ &ro ecu!ion and con!rol o$ cour! 1. Control "y -rosecution 1.1 :hat case to file,3 1.2 :hom to prosecute,6

34 35

Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 110, Se2. 5. Ibid, Se2. 16. 36 Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 110, Se2. 5. 37 People v. Pine!a, No. L-26222, Jul# 21, 1967, 20 SCR 74.. 3. People v. ,evara+, $. R. No+. 10093.-9, ,e2e*1er 15, 1993, 22. SCR 4.2.

- 10 -

1., <anner of prosecution,8 1./ (i#ht of -rosecution to withdraw Information "efore arrai#nment e&en without notice and hearin#/9 2. Control "y Court 2nce Case is $iled 2.1 >uspension of 5rrai#nment/1 2.2 (ein&esti#ation/2 2., -rosecution "y $iscal/, 2./ 4ismissal// ,. Cimitations on Control "y Court ,.1 -rosecution entitled to notice of hearin#. /0 ,.2 Court must await result of petition for re&iew. /1 ,., -rosecution7s stand to maintain prosecution should "e respected "y court /3 ,./ =ltimate test of court7s independence is where the fiscal files a motion to dismiss or to withdraw information./6 ,.0 Court has authority to re&iew power of judicial re&iew! the >ecretary7s recommendation and reject it if there is #ra&e a"use of discretion. /8 The (esolution of the >ecretary of Justice may "e appealed to the 2ffice of the -resident only in offenses punisha"le "y death or reclusion perpetua.5 ,.1 To reject or #rant motion to dismiss% the court must ma.e own independent assessment of e&idence.01
39 40

People v. Na-areno, $. R. No. 103964, u3u+" 1, 1996, 260 SCR 256. $alve- v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, $. R. No. 114046, 42"o1er 24, 1994, 237 SCR 6.5. 41 Cre+po v. Mo3ul, No. L-53373, June 30, 19.7, 151 SCR 462. 42 /ela+=ue- v. )n!er+e2re"ar# o0 Ju+"i2e, $. R. No. ..442, 7e1ruar# 1, 1990, 1.2 SCR 3... 43 S"a. Ro+a Minin3 Co. v. >a1ala, No. L-44723, u3u+" 31, 19.7, 153 SCR 367. 44 ,un3o3 v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, No. L-775.0-51, Mar2% 25, 19.., 159 SCR 145. 45 Repu1li2 v. Sun3a, No. L-3.634, June 20, 19.., 162 SCR 191. 46 Mar2elo v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, $. R. No. 106695, u3u+" 4, 1994, 235 SCR 39( Ro1er"+ v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, $. R. No. 113930, Mar2% 5, 1996, 254 SCR 307( ,i*a"ula2 v. /illon, $. R. No. 12707, 42"o1er 12, 199., 297 SCR 679( Solar ;ea* 6n"er"ain*en", 8n2. v. ?o@, $. R. No. 140.63, u3u+" 22, 2000. 47 People v. Mon"e+a, $. R. No. 114302, Sep"e*1er 29, 1995, 24. SCR 641. 4. Ro1er"+ v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, supra, no"e 45. 49 Le!e+*a v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, $. R. No. 113216, Sep"e*1er 5, 1997, 27. SCR 656( Solar ;ea* 6n"er"ain*en", 8n2. v. ?o@, supra, no"e 45. 50 Pere- v. ?a3ono# Rural 5anA, $. R. No. 126210, Mar2% 9, 2000. 51 Mar"ine- v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, $. R. No. 1123.7, 42"o1er 13, 1994, 237 SCR 575( Ro1er"+ v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, supra, no"e 45( Le!e+*a v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, supra, no"e 4.( Pere- v. ?a3ono# Rural 5anA, supra, no"e 50( Jalan!oni v. Se2re"ar# o0 Ju+"i2e, $. R. No+. 115239-40, Mar2% 2, 2000.

- 11 -

,.3 Jud#ment is &oid if there is no independent assessment and findin# of #ra&e a"use of discretion02 %. Te !in, Su$$icienc2 O$ Com&lain! Or In$orma!ion 5 complaint or information is sufficient if it states the name of the accused; 0, the desi#nation of the offense #i&en "y the statute;0/ the acts or omissions complained of as constitutin# the offense;00 the name of the offended party; 01 the appro*imate date of the commission of the offense;03 and the place where the offense was committed.06 :hen an offense is committed "y more than one person% all of them shall "e included in the complaint or information.08 D. S!ric! Scru!in2 in 6einou Crime 1. Cause of the accusation The acts or omissions complained of as constitutin# the offense and the )ualifyin# and a##ra&atin# circumstances must "e stated in ordinary and concise lan#ua#e and not necessarily in the lan#ua#e used in the statute "ut in terms sufficient to ena"le a person of common understandin# to .now what offense is "ein# char#ed as well as its )ualifyin# and a##ra&atin# circumstances and for the court to pronounce jud#ment.19
". -ursuant to >ection 11 of the amendatory statute% the death penalty may "e imposed in rape cases under the last para#raph of 5rticle ,,0 of the (e&ised -enal Code% when the rape is committed with any of the followin# attendant circumstances7 1. :hen the &ictim is less than ei#hteen 16! years of a#e and the offender is a parent% ascendant% step-parent% #uardian% relati&e "y consan#uinity or affinity within the third ci&il de#ree% or the common-law spouse of the parent of the &ictim. 2. :hen the &ictim is under the custody of the police or military authorities. ,. :hen the rape is committed in full &iew of the hus"and% parent% any of the children or other relati&e within the third de#ree of consan#uinity. /. :hen the &ictim is a reli#ious or a child "elow se&en 3! years old. 0. :hen the offender .nows that he is afflicted with 5c)uired Immune 4eficiency >yndrome 5I4>! disease. 1. :hen committed "y any mem"er of the 5rmed $orces of the -hilippines or the -hilippine @ational -olice or any law enforcement a#ency. 3. :hen "y reason on the occasion of the rape% the &ictim has suffered permanent physical mutilation.11
52 53

Le!e+*a v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, supra, no"e 49( Solar ;ea* 6n"er"ain*en" v. ?o@, supra, no"e 46. Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 110, Se2. 7. 54 Ibid, Se2. .. 55 Ibid, Se2. 9. 56 Ibid, Se2. 6. 57 Ibid, Se2. 11. 5. Ibid. 59 Ibid, Se2. 6. 60 Ibid, Se2. 9. 61 + a*en!e! 1# Rep. 2" No. 7659, Se2. 11.

- 12 -

The need to alle#e )ualifyin# circumstances to justify findin# of )ualified rape and the imposition of death penalty was stressed in se&eral cases. The additional attendant circumstances introduced "y (ep. 5ct @o. 3108 should "e considered as special )ualifyin# circumstances distinctly applica"le to the crime of rape% and if not pleaded as such% could only "e appreciated as #eneric a##ra&atin# circumstances. 12 :ithout alle#ation of relationship in cases of statutory rape% proof alone of relationship unless specifically alle#ed in the information would not warrant imposition of the death penalty.1, Thus4 the concurrence of the minority of the &ictim and her relationship of the offender is a special )ualifyin# circumstance which should "oth "e alle#ed 1/ and pro&ed10 with certainty in order to warrant the imposition of the death penalty. In these cases complainant ne&er said she was "elow ei#hteen 16! years of a#e when she was alle#edly raped "y her father on any of the dates stated in the complaint.11 :here the information alle#ed the accused% who is the stepfather of complainant% succeeded in ha&in# carnal .nowled#e of the latter who was then "elow ei#hteen 16! years of a#e% the e&idence shows that the accused is not the complainant7s stepfather "ecause he and complainant7s mother were not really married "ut only li&ed in common law relationship. Thus% althou#h a hus"and is su"ject to punishment "y death in case he commits rape a#ainst his wife7 s dau#hter% the death penalty cannot "e imposed "ecause the relationship alle#ed in the information is different from that actually pro&en. 13 3. Du&lici!2 o$ !#e O$$en e and Con!inuin, Crime 1. Du&lici!2 o$ !#e o$$en e 5 complaint or information must char#e only one offense% e*cept when the law prescri"es a sin#le punishment for &arious offenses.16 2. Con!inuin, Crime 7 T#e Princi&le o$ Deli!o Con!inuado San!ia,o ". Garc#i!orena E. (. @o. 198211% 4ecem"er 2% 188,% 226 >C(5 21/
The ori#inal Information char#ed petitioner with performin# a sin#le criminal act ? that of her appro&in# the application for le#ali;ation of aliens not )ualified under the law to enjoy such pri&ile#e. The ,2 5mended Informations reproduced verbatim the alle#ation of the ori#inal Information% e*cept that instead of the word AaliensA in the ori#inal Information% each amended Information states the name of the indi&idual whose stay was le#ali;ed. The ,2 5mended Informations char#e what is .nown as delito continuado or Acontinued crimeA and sometimes referred to as Acontinuous crimeA.

62 63

People v. $ar2ia, $. R. No. 120093, Nove*1er 6, 1997, 2.1 SCR 463. People v. Pere-, $. R. No. 122764, Sep"e*1er 24, 199., 296 SCR 17( People v. 5ola"e"e, $. R. No. 127570, 7e1ruar# 13, 1999, 303 SCR 709( People v. !e la Cue+"a, $. R. No. 126134, Mar2% 2, 1999, 304 SCR .3( People v. *1ra#, $. R. No. 127177, 7e1ruar# 25, 1999, 303 SCR 697. 64 People v. Can"o+, $. R. No. 12929., pril 14, 1999, 305 SCR .76. 65 People v. Man33a+in, $. R. No. 130599-60, pril 21, 1999, 306 SCR 22.. 66 People v. Ma3len"e, $. R. No+. 1124559-66, pril 30, 1999, 306 SCR 546. 67 People v. Man33a+in, supra, no"e 65. 6. Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 110, Se2"ion 13

- 13 -

$or !uello !alon, the delito continuado to e*ist there should "e a plurality of acts performed durin# a period of time; unity of penal pro&ision &iolated; and unity of criminal intent or purpose% which means that two or more &iolations of the same penal pro&isions are united in one and the same intent or resolution leadin# to the perpetration of the same criminal purpose or aim. 5ccordin# to Eue&arra% in appearance% a delito continuado consists of se&eral crimes "ut in reality there is only one crime in the mind of the perpetrator.

2.1 E*amples of 4elito Continuado 2.1.1 The sin#le larceny rule a. The theft of 1, cows "elon#in# to two different owners committed "y the accused at the same place and at the same period of time; 18 ". The theft of si* roosters "elon#in# to two different owners from the same coop and at the same period of time;39 c. The theft of two roosters in the same place and on the same occasion; 31 d. The ille#al char#in# of fees for ser&ices rendered "y a lawyer e&ery time he collects &eterans7 "enefits on "ehalf of a client% who a#reed that the attorney7s fees shall "e paid out of said "enefits; 32 e. Ille#al appro&al of the application for the le#ali;ation of stay of ,2 aliens% constitutes only one crime.3, 2.1.2 The concept of delito continuado was not applied in the followin# cases+ a. Two estafa cases% one of which was committed durin# the period from January 18 to 4ecem"er 1880 and the other from January 1801 to July 1801. The said acts were committed on two different occasions. 3/ ". >e&eral mal&ersations committed in <ay% June and July% 18,1% and falsifications to conceal the same offenses committed in 5u#ust and 2cto"er 18,1. The mal&ersations and falsifications Awere not the result of only one purpose or of only one resolution to em"e;;le and falsify ***.A 30 c. Two estafa cases% one committed in 4ecem"er 181, in&ol&in# the failure of the collector to turn o&er the installments for a radio and the other in June 181/ in&ol&in# the poc.etin# of the installments for a sewin# machine.31 d. 30 estafa cases committed "y the con&ersion "y the a#ent of collections from customers of the employer made on different dates. 33
69 70

People v. ;u*lo+, 67 P%il. 320 &1939'. People v. Jaranilla, No. L-2.547, 7e1ruar# 22, 1974, 55 SCR 563. 71 People v. ,e Leon, 49 P%il. 437 &1926'. 72 People v. Sa11un, No. L-1.510, Januar# 31, 1964, 10 SCR 156. 73 San"ia3o v. $ar2%i"orena, $. R. No. 109266, ,e2e*1er 2, 1993, 22. SCR 214 74 People v. ,i2%upa, 113 P%il. 306 &1961'. 75 People v. Ci!, 66 P%il. 354 &193.'. 76 People v. Le!e+*a, No. L-415522, Sep"e*1er 29, 1976, 73 SCR 77. 77 $a*1oa v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, No. L-41054, Nove*1er 2., 1975, 6. SCR 30..

- 14 -

e. (o""ery and fencin# are two separate crimes. -rinciple of Delito !ontinuado is not applica"le.36 f. In a sin#le Information for murder for shootin# three persons where e&idence did not show that a sin#le shot had slain three different persons% the appellant was properly held lia"le for three separate murders and sentenced to three separate penalties of reclusion perpetua."# #. >e&eral &ictims dyin# from separate shots constitute separate offenses and if there is no o"jection for duplicity% the accused should "e con&icted of all offenses char#ed in one Information.69 It is not the act of pressin# the tri##er li.e a Thompson su"machine #un that determines the num"er of felonies committed% "ut the num"er of "ullets which actually produced them.61 The firin# of se&eral "ullets "y the accused althou#h resultin# from one continuous "urst of #unfire% constitutes se&eral acts. Each person fell "y different shots% is a &ictim of a separate crime of murder. 62 %. E8ce&!ion !o Rule On Du&lici!2 The rule on duplicity of offenses does not apply where the law prescri"es a sin#le penalty for &arious offenses such as a comple* crime under 5rticle /6 of the (e&ised -enal Code or special comple* crime such as (o""ery with Fomicide or with (ape or (ape with Fomicide% or (e"ellion comple*ed with <urder% (o""ery and Gidnappin#. 1. Rule on Com&le8 Crime The precise lan#ua#e of the statute used in alle#in# the commission of the crime is not necessary as lon# as in char#in# the commission of a comple* offense li.e that of (o""ery with Fomicide% the information alle#es each element of the component offenses with the same precision that would "e necessary if they were made the su"ject of a separate prosecution.6, Thus% althou#h the phrase "y reason or on occasion of the ro""ery as pro&ided for "y the (e&ised -enal Code% was not literally used in the recital of facts alle#in# the commission of the two crimes of (o""ery with Fomicide% the Information as filed sufficiently and distinctly alle#es the commission of the two crimes of ro""ery and homicide and ade)uately informs the accused of the crime char#ed.6/ =nder 5rticle /6 of the (e&ised -enal Code% when a sin#le act constitutes two or more #ra&e or less #ra&e felonies% or when an offense is a necessary means for committin# the other% the penalty for the most serious crime shall "e imposed% the same to "e applied in its ma*imum period.

7. 79

Ibid. People v. ?u1ilo, $. R. No. 101741, Mar2% 23, 1993, 220 SCR 3.9( People v. Co3onan, $. R. No. 9454., 42"o1er 4, 1996, 262 SCR 693 .0 People v. ,u2a#, $. R. No. .6939, u3u+" 2, 1993, 225 SCR 1. .1 People v. ;a1a2o, $. R. No+. 1003.2-5, Mar2% 19, 1997, 270 SCR 32 2i"in3 Re#e+ 8 Revi+e! Penal Co!e 655 &1993'. .2 Ibid. .3 People v. /i2"or, $. R. No+. 75154-55, 7e1ruar# 6, 1990, 1.1 SCR .1.. .4 Ibid.

- 15 -

The throwin# of a hand #renade at the -resident with the intention of .illin# him resultin# in the death and injuries of se&eral persons constitutes the comple* crime of <urder with 5ttempted <urder.60 $or a criminal complaint or Information to char#e the commission of a comple* crime% the alle#ations contained therein do not necessarily ha&e to char#e a comple* crime as defined "y law. It is sufficient that the information contains alle#ations which state that one offense was a necessary means to commit the other. The information in )uestion in the present case contains alle#ations properly char#in# the commission of the comple* crime of incriminatory machinations throu#h unlawful arrest% and the court a $uo committed error when it ordered its dismissal.61 3. No Du&lici!2 In Ra&e 9i!# 6omicide There is no duplicity in an Information for (ape with Fomicide. 63 :here se&en persons committed (ape with Fomicide in conspiracy with each other% e&ery one of the se&en accused may separately "e char#ed for rape with homicide. 66 *. No Du&lici!2 In C#ar,e O$ Estafa There is no duplicity in a char#e of estafa committed "y the accused for misappropriation of the purchase price of se&eral lots owned "y the Fometrust Corporation which were fraudulently recei&ed "y the accused a#ainst se&en lot "uyers on the prete*t that she was authori;ed to do so and which she misapplied to her personal use instead of remittin# the money to the owner corporation. The crime of estafa committed a#ainst the corporation and those committed a#ainst the lot "uyers are definitely separate felonies. They were dictated "y different criminal intents% committed under different modes of commission pro&ided "y the law on estafa% perpetrated "y different acts% consummated on different occasions% and caused injury to different parties.68 ). Ille,al Po e ion o$ :irearm and Unla5$ul ;illin, 5i!# !#e U e T#ereo$

In case Fomicide or <urder is committed with the use of unlicensed firearm% such use of unlicensed firearm shall "e merely considered as a##ra&atin#. 89 (.5. 628/ amended -4 @o. 1611 a"andoned pre&ious rulin#s that )ualified use of firearms and murder are separate offenses. =nder the present rule% the unauthori;ed use of licensed or unlicensed firearm is simply an a##ra&atin# circumstance in the commission of homicide or murder and no lon#er a separate offense% effecti&ely modifyin# People v. %ui&ada and its pro#eny. 81 Thus% is has "een held that the principle of a"sorption does not apply to ille#al possession of firearms in connection with the crime of >u"&ersion "ut simply descri"es the mode or manner "y which the &iolation of >ection 1 of -.4. 1611 was committed so as to )ualify the
.5 .6

People v. $uillen .5 P%il. 307 &1950'. People v. la3ao, No. L-20721, pril 30, 1966, 16 SCR .79. .7 San2%e- v. ,e*e"riou, $. R. No+. 111771-77, Nove*1er 9, 1993, 227 SCR 627. .. Ibid. .9 8la3an v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, $. R. No. 119617, ,e2e*1er 29, 1994, 239 SCR 575. 90 People v. 7elo"eo, $.R. No. 124212, June 5, 199., 290 +CR 627. 91 $.R. No+. 11500.-09, Jul# 24, 1996, 259 SCR 191 &1996'( People v. Molina, $.R. No. 115.35-36, Jul# 22, 199., 292 +CR 742.

- 16 -

penalty of death.82 The char#e should therefore "e amended to simple Ille#al -ossession of $irearm% and was accordin#ly deemed amended "y the >upreme Court. 8, It should% howe&er% "e noted that under e*istin# laws (ep. 5ct no. 628/!% if Fomicide or <urder is committed with the use of an unlicensed firearm% such use of unlicensed firearm shall "e considered merely as an a##ra&atin# circumstance and cannot "e the su"ject of a separate prosecution.8/ It does not% howe&er% mean that there can no lon#er "e any prosecution for the crime of ille#al possession of firearm. In #eneral% all pendin# cases in&ol&in# ille#al possession of firearm should continue to "e prosecuted and tried if no other crimes e*pressly indicated in (epu"lic 5ct @o. 628/ are in&ol&ed murder or homicide under >ection 1 and re"ellion% insurrection% sedition or attempted coup d7etat under >ection ,!. 80 <. Rec=le Im&rudence Ca e

(ec.less imprudence resultin# in sli#ht physical injuries and dama#e to property is not a comple* crime and cannot "e the su"ject of a sin#le information% they are separate offenses su"ject to distinct penalties.81 The two offenses may% howe&er% "e consolidated since under the e*panded jurisdiction of the municipal trial courts% dama#e to property throu#h rec.less imprudence now falls under its jurisdiction.83 +. Amendmen! or Su( !i!u!ion 5 complaint or information may "e amended% in form or in su"stance% without lea&e of court% at any time "efore the accused enters his/her plea. 5fter the plea and durin# the trial% a formal amendment may only "e made with lea&e of court and when it can "e done without causin# prejudice to the ri#hts of the accused. Fowe&er% any amendment "efore plea% which down#rades the nature of the offense char#ed in or e*cludes any accused from the complaint or information% can "e made only upon motion "y the prosecutor% with notice to the offended party and with lea&e of court. The court shall state its reasons in resol&in# the motion and copies of its order shall "e furnished all parties% especially the offended party. If it appears at any time "efore jud#ment that a mista.e has "een made in char#in# the proper offense% the court shall dismiss the ori#inal complaint or information upon the filin# of a new one char#in# the proper offense in accordance with section 18% (ule 118% pro&ided the accused shall not "e placed in dou"le jeopardy. The court may re)uire the witnesses to #i&e "ail for their appearance at the trial. 86

1. Pro ecu!ion o$ Ci"il Ac!ion


92 93

Rep. 2" No. 1700 @a+ repeale! 1# Rep. 2" No. 7636. People v. Pi*en"el, $.R. No. 100210, pril 1, 199., 2.. SCR 542. 94 People v. Molina, supra, No"e 91. 95 People v. /al!e-, $.R. No. 127663, Mar2% 11, 1999, 304 SCR 611. 96 Reo!i2a v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, $. R. No. 125066, Jul# ., 199., 292 SCR .7 2i"in3 Lon"oA v. $or3onio, Jr., No. L-37396, pril 30, 1979, .9 SCR 632. 97 Rep. 2" No. 7691, Se2. 2.
9. Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 110, Se2. 14.

- 17 -

1. -a ic Rule Rule o$ Cour!4 Rule 111 'nstitution of criminal and civil actions. ?
a! :hen a criminal action is instituted% the ci&il action for the reco&ery of ci&il lia"ility arisin# from the offense char#ed shall "e deemed instituted with the criminal action unless the offended party wai&es the ci&il action% reser&es the ri#ht to institute it separately or institutes the ci&il action prior to the criminal action. The reser&ation of the ri#ht to institute separately the ci&il action shall "e made "efore the prosecution starts presentin# its e&idence and under circumstances affordin# the offended party a reasona"le opportunity to ma.e such reser&ation. :hen the offended party see.s to enforce ci&il lia"ility a#ainst the accused "y way of moral% nominal% temperate% or e*emplary dama#es without specifyin# the amount thereof in the complaint or information% the filin# fees therefore shall constitute a first lien on the jud#ment awardin# such dama#es. :here the amount of dama#es% other than actual% is specified in the complaint or information% the correspondin# filin# fees shall "e paid "y the offended party upon the filin# thereof in court. E*cept as otherwise pro&ided in these (ules% no filin# fees shall "e re)uired for actual dama#es. @o counterclaim% cross-claim or third-party complaint may "e filed "y the accused in the criminal case% "ut any cause of action which could ha&e "een the su"ject thereof may "e liti#ated in a separate ci&il action. "! The criminal action for &iolation of 'atas -am"ansa 'l#. 22 shall "e deemed to include the correspondin# ci&il action. @o reser&ation to file such ci&il action separately shall "e allowed. =pon filin# of the aforesaid joint criminal and ci&il actions% the offended party shall pay in full the filin# fees "ased on the amount of the chec. in&ol&ed% which shall "e considered as the actual dama#es claimed. :here the complaint or information also see.s to reco&er li)uidated% moral% nominal% temperate or e*emplary dama#es% the offended party shall pay additional filin# fees "ased on the amounts alle#ed therein. If the amounts are not so alle#ed "ut any of these dama#es are su"se)uently awarded "y the court% the filin# fees "ased on the amount awarded shall constitute a first lien on the jud#ment. :here the ci&il action has "een filed separately and trial thereof has not yet commenced% it may "e consolidated with the criminal action upon application with the court tryin# the latter case. If the application is #ranted% the trial of "oth actions shall proceed in accordance with in section 2 of this (ule #o&ernin# consolidation of the ci&il and criminal actions.

The 2999 (ules on Criminal -rocedure deems as instituted with the criminal action only the ci&il lia"ility arisin# from the offense char#ed. The ci&il lia"ility is deemed instituted ? not merely AimpliedlyA instituted ? with the institution of the criminal action. The independent ci&il actions under 5rticles ,2% ,,,% ,/ and 2131 of the Ci&il Code are no lon#er deemed or impliedly instituted with the criminal action or considered as wai&ed e&en if there is no reser&ation. The reser&ation applies only to the ci&il lia"ility arisin# from the offense char#ed. The employer may no lon#er "e held ci&illy lia"le for $uasi(delict in the criminal action as ruled in )aniago v. !ourt of *ppeals,## San 'ldefonso +ines, 'nc. v. !ourt of *ppeals, and all other similar cases% since $uasi(delict is not deemed instituted with the criminal. If at all% the only ci&il lia"ility of the employer in the criminal action would "e his/her su"sidiary lia"ility under the (e&ised -enal Code. The rule has also done away with third party complaints and counterclaims in criminal actions. Third-party complaints and counterclaims in criminal actions ha&e to "e &entilated in a separate ci&il action. 2. Ci"il Ac!ion No! -a ed on Crime No! E8!in,ui #ed
99 100

$.R. No. 104392, 7e1ruar# 20, 1996, 253 SCR 674. $.R. No. 119771, pril 24, 199., 2.9 SCR 56..

- 18 -

5c)uittal in a criminal action "ars the ci&il action arisin# therefrom where the jud#ment of ac)uittal holds that the accused did not commit the criminal acts imputed to him. 191 The ci&il lia"ility that is deemed e*tin#uished is the ci&il lia"ility "ased on crime. 'ut not the ci&il lia"ility "ased on sources of o"li#ation other than the criminal offense althou#h arisin# from the same act or omission. 5rticle 28 of the Ci&il Code e*pressly pro&ides that when the accused in a criminal prosecution is ac)uitted on the #round that his/her #uilt has not "een pro&ed "eyond reasona"le dou"t% a ci&il action for dama#es for the same act or omission may "e instituted. >uch action re)uires only a preponderance of e&idence. The ci&il lia"ility therefor under 5rticles ,2% ,, ,/ and 2131 of the Ci&il Code or those where the source of ci&il o"li#ation is not "ased on the criminal offense is not affected "y the result of the criminal action. In other words% the e*tinction of the ci&il lia"ility referred to in par. e! of >ection ,% (ule 111% 181/ (ules! refers e*clusi&ely to the ci&il lia"ility founded on 5rticle 199 of the (e&ised -enal Code whereas the ci&il lia"ility for the same act considered as a )uasi-delict only and not as a crime is not e*tin#uished e&en "y a declaration in the criminal case that the criminal act char#ed has not happened or has not "een committed "y the accused. 'riefly stated% culpa a$uiliana includes &oluntary and ne#li#ent acts which may "e punisha"le "y law. It results% therefore% that the ac)uittal of (e#inald Fill in the criminal case has not e*tin#uished his/her lia"ility for $uasi(delict, hence that ac)uittal is not a "ar to the instant action a#ainst him.192 The only ci&il lia"ility that may thus "e imposed in a criminal action is that arisin# from and conse)uent to the criminal lia"ility of the accused on the principle that e&ery person criminally lia"le is also ci&illy lia"le.19, This includes restitution% reparation of dama#es caused and indemnification of conse)uential dama#es. 19/ Complementary thereto% are the su"sidiary ci&il lia"ility of inn.eepers% ta&ern .eepers and proprietor of esta"lishments% 190 employers% teachers% persons and corporations en#a#ed in any .ind of industry% for felonies committed "y their ser&ants% pupils% wor.men% apprentices% employees in the dischar#e of their duties.191 %. Criminal Ac!ion To Reco"er Ci"il Lia(ili!2 Ari in, :rom Delict and Ci"il Ac!ion -a ed on Quasi-Delict Ma2 Proceed Simul!aneou l2 5 separate ci&il action for dama#es lies a#ainst the offender in a criminal act% whether or not he is criminally prosecuted and found #uilty or ac)uitted% pro&ided that the offended party is not allowed% if he is actually char#ed also criminally% to reco&er dama#es on "oth sides% and would "e entitled in such e&entuality only to the "i##er award of the two% assumin# the awards made in the two cases &ary. 193 1. E8!inc!ion O$ T#e Penal Doe No! Carr2 9i!# I! E8!inc!ion O$ T#e Ci"il 'ut while e&ery person criminally lia"le is also ci&illy lia"le% the con&erse is not true. E*tinction of the penal does not carry with it e*tinction of the ci&il unless the e*tinction
101 102

Be+"ern 8n+"i"u"e o0 ;e2%nolo3# v. Sala+, $. R. No. 113032, u3u+" 21, 1997, 27. SCR 216. 6l2ano v. ?ill, No. L-24.03, Ma# 26, 1977, 77 SCR 9.. 103 Revi+e! Penal Co!e, r". 100. 104 Ibid, r". 104. 105 Ibid, r". 102. 106 Ibid, r". 103. 107 6l2ano v. ?ill, supra, no"e 102( Jaran"illa v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, $. R. No. .0194, Mar2% 21, 19.9, 171 SCR 429( 2e ?auler+ Corpora"ion v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, $. R. No. 127934, u3u+" 23, 2000.

- 19 -

proceeds from a declaration in a final jud#ment that the fact from which the ci&il mi#ht arise did not e*ist.196 >imilarly% a final jud#ment rendered in a ci&il action a"sol&in# the defendant from the ci&il lia"ility is no "ar to a criminal action 198 unless the ci&il action is a prejudicial )uestion which in&ol&es an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the criminal% the resolution of which determines whether or not the criminal action may proceed.119

1. PROCEDURAL C6EC;LISTS ON CRIMINAL PROCEDURE


10. 109

Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 111, Se2. 291:. Ibid, Se2. 5. 110 Ibid, Se2+. 6 an! 7.

- 20 -

1. :or Ca e Co,ni>a(le -2 T#e Munici&al Trial Cour! C#ec=li ! I Thin#s To Chec./4o =pon (eceipt 2f Complaint 2r Information 1. Chec. if the offense char#ed is within court7s jurisdiction. 2. If the offense is not within the court7s jurisdiction% dismiss complaint/information% unless the complaint presents a case for preliminary in&esti#ation "y the <unicipal Trial Court. -hen !ase is for Preliminary 'nvestigation 1. :hen the case is for preliminary in&esti#ation "y the <unicipal Trial Court% chec. the complaint as well as accompanyin# affida&its and other supportin# documents if there is #round to continue with the in)uiry. 1.1 If there is no such #round% dismiss the complaint. 1.2 If there is such #round% conduct preliminary in&esti#ation followin# the procedure in (ule 112% >ection ,. 2. :ithout waitin# for the conclusion of the preliminary in&esti#ation% the in&esti#atin# jud#e may issue a warrant of arrest% after conductin# an e*amination under oath of the complainant and his/her witnesses in the form of searchin# )uestions and answers to determine e*istence of pro"a"le cause and the necessity of placin# the respondent under immediate custody so as not to frustrate the ends of justice. @ote+ $or purposes of issuin# a warrant of arrest durin# preliminary in&esti#ation% it is mandatory that an e*amination in writin# and under oath "y searchin# )uestions and answers should "e conducted "y the in&esti#atin# jud#e. 111 2.1 If there is pro"a"le cause "ut no such Anecessity%A do not issue arrest warrant; only issue the subpoena to respondent% attachin# thereto a copy of the complaint% affida&its% and other supportin# documents with the directi&e to su"mit counter affida&its within ten 19! days from receipt of order. 2.1.1 Illustrati&e case+ :here no such AnecessityA e*ists The issuance of warrant of arrest "y the <unicipal Jud#e conductin# preliminary in&esti#ation is left to his/her sound jud#ment and discretion. The >upreme Court sustained Jud#e >amulde7s refusal to issue an arrest warrant% holdin# that under the applica"le rule% it is not o"li#atory% "ut merely discretionary% upon the in&esti#atin# jud#e to issue a warrant for the arrest of the accused% for the determination of whether a pro"a"le cause e*ists and whether it is necessary to arrest the accused in order not to frustrate the ends of justice% is left to his/her sound jud#ment or discretion. In this particular case% since the ro""ery char#e was offshoot of a "oundary dispute "etween the two property owners% the in&esti#atin# jud#e did not "elie&e there was any dan#er of the accused a"scondin# "efore
111

Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 112, Se2. 6 91:( 4r"i- v. Pala#pa#on, . M. No. M;J-93-.23, Jul# 25, 1994, 234 SCR 391.

- 21 -

the filin# of the information a#ainst him "y the fiscal% hence% he found no need to place him under immediate custody. 112 2.2 If% howe&er% his/her findin#s and recommendations are affirmed "y the pro&incial fiscal or city prosecutor or "y the 2m"udsman or his/her deputy% and the correspondin# information is filed% he shall issue a warrant of arrest. 11, ,. If there is possi"le cause and such AnecessityA% issue arrest warrant. -hen !ase is for .rial on the )erits 1. If the case presented "y complaint or information is within the jurisdiction of the <unicipal Trial Court% chec. if case is for Asummary procedureA or Are#ular procedure.A 1.1 >ummary -rocedure Cases 1.1.1 <a.e preliminary determination whether to dismiss case outri#ht for "ein# patently without "asis or merit or to re)uire further proceedin#s to "e ta.en. 1.1.2 :hen further proceedin#s are re)uired% set the case for immediate arrai#nment of the accused who is under custody and if he pleads not #uilty% render jud#ment forthwith; if he pleads not #uilty% he shall "e released without "ail unless he is a recidi&ist% fu#iti&e from justice% is char#ed with physical injuries% does not reside in the place where the &iolation of the law or ordinance was committed% or has no .nown residence. 1.2 (e#ular -rocedure Cases 1.2.1 If the case is commenced "y complaint or information% the procedure in section , a!% (ule 112 shall "e o"ser&ed; 1.2.2 If within ten 19! days from the filin# of the complaint or information% the jud#e after e&aluatin# the e&idence or after personally e*aminin# in writin# and under oath the complainant and his/her witnesses% the jud#e finds no pro"a"le cause he shall dismiss the case unless it is deemed necessary to re)uire su"mission of affida&its of witnesses to aid him in arri&in# at the conclusion as to the e*istence of pro"a"le cause which should "e done within ten 19! days from notice. 1.2., If the case is commenced "y complaint% the court may either e&aluate the supportin# affida&its or personally e*amine in writin# and under oath the complainant and his/her witnesses in the form of searchin# )uestions and answers to determine if there is pro"a"le cause; if there is% issue arrest warrant; otherwise% dismiss the case outri#ht. 1.2./ The court may% howe&er% opt not to issue a warrant of arrest or a commitment order if the accused had already "een arrested% and hold him for trial. Fowe&er% if the jud#e is satisfied that there is no necessity for placin# the accused under custody% he may issue a summons instead of a
112 113

Sa*ul!e v. Salvani. Jr., No. L-7.606, Sep"e*1er 26, 19.., 165 SCR 734. Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 113, Se2. 5 91:.

- 22 -

warrant of arrest. This refers only to cases which do not re)uire preliminary in&esti#ation.11/ 1.2.0 A>earchin# Iuestions and 5nswersA means only% ta.in# into consideration the purpose of the preliminary e*amination which is to determine whether there is a reasona"le #round to "elie&e that an offense has "een committed and the accused is pro"a"ly #uilty thereof so that a warrant of arrest may "e issued and the accused held for trial% such )uestions as ha&e tendency to show the commission of a crime and the perpetrator thereof. :hat would "e searchin# )uestions would depend on what is sou#ht to "e in)uired into% such as+ the nature of the offense% the date% time% and the place of its commission% the possi"le moti&es for its commission; the su"ject% his/her a#e% education% status% financial and social circumstances% his/her attitude toward the in&esti#ation% social attitudes% opportunities to commit the offense; the &ictim% his/her a#e% status% family responsi"ilities% financial and social circumstances% characteristics% etc. The points that are su"ject of in)uiry may differ from case to case. The )uestions% therefore% must to a #reat de#ree depend upon the jud#e ma.in# the in&esti#ation. 1.2.1 $orm of >earchin# Iuestions for >imple Theft The witness is duly sworn to and #i&es his/her name and other personal circumstances! I. - 5re you the same complainant in this complaint for simple theftJ 5. I. - 4escri"e the rin# alle#edly stolen from you. 5. I. ? :hen and how did you learn that your rin# was stolenJ 5. ? I. ? :hen and how did you come to .now the accusedJ 5. ? I. ? :here does the accused resideJ 5. ? I. ? 4o you .now the accused7s present wherea"outsJ 5. ?

114

Ibid, Rule 112, Se2. 9 91:.

- 23 -

I. ? Is the accused related to you "y "lood or marria#eJ 5. ? I. ? 4id you ha&e any .ind of dealin# with the accused "efore the date in )uestionJ If so% whatJ 5. ? I. ? 4o you .now of any reason why the accused would ta.e your rin# without your consentJ 5. ? I. ? 4o you owe the accused anythin#J 5. ? I. ? :hen and how did you ac)uire the rin#J 5. ? I. ? :hat is the appro*imate &alue of the rin#J 5. ? I. ? 4id you actually witness the ta.in# of your rin#J 5. ? I. ? >tate the name or names of the person or persons% if any% who .now the alle#ed theft. 5. ? I. ? 4o you wish to state anythin# elseJ 5. If the jud#e still finds no pro"a"le cause despite the additional e&idence% he shall% within ten 19! days from its su"mission or e*piration of said period% dismiss the case. :hen he finds pro"a"le cause% he shall issue a warrant of arrest% or a commitment order if the accused had already "een arrested% and hold him for trial. Fowe&er% if the jud#e is satisfied that there is no necessity for placin# the accused under custody% he may issue summons instead of a warrant of arrest. C#ec=li ! II Thin#s To Chec./4o 5fter The Issuance 2f 5rrest :arrant 5nd 'efore Trial >ta#e

- 24 -

1. If arrest warrant was properly released and a report has "een properly su"mitted "ut accused could not "e apprehended for a considera"le len#th of time% issue alias arrest warrant and order for archi&in# of case. 1.1 If report is su"mitted with accused "ein# arrested and he does not post "ail forthwith% issue correspondin# commitment pendin# trial and ha&e it ser&ed on warden or head of the jail or place of detention% alon# with the correspondin# notice to produce the accused "efore the court for arrai#nment on the date and time already fi*ed "y the court. 1.2 In case of a summary procedure case and accused is arrested under an arrest warrant issued for failure of accused to appear when re)uired per second para#raph >ection 19 of the >ummary (ule!% set case for immediate arrai#nment% the warden or head of the jail or place of detention li.ewise "ein# ser&ed with correspondin# commitment pendin# trial and notice to produce the accused for arrai#nment "efore the court. 1., If accused files "ail "ond% cash "ond deposit% or reco#ni;ance% chec. sufficiency of documentation% particularly the correspondin# si#natures on the re)uisite documents% and if in order% appro&e it and issue correspondin# release order for immediate ser&ice on officer concerned. 2. 5t the scheduled arrai#nment% jud#e shall inform accused who appears without counsel of his/her ri#ht to counsel and shall as. accused if he desires to ha&e one. 2.1 In proper cases% appoint counsel de oficio for the accused who appears without counsel. ,. 5rrai#nment must "e in open court; accused must "e furnished a copy of the complaint or information; accused must "e present at the arrai#nment and plea must "e made of record; if accused refuses to plead% or he ma.es a conditional plea of #uilty e.g., enterin# a plea of #uilt pro&ided the penalty to "e meted shall only "e a fine!% then enter a plea of not #uilty for the accused. /. If accused wants to plead #uilty to lesser offense% "oth prosecutor and offended party must consent thereto. 0. If accused pleads #uilty% impose correspondin# sentence% unless court desires to recei&e e&idence to determine penalty to "e imposed% includin# ci&il indemnity in the proper cases. 1. If the plea is not #uilty% set case for trial. 3. 5fter arrai#nment% as a measure to e*pedite the trial% where the accused and counsel a#ree% conduct a pre-trial conference% without impairin# the ri#hts of the accused% on the followin# matters% to wit+ a! plea "ar#ainin#; "! stipulation of facts; c! mar.in# for identification of parties e&idence; d! wai&er of o"jections to admissi"ility of e&idence; and% e! such other matters as will promote a fair and e*peditious trial. 3.1 5fter pre-trial% issue order recitin# the actions ta.en% the facts stipulated% and e&idence mar.ed.

- 25 -

3.2 Chec. if a#reement/s or admission/s made entered durin# pre-trial were properly reduced to writin# and duly si#ned "y the parties char#ed and their counsel.

-. :or Ca e Co,ni>a(le -2 T#e Re,ional Trial Cour! C#ec=li ! I

- 26 -

Thin#s To 4o =pon (eceipt 2f Complaint 2r Information =p To Issuance 2f The :arrant 2f 5rrest 1. Chec. if% on the face of the information/complaint% the court has jurisdiction o&er the case; otherwise% dismiss it and order the release of the accused if under detention insofar as the case is concerned. 2. Chec. if a claim for dama#es other than actual alle#ed in the information/complaint% and if in the affirmati&e% ascertain whether appropriate filin#/doc.et fee for said claim has "een paid to the cler. of court. If the re)uisite filin#/doc.et fees ha&e not "een paid at the time of the filin# of the information/complaint% issue an order to the offended party to pay the re)uisite filin#/doc.et fees within a reasona"le time. ,. If accused is detained% issue a commitment/detention order to the warden/jailers; if the accused is at lar#e% issue a warrant for his/her arrest% in accordance with the succeedin# steps. /. :hen warrant of arrest may issue :ithin ten 19! days from the filin# of the complaint or information% the jud#e shall personally e&aluate the resolution of the prosecutor and its supportin# e&idence. Fe may immediately dismiss the case if the e&idence on record clearly fails to esta"lish pro"a"le cause. If he finds pro"a"le cause% he shall issue a warrant of arrest% or a commitment order if the accused has already "een arrested pursuant to a warrant issued "y the jud#e who conducted the preliminary in&esti#ation or when the Complaint or Information was filed pursuant to section 3 of the (ule. In case of dou"t on the e*istence of pro"a"le cause% the jud#e may order the prosecutor to present additional e&idence within fi&e 0! days from notice and the issue must "e resol&ed "y the court within thirty ,9! days from the filin# of the complaint of information. 0. If not satisfied upon the filin# of information/complaint that pro"a"le cause e*ists% order the prosecutor to su"mit the records of the case and if "ased thereon% there is pro"a"le cause% issue a warrant of arrest. 2therwise% dismiss the case. 1. If the char#e is "aila"le% fi* the amount of "ail either in the commitment/detention order or warrant of arrest. C#ec=li ! II Incidents 5fter Issuance 2f :arrant 2f 5rrest 2r Commitment 2rder 1. 2nce the accused is arrested or otherwise ta.en into custody% issue a commitment order and set the case for arrai#nment. 2. :hen the accused is under pre&enti&e detention% his/her case shall "e raffled and its records transmitted to the jud#e to whom the case was raffled within three ,! days from the filin# of the information or complaint. The accused shall "e arrai#ned within ten 19! days from the date of the raffle. The pre-trial conference shall "e held within ten 19! days after arrai#nment.110 ,. =nless a shorter period is pro&ided "y special law or >upreme Court circular% the arrai#nment shall "e held within thirty ,9! days from the date the court ac)uires jurisdiction
115

Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 116, Se2. 1 9e:.

- 27 -

o&er the person of the accused. The time of the pendency of a motion to )uash or for a "ill of particulars or other causes justifyin# suspension of the arrai#nment shall "e e*cluded in computin# the period.111 /. If there is failure to e*ecute the warrant of arrest or no report is made within ten 19! days from receipt of the warrant "y the e*ecutin# officer% issue an alias arrest warrant and order the archi&in# of the case% furnishin# a copy of the said order to the complainant. 0. If "ail is a matter of ri#ht% and the accused files "ail% ascertain if all the re)uirements for the "ail are complied with% as follows+ 0.1 Cash 'ond 0.1.1 The official receipt or certificate of deposit of the amount of "ail fi*ed "y the court who filed the information/complaint% issued "y the #o&ernment officer concerned% is attached to records of the case. 0.1.2 The written underta.in#% e*ecuted "y the accused containin# all the conditions contained in >ection 2 of (ule 11/ of the (e&ised (ules on Criminal -rocedure% as amended% is attached to the records of the case. 0.2 Corporate >urety 0.2.1 -hotocopy of the Certification issued "y the >upreme Court% accompanied "y the photocopies of receipts of payment "y the surety company of the re)uisite fees to the >upreme Court is attached to the "ond. 0.2.2 Certificate of the Cler. of Court of the (e#ional Trial Court where the case is filed and pendin# showin# that the "ondin# company does not ha&e any pendin# o"li#ations/lia"ilities to the #o&ernment% consistin# of writs of e*ecution and/or confiscated "onds in criminal cases and that "ondin# company was issued a Certificate of 5uthority "y the Insurance Commission and presently updatin# its o"li#ation. 0.2., Certificate of 5uthority issued "y the Insurance Commission. 0., -roperty 'ond 0.,.1 5ffida&it of surety/ sureties ta.en "efore the jud#e or su"mitted to the jud#e% statin# therein that each of the sureties possesses the )ualifications as pro&ided for in >ection 12 of (ule 11/ of the 2999 (ules on Criminal -rocedure and descri"in# the property offered as "ond for the accused% the nature of the title of the property% the encum"rances thereon% the num"er and amount of other "onds entered into "y him/them and remainin# undischar#ed% and his/her/their other lia"ilities% if any. 0.,.2 2wner7s duplicate of the ori#inal Certificate of Title of the surety/sureties co&erin# the property offered as "ond% if re#istered under the Torrens system or% the 2wner7s copy of the declaration of (eal -roperty% if unre#istered.
116

Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 116, Se2. 1 93:( SC Cir2ular No. 3.-9..

- 28 -

0.,., Certificates of -ayment of (ealty Ta*es on the property offered as "ond. If the property is sufficient% and the re)uisite affida&it is su"mitted to the court% appro&e the "ond and order the accused to cause the annotation of the lien% within ten 19! days from the receipt "y the accused of the court% at the "ac. of the title to the property% if re#istered% or in the (e#istration 'oo.% if unre#istered% and on the correspondin# ta* declaration in the 2ffice of the -ro&incial and <unicipal 5ssessor concerned. =pon compliance "y the accused of order of the court% issue an order releasin# the accused from detention. 1. In either case% the accused should su"mit photo#raphs passport si;e! ta.en within the last si* 1! months showin# the face% the left and ri#ht profiles of the accused and attached to the records% and the written underta.in# containin# the conditions set forth in >ection 2 of (ule 11/ of the 2999 (ules on Criminal -rocedure% as amended. 3. If the accused fails to comply with the order of the court for the annotation of the lien and for the re#istration of the annotation% cancel the property "ond. 6. If the accused applies for release on reco#ni;ance% set the hearin# of the application and #i&e reasona"le notice of the hearin# to the prosecutor with the re)uirement to su"mit the comment and recommendation in the application. 6.1 4efinition of (eco#ni;ance 5n o"li#ation of record% entered into "efore some court or ma#istrate duly authori;ed to ta.e it% with the condition to do some particular act% the most usual condition in criminal cases "ein# the appearance of the accused for trial; a contract "etween the sureties and the >tate for the production of the principal at the re)uired time.113 6.2 (eco#ni;ance may "e allowed in the followin# instances+ 6.2.1 The char#e a#ainst the accused is for &iolation of a municipal or city ordinance% a li#ht felony and/or a criminal offense prescri"ed penalty for which is not hi#her than si* 1! months imprisonment and/or a fine of -hp 2%999% or "oth% pro&ided the accused has esta"lished% to the satisfaction of the court% the ina"ility to post the re)uired cash or "ail "ond. 6.2.2 :hen the accused has "een in custody for a period e)ual to or more than the possi"le ma*imum imprisonment of the offense char#ed to which he/she may "e sentenced. Fowe&er% if the ma*imum penalty to which the accused is sentenced is destierro, he shall "e released after thirty ,9! days of pre&enti&e imprisonment. 6.2., 5t the discretion of the Court% if the accused has "een in custody for a period e)ual to or more than the minimum of the principal penalty prescri"ed for the offense char#ed% without applyin# the Indeterminate >entence Caw or any modifyin# circumstances.

117

People v. 1ner .7 P%il. 566 &1950'.

- 29 -

6.2./ 5t the discretion of the court% and% upon recommendation of the 4epartment of >ocial :elfare and 4e&elopment 4>:4! or other a#ency or a#encies% if the accused is a youthful offender o&er nine 8! "ut under ei#hteen 16! years at the same time of the commission of the offense char#ed% in which case% the accused may "e released on his/her own co#ni;ance or to the custody of his/her parents or of a suita"le person who shall "e punisha"le for the appearance of the accused when re)uired. 8. :here the accused is char#ed with a capital offense which% under the law at the time of the application for "ail is punisha"le "y death or reclusion perpetua, and the accused files an application for "ail% #i&e reasona"le notice of the hearin# to the prosecutor or re)uire him to su"mit his/her recommendation. 19. If the prosecutor% where "ail is a matter of discretion% o"jects to the application of the accused for "ail% hold in a"eyance resolution of the application until the arrai#nment of the accused. 11. If the case is not dismissed and the accused is under arrest% order the 'ranch Cler. of Court to schedule the arrai#nment of the accused with notice to the complainant.

%. Common Procedure in :ir ! and Second Le"el Cour! C#ec=li ! I Thin#s To 4o 5t The 5rrai#nment 2f The 5ccused116
11.

Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 116.

- 30 -

1. The accused must "e arrai#ned "efore the court where the Complaint or Information was filed or assi#ned for trial. The arrai#nment shall "e made in open court "y the jud#e or cler. "y furnishin# the accused with a copy of the Complaint or Information% readin# the same in the lan#ua#e or dialect .nown to him% and as.in# him whether he pleads #uilty or not #uilty. The prosecution may call at the trial witnesses other than those named in the Complaint or Information. 2. The accused must "e present at the arrai#nment and must personally enter his/her plea. 'oth arrai#nment and plea shall "e made of record% "ut failure to do so shall not affect the &alidity of the proceedin#s. ,. 'efore the readin# of the Information% where the accused is not assisted "y counsel de parte, inform him/her of his/her ri#ht to counsel of his own choice and in)uire from him if he/she desires to en#a#e his/her own counsel. =nless the accused is allowed to defend himself in person% and the accused is amena"le to a counsel de oficio, appoint a competent and responsi"le counsel de oficio for him. /. :hene&er a counsel de oficio is appointed "y the court to defend the accused at the arrai#nment% he shall "e #i&en a reasona"le time to consult with the accused as to his/her plea "efore proceedin# with the arrai#nment. 0. :hen the accused refuses to plead or ma.es a conditional plea% a plea of not #uilty shall "e entered for him. 1. :hen the accused pleads #uilty "ut presents e*culpatory e&idence% his/her plea shall "e deemed withdrawn and a plea of not #uilty shall "e entered for him. 3. The pri&ate offended party shall "e re)uired to appear at the arrai#nment for purposes of plea-"ar#ainin#% determination of ci&il lia"ility% and other matters re)uirin# his/her presence. In case of failure of the offended party to appear despite due notice% the court may allow the accused to enter a plea of #uilty to a lesser offense which is necessarily included in the offense char#ed with the conformity of the trial prosecutor alone. 118 =nless the ci&il action has "een reser&ed% wai&ed or otherwise instituted ahead% reset the case for the reception of e&idence to determine the ci&il lia"ility and the imposa"le penalty. 6. -lea of #uilty to a lesser offense 5t arrai#nment% the accused% with the consent of the offended party and the prosecutor% may "e allowed "y the trial court to plead #uilty to a lesser offense which is necessarily included in the offense char#ed. 5fter arrai#nment "ut "efore trial% the accused may still "e allowed to plead #uilty to said lesser offense after withdrawin# his/her plea of not #uilty. @o amendment of the complaint or information is necessary. 129 8. -lea of #uilty to capital offense; reception of e&idence :hen the accused pleads #uilty to a capital offense% the court a! shall conduct a searchin# in)uiry into the &oluntariness and full comprehension of the conse)uences of his/her plea and "! shall re)uire the prosecution to pro&e his/her #uilt and the precise de#ree of culpa"ility. The accused may present e&idence in his/her "ehalf. 19. -lea of #uilty to non-capital offense; reception of e&idence% discretionary
119 120

SC Cir2ular No. 1-.9. SC Cir2ular No. 3.-9., Se2. 4.

- 31 -

:hen the accused pleads #uilty to a non-capital offense% the court may recei&e e&idence from the parties to determine the penalty to "e imposed. 11. :ithdrawal of impro&ident plea of #uilty 5t any time "efore the jud#ment of con&iction "ecomes final% the court may permit an impro&ident plea of #uilty to "e withdrawn and "e su"stituted "y a plea of not #uilty. 12. If a A@ot EuiltyA plea is entered% schedule the pre-trial of the case with due notice to the offended party/arrestin# officer. 1,. If the accused is under pre&enti&e detention% the pre-trial conference of the case shall "e held within ten 19! days after arrai#nment. 1/. In other cases% unless a shorter period is pro&ided "y special law or >upreme Court circular% the arrai#nment shall "e held within thirty ,9! days from the date the court ac)uires jurisdiction o&er the person of the accused. The time of the pendency of a motion to )uash or for a "ill of particulars or other causes justifyin# suspension of the arrai#nment shall "e e*cluded in computin# the period.121 10. If the accused appears to "e sufferin# from an unsound mental condition which effecti&ely renders him/her una"le to fully understand the char#e a#ainst him/her and to plead intelli#ently thereto% suspend the arrai#nment and order the accused7s mental e*amination; and if necessary% accused7s confinement for such purpose. 11. =pon motion of the accused% suspension of his/her arrai#nment may "e allowed on any of the followin# #rounds+ 11.1 The accused appears to "e sufferin# from an unsound mental condition which effecti&ely renders him una"le to fully understand the char#e a#ainst him and to plead intelli#ently thereto. In such case% the court shall order his/her mental e*amination and% if necessary% his/her confinement for such purpose. 11.2 There e*ists a prejudicial )uestion. 11., 5 petition for re&iew of the resolution of the prosecutor is pendin# at either the 4epartment of Justice% or the 2ffice of the -resident; provided, that the period of suspension shall not e*ceed si*ty 19! days counted from the filin# of the petition with the re&iewin# office. @ote+ In People v. *licando,,// the >upreme Court held that a con&iction in capital offenses cannot rest alone on a plea of #uilt. The trial court must re)uire the prosecution to pro&e the #uilt of the appellant and the precise de#ree of his/her culpa"ility "eyond reasona"le dou"t.

121 122

SC Cir2ular No. 3.-9., Se2. 2. People v li2an!o, $. R. No. 1174.7, ,e2e*1er 12, 1995, 251 SCR 293.

- 32 -

C#ec=li ! II -re-Trial Pre(trial0 mandatory in criminal cases. ? In all criminal cases co#ni;a"le "y the Sandiganbayan, (e#ional Trial Court% <etropolitan Trial Court% <unicipal Trial Court in Cities% <unicipal Trial Court and <unicipal Circuit Trial Court% the court shall% after arrai#nment and within thirty ,9! days from the date the court ac)uires jurisdiction o&er the person of the accused% unless a shorter period is pro&ided for in special laws or circulars of the >upreme Court% order a pre-trial conference to consider the followin#+

- 33 -

a! plea "ar#ainin#; "! stipulation of facts; c! mar.in# for identification of e&idence of the parties; d! wai&er of o"jections to admissi"ility of e&idence; e! modification of the order of trial if the accused admits the char#e "ut interposes a lawful defense; and f! such matters as will promote a fair and e*peditious trial of the criminal and ci&il aspects of the case.12, Thin#s To 4o 4urin# The -re-Trial Conference 1. 4etermine and consider with the parties and counsel mutually satisfactory plea"ar#ainin# arran#ements% such% as for e*ample% the followin#+ 1.1 for the accused to chan#e his/her plea to a lesser or different offense in return for the dismissal of other count/s with or without credit% for the plea of #uilty as a miti#atin# circumstance; or 1.2 for the accused to chan#e his/her plea of not #uilty to that of #uilty to one or some of the counts of a multi-count indictment in return for the dismissal of other count/s with or without credit for the plea of #uilty as a miti#atin# circumstance; or 1., for the accused to chan#e his/her plea of not #uilty to that of #uilty to the offense char#ed% in return for the offended party7s wai&er of the whole or part of the ci&il lia"ility or dama#es; or 1./ for the accused to chan#e his/her plea of not #uilty to that of #uilty plea to the offense char#ed% in return for the elimination of one% some% or all of the #eneric a##ra&atin# circumstances alle#ed in the information/complaint; or 1.0 for the accused to plea "ar#ain on the nature% duration or the amount of the imposa"le penalty within the allowa"le ran#e. -hen .here 's Plea Bargaining 1. The accused and his/her counsel shall manifest that they a#ree to enter into plea "ar#ainin# on any of the forms a"o&e-descri"ed. If the prosecution and offended party a#ree to the plea offered "y the accused% the court issues an order ma.in# on record the plea "ar#ainin# arri&ed at and duly implemented. 2. In case of any such chan#e of plea to one of #uilty% proceed to recei&e e&idence on the ci&il aspect "efore renderin# jud#ment% unless the offended party wai&es ci&il action or his/her claim for ci&il lia"ility or dama#es% reser&es the ri#ht to institute the ci&il action separately% or has instituted the ci&il action "efore the criminal action.
123

Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 11., Se2. 1( SC Cir2ular No. 3.-9., Se2+. 2 an! 3.

- 34 -

,. (ender and promul#ate jud#ment of con&iction% includin# therein% in the proper case% the ci&il lia"ility or dama#es duly esta"lished "y the e&idence. -hen .here 's 1o Plea Bargaining 1. Cause the mar.in# for identification of the parties respecti&e e*hi"it/s% if any% 2. 4etermine and consider with the parties and counsel such stipulation of facts% admission% and/or a#reement as may "e feasi"le% such as% for e*ample+ 2.1 the identity of the accused; 2.2 the court7s territorial jurisdiction relati&e to the offense/s char#ed; 2., the )ualification of e*pert-witness/es; 2./ the amount of dama#es; 2.0 the #enuineness and due e*ecution of documents; and/or% 2.1 the cause of death or injury in proper cases. 2. If con&enient% forthwith cause to "e reduced into writin# and duly si#ned "y the parties% particularly "y the accused and his/her counsel% such stipulation% admission% and/or a#reement as may "e directly related to any essential element of the offense/s char#ed. 2therwise% incorporate admissions% a#reements% stipulations in the pre-trial order to "e issued after the pre-trial conference% and re)uire the parties and counsel to si#n the same. ,. 4etermine and consider with the parties and counsel the followin# and such other matters as will promote a fair and e*peditious trial% to wit+ ,.1 the num"er of witnesses to "e presented; ,.2 the appro*imate num"er of hours that will "e re)uired "y the parties for the presentation of their respecti&e e&idence; and ,., the specific trial dates needed to complete e&idence presentation "y all the parties which must "e within a period of three ,! months from the first trial. /. $i* the trial dates for the parties7 presentation of their respecti&e e&idence inclusi&e of e&idence in-chief and re"uttin# e&idence% and cause the parties and their respecti&e counsel to affi* their si#natures in the minutes to si#nify their a&aila"ility on the scheduled dates. 0. (e)uire the parties to su"mit to the "ranch cler. "efore lea&in# the court premises the names and addresses of witnesses that need to "e summoned "y subpoena, so that the necessary subpoena may "e issued on time. Counsel or their representati&es may "e allowed to ser&e the subpoenas to insure ser&ice thereof and the su"mission of the returns on time. 1. -re-trial a#reement

- 35 -

5ll a#reements or admissions made or entered durin# the pre-trial conference shall "e reduced in writin# and si#ned "y the accused and counsel; otherwise% they cannot "e used a#ainst the accused. The a#reements co&erin# the matters referred to in section 1 of this (ule shall "e appro&ed "y the court.12/ 3. @on-appearance at pre-trial conference If the counsel for the accused or the prosecutor does not appear at the pre-trial conference and does not offer an accepta"le e*cuse for his/her lac. of cooperation% the court may impose proper sanctions or penalties.120 6. -re-trial order 5fter the pre-trial conference% the court shall issue an order recitin# the actions ta.en% the facts stipulated% and e&idence mar.ed. >uch order shall "ind the parties% limit the trial to matters not disposed of% and control the course of the action durin# the trial% unless modified "y the court to pre&ent manifest injustice. 121

C#ec=li ! III :hat To 4o 5fter -re-Trial To Initial Trial 1. Cause subpoena to "e issued+ Subpoena ad testificandum may "e si#ned "y the cler. or "ranch cler. of court. 'ut subpoena duces tecum must "e si#ned "y the jud#e who must determine that the su"ject thereof is prima facie rele&ant!. 2. If petition for "ail is filed "y the accused who is char#ed with an offense punisha"le "y death or reclusion perpetua+
124 125

Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 11., Se2. 2( SC Cir2ular No. 3.-9., Se2. 4. Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 11., Se2. 3( SC Cir2ular No. 3.-9., Se2. 5. 126 Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 11., Se2. 4.

- 36 -

2.1 >et the petition for hearin# and re)uire the prosecutor to comment thereon% either "y way of recommendation or opposition. >uch notice of hearin# should also "e ser&ed upon all other accused% if any. 2.2 If the prosecutor opposes the petition% allow him to present his/her e&idence to show that the prosecution7s a&aila"le e&idence is stron#. Fearin# may "e summary or otherwise. Cross-e*amination "y the petitioner and any other accused shall "e allowed. -etitioner shall also "e allowed to offer and present e&idence. >ummary hearin# is one that focuses on )uantity and character of proof in anticipation of that to "e presented at the re#ular trial% "ut not to "e mere sham or pretense. 123 2., E&en if the prosecutor recommends "ail or interposes no o"jection to the petition for "ail% the court must still set the case for hearin#. 2./ (esol&e the petition for "ail with a narration of the e&idence collecti&ely deemed either stron# or wea. to justify the conclusion made. 2.0 Indispensa"le re)uirements There must "e a hearin#.126 E&idence of #uilt must "e stron#. -rosecution must "e #i&en full opportunity to present e&idence.128 @ote+ The Court may not #rant "ail simply for non-appearance of the prosecution "ut should as. the prosecution such )uestions as would ascertain the stren#th of the state in e&idence and jud#e the ade)uacy of the "ail. 1,9 2.1. 4uties of a Jud#e in case an application for "ail for crimes punisha"le "y reclusion perpetua or hi#her In the li#ht of the applica"le rules on "ail and the jurisprudential principles just enunciated% the Court laid down the duties of the trial jud#e in case an application for "ail is filed+ 2.1.1 @otify the prosecutor of the hearin# of the application for "ail or re)uire him to su"mit his/her recommendation;1,1 2.1.2 Conduct a hearin# of the application for "ail re#ardless of whether or not the prosecution refuses to present e&idence to show that the #uilt of the
127 12.

42a*po v. 5erna1e, 77 P%il. 55 &1946'. 5a+2o v. Rapa"ala, . M. No. R;J-96-1335, Mar2% 5, 1997, 269 SCR 230. 129 People v. ,a2u!ao, $. R. No. .13.9, 7e1ruar# 21, 19.9, 170 SCR 4.9( People v. San ,ie3o, No. L29676, ,e2e*1er 24, 196., 26 SCR 522( People v. Calo, $. R. No. ..531, June 1., 1990, 1.6 SCR 620( Mora!o v. ;a#ao, . M. No. 93-.-1204R;C, 7e1ruar# 7, 1994, 229 SCR 723( Corpu+ v. Ma3lalan3, $. R. No. 7.162, pril 19, 1991, 196 SCR 41( l*eron v. San!i!o, . M. No. M;J-97-1142, Nove*1er 6, 1997, 2.1 SCR 415. 130 Li1rario+ v. ,a1alo+, . M. No. R;J-.9-2.6, Jul# 11, 1991, 199 SCR 4. 2i"e! in 5orina3a v. ;a*in, . M. No. R;J-93-936, Sep"e*1er 10, 1993, 226 SCR 206( urillo v. 7ran2i+2o, . M. R;J-93-1097, u3u+" 12, 1994, 235 SCR 2.3( 3uirre v. 5el*on"e, . M. No. R;J-93-1052, 42"o1er 27, 1994, 237 SCR 77.( San"o+ v. 4"ili!a, . M. No. R;J-94-1217, June 16, 1995, 245 SCR 56( ,e lo+ San"o+-Re#e+ v. Mon"e+a, . M. No. R;J-93-9.3, u3u+" 7, 1995, 247 SCR .5( ;a1ao v. 6+pina, R;J-96-13447, June 14, 1996, 257 SCR 29.. 131 Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 114, Se2. 1..

- 37 -

accused is stron# for the purpose of ena"lin# the court to e*ercise its sound discretion;1,2 2.1., 4ecide whether the e&idence of #uilt of the accused is stron# "ased on the summary of e&idence of the prosecution; 1,, 2.1./ If the #uilt of the accused is not stron#% dischar#e the accused upon the appro&al of the "ail"ond.1,/ 2therwise% petition should "e denied.1,0 TEN COMMANDMENTS :OR A JUDGE ON APPLICATIONS :OR -AIL 1. 4o not #rant "ail unless the accused is in le#al custody. 1,1 2. 4o not act on an application for "ail or set it for hearin# unless you ha&e jurisdiction o&er the person of the accused and of the case.1,3 ,. 4o not #rant "ail in non-"aila"le offenses without application and notice to the prosecutor and in "aila"le offenses without notice to or recommendation of prosecutor. 1,6 /. 4o not #rant "ail in non-"aila"le offenses without a hearin#. 1,8 E&en if the in&esti#atin# jud#e had #ranted "ail or the prosecutor in filin# the Information had recommended "ail.! 0. 4o not #rant "ail in non-"aila"le offenses without #i&in# the prosecution full opportunity to present its e&idence.1/9 1. 4o not #rant "ail in non-"aila"le offenses simply "ecause of the prosecution7s nonappearance. 1/1

132 133

Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 114, Se2+. 7 an! .. 5a#lon v. Si+on, . M. No. 92-7-360-0, pril 6, 1995, 243 SCR 2.4. 134 Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 114, Se2. 19. 135 5a+2o v. Rapa"alo, . M. No. 96-1335, Mar2% 5, 1997, 269 SCR 220 rei"era"e! in People v. Ca1ral, $. R. No. 131909, 7e1ruar# 1., 1999, 303 SCR 361. 136 7eli2iano v. Pa+i2olan, No. L-14567, Jul# 31, 1967, 2 SCR ...( Men!o-a v. C78 o0 <ue-on, No+. L35612-14, June 27, 1973, 51 SCR 369( Pa!eran3a v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, $. R. No. 115407, u3u+" 2., 1995, 247 SCR 741( 3uirre v. 5el*on"e, supra, no"e 130( ,e lo+ San"o+-Re#e+ v. Mon"e+a 247 SCR .5. 137 ,inapol v. 5al!a!o, . M. No. R;J-92-.9., u3u+" 5, 1993, 225 SCR 110( 5orina3a v. ;a*in, supra, no"e 130( 3uirre v. 5el*on"e, supra, no"e 130. 13. Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 114, Se2. 1.( C%in v. $u+"ilo, .M. No. R;J-94-1243, u3u+" 11, 1995, 247 SCR 175. 139 Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 114, Se2. 1.( 5orina3a v. ;a*in, supra, no"e 130, $o v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, pril 7, 1993, 221 SCR 397( People v. ,a2u!ao, $. R. No. .13.9, 7e1ruar# 21, 19.9, 170 SCR 4.9( People v. Ca+in3al, $. R. No. .7163, Mar2% 29, 1995, 243 SCR 37( Lar!i-a1al v. Re#e+, . M. No. M;J-94-.77, ,e2e*1er 5, 1994, 23. SCR 640( ;a1ao v. 6+pina, supra, no"e 130( San"o+ v. 4"ili!a supra, no"e 131. 140 People v. ,a2u!ao, supra, no"e 129( 5orina3a v. ;a*in, supra, no"e 130( $uiller*o v. Re#e+, 240 SCR 154( Ma*olo, Sr. v. Nari+*a, . M. No. M;J-96-1072, Januar# 31, 1996, 252 SCR 613( People v. Calo, $. R. No. ..531, June 1., 1990, 1.6 SCR 620. 141 5orina3a v. ;a*in , supra, no"e 130( Li1ario+ v. ,a1alo+, . M. No. R;J-.9-2.6, Jul# 11, 1991, 199 SCR 4.( 3uirre v. 5el*on"e, supra, no"e 130( 5a#lon v. Si+on, supra, no"e 133( ;u2a# v. ,o*a3a+, . M. No. R;J-95-12.6, Mar2% 2,1995, 242 SCR 110( Pa!eran3a v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, $. R. No. 115407, u3u+" 2., 1995, 247 SCR 741.

- 38 -

3. 4o not #rant "ail on appeal after the accused ha&e "een con&icted of a non-"aila"le offense1/2 or from a non-"aila"le offense to a "aila"le offense. This should "e addressed to the appellate court.1/, 6. 4o not #rant "ail when the penalty imposed "y the (e#ional Trial Court e*ceeds si* 1! years "ut not more than twenty 29! years where any of the circumstances mentioned in >ection 0% (ule 11/ are present.1// 8. 4o not #rant "ail after the jud#ment has "ecome final unless the accused has applied for pro"ation "efore commencin# to ser&e sentence% the penalty and the offense "ein# within the pur&iew of the pro"ation law. 1/0 19. 4o not #rant "ail after the accused had commenced to ser&e sentence. 1/1

C#ec=li ! I? Incidents 4urin# Trial What To Do When There Is Application To Discharge Accused To Be State Witness 1. 5pplica"le (ule+ >ection 13% (ule 118. 2. :hen applica"le
142

!*. Cir2ular No. 2-92( People v. ,ivina, $. R. No+. 93.0.-09, pril 7, 1993( 221 SCR 209( People v. 7uer"e+, $. R. No. 90643, June 25, 1993, 223 SCR 619( People v. Ni"2%a, $. R. No. 113517, Januar# 19, 1995, 240 SCR 2.3. 143 Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 114, Se2. 5. 144 Ibid. 145 Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 114, Se2. 24. 146 Ibid.

- 39 -

Two or more persons jointly char#ed with the commission of the offense. :hether to dischar#e more than one depends upon the need of the prosecutor and the discretion of the Jud#e.1/3 ,. :hen to apply =pon motion of the prosecution "efore restin# its case. 1/6 /. Thin#s the Court should do /.1 re)uire prosecution to present e&idence. Trial court should hold in a"eyance or defer its resolution on the motion until the prosecution had presented all its e&idence.1/8 /.2 re)uire su"mission of sworn statement of each proposed witness at a hearin# in support of the dischar#e and ascertain if the conditions fi*ed "y >ection 13 of (ule 118 are complied with% namely+ /.2.1 there is a"solute necessity for the testimony of the defendant whose dischar#e is re)uested.109 The prosecutor must show that there is a"solute necessity for the testimony of the defendant whose dischar#e he see.s% in order to "e a witness for the prosecution101 or the accused is the only one who has .nowled#e of the crime and not when his/her testimony would simply corro"orate or otherwise stren#then the e&idence in the hands of the prosecution.102 E*ample+ :here the prosecution itself admitted that one of the #o&ernment witnesses% named <ichael Ku testified that he saw and reco#ni;ed the accused% 4omin#o Can as one of those who committed the ro""ery% such testimony is direct e&idence of Can7s participation and clearly ne#ates the a"solute necessity of 4aria7s testimony in identifyin# Can as one of the perpetrators of the crime. If at all% 4aria7s testimony would "e merely corro"orati&e and not essential.10, /.2.2 there is no other direct e&idence a&aila"le for the proper prosecution of the offense committed% e*cept the testimony of said defendant. 10/ /.2., the testimony of said accused can "e su"stantially corro"orated in its material points.100
147 14.

People v. 5ae+a, 104 P%il. 136 &195.'. Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 119, Se2. 17. 149 7lore+ v. San!i3an1a#an, No. L-63677, u3u+" 12, 19.3, 124 SCR 409. 150 Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 119, Se2. 17 9a:. 151 7lore+ v. San!i3an1a#an, supra, no"e 149. 152 7lore+ v. San!i3an1a#an, supra, no"e 149; People v. niCon, No. L-39.03, Mar2% 16, 19.., 15. SCR 701( Lu3"u v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, $. R. No. 42037, Mar2% 21, 1990, 1.3 SCR 3... 153 Can v. $alin3, $. R. No. 5425., Nove*1er 27, 19.7, 155 SCR 663. 154 Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 119, Se2. 17 91:( People v. niCon, supra, no"e 152. 155 Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 119, Se2. 1792:.

- 40 -

/.2./ said accused does not appear to "e the most #uilty. 101 a. <eanin# of not the most #uilty not the least #uilty. 103The rule does not re)uire that he "e the Aleast #uiltyA "ut only that he not "e the Amost #uilty.A 106 ". 5"solute certainty is not re)uired. 108In comin# to his/her conclusion as to the Anecessity for the testimony of the accused whose dischar#e is re)uestedA; as to the Aa&aila"ility or nona&aila"ility of other direct or corro"orati&e e&idenceA; as to which of the accused is the Amost #uiltyA; and li.e% the jud#e must rely in a lar#e part upon the su##estions and information furnished "y the state prosecutors. 119 /.2.0 said accused has not at any time "een con&icted of any offense in&ol&in# moral turpitude. 111 a. Concept of moral turpitude <oral turpitude has "een descri"ed as an act of "aseness% &ileness and depra&ity in the pri&ate and social duty which a man owes to us fellowmen or to society in #eneral% 112done out of spirit of cruelty% hostility or re&en#e% 11,"ut there is also authority to the effect that an act is not done when it is prompted "y the sudden resentment of an injury calculated in no sli#ht de#ree to awa.en passion. 11/In the a"sence% therefore% of any e&idence to show the #ra&ity and the nature of the malicious mischief committed% or at least% the &alue of the property destroyed and/or the circumstances under which the act of destroyin# was committed% we should not ma.e haste in declarin# that the crime of malicious mischief in&ol&es moral turpitude. 110 ". E*amples of crimes in&ol&in# moral turpitude 2stafa% 111a"duction with consent% 113concu"ina#e. 116There is no moral turpitude for con&iction for or playin# mah&ong ,3# Effects of Discharge

156 157

Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 119, Se2. 179!:. Ibid, Se2. 69!:( People v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, No. L-55533, Jul# 31, 19.4, 131 SCR 107. 15. People v. 7al"a!o .4 P%il. .9 &1949'. 159 People v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, No. L-62..1, u3u+" 20, 19.3, 124 SCR 33.. 160 Ibid. 161 Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 119, Se2. 179e:. 162 Moore v. S"a"e 67 So. 7.9. 163 54 CJS 935. 164 54 CJS 935. 165 People v. Ja*ero, No. L-19.52, Jul# 29, 196., 24 SCR 206. 166 8n re 1e+a*i+, 102 P%il 11.2 &195.'. 167 8n re 5a+a 41 P%il. 275 &1920'. 16. 8n re 8+a!a 60 P%il. 915 &1934'. 169 C%ion3 v. Repu1li2 103 P%il 1114 &195.'.

- 41 -

1. E&idence adduced in support of the dischar#e shall automatically form part of the trial. 139 If the court denies the motion to dischar#e of the accused as state witness% his/her sworn statement shall "e inadmissi"le in e&idence. 131 2. 4ischar#e of accused operates as an ac)uittal and "ar to further prosecution for the same offense132 e*cept in the followin# cases+ 2.1 =nless accused fails or refused to testify a#ainst his/her co-accused in accordance with his/her sworn statement constitutin# the "asis of his/her dischar#e. 13, 2.2 $ailure to testify refers e*clusi&ely to defendant7s will or fault. 13/ 2., E*trajudicial Confession+ 5dmissi"ility; where an accused who turns >tate7s e&idence on a promise of immunity "ut later retracts and fails to .eep his/her part of the a#reement% his/her confession of his/her participation in the commission of the crime is admissi"le as e&idence a#ainst him. 130 ,. Erroneous or improper dischar#e of state witness does not affect the competency and )uality of the testimony of the dischar#ed defendant. 131 When A Motion/Petition To Suspend A Cri inal Action Based !pon The Alleged Pendenc" #f A Pre$udicial Question In A Ci%il Action Is &iled In The Cri inal Action 1. 5t the hearin# of the motion% as. the ad&erse party to comment on the motion if no such comment or opposition has not yet "een filed. 2. Thereafter% determine if a prejudicial )uestion e*ists. 5 prejudicial )uestion is a )uestion "ased on a fact distinct and separate from the crime "ut so intimately connected with it that it determines the #uilt or innocence of the accused. 133Its essential elements are+ a! the ci&il action in&ol&es an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the criminal action; "! the resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action may proceed; and c! the co#ni;ance of the prejudicial )uestion pertains to another tri"unal. 136 2.1 E*amples :here a man was char#ed with "i#amy "y his second wife% a ci&il action filed "y him a#ainst her for the annulment of their marria#e on the #round that he was forced to contract said su"se)uent marria#e is a prejudicial )uestion to the criminal action. 138The )uestion of &alidity of said marria#e cannot ordinarily "e decided in the criminal action for "i#amy "ut in the ci&il action for annulment. The annulment
170 171

Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 119, Se2. 17. Ibid. 172 Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 119, Se2. 1.. 173 Ibid. 174 People v. Men!iola .2 P%il. 740 &1949'. 175 People v. 5e1erino, No. L-23092, 42"o1er 29, 1977, 79 SCR 694. 176 People v. Ja*ero, supra, no"e 165( Man3u1a" v. San!i3an1a#an, No. L-60613, pril 20, 19.5, 135 SCR 732( Ra*o+ v. San!i3an1a#an, $. R. No. 5..76, Nove*1er 27, 1990, 191 SCR 671. 177 Men!iola v. Ma2a!ae3, No. L-16.74, 7e1ruar# 27, 1961, 1 SCR 593( 5eni"e- v. Con2ep2ion, 112 P%il. 105 &1961'. 17. People v. ra3on 94 P%il 357 &1954'. 179 >apan"a v. Mon"e+a No. L-14534, 7e1ruar# 2., 1962, 4 SCR 510.

- 42 -

on the aforesaid #round would pro&e that his act of contractin# that marria#e was in&oluntary; hence% no criminal lia"ility would attach. In a ci&il action "rou#ht "y plaintiff to annul the sale of land "y defendant to a third party ? the plaintiff alle#in# that the same land was pre&iously sold "y the defendant to him% "ut defendant raised the defense that his si#nature appearin# on the deed of sale to plaintiff has "een for#ed ? the )uestion of &alidity of the sale to plaintiff% to "e determined in the ci&il action% is prejudicial to the criminal action for 2stafa filed "y plaintiff a#ainst said defendant. 169 2.2 Elements of prejudicial )uestion The elements of a prejudicial )uestion are+ a! the pre&iously instituted ci&il action in&ol&es an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the su"se)uent criminal action% and "! the resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action may proceed. 161 The law limits a prejudicial )uestion to a pre&iously instituted ci&il action not to a su"se)uent one. 2., @ote also althou#h the present (ule does not specify who may file the motion or petition for suspension of the criminal proceedin#s on the #round of pendency of a prejudicial )uestion% any party ? the prosecutor% the accused% or the pri&ate prosecutor ? may file the petition. 162 2./ $inally% note that while such petition to suspend may "e filed in the office of the prosecutor or the court conductin# the preliminary in&esti#ation% it may "e filed "efore the court tryin# the criminal action only A"efore the prosecution rests.A 16, 5ccordin#ly% the petition should "e denied if it is filed after the prosecution has rested. If a petition to suspend is filed with the -rosecutor7s 2ffice% and the same is denied% the petition to suspend may "e a#ain filed "efore the Court. The determination of its finality is only pro&isional. What A 'udge Should Do If Accused Is (eported To )a%e Died *+, 1. 5scertain &eracity of report with su"mission of 4eath Certificate and Comment from prosecution. 2. If the accused dies "efore arrai#nment% the case shall "e dismissed without prejudice to any ci&il action the offended party may file a#ainst the estate of the deceased. 160 ,. The death of the accused after arrai#nment and durin# the pendency of the criminal action shall e*tin#uish the ci&il lia"ility arisin# from the delict.

1.0 1.1

Ra+ v. Ra+ul, No+. L-50441-42, Sep"e*1er 1., 19.0, 100 SCR 125. Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 111, Se2. 7. 1.2 7or"i2%-Cel!ran v. Cel!ran, No. L-22677, 7e1ruar# 2., 1967, 19 SCR 502. 1.3 Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 111, Se2. 6. 1.4 Revi+e! Penal Co!e, r". .9 91:. 1.5 Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 111, Se2. 4.

- 43 -

/. Fowe&er% the independent ci&il action instituted under section , of this (ule or which thereafter is instituted to enforce lia"ility arisin# from other sources of o"li#ation may "e continued a#ainst the estate or le#al representati&e of the accused after proper su"stitution or a#ainst said estate% as the case may "e. The heirs of the accused may "e su"stituted for the deceased without re)uirin# the appointment of an e*ecutor or administrator and the court may appoint a #uardian ad litem for the minor heirs. 0. 'efore orderin# su"stitution% direct counsel for the accused to inform court of the names and addresses of the decedent7s heirs or whether or not his/her estate is under administration and has a duly appointed administrator. 1. The court shall forthwith order said le#al representati&e or representati&es to appear and "e su"stituted within a period of thirty ,9! days from notice 3. The title of the case should "e amended to show its ci&il aspect "y includin# the name of the offended party as plaintiff and the le#al representati&e or heir of the accused su"stituted as defendant. 161 6. 5 final jud#ment entered in fa&or of the offended party shall "e enforced in the manner especially pro&ided in these rules for prosecutin# claims a#ainst the estate of the deceased. What A 'udge Should Do In Case A Motion &or Dis-ualification #r Inhi.ition Is &iled 5. The (ules of 4is)ualification and Inhi"ition 1. Code of Judicial Conduct
(ule ,.12. ? 5 jud#e should ta.e no part in a proceedin# where the jud#e7s impartiality mi#ht reasona"ly "e )uestioned. These cases include% amon# others% proceedin#s where+ a! The jud#e has personal .nowled#e of disputed e&identiary facts concernin# the proceedin#; "! The jud#e ser&ed as e*ecutor% administrator% #uardian% trustee or lawyer in the case or matters in contro&ersy% or a former associate of the jud#e ser&ed as counsel durin# their association% or the jud#e or lawyer was a material witness therein; c! The jud#e7s rulin# in a lower court is the su"ject of re&iew; d! The jud#e is related "y consan#uinity or affinity to a party liti#ant within the si*th de#ree or to counsel within the fourth de#ree; e! The jud#e .nows the jud#e7s spouse or child has a financial interest% as heir% le#atee% creditor% fiduciary% or otherwise% in the su"ject matter in contro&ersy or in a party to the proceedin#% or any other interest that could "e su"stantially affected "y the outcome of the proceedin#. In e&ery instance the jud#e shall indicate the le#al reason for inhi"ition. (ule ,.1,. ? 5 jud#e dis)ualified "y the terms of (ule ,.12 may% instead of withdrawin# from the proceedin#% disclose on the record the "asis of dis)ualification. If% "ased on such disclosure% the parties and lawyers independently of the jud#e7s participation% all a#ree in writin# that the reason for the inhi"ition is immaterial or insu"stantial% the jud#e may then participate in the proceedin#. The a#reement% si#ned "y all parties and lawyers% shall "e incorporated in the record of the proceedin#. 2. (ules of Court ? (ule 1,3
1.6

;orriDo+ v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, No. L-40336, 42"o1er 24, 1975, 67 SCR 394.

- 44 -

>ec. 1. Dis$ualification of &udges. ? @o jud#e or judicial officer shall sit in any case in which he% or his wife or child% is pecuniarily interested as heir% le#atee% creditor or otherwise% in which he is related to either party within the si*th de#ree of consan#uinity or affinity% or to counsel within the fourth de#ree% computed accordin# to the rules of the ci&il law% or in which he has "een e*ecutor% administrator% #uardian% trustee or counsel% or in which he has presided in any inferior court when his rulin# or decision is the su"ject of re&iew% without the written consent of all parties in interest% si#ned "y them and entered upon the record. 5 jud#e may% in the e*ercise of the sound discretion% dis)ualify himself from sittin# in a case% for just or &alid reasons other than those mentioned a"o&e. >ec. 2. 4b&ection that &udge dis$ualified, ho5 made and effect . ? If it "e claimed that an official is dis)ualified from sittin# as a"o&e pro&ided% the party o"jectin# to his competency may% in writin#% file with the official his o"jection% statin# the #rounds therefor% and the official shall thereupon proceed with the trial% or withdraw therefrom in accordance with his determination of the )uestion of his dis)ualification. Fis decision shall "e forthwith made in writin# and filed with the other papers in the case% "ut no appeal or stay shall "e allowed from% or "y reason of% his decision in fa&or of his own competence until after final jud#ment in the case.

'. 4istinction 'etween Eround $or 4is)ualification 2r Inhi"ition 5 #round for dis)ualification #i&es the jud#e no discretion% while #round for inhi"ition is addressed to the sound discretion of the jud#e. 163 C. If the jud#e dis)ualifies or inhi"its himself% the inhi"ition is a judicial matter which does not re)uire administrati&e action "y the >upreme Court e*cept under the situation discussed "elow+ 1. The jud#e should send the copy of his/her 2rder of Inhi"ition or 4is)ualification to the E*ecuti&e Jud#e for re-raffle of the case. 166 2. There should "e no e*chan#e of cases "etween the recusin# jud#e and the jud#e to whom the case is re-raffled. Fowe&er% appropriate adjustments must "e made in the raffle of cases so that the jud#e to whom the case is re-raffled should "e credited with one new case. 5nd the recusin# jud#e should "e assi#ned one additional case to offset the case that he re-raffled. 4. >u"mission for appro&al or notation to the >upreme Court of order of inhi"ition is re)uired where+ 1. The jud#e is in a sin#le sala seat and another jud#e from another seat has to "e desi#nated. 2. The jud#e is in a multiple sala seat and there is a conflict of opinion "etween the recusin# jud#e and the jud#e desi#nated on the propriety of inhi"ition or dis)ualification. 168 If the situation is not as descri"ed a"o&e% then the jud#e should merely send his/her order to the E*ecuti&e Jud#e for re-raffle in a multiple sala court. E. >i#nificant (ulin#s

1.7 1..

Pi*en"el v. Salan3a, No. L-29734, Sep"e*1er 1., 1967, 21 SCR 160. SC Cir2ular No. 10, Ma# 22, 19.7. 1.9 !*. Cir2ular No. 1, Januar# 2., 19...

- 45 -

1. Test in inhi"ition is whether the parties can "e assured that the case can "e heard with the cold neutrality of an impartial jud#e. 189 2. Jud#e must either recuse himself or proceed with the case; he cannot do "oth "y first disposin# of the case and then inhi"itin# himself. 181In sin#le sala courts% jud#es should e*ercise prudence and discretion to a&oid unnecessary pro"lems and waste of time resultin# in the transfer of the case to another sala. ,#/ ,. The mere filin# of an administrati&e case a#ainst respondent jud#e is not a #round for dis)ualifyin# him from hearin# the case% for if on e&ery occasion the party apparently a##rie&ed would "e allowed to either stop the proceedin#s in order to await the final decision on the desired dis)ualification% or demand the immediate inhi"ition of the jud#e on the "asis of his/her "ein# so char#ed% many cases would ha&e to "e .ept pendin# or perhaps there would not "e enou#h jud#es to handle all the cases pendin# in all the courts.
18,

/. 5 jud#e cannot sit any case in which he was a counsel without the written consent of all the parties in interest% si#ned "y them and entered upon the record. Fe cannot proceed just "ecause there was no o"jection from any of the parties. The rule is e*plicit that he must secure the written consent of all the parties% not a mere &er"al consent much less a tacit ac)uiescence. 18/ 0. The fact that the jud#e issued a writ of preliminary prohi"itory injunction on the )uestion of whether the carousel was an attracti&e nuisance% does not dis)ualify the jud#e from hearin# the case on the merits "ecause this is not yet a final determination. 5n ad&erse pro&isional rulin# does not dis)ualify a jud#e. 180

190 191

$u"ierre- v. San"o+ 112 P%il. 1.4 &1961'. ?a2ien!a 5eni"o v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, L-75297, u3u+" 12, 19.7, 153 SCR 46. 192 !*. Ma""er No. 90-.-1.63R;C, 42"o1er 4, 1990, Minu"e Re+olu"ion. 193 pari2io v. n!al, $. R. No+. .65.7-93, Jul# 25, 19.9, 175 SCR 659. 194 Loren-o v. Mar=ue-, . M. No. M;J-.7-123, June 27, 19.., 162 SCR 546. 195 M2,onal!E+ Corpora"ion v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, $. R. No. 9.699, Jul# 15, 1991. 9Minu"e Re+olu"ion, 7ir+" ,ivi+ion:

- 46 -

*. CONDUCTING T6E TRIAL 1. >upreme Court Circulars Circular %0++


5. .rial 1. =nless the doc.et of the court re)uires otherwise% not more than four /! cases shall "e scheduled for trial daily. 2. The -residin# Jud#e shall ma.e arran#ements with the prosecutor and the -u"lic 5ttorney7s 2ffice -52! so that a relief prosecutor and a -52 attorney are always a&aila"le in case the re#ular prosecutor or -52 attorneys are a"sent. ,. Contin#ency measures must li.ewise "e ta.en for any une*pected a"sence of the steno#rapher and other support staff assistin# in the trial. /. The issuance and ser&ice of subpoenae shall "e done in accordance with 5dministrati&e Circular @o. / dated 22 >eptem"er 1866. 0. The jud#e shall conduct trial with utmost dispatch% with judicious e*ercise of the court7s power to control trial proceedin#s to a&oid delay. 1. The jud#e must ta.e notes of the material and rele&ant testimonies of witnesses to facilitate his decisionma.in#.

- 47 -

3. The trial shall "e terminated within ninety 89! days from initial hearin#. 5ppropriate disciplinary sanctions may "e imposed on the jud#e and the lawyers for failure to comply with the re)uirement due to causes attri"uta"le to them. 6. Each party is "ound to complete the presentation of his e&idence within the trial dates assi#ned to him. 5fter the lapse of said dates% the party is deemed to ha&e completed the presentation of e&idence. Fowe&er% upon &erified motion "ased on compellin# reasons% the jud#e may allow a party additional trial dates in the afternoon; pro&ided that said e*tension will not #o "eyond the three-month limit computed from the first trial date e*cept when authori;ed in writin# "y the Court 5dministrator% >upreme Court.

5ll trial jud#es must strictly comply with Circular @o. ,6-86% entitled AImplementin# the -ro&isions of (epu"lic 5ct @o. 6/8, 5n 5ct to Ensure a >peedy Trial of 5ll Cases 'efore the >andi#an"ayan% (e#ional Trial Court% <etropolitan Trial Court% <unicipal Trial Court in Cities% <unicipal Trial Court% and <unicipal Circuit Trial Court% 5ppropriatin# $unds Therefor% and for 2ther -urposes!A issued "y the Fonora"le Chief Justice 5ndres (. @ar&asa on >eptem"er 10% 1886. 2. Com&liance 9i!# Period 1. 5s a constant reminder of what cases must "e decided or resol&ed% the jud#e must .eep a calendar of cases su"mitted for decision% notin# therein the e*act day% month and year when the 89-day period is to e*pire. 5s soon as a case is su"mitted for decision% it must "e noted in the calendar of the jud#e; moreo&er% the records shall "e duly collated with the e*hi"its and transcripts of steno#raphic notes% as well as the trial notes of the jud#e% and placed in the jud#e7s cham"er. 2. In criminal cases% the jud#e will do well to announce in open court at the termination of the trial the date of the promul#ation of the decision% which should "e set within 89 days from the su"mission of the case for decision. ,. 5ll Jud#es must scrupulously o"ser&e the period prescri"ed in >ection 10% 5rticle BIII of the Constitution. %. Per!inen! Rule 1. Time to prepare for trial 5fter a plea of not #uilty is entered% the accused shall ha&e at least fifteen 10! days to prepare for trial. The trial shall commence within thirty ,9! days from receipt of the pre-trial order. 181 2. Continuous trial until terminated; postponements Trial once commenced shall continue from day to day as far as practica"le until terminated. It may "e postponed for a reasona"le period of time for #ood cause. The court shall% after consultation with the prosecutor and defense counsel% set the case for continuous trial on a wee.ly or other short-term trial calendar at the earliest possi"le time so as to ensure speedy trial. In no case shall the entire trial period e*ceed one hundred ei#hty 169! days from the first day of trial% e*cept as otherwise authori;ed "y the >upreme Court. 183

196 197

SC Cir2ular 3.-9., Se2. 6. Cir2ular 3.-9., Se2. ..

- 48 -

The time limitations pro&ided under this section and the precedin# section shall not apply where special laws or circulars of the >upreme Court pro&ide for a shorter period of trial. ,. E*clusions The followin# periods of delay shall "e e*cluded in computin# the time within which trial must commence+ ,.1 5ny period of delay resultin# from other proceedin#s concernin# the accused% includin# "ut not limited to the followin#+ 1! delay resultin# from an e*amination of the physical and mental condition of the accused; 2! delay resultin# from proceedin#s with respect to other criminal char#es a#ainst the accused; ,! delay resultin# from e*traordinary remedies a#ainst interlocutory orders; /! delay resultin# from pre-trial proceedin#s; Provided, that the delay does not e*ceed thirty ,9! days; 0! delay resultin# from orders of inhi"ition% or proceedin#s relatin# to chan#e of &enue of cases or transfer from other courts; 1! delay resultin# from a findin# of the e*istence of a prejudicial )uestion; and 3! delay reasona"ly attri"uta"le to any period% not to e*ceed thirty ,9! days% durin# which any proceedin# concernin# the accused is actually under ad&isement. ,.2 5ny period of delay% resultin# from the a"sence or una&aila"ility of an essential witness. $or purposes of this su"para#raph% an essential witness shall "e considered a"sent when his wherea"outs are un.nown or his wherea"outs cannot "e determined "y due dili#ence. Fe shall "e considered una&aila"le whene&er his wherea"outs are .nown "ut his presence for trial cannot "e o"tained "y due dili#ence. ,., 5ny period of delay resultin# from the mental incompetence or physical ina"ility of the accused to stand trial. ,./ If the information is dismissed upon motion of the prosecution and thereafter a char#e is filed a#ainst the accused for the same offense% any period of delay from the date the char#e was dismissed to the date the time limitation would commence to run as to the su"se)uent char#e had there "een no pre&ious char#e. ,.0 5 reasona"le period of delay when the accused is joined for trial with a coaccused o&er whom the court has not ac)uired jurisdiction% or as to whom the time for trial has not run and no motion for separate trial has "een #ranted.

- 49 -

,.1 5ny period of delay resultin# from a continuance #ranted "y any court motu proprio% or on motion of either the accused or his counsel or the prosecution% if the court #ranted the continuance on the "asis of his findin#s set forth in the order that the ends of justice ser&ed "y ta.in# such action outwei#h the "est interest of the pu"lic and the accused in a speedy trial. 186 /. $actors for #rantin# continuance The followin# factors% amon# others% shall "e considered "y a court in determinin# whether to #rant a continuance under su"para#raph f! of >ection 8 of >C Circular ,6-86. /.1 :hether or not the failure to #rant a continuance in the proceedin# would "e li.ely to ma.e a continuation of such proceedin# impossi"le or result in a miscarria#e of justice; and /.2 :hether or not the case ta.en as a whole is so no&el% unusual and comple*% due to the num"er of accused or the nature of the prosecution or otherwise% that it is unreasona"le to e*pect ade)uate preparation within the periods of time esta"lished therein. In addition% no continuance under section , f! of this (ule shall "e #ranted "ecause of con#estion of the court7s calendar or lac. of dili#ent preparation or failure to o"tain a&aila"le witnesses on the part of the prosecutor. 188 0. Time limit followin# an order for new trial If the accused is to "e tried a#ain pursuant to an order for a new trial% the trial shall commence within thirty ,9! days from notice of the order% pro&ided that if the period "ecomes impractical due to una&aila"ility of witnesses and other factors% the court may e*tend it "ut not to e*ceed one hundred ei#hty 169! days from notice of said order for a new trial. 299 1. E*tended time limit @otwithstandin# the pro&isions of section 1 #!% (ule 111 and >ection 1% >C Circular @o. ,686 for the first twel&e-calendar-month period followin# its effecti&ity on >eptem"er 10% 1886% the time limit with respect to the period from arrai#nment to trial imposed "y said pro&ision shall "e one hundred ei#hty 169! days. $or the second twel&e-month period% the time limit shall "e one hundred twenty 129! days% and for the third twel&e-month period% the time limit shall "e ei#hty 69! days. 291 3. -u"lic attorney7s duties where accused is imprisoned If the pu"lic attorney assi#ned to defend a person char#ed with a crime .nows that the latter is pre&enti&ely detained% either "ecause he is char#ed with a "aila"le crime and has no means to post "ail% or is char#ed with a non-"aila"le crime% or is ser&in# a term of imprisonment in any penal institution% it shall "e his duty to do the followin#+

19. 199

SC Cir2ular 3.-9., Se2. 9. Ibid, Se2. 10. 200 SC Cir2ular 3.-9.., Se2. 11. 201 Ibid, Se2. 7.

- 50 -

3.1 >hall promptly underta.e to o"tain the presence of the prisoner for trial% or cause a notice to "e ser&ed on the person ha&in# custody of the prisoner re)uirin# such person to so ad&ise the prisoner of his ri#ht to demand trial. 3.2 =pon receipt of that notice% the custodian of the prisoner shall promptly ad&ise the prisoner of the char#e and of his ri#ht to demand trial. If at anytime thereafter the prisoner informs his custodian that he demands such trial% the latter shall cause notice to that effect to "e sent promptly to the pu"lic attorney. 3., =pon receipt of such notice% the pu"lic attorney shall promptly see. to o"tain the presence of the prisoner for trial. 3./ :hen the custodian of the prisoner recei&es from the pu"lic attorney a properly supported re)uest for the a&aila"ility of the prisoner for purposes of trial% the prisoner shall "e made a&aila"le accordin#ly. 292 6. >anctions In any case in which pri&ate counsel for the accused% the pu"lic attorney% or the prosecutor+ 6.1 Gnowin#ly allows the case to "e set for trial without disclosin# that a necessary witness would "e una&aila"le for trial; 6.2 $iles a motion solely for delay which he .nows is totally fri&olous and without merit; 6., <a.es a statement for the purpose of o"tainin# continuance which he .nows to "e false and which is material to the #rantin# of a continuance; or 6./ :illfully fails to proceed to trial without justification consistent with the pro&isions hereof% the court may punish such counsel% attorney% or prosecutor% as follows+ 1! 'y imposin# on a counsel pri&ately retained in connection with the defense of an accused% a fine not e*ceedin# -hp 29%999; 2! 'y imposin# on any appointed counsel de oficio% pu"lic attorney% or prosecutor a fine not e*ceedin# -hp 0%999; and ,! 'y denyin# any defense counsel or prosecutor the ri#ht to practice "efore the court tryin# the case for a period not e*ceedin# thirty ,9! days. The punishment pro&ided for "y this section shall "e without prejudice to any appropriate criminal action or other sanction authori;ed under these rules. 29, 8. (emedy where accused is not "rou#ht to trial within the time limit If the accused is not "rou#ht to trial within the time limit re)uired "y >ection 1 #!% (ule 111 and >ection 1% as e*tended "y >ection 1 of this rule% the information may "e dismissed on motion of the accused on the #round of denial of his ri#ht to speedy trial. The accused shall
202 203

SC Cir2ular 3.-9., Se2. 12. Cir2ular 3.-9., Se2. 13.

- 51 -

ha&e the "urden of pro&in# the motion "ut the prosecution shall ha&e the "urden of #oin# forward with the e&idence to esta"lish the e*clusion of time under section , of this rule. The dismissal shall "e su"ject to the rules on dou"le jeopardy. $ailure of the accused to mo&e for dismissal prior to trial shall constitute a wai&er of the ri#ht to dismiss under this section. 29/ 19. Caw on speedy trial not a "ar to pro&ision on speedy trial in the Constitution @o pro&ision of law on speedy trial and no rule implementin# the same shall "e interpreted as a "ar to any char#e of denial of the ri#ht to speedy trial #uaranteed "y section 1/ 2!% article III% of the 1863 Constitution. 290 11. 2rder of trial The trial shall proceed in the followin# order+ 1! The prosecution shall present e&idence to pro&e the char#e and% in the proper case% the ci&il lia"ility. 2! The accused may present e&idence to pro&e his defense and dama#es% if any% arisin# from the issuance of a pro&isional remedy in the case. ,! The prosecution and the defense may% in that order% present re"uttal and surre"uttal e&idence unless the court% in furtherance of justice% permits them to present additional e&idence "earin# upon the main issue. /! =pon admission of the e&idence of the parties% the case shall "e deemed su"mitted for decision unless the court directs them to ar#ue orally or to su"mit written memoranda. 0! :hen the accused admits the act or omission char#ed in the complaint or information "ut interposes a lawful defense% the order of trial may "e modified. 1. 6o5 To Deal 9i!# Accu ed@ Mo!ion :or E8amina!ion O$ 6i A6er 9i!ne Trial -e$ore

1. Chec. sufficiency of the motion% particularly as re#ards notice and ser&ice thereof% and the contents of the motion% .eepin# in mind that the #o&ernin# rule 291 re)uires the followin#+ 1.1 that there "e notice to all other parties+ 1.2 that the motion shall state+ 1! the name and residence of the witness; 2! the su"stance of his/her testimony; and ,! that the witness is so sic. or infirm as to afford reasona"le #round for "elie&in# that he will not "e a"le to attend the trial% or resides more than 199 .ilometers from the place of trial and has no means to attend the same% or that% apart from the fore#oin#% other similar circumstances e*ist that would ma.e him una&aila"le or pre&ent him from attendin# the trial; and

204 205

Cir2ular 3.-9., Se2. 14. Cir2ular 3.-9., Se2. 15. 206 Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 119, Se2. 4 .

- 52 -

1., that the motion shall "e supported "y affida&it of the accused and such other e&idence as the court may re)uire. 2. If the motion does not comply with the notice re)uirement% issue an order re)uirin# compliance "y mo&ant with the notice re)uirement with the warnin# that the motion shall "e disallowed if not complied with. ,. If the motion complied with the notice re)uirement% hear the motion at the time set therefor. /. If the motion is found to "e unmeritorious% issue an order denyin# it% with a concise statement of the reason s! for the denial. 0. If satisfied that the e*amination of the witness is necessary% issue an order directin# and pro&idin#% conforma"ly with the #o&ernin# rule293 as follows+ 0.1 that the witness "e e*amined at a specified time and place "efore the jud#e orderin# the e*amination or "efore any other jud#e or if not practica"le% any mem"er of the 'ar in #ood standin# so desi#nated "y the jud#e in the order% or% if the order "e #ranted "y a court of superior jurisdiction% "efore an inferior court desi#nated in the order!; 0.2 that a copy of the order "e ser&ed on the prosecutor within a #i&en time prior to that fi*ed for the e*amination; 0., that the e*amination shall proceed notwithstandin# the prosecutor7s a"sence% if it appears that he was duly notified of the hearin#; and 0./ that a written record of the testimony shall "e ta.en. 3. 6o5 To Deal 9i!# Pro ecu!ion@ Mo!ion :or E8amina!ion O$ I! 9i!ne Trial -e$ore

1. Chec. sufficiency of the motion% particularly as re#ards notice and ser&ice thereof% and the contents of the motion% .eepin# in mind that the #o&ernin# rule 296 re)uires a! that there "e notice to the accused and "! that there "e a showin# that the witness is too sic. or infirm to appear at the trial or has to lea&e the -hilippines with no definite date of returnin# thereto. 1.1 If the motion does not comply with the notice re)uirement% issue an orderin# re)uirin# compliance "y mo&ant with the notice re)uirement% with warnin# that the motion shall "e disallowed if not complied with. 1.2 If the motion complied with the notice re)uirement% hear the motion at the time set therefor. 2. If the motion is found to "e unmeritorious% issue an order denyin# it% with a concise statement of the reason s! for the denial.

207 20.

Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 119, Se2. 5 . Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 119, Se2. 7 .

- 53 -

,. If the motion is found to "e meritorious% issue an order directin# and pro&idin#% conforma"ly with the said #o&ernin# rule% as follows+ ,.1 that the witness "e e*amined "efore the court at a specified time% such e*amination to "e conducted in the same manner as an e*amination at the trial; ,.2 that a copy of the order "e ser&ed on the accused within a #i&en time prior to that fi*ed for the e*amination; ,., that the accused shall attend the said e*amination and his/her failure or refusal to do so despite due notice shall "e deemed a wai&er; and ,./ that the statement thus ta.en may "e admitted in "ehalf of or a#ainst the accused. /. 5t the same time set therefor% hold the hearin# for the e*amination of the witness% the same to "e conducted in the same manner as an e*amination at the trial% in the presence of the accused or notwithstandin# his/her a"sence% if it appears that he was duly notified of the hearin#. *. I$ A Mo!ion :or Con$inemen! O$ An Accu ed In A Men!al 6o &i!al I :iled 1. >et the motion for hearin# on the date su##ested "y the mo&ant or fi*ed "y the court% with notice to the parties% their counsel% the prosecutor and the person ha&in# char#e of the accused or his/her relati&es. 2. If the accused appears to "e sufferin# from an unsound mental condition which effecti&ely renders him una"le to fully comprehend or stand trial+ 2.1 >uspend the proceedin# and order his/her mental e*amination and/or confinement in the @ational Centre for <ental Fealth or any mental institution in the locality reco#ni;ed "y the #o&ernment% with a directi&e to the 4irector of the hospital or mental institution to su"mit a )uarterly report on the accused7s mental condition. 2.2 2n the "asis of the report that the accused has fully reco&ered and can stand trial% order his/her immediate dischar#e and set the case for the continuation of the proceedin#s. 298 ). Demurrer !o E"idence 1. 5 demurrer to e&idence is a motion to dismiss the case on the #round of insufficiency of e&idence after the prosecution has rested its case 2. 5fter the prosecution rests its case% the court may dismiss the action on the #round of insufficiency of e&idence 1! on its own initiati&e after #i&in# the prosecution the opportunity to "e heard or 2! upon demurrer to e&idence filed "y the accused with or without lea&e of court. 219

209 210

Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 101 . Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 119, Se2. 23.

- 54 -

,. The motion for lea&e of court to file demurrer to e&idence shall specifically state its #rounds and shall "e filed within a non-e*tendi"le period of fi&e 0! days after the prosecution rests its case. The prosecution may oppose the motion within a non-e*tendi"le period of fi&e 0! days from its receipt. C#ec=li ! >teps To Ta.e :hen 4emurrer To E&idence Is $iled 1. 4etermine whether the filin# of the demurrer to e&idence is made after the prosecution has rested its case% otherwise% deny the motion for "ein# prematurely filed. 211 2. If the demurrer to e&idence is properly filed after the prosecution has rested its case% #i&e the prosecution an opportunity to "e heard whether in oral ar#ument or in writin#. ,. If lea&e of court is #ranted% the accused shall file the demurrer to e&idence within a none*tendi"le period of ten 19! days from notice. The prosecution may oppose the demurrer to e&idence within a similar period from its receipt. /. Court7s discretion in the #rant or denial of demurrer to e&idence Judicial action on a demurrer to e&idence or motion to dismiss is left to the e*ercise of sound judicial discretion. In the a"sence of a clear showin# of #ra&e a"use thereof% amountin# to lac. of jurisdiction% the trial court7s denial of the motion may not "e distur"ed and may only "e re&iewed in the ordinary courts of law "y an appeal from the jud#ment after trial. !ertiorari does not lie to challen#e the trial court7s interlocutory order denyin# the accused7s motion to dismiss. !ertiorari is not the proper remedy% for the error% if any% of the trial court% is an error of jud#ment and not of jurisdiction. The appellate court will not re&iew in such special ci&il action the prosecution7s e&idence and decide in ad&ance that such e&idence has or has not yet esta"lished the #uilt of the accused "eyond reasona"le dou"t. 0. :hen demurrer to e&idence is denied If the court denies the demurrer to e&idence filed with lea&e of court% the accused may adduce e&idence in his/her defense. :hen the demurrer to e&idence is filed without lea&e of court% the accused wai&es the ri#ht to present e&idence and su"mits the case for jud#ment on the "asis of the e&idence for the prosecution. 1. The order denyin# the motion for lea&e of court to file demurrer to e&idence or the demurrer itself shall not "e re&iewa"le "y appeal or "y certiorari "efore jud#ment. 3. :hen demurrer to e&idence is #ranted The dismissal is one on the merits which is e)ui&alent to an ac)uittal; hence% the prosecution cannot appeal as it would place the accused in dou"le jeopardy. 212 6. (eopenin#

211

=uino v. Si+on, $. R. No. .6025, Nove*1er 2., 19.9, 179 SCR 64.( $o!o# v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, No. L-.0.14, u3u+" 30, 19.., 165 SCR 14.. 212 People v. ;%e Ci"# Cour" o0 Sila#, L-43790, ,e2e*1er 9, 1976, 74 SCR 247.

- 55 -

5t any time "efore finality of the jud#ment of con&iction% the jud#e may% motu proprio or upon motion% with hearin# in either case% reopen the proceedin#s to a&oid a miscarria#e of justice. The proceedin#s shall "e terminated within thirty ,9! days from the order #rantin# it. 21,

). JUDGMENT 1. 4efinition Jud#ment means that adjudication "y the court that the accused is #uilty or is not #uilty of the offense char#ed% and the imposition of the proper penalty and ci&il lia"ility pro&ided for "y law on the accused. 21/ C#ec=li ! >teps To Ta.e In (enderin# Jud#ment (ules of Court% (ule 129% >ec. 2 1. -repare the jud#ment personally and directly in the official lan#ua#e and si#n the same. 210 This holds true with orders of dismissal; 2. >ee to it that the jud#ment contains a clear and distinct statement of facts pro&ed or admitted "y the accused and the law upon which the jud#ment is "ased+ 211 ,. If it is of con&iction% state+

213 214

Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 119, Se2. 24. Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 120, Se2. 1 . 215 1a# v. $ar2ia, $. R. No. 66132, June 27, 19.., 162 SCR 665. 216 People v. 6+2o1ar, $. R. No. 69564, Januar# 29, 19.., 157 SCR 541.

- 56 -

,.1 the le#al )ualification of the offense constituted "y the acts committed "y the accused% and the a##ra&atin# or miti#atin# circumstances attendin# the commission thereof% if there are any; ,.2 the participation of the accused in the commission of the offense% whether as principal% accomplice% or accessory after the fact; ,., the penalty imposed upon the accused; 213 ,./ the ci&il lia"ility or dama#es caused "y the wron#ful act to "e reco&ered from the accused "y the offended party% if there is any% unless the enforcement of the ci&il lia"ility "y a separate action has "een reser&ed or wai&ed. /. In case the jud#ment is of ac)uittal% it shall state whether the e&idence of the prosecution a"solutely failed to pro&e the #uilt of the accused or merely failed to pro&e his/her #uilt "eyond reasona"le dou"t. In either case% the jud#ment shall determine if the act or omission from which the ci&il lia"ility mi#ht arise did not e*ist. 0. :hen two or more offenses are char#ed in a sin#le complaint or information% and the accused fails to o"ject to it "efore trial% con&ict the accused of as many offenses as are char#ed and pro&ed% and impose on him the penalty for each and e&ery one of them settin# out separately the findin#s of fact and law in each offense. 216 1. :hen there is a &ariance "etween the offense char#ed in the complaint or information% and that pro&ed or esta"lished "y the e&idence% and the offense as char#ed is included in or necessarily includes the offense pro&ed% the accused shall "e con&icted of the offense pro&ed which is included in the offense char#ed% or of the offense char#ed which is included in the offense pro&ed. 218 5n offense char#ed necessarily includes that which is pro&ed% when some of the essential elements or in#redients of the former% as this is alle#ed in the complaint or information% constitute the latter. 5nd an offense char#ed is necessarily included in the offense pro&ed% when the essential in#redients of the former constitute or form part of those constitutin# the latter. 229 2. E8!en! o$ Dama,e A5arded in Ci"il Lia(ili!2 Ari in, $rom Crime Ci&il lia"ility arisin# from crime includes% moral dama#es% e*emplary dama#es and loss of earnin# capacity. 2215ttorney7s fees may "e awarded "ut only when a separate ci&il action to reco&er ci&il lia"ility has "een filed or when e*emplary dama#es are awarded. 222Cife e*pectancy must "e included in award of dama#es. 22,

217 21.

People v. Li2erio, 61 P%il. 361 &1935'. Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 120, Se2"ion 3 ( People v. 5a+o#, $. R. No. 6.57., Jul# 7, 19.6, 142 SCR 476( People v. l2i!, $. R. No. 663.7-.., 7e1ruar# 2., 19.5, 135 SCR 2.0. 219 Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 120, Se2. 4 . 220 Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 120, Se2. 5 . 221 People v. Morallano, $. R. No. 105004, Jul# 24, 1997, 276 SCR .4. 222 People v. ;ee%anAee, Jr., $. R. No+. 111206-0., 42"o1er 6, 1995, 249 SCR 54( People v. <uila"on, $. R. No. 69666, Januar# 23, 1992, 205 SCR 279. 223 People v. /illanueva, $. R. No. 96469, 42"o1er 21, 1992, 215 SCR 22( People v. Cor!ero, $. R. No. 10.919, 42"o1er 11, 1996, 263 SCR 122.

- 57 -

The court should% howe&er% specify how much is the indemnity for death and how much is for moral dama#es and not lump the whole amount. 22/Ci&il indemnity is separate from moral dama#es. 220 In rape cases a ci&il indemnity of -hp 09%999 is mandatory. 221In addition% moral dama#es in rape is automatic without the need of pleadin# or any proof. 223 Ci&il indemnity or actual and compensatory dama#es if committed or effecti&ely )ualified "y any of the circumstances under which the death penalty is authori;ed "y law% the indemnity for the &ictim shall "e increased to the amount of -hp 30%999. 226 5ctual dama#es should "e supported "y receipts. 228 To justify a #rant of actual or compensatory dama#es% it is necessary to pro&e with a reasona"le de#ree of certainty% premised upon competent proof and on the "est e&idence o"taina"le "y the injured party% the actual amount of loss. 2,9 :here there are no a##ra&atin# circumstances% e*emplary dama#es should not "e awarded. >o also actual dama#es if not supported "y e&idence may not "e awarded. 2,1 5c)uittal does not necessarily preclude ci&il lia"ility% as in the followin# cases+ a! :here the ac)uittal is "ased on reasona"le dou"t2,2 as only preponderance of e&idence is re)uired in ci&il cases; "! :here there is a findin# that the accused7s lia"ility is not criminal "ut only ci&il in nature; 2,,and c! :here there is a findin# that the ci&il lia"ility does not arise from or is not "ased upon the criminal act of which the accused was ac)uitted 2,/ as where the accused was ac)uitted of mal&ersation "ut was held lia"le for the funds which were spent for unauthori;ed purposes.

224 225

People v. Ca+"illo, $. R. No. 116122, Sep"e*1er 6, 1996, 261 SCR 493. People v. Man3ila, $. R. No+. 130203-4, 7e1ruar# 15, 2000. 226 People v. Mara1illa+, $. R. No. 127494, 7e1ruar# 1., 1999, 303 SCR 352( People v. Mo+"rale+, $. R. No. 125397, u3u+" 2., 199., 294 SCR 701( People v. 8lao, $. R. No. 129529, Sep"e*1er 20, 199., 296 SCR 65.. 227 People v. Pra!e+, $. R. No. 127569, Jul# 30, 199., 293 SCR 411( People v. Malapo, $. R. No. 123115, u3u+" 25, 199., 294 SCR 579( People v. Lo-ano, $. R. No. 1250.0, Sep"e*1er 25, 199., 296 SCR 403( People v. Pa!illa, $. R. No. 126124, Januar# 30, 1999. 22. People v. /i2"or, $. R. No. 127903, Jul# 9, 199., 292 SCR 1.6( People v. Pra!e+, supra, no"e 227( People v. Malapo, supra, no"e 227( People v. Pere-, $. R. No. 122764, Sep"e*1er 24, 199., 296 SCR 17. 229 People v. Cor!ero, $. R. No. 10.919, 42"o1er 11, 1996, 263 SCR 122( People v. Ca#a1#a1, $. R. No. 123073, June 19, 1997, 274 SCR 3.7( People v. Morollano, $. R. No. 105004, Jul# 24, 1997, 276 SCR .4( Su*alpon3 v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, $. R. No. 123404, 7e1ruar# 26, 1997, 26. SCR 764. 230 Su*alpon3 v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, supra, no"e 229. 231 People v. Man33a+in, $. R. No. 130599-600, pril 21, 1999, 306 SCR 22.. 232 Pa!illa v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, No. 39999, Ma# 31, 1994, 129 SCR 55.( People v. Jalan!oni, No. L57555, u3u+" 2., 19.4, 131 SCR 454. 233 ,e $u-*an v. lvia, 96 P%il 55. &1955'( People v. Pan"i3, 97 P%il. 74.. 234 Ca+"ro v. Colle2"or o0 8n"ernal Revenue, L-12174, pril 26, 1962, 4 SCR 1093( Repu1li2 v. 5ello, No. L-34906, Januar# 27, 19.3, 120 SCR 203.

- 58 -

%. Promul,a!ion O$ Jud,men! 1. :hat to do (ule 129% >ection 1% (ules of Court!. 1.1 4irect the cler. of court/"ranch cler. of court to #i&e notice to the accused personally or throu#h his/her "ondsman if "onded% or throu#h the warden if detained% or throu#h the custodian if out on reco#ni;ance. 1.2 To promul#ate the jud#ment% direct the cler. of court/"ranch cler. of court to read the same in the presence of the accused and counsel de(parte or de officio. 1., If the con&iction is for a li#ht offense% the jud#ment may "e read in the presence of the accused7s counsel or representati&e. 1./ :hen the jud#e is a"sent or outside of the pro&ince or city% direct the cler. of court/"ranch cler. of court to promul#ate the jud#ment. 1.0 If the accused is confined or detained in another pro&ince or city% re)uest the e*ecuti&e jud#e of the (e#ional Trial Court ha&in# jurisdiction o&er the place of confinement or detention to promul#ate the jud#ment. The court promul#atin# the jud#ment shall ha&e authority to accept the notice of appeal and to appro&e the "ail "ond pendin# appeal pro&ided% that if the decision of the trial court con&ictin# the accused chan#ed the nature of the offense from non-"aila"le to "aila"le% the application for "ail can only "e filed and resol&ed "y the appellate court. 1.1 The proper cler. of court shall #i&e notice to the accused personally or throu#h his/her "ondsman or warden and counsel% re)uirin# him/her to "e present at the promul#ation of the decision. If the accused was tried in absentia "ecause s/he jumped "ail or escaped from prison% the notice to him/her shall "e ser&ed at his/her last .nown address. 1.3 In case the accused fails to appear at the scheduled date of promul#ation of jud#ment despite notice% the promul#ation shall "e made "y recordin# the jud#ment in the criminal doc.et and ser&in# him/her a copy thereof at his/her last .nown address or thru his/her counsel. 1.6 If the jud#ment is for con&iction and the failure of the accused to appear was without justifia"le cause% he shall lose the remedies a&aila"le in these rules a#ainst the jud#ment and the court shall order his/her arrest. :ithin fifteen 10! days from promul#ation of jud#ment% howe&er% the accused may surrender and file a motion for lea&e of court to a&ail of these remedies. >/he shall state the reasons for his/her a"sence at the scheduled promul#ation and if s/he pro&es that his/her a"sence was for a justifia"le cause% s/he shall "e allowed to a&ail of said remedies within fifteen 10! days from notice. 1. Modi$ica!ion o$ Jud,men!2%3 1. <odify or set aside a jud#ment of con&iction only 1.1 =pon motion of the accused and

235

Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 120, Se2"ion 7.

- 59 -

1.2 'efore the jud#ment has "ecome final or appeal has "een perfected. E*cept when the death penalty is imposed% a jud#ment for con&iction "ecomes final a! after the lapse of the period for perfectin# an appeal or "! when the sentence has "een partially or totally satisfied or c! the accused has e*pressly wai&ed in writin# his/her ri#ht to appeal or d! the accused has applied for pro"ation. 2,1 3. En!r2 o$ Jud,men! 2%) 1. 5fter the jud#ment has "ecome final% ha&e it entered in the "oo. of entries of jud#ments.
2,6

2. If no appeal or motion for new trial is filed within the time pro&ided in the rules% direct the cler. of court/"ranch cler. of court to enter the jud#ment and prepare a certificate that such jud#ment has "ecome final and e*ecutory.

<. MOTION :OR NE9 TRIAL OR RECONSIDERATION 1. Ground :or Ne5 Trial2%+ 1. That errors of law or irre#ularities ha&e "een committed durin# the trial prejudicial to the su"stantial ri#hts of the accused; 2. That new and material e&idence has "een disco&ered which the accused could not with reasona"le dili#ence ha&e disco&ered and produced at the trial and which if introduced and admitted would pro"a"ly chan#e the jud#ment; ,. <eritorious circumstances as determined "y the court on a case-to-case "asis% such as+ ,.1 retraction of a witness2/9 ,.2 ne#li#ence or incompetency of counsel2/1 ,., impro&ident plea of #uilty; ,./ dis)ualification of an attorney de officio to represent the accused in trial court2/2

236 237

Ra*o+ v. $onon3, No. L-42010, u3u+" 31, 1976, 72 SCR 559. Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 36, Se2"ion 2. 23. ;%e re2or! +%all 2on"ain "%e !i+po+i"ive par" o0 "%e Du!3*en" an! +%all 1e +i3ne! 1# "%e ClerA o0 Cour". 239 Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 121, Se2. 2. 240 People v. 5o2ar, 97 P%il. 39. &1955'( People v. Curiano, No+. L-15256-7, 42"o1er 31, 1963, 9 SCR 323, 9 SCR 323. 241 Ne3li3en2e or in2o*pe"en2e i+ no" a 3roun! 0or ne@ "rial unle++ i" i+ +o 3ro++ a+ "o a*oun" "o !epriva"ion o0 !ue pro2e++. 242 Jo+e v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, No. L-3.5.1, Mar2% 31, 1976, 70 SCR 257

- 60 -

2. Ground :or Recon idera!ion21% 1. Errors of law or fact in the jud#ment. %. :orm O$ Mo!ion :or A Ne5 Trial Or Recon idera!ion211 1. The motion shall "e in writin# and filed with the court. 2/0 2. It shall state the #rounds on which it is "ased. ,. If "ased on newly disco&ered e&idence% it must "e supported "y affida&its of witnesses "y whom such e&idence is e*pected to "e #i&en or "y duly authenticated copies of documents which it is proposed to introduce in e&idence. 1. S!e& !o !a=e 1. 5scertain whether motion is seasona"ly filed with notice to the prosecutor and in due form; 2. :here a motion for the decision of any )uestion of fact+ hear e&idence of such motion "y affida&its or otherwise; 2/1 ,. :hen a new trial on the #round of errors of law or irre#ularities committed durin# the trial is #ranted% see to it that all the proceedin#s and e&idence not affected "y the commission of such errors and irre#ularities remain+ set aside those affected there"y. In the interest of justice% allow the introduction of additional e&idence; /. :hen a new trial is #ranted on the #round of newly disco&ered e&idence% let the e&idence already ta.en stand; ta.e and consider to#ether with the e&idence already in the record the newly disco&ered and such other e&idence allowed to "e introduced% in the interest of justice; 0. In all cases% when a new trial or reconsideration is #ranted% set aside the ori#inal jud#ment and render a new jud#ment accordin#ly. 2/3

243 244

Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 121, Se2. 3. Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 121, Se2. 4. 245 8n 2ri*inal 2a+e+, "%e la2A o0 a00i!avi"+ o0 *eri" in a *o"ion 0or ne@ "rial i+ no" a 0a"al !e0e2" an! 2an 1e 2ure! 1# "%e "e+"i*on# pre+en"e! a" "%e ne@ "rial. Pare!e+ v. 5orDa, L-15559, Nove*1er 29, 1961, 3 SCR 495. 246 Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 121, Se2. 5 . 247 Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 121, Se2. 6 .

- 61 -

C#ec=li ! I >teps $rom $ilin# 2f 5pplication To (eferral Thereof To -ro"ation 2fficer 1. 4etermine whether or not the pro"ation application may "e #i&en due course% .eepin# in mind that the #o&ernin# law% -res. 4ecree @o. 816% as amended% 2/6re)uires the followin#+ 1.1 that an application for pro"ation "e filed with the trial court; 2/8 1.2 that the application "e filed within the period for perfectin# an appeal% that is% within fifteen 10! days from the promul#ation or notice of the jud#ment appealed from; otherwise% the application shall not "e entertained or #ranted; 209 1., that the applicant is not a dis)ualified offender. 5 dis)ualified offender is+ 1! sentenced to ser&e a ma*imum term of imprisonment of not more than si* 1! years; 2! con&icted of any crime a#ainst the national security or the pu"lic order; ,! pre&iously con&icted "y final jud#ment of an offense punished "y imprisonment of not less than one 1! month and one 1! day and/or fine of not less than -hp299; /! once on pro"ation under the pro&isions of this 4ecree; and 0! already ser&in# sentence at the time the su"stanti&e pro&isions of this 4ecree "ecame applica"le pursuant to >ection ,, hereof. 201

24.

;ori1io v. ,ia-, $. R. No. .4623, Ma# ., 1992, 20. SCR 595( 5ernar!o v. 5ala3o", $. R. No. .6561, Nove*1er 16, 1992, 215 SCR 526. 249 La+" +en"en2e, +e2on! para3rap%, Se2. 4, P, 965, a+ a*en!e!. 250 Lla*a!o v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, $. R. No. .4.50, June 29, 19.9, 174 SCR 566. 251 P, 96., Se2. 9.

- 62 -

2. If the application does not appear to "e meritorious% issue 2rder denyin# due course to the application. (efer to the copy of -ro"ation Court form for use as a #uide in draftin# the 2rder. ,. If the application appears meritorious% issue 2rder #i&in# due course to the application. (efer to the copy of -ro"ation Court form for use as a #uide in draftin# the 2rder. /. In the a"sence of any showin# that the applicant may not "e placed on pro"ation under e*istin# laws% issue 2rder for post-sentence in&esti#ation to "e conducted "y the pro"ation officer of the territory where the court sits. (efer to the copy of -ro"ation Court form% for use as a #uide in draftin# the 2rder. Sam&le 1 (E-='CIC 2$ TFE -FICI--I@E> (EEI2@5C T(I5C C2=(T 2$ LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL 'ranch LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL Judicial 4istrict Criminal Case @o. LLLLLLLLLLLLLL $or+ LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL Crime! *----------------------------------* 2(4E( It appearin# from the records that the accused% name! % is dis)ualified for pro"ation for the reason that state reason% e.#. sentenced to suffer imprisonment of more than si* 1! years% his/her A5pplication for -ro"ationA filed with this Court on LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL is here"y denied due course. The 'ranch Cler. of Court is here"y instructed to issue correspondin# notices to "ondsman/custodian to produce the accused or to the accused himself for the e*ecution of sentence. If the accused is detained% direct 'ranch Cler. of Court to issue correspondin# commitment order!. >2 2(4E(E4 Jud#e LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

- 63 -

2r other appropriate court Sam&le 2 (E-='CIC 2$ TFE -FICI--I@E> (EEI2@5C T(I5C C2=(T 2$ LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL 'ranch LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL Judicial 4istrict Criminal Case @o. LLLLLLLLLLLLLL $or+ LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL Crime! *----------------------------------* 2(4E( It appearin# from the A5pplication for -ro"ationA dated LLLLLLLLLL filed with this Court on LLLLLLLLLLL that the applicant name! % may "e placed on pro"ation under e*istin# laws% the application is here"y #i&en due course. Cet a copy of this 2rder "e ser&ed upon the -rosecutin# 2fficer! who may ta.e appropriate action or su"mit his/her comments on the application within ten 19! days from receipt thereof. -endin# consideration of his/her application% the accused% name! shall remain under confinement at the LLLLLLLLLLLL/or is allowed temporary li"erty under his/her "ail "ond/or is released to the custody name! on the latter7s reco#ni;ance. >2 2(4E(E4. ----------------------------------lace! --------------------------------4ate! Jud#e LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

- 64 -

2r other appropriate court Sam&le % (E-='CIC 2$ TFE -FICI--I@E> (EEI2@5C T(I5C C2=(T 2$ LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL 'ranch LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL Judicial 4istrict Criminal Case @o. LLLLLLLLLLLLLL $or+ LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL Crime! *----------------------------------* 2(4E( The -ro"ation 2fficer of LLLLLLLLLLLL -ro&ince/City!LLLLLLLLLL is here"y directed to conduct an in&esti#ation on the application for pro"ation of the accused name! and to su"mit his/her report thereon within 19 days from receipt hereof in accordance with >ection 0 and 3 -.4. 816% as amended. The Cler. of Court is here"y ordered to furnish said -ro"ation 2fficer with a copy of the decision% as well as the necessary data pertinent to the case. The accused% name! is here"y ordered to report to the aforesaid -ro"ation 2fficer within se&enty-two 32! hours from receipt of

- 65 -

this 2rder. >2 2(4E(E4. -----------------------------------------------------------------------lace! 4ate! Jud#e LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

2r other appropriate court

C#ec=li ! II >teps $rom (eceipt 2f -ost->entence In&esti#ation (eport To Issuance 2f -ro"ation 2rder

- 66 -

1. E*amine and consider the pro"ation officer7s post-sentence in&esti#ation report upon receipt thereof% 202.eepin# in mind the criteria for placin# an offender on pro"ation esta"lished in >ec. 6 of the -ro"ation Caw% to wit+ that in determinin# whether an offender may "e placed on pro"ation% the court shall consider all information relati&e to the character% antecedents% en&ironment; mental and physical condition of the offender% and a&aila"le institutional and community resources; and% that pro"ation shall "e denied if the court finds that+ a! the offender is in need of correctional treatment that can "e pro&ided most effecti&ely "y his/her commitment to an institution; or "! there is an undue ris. that durin# the period of pro"ation% the offender will commit another crime; or c! pro"ation will depreciate the seriousness of the offense committed. 2. 4etermine after such e*amination and consideration of said report whether to deny or #rant the application for pro"ation% .eepin# in mind that the court must resol&e the said application not later than fifteen 10! days after receipt of the post-sentence in&esti#ation report from the pro"ation officer. 20, 2.1 If you resol&e to deny the pro"ation application% issue 2rder denyin# the application% settin# forth a concise statement of the reason/s for the denial. 2.2 If you resol&e to #rant the pro"ation application% issue 2rder referred to in the -ro"ation Caw as the Apro"ation orderA! 20/#rantin# the application see attached copy of such order for use as a #uide in draftin# the pro"ation order!% .eepin# in mind the followin# particulars re)uired "y the #o&ernin# law% to wit+ a! that the pro"ation order shall contain the followin# mandatory conditions% namely+ 1! that the pro"ationer shall present himself to the pro"ation officer desi#nated to underta.e his/her super&ision at such place as may "e specified in the order within 32 hours from receipt of said order; and 2! that the pro"ationer shall report to the pro"ation officer at least once a month at such time and place as specified "y said officer; "! that the pro"ation order shall state the period of pro"ation; 200and c! that the court may impose other conditions pro&ided the same are related to the reha"ilitation of the pro"ationer and not unduly restricti&e of his/her li"erty or incompati"le with his/her freedom of conscience. 201 ,. Issue pro"ation order to the accused% at the same time informin# him of the conse)uences of said 2rder such as% that the 2rder does not set aside or otherwise do away with the jud#ment of con&iction and that it merely suspends the e*ecution of the sentence to #i&e way to the pro"ation! and e*plainin# that upon his/her failure to comply with any of the conditions prescri"ed in the 2rder or his/her commission of another offense% he shall ser&e the penalty imposed in the said jud#ment. 203 C#ec=li ! III Fow To 4eal :ith Incidents 4urin# -ro"ation I. Modi$ica!ion o$ Pro(a!ion Condi!ionA or Period

252

;%e po+"-+en"en2e inve+"i3a"ion repor" *u+" 1e +u1*i""e! 1# "%e pro1a"ion o00i2er "o "%e Cour" @i"%in 60 ,a#+ 0ro* re2eip" o0 "%e 2our"E+ or!er "o 2on!u2" "%e inve+"i3a"ion. 253 n or!er 3ran"in3 or !en#in3 pro1a"ion +%all no" 1e appeala1le. La+" para., +e2. 4, P, 96., a+ a*en!e!. 254 P, 96., Se2. 4. 255 P, 96., Se2+. 10 an! 14. 256 P, 96., Se2. 109 A:. 257 P, 96., Se2. 11.

- 67 -

1. 2n receipt of the application for modification of the condition/s and/or period of pro"ation% direct the cler. of court to set the application for hearin#% with due notice to the pro"ationer and the pro"ation officer% .eepin# in mind that the #o&ernin# law 206 pro&ides that durin# the pro"ation period% the court may% upon application of either the pro"ationer or the pro"ation officer% re&ise or modify the conditions or period of pro"ation and that "oth pro"ationer and pro"ation officer must "e #i&en an opportunity to "e heard thereon. 2. Fear the pro"ationer and the pro"ation officer on the application on the date and hour set for hearin# thereof. ,. If you find the application to "e unmeritorious% issue 2rder denyin# it% with due notice to the pro"ationer and the pro"ation officer. /. If you find the application to "e meritorious% issue 2rder #rantin# it 208 with due notice to the pro"ationer and the pro"ation officer. II. Re"oca!ion o$ Pro(a!ion 1. 2n your own initiati&e or upon receipt of proper application% issue 2rder settin# forth the &iolation of the pro"ation conditions char#ed a#ainst the pro"ationer and directin# the issuance of a warrant for his/her arrest since the #o&ernin# law 219 pro&ides pertinently that at any time durin# pro"ation% the court may issue a warrant for the arrest of the pro"ationer for any serious &iolation of the pro"ation conditions; that once arrested% the pro"ationer shall immediately "e "rou#ht "efore the Court for a hearin# of the &iolation char#ed; that the defendant may "e admitted to "ail pendin# such hearin#; and% that the pro&isions re#ardin# release on "ail of persons char#ed with a crime shall "e applica"le to the pro"ationer in such case. 2. =pon receipt of the return on the pro"ationer7s arrest and detention pursuant to said warrant% direct the cler. of court to set the char#e a#ainst the pro"ationer for hearin#% with due notice to the pro"ationer and the pro"ation officer. ,. Conduct the hearin# as scheduled% .eepin# in mind that the #o&ernin# law 211 pro&ides pertinently that the hearin# shall "e summary in nature; that the court shall not "e "ound "y the technical rules of e&idence "ut may inform itself of all the facts which are material and rele&ant to ascertain the &eracity of the char#e; that the pro"ationer shall ha&e the ri#ht to "e informed of the &iolation char#ed and to adduce e&idence in his/her fa&or; and% that the >tate shall "e represented "y a prosecutin# officer in any contested hearin#. /. If the &iolation is esta"lished% issue 2rder either re&o.in# the pro"ation or continuin# the pro"ation and modifyin# the conditions thereof% .eepin# in mind that the #o&ernin# law 212 pro&ides pertinently that if the #rant of pro"ation is re&o.ed% the court shall order the pro"ationer to ser&e the sentence ori#inally imposed and that an 2rder re&o.in# the #rant of pro"ation or modifyin# the terms and conditions thereof shall not "e appeala"le. 21, 0. If the #rant of pro"ation is re&o.ed% issue 2rder of commitment on final sentence.
25. 259

P, 96., Se2. 12, 1+" par. P, 96., Se2. 12, 2n! par. 260 P, 96., Se2. 13, 1+" par. 261 P, 96., Se2. 1., 2n! par. 262 P, 96., Se2. 13, la+" par., 2n! par. 263 5a2la#on v. Mu"ia, No. L-5929., pril 30, 19.4, 129 SCR 14.( 5ala v. Mar"ine-, $. R. No. 67301, Januar# 29, 1990, 1.1 SCR 459.

- 68 -

1. If the &iolation is not esta"lished% issue 2rder dismissin# the char#e and continuin# the pro"ation under the same terms and conditions of the -ro"ation 2rder% with correspondin# directi&e for the pro"ationer7s immediate release from custody or the cancellation of his/her "ail "ond% as the case may "e. III. Tran $er o$ Con!rol o"er Pro(a!ioner 1. 2n receipt of application therefor% e*amine and determine if the same is meritorious or not. 2. If meritorious% issue 2rder #rantin# the application% .eepin# in mind that the #o&ernin# law21/ pro&ides pertinently that whene&er a pro"ationer is permitted to reside in a place under the jurisdiction of another court% control o&er him shall "e transferred to the E*ecuti&e Jud#e of the (e#ional Trial Court formerly% the Court of $irst Instance! of that place 210 and in such a case% a copy of the -ro"ation 2rder% the post-sentence in&esti#ation report% and other pertinent records shall "e furnished the said E*ecuti&e Jud#e% and thereafter% the said E*ecuti&e Jud#e shall ha&e the power with respect to the pro"ationer that was pre&iously possessed "y the court which #ranted the pro"ation to the defendant. I?. Termina!ion o$ Pro(a!ion 1. 5fter the period of pro"ation and upon consideration of the correspondin# report and recommendation of the pro"ation officer% issue 2rder directin# the final dischar#e of the pro"ationer if you find that he has fulfilled the terms and conditions of his/her pro"ation% .eepin# in mind that the #o&ernin# law211 pro&ides pertinently that upon the issuance of such 2rder the case is deemed terminated; that the final dischar#e of the pro"ationer shall operate to restore to him all ci&il ri#hts lost or suspended as a result of his/her con&iction and to fully dischar#e his/her lia"ility for any fine imposed as to the offense for which pro"ation was #ranted and that the pro"ationer and the pro"ation officer shall each "e furnished a copy of such 2rder. 213 Pro(a!ion Cour! :orm No. 'Order Re"o=in, Pro(a!ion. (E-='CIC 2$ TFE -FICI--I@E> (EEI2@5C T(I5C C2=(T 2$ LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL 'ranch LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL Judicial 4istrict Criminal Case @o. LLLLLLLLLLLLLL $or+ LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

264 265

P, 96., Se2. 13, 2n! par. 5ala v. Mar"ine-, supra, no"e 262. 266 Se2. 16, P, 96. 267 5ala v. Mar"ine-, supra, no"e 262.

- 69 -

Crime! *----------------------------------* 2(4E( =pon the recommendation dated LLLLLLLLLLLLLL of the -ro"ation 2fficer assi#ned to this case and findin# the same to "e well ta.en% the same is appro&ed and the pro"ation #ranted to the accused% name! % is here"y re&o.ed. The e*ecution of the sentence ori#inally imposed upon the said accused is here"y set for 4ate! at -lace! . Cet copies of this 2rder "e furnished the pro"ationer and the pro"ation officer. >2 2(4E(E4 --------------------------------lace! ------------------------------------4ate! Jud#e LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

2r other appropriate court Pro(a!ion Cour! :orm No. 'Order Modi$2in, !#e Condi!ion o$ Pro(a!ion. (E-='CIC 2$ TFE -FICI--I@E> (EEI2@5C T(I5C C2=(T 2$ LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL 'ranch LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL Judicial 4istrict Criminal Case @o. LLLLLLLLLLLLLL $or+ LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL Crime!

- 70 -

*----------------------------------* 2(4E( =pon the recommendation dated LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL of the -ro"ation 2fficer assi#ned to this case and findin# the same to "e well ta.en% the pro"ation is here"y modified as follows+ Cet copies of this 2rder "e furnished the pro"ation and the pro"ation officer. >2 2(4E(E4 --------------------------------lace! ------------------------------------4ate! Jud#e LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

2r other appropriate court Pro(a!ion Cour! :orm No. 'Order Modi$2in, !#e Condi!ion o$ Pro(a!ion. (E-='CIC 2$ TFE -FICI--I@E> (EEI2@5C T(I5C C2=(T 2$ LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL 'ranch LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL Judicial 4istrict Criminal Case @o. LLLLLLLLLLLLLL $or+ LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL Crime! *----------------------------------* 2(4E( =pon the recommendation dated LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL of the -ro"ation 2fficer assi#ned to this case and findin# the same to "e well ta.en% the

- 71 -

pro"ation is here"y modified as follows+ Cet copies of this 2rder "e furnished the pro"ation and the pro"ation officer. >2 2(4E(E4 --------------------------------lace! ------------------------------------4ate! Jud#e LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

2r other appropriate court

?III. ISSUANCE O: SEARC6 9ARRANTS Rule o$ Cour! Rule 12*

- 72 -

>ec. 2. !ourt 5here application for search 5arrant shall be filed . ? 5n application for search warrant shall "e filed with the followin#+ a! 5ny court within whose territorial jurisdiction a crime was committed. "! $or compellin# reasons stated in the application% any court within the judicial re#ion where the crime was committed if the place of the commission of the crime is .nown% or any court within the judicial re#ion where the warrant shall "e enforced. Fowe&er% if the criminal action has already "een filed% the application shall only "e made in the court where the criminal action is pendin#. 1. Rule on :orum S#o&&in, 5 search warrant was )uashed "ecause the applicant had "een #uilty of forum shoppin# as the applicant sou#ht the search warrant from a <anila (e#ional Trial Court after was denied "y the courts of -ampan#a. 216 The (ules of Court% howe&er% re)uires only initiatory pleadin# to "e accompanied with a certificate of non-forum shoppin# omittin# any mention of AapplicationsA as in >upreme Court Circular @o. 9/-8/. Fence% the a"sence of such certification will not result in the dismissal of the application for search warrant. 218 Rule o$ Cour! Rule 12* >ec. ,. Personal property to be seized .M 5 search warrant may "e issued for the search and sei;ure of personal property+ a! >u"ject of the offense; "! >tolen or em"e;;led and other proceeds% or fruits of the offense; or c! =sed or intended to "e used as the means of committin# an offense. >ec. /. 6e$uisites for issuing search 5arrant.M 5 search warrant shall not issue e*cept upon pro"a"le cause in connection with one specific offense to "e determined personally "y the jud#e after e*amination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce% and particularly descri"in# the place to "e searched and the thin#s to "e sei;ed which may "e anywhere in the -hilippines. >ec. 0. 27amination of complainant0 record.M The jud#e must% "efore issuin# the warrant% personally e*amine in the form of searchin# )uestions and answers% in writin# and under oath% the complainant and the witnesses he may produce on facts personally .nown to them and attach to the record their sworn statements% to#ether with the affida&its su"mitted.

26. 269

Ba+%in3"on ,i+"iller+ v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, $. R. No. 11.151, u3u+" 22, 1996, 260 SCR .21. Sava3e v. ;a#pin, $. R. No. 134217, Ma# 11, 2000.

- 73 -

-. Meanin, o$ Pro(a(le Cau e -ro"a"le cause for a search is defined as such facts and circumstances which could lead a reasona"ly discreet and prudent man to "elie&e that an offense has "een committed and that the o"jects sou#ht in connection with the offense are in the place sou#ht to "e searched. 239 %. -a i o$ Pro(a(le Cau eB Per onal ;no5led,e This pro"a"le cause must "e shown to "e within the personal .nowled#e of the complainant or the witnesses he may produce and not "ased on mere hearsay% 231in order to con&ince the jud#e% not the indi&idual ma.in# the affida&it and see.in# the issuance of the warrant of the e*istence of a pro"a"le cause. 232 1. <eanin# of .nowled#e; test is lia"ility for perjury The followin# test was laid in determinin# whether the alle#ations in an application for search warrant or in supportin# deposition% are "ased on personal .nowled#e or not M The true test of sufficiency of a deposition or affida&it to warrant issuance of a search warrant is whether it has "een drawn in a manner that perjury could "e char#ed thereon and the affiant "e held lia"le for dama#e caused. The oath re)uired must refer to the truth of the facts within the personal .nowled#e of the applicant for search warrant% and/or his/her witnesses% not of the facts merely reported "y a person whom one considers to "e relia"le. 23, 2. Insufficiency of 5ffida&its <ere affida&its of the complainant and his/her witnesses are not sufficient. The e*aminin# Jud#e has to ta.e depositions in writin# of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce and to attach them to the record. >uch written deposition is necessary in order that the Jud#e may "e a"le to properly determine the e*istence or non-e*istence of the pro"a"le cause% to hold lia"le for perjury the person #i&in# it if it will "e found later that his/her declarations are false. 23/ >earch warrants are not issued on loose% &a#ue or dou"tful "asis of fact% nor on mere suspicion or "elief. The facts recited in an affida&it supportin# the application for a search warrant must "e stated with sufficient definiteness% so that% if they are false% perjury may "e assi#ned on the affiant. Fence% affida&its which #o no further than to alle#e conclusions of law% or of fact% are insufficient. 230

270

5ur3o+, Sr. v. C%ie0 o0 S"a00, No. L-64261, ,e2e*1er 26, 19.4, 133 SCR .15( <uin"ero v. Na"ional 5ureau o0 8nve+"i3a"ion, No. L-35149, June 23, 19.., 162 SCR 4.3( Pen!on v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, $. R. No. .4.73, Nove*1er 16, 1990, 191 SCR 429( Manalili v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, $. R. No. 113447, 42"o1er 9, 1997, 2.0 SCR 400( People v. Mon"illa, $. R. No. 123.72, Januar# 30, 199., 2.5 SCR 703. 271 Pru!en"e v. ,a#ri", $. R. No. .2.70, ,e2e*1er 14, 19.9, 1.0 SCR 69. 272 lvare- v. Cour" o0 7ir+" 8n+"an2e o0 ;a#a1a+ 64 P%il. 33 &1937'( 5ur3o+, Sr. v. C%ie0 o0 S"a00, supra, no"e 269( 20"% Cen"ur# 7oF 7il* Corpora"ion v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, No+. L-76649-51, u3u+" 19, 19.., 164 SCR 655( Silva v. Re3ional ;rial Cour" o0 Ne3ro+ 4rien"al, $. R. No. .1756, 42"o1er 21, 1991, 203 SCR 140. 273 lvare- v. Cour" o0 7ir+" 8n+"an2e, supra, no"e 272. 274 Ma"a v. 5a#ona, No. L-50720, Mar2% 26, 19.4, 12. SCR 3.. 275 <uin"ero v. Na"ional 5ureau o0 8nve+"i3a"ion, supra, no"e 270( 5ur3o+ v. C%ie0 o0 S"a00, supra, no"e 270.

- 74 -

E)ually insufficient as a "asis for the determination of pro"a"le cause is a statement contained in a joint affida&it Athat the e&idence #athered and collated "y our unit clearly shows that the premises a"o&e-mentioned and the articles and thin#s a"o&e-prescri"ed were used and are continuously "ein# used for su"&ersi&e acti&ities in conspiracy with and to promote the o"jecti&e of% ille#al or#ani;ations such as the Ci#ht-5-$ire <o&ement% <o&ement for $ree -hilippines% and 5pril 1 <o&ement.A ,. Prudente v. .he 8on. 27ecutive Judge *.). Dayrit In his/her application for search warrant% -/<ajor 5lladin 4ima#maliw stated that Ahe has "een informedA that @emesio -rudente Ahas in his control and possessionA the firearms and e*plosi&es descri"ed therein% and that he Ahas &erified the report and found it to "e a fact.A 2n the other hand% in his supportin# deposition% -/Ct. $lorencio C. 5n#eles declared that% as a result of their continuous sur&eillance for se&eral days% they gathered informations from verified sources that the holders of the said firearms and e*plosi&es are not licensed to possess them. In other words% the applicant and his witness had no personal .nowled#e of the facts and circumstances which "ecame the "asis for issuin# the )uestioned search warrant% "ut ac)uired .nowled#e thereof only throu#h information from other sources or persons. :hile it is true that in his application for search warrant% applicant -/<ajor 4ima#maliw stated that he verified the information he had earlier recei&ed that petitioner had in his possession and custody the firearms and e*plosi&es descri"ed in the application% and that he found it to "e a fact% yet there is nothin# in the record to show or indicate ho5 and 5hen said applicant verified the earlier information ac)uired "y him as to justify his conclusion that he found such information to "e a fact. Fe mi#ht ha&e clarified this point if there had "een searchin# )uestions and answers% "ut there were none. In fact% the records yield no )uestions and answers% whether searchin# or not% &is-N-&is the said applicant. :hat the records show is the deposition of witness% -/Ct. 5n#eles% as the only support to -/<ajor 4ima#maliw7s application% and the said deposition is "ased on hearsay. $or it a&ers that they presuma"ly% the police authorities! had conducted continuous sur&eillance for se&eral days of the suspected premises and% as a result thereof% they A#athered information from &erified sourcesA that the holders of the su"ject firearms and e*plosi&es are not licensed to possess them. E&idently% the alle#ations contained in the application of -/<ajor 5lladin 4ima#maliw and the declaration of -/Ct $lorencio C. 5n#eles in his deposition were insufficient "asis for the issuance of a &alid search warrant. 5s held in the Prudente case+ The oath re)uired must refer to the truth of the facts within the personal .nowled#e of the petitioner or his witnesses% "ecause the purpose thereof is to con&ince the committin# ma#istrate% not the indi&idual ma.in# the affida&it and see.in# the issuance of the warrant% of the e*istence of pro"a"le cause. 231 /. $actors that may "e considered in determination of pro"a"le cause+ time of application in relation to alle#ed offense considered in determination of pro"a"le cause The >upreme Court o"ser&ed+ It has li.ewise "een o"ser&ed that the offenses alle#ed too. place from 1811 to 181/% and the application for search warrant was made on 2cto"er 23% 1810. The
276

Pru!en"e v. ,a#ri", supra, no"e 271.

- 75 -

time of the application is so far remote in time as to ma.e the pro"a"le cause of dou"tful &eracity and the warrant &itally defecti&e. Thus% <r. Joseph Baron% an eminent authority on >earches% >ei;ures and Immunities% has this to say on this point+ su"ject% the followin# #eneral rules are said to apply to affida&its for search warrants+ 1! * * * 2! >uch statement as to the time of the alle#ed offense must "e clear and definite and must not "e too remote from the time of the ma.in# of the affida&it and issuance of the search warrant. ,! There is no ri#id rule for determinin# whether the stated time of o"ser&ation of the offense is too remote from the time when the affida&it is made or the search warrant issued% "ut% #enerally spea.in#% a lapse of time of less than three wee.s will "e held not to in&alidate the search warrant% while a lapse of four wee.s will "e held to "e so. 5 #ood and practical rule of thum" to measure the nearness of time #i&en in the affida&it as to the date of the alle#ed offense% and the time of ma.in# the affida&it is thus e*pressed+ 9.he nearer the time at 5hich the observation of the offense is alleged to have been made, the more reasonable the conclusion of establishment of probable cause9./"" Italics ours.! The >upreme Court o"ser&ed that had the respondent jud#e "een cautious in issuin# the )uestioned search warrants he would ha&e wondered% and therefor as.ed the affiant why the said incident was reported only on <ay ,1% 1832 when he alle#edly witnessed it on <ay 28% 1832. 236 0. The @eed of Competent -roof of -articular 5cts or >pecific 2missions The >upreme Court in the cele"rated case of Stonehill v. Dio:no pointed to the need of competent proof of particular acts or specific omissions in the ascertainment of pro"a"le cause+ Two points must "e stressed in connection with this constitutional mandate% namely+ 1! that no warrant shall issue "ut upon pro"a"le cause% to "e determined "y the jud#e in the manner set forth in said pro&ision% and 2! that the warrant shall particularly descri"e the thin#s to "e sei;ed. @one of these re)uirements has "een complied with in the contested warrants. Indeed% the same were issued upon applications statin# that the natural and juridical persons therein named had committed a A&iolation of Central 'an. Caws% Tariff and Customs Caws% Internal (e&enue Code and (e&ised -enal Code.A In other words% no specific offense had "een alle#ed in said applications. The a&erments thereof with respect to the offense committed were a"stract. 5s a conse)uence% it was impossi"le for the jud#es who issued the warrants to ha&e found the e*istence of pro"a"le cause for the same presuppose the introduction of competent proof that the party a#ainst whom it is sou#ht has performed particular acts or committed specific omissions% &iolatin# a #i&en pro&ision of our criminal laws. 5s a matter of fact% the applications in&ol&ed in this case do not alle#e any
277 27.

+ian Sure"# an! 8n+uran2e Co. v. ?errera, No. L-25232, ,e2e*1er 20, 1973, 54 SCR 312. <uin"ero v. Na"ional 5ureau o0 8nve+"i3a"ion, supra, no"e 270.

- 76 -

specific acts performed "y herein petitioners. It would "e a le#al heresy% of the hi#hest order% to con&ict any"ody of a A&iolation of Central 'an. Caws% Tariff and Customs Caws% Internal (e&enue Code! and (e&ised -enal Code.A M as alle#ed in the aforementioned applications M without reference to any determinate pro&ision of said laws or codes. 238 1. -ro"a"le Cause to "e 4etermined only "y Jud#e 5 nota"le inno&ation in this #uarantee is found in the Constitution in that it specifically pro&ides that the pro"a"le cause upon which a warrant of arrest may "e issued% must "e determined "y the jud#e after e*amination under oath% etc.% of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce. This re)uirement M Ato "e determined "y the jud#eA M is not found in the $ourth 5mendment of the =.>. Constitution% in the -hilippine 'ill or in the Jones 5ct% all of which do not specify who will determine the e*istence of a pro"a"le cause. Fence% under their pro&isions% any pu"lic officer may "e authori;ed "y the Ce#islature to ma.e such determination% and thereafter issue the warrant of arrest. =nder the e*press terms of the Constitution% it is% therefore% e&en dou"tful whether the arrest of an indi&idual may "e ordered "y any authority other than the jud#e if the purpose is merely to determine the e*istence of a pro"a"le cause% leadin# to an administrati&e in&esti#ation. The Constitution does not distin#uish "etween warrants in administrati&e proceedin#s. 5nd% if one suspected of ha&in# committed a crime is entitled to a determination of the pro"a"le cause a#ainst him% "y a jud#e% why should one suspected of a &iolation of an administrati&e nature deser&e less #uaranteeJ 2f course it is different if the order of arrest is issued to carry out a final findin# of a &iolation% either "y an e*ecuti&e or le#islati&e officer or a#ency duly authori;ed for the purpose% as then the warrant is not that mentioned in the Constitution which is issua"le only on pro"a"le cause. >uch% for e*ample% would "e a warrant of arrest to carry out a final order of deportation% or to effect compliance of an order of contempt. 269 3. <anner of e*amination In determinin# the e*istence of pro"a"le cause% it is re)uired that+ 1! the jud#e must e*amine the witnesses personally; 2! the e*amination must "e under oath; and ,! the e*amination must "e reduced to writin# in the form of searchin# )uestions and answers. 261 These re)uirements are pro&ided under >ection 0% (ule 121 of the (ules of Court. It has "een ruled that the e*istence of pro"a"le cause depends to a lar#e de#ree upon the findin# or opinion of the jud#e conductin# the e*amination; 262howe&er% the opinion or findin# of pro"a"le cause must% to a certain de#ree% "e su"stantiated or supported "y the record. 26, 6. E*amination is heard e*-parte and may "e done in cham"ers "ut action must "e e*pedited 5n application for a search warrant is heard e7(parte. It is neither a trial nor a part of the trial. 26/The e*amination or in&esti#ation which must "e under oath may not "e in pu"lic. It may "e e&en held in the secrecy of the cham"ers. It must "e under oath and must "e in
279

S"one%ill v. ,ioAno, No. L-19550, June 19, 1967, 20 SCR 3.3( La C%e*i+e La2o+"e, S. . v. 7ernan!e-, No. L-63796-7, Ma# 21, 19.4, 129 SCR 373. 2.0 <ua C%ee $an v. ,epor"a"ion 5oar!, No. L-102.0, Sep"e*1er 30, 1963, 9 SCR 27. 2.1 Marina+ v. Sio2%i, No+. L-25707 an! 25753-4, Ma# 14, 19.1,104 SCR 423( Pon+i2a v. 83nala3a, $. R. No. 72301, Jul# 31, 19.7, 152 SCR 647. 2.2 Luna v. Pla-a, $. R. No. L-27511, Nove*1er 29, 196., 26 SCR 310. 2.3 Pen!on v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, $. R. No. .4.73, Nove*1er 16, 1990, 191 SCR 429. 2.4 La C%e*i+e La2o+"e, S. . v. 7ernan!e-, supra, no"e, 279.

- 77 -

writin#. 2605ction on these applications must% "e e*pedited for time is of the essence. Ereat reliance has to "e accorded "y the jud#e to the testimonies under oath of the complainant and the witnesses. 261The e*amination or in&esti#ation must not% howe&er% "e merely routinary "ut one that is thorou#h and elicit the re)uired information. 263 The searchin# )uestions propounded to the applicants of the search warrant and his/her witnesses must depend to a lar#e e*tent upon the discretion of the Jud#e just as lon# as the answers esta"lish a reasona"le #round to "elie&e the commission of a specific offense and that the applicant is one authori;ed "y law% and said answers particularly descri"e with certainty the place to "e searched and the persons or thin#s to "e sei;ed. The e*amination or in&esti#ation which must "e under oath may not "e in pu"lic. It may "e e&en "e held in the secrecy of his/her cham"ers. $ar more important is that the e*amination or in&esti#ation is not merely routinary "ut one that is thorou#h and elicit the re)uired information. To repeat% it must "e under oath and must "e in writin#. 266 8. The need for searchin# )uestions and answers "y the jud#e <ore emphatic and detailed is the implementin# rule of the constitutional injunction% >ection / of (ule 121 which pro&ides that the jud#e "efore issuin# the warrant personally e*amine on oath or affirmation the complainant and any witnesses he may produce and ta.e their depositions in writin# and attach them to the record in addition to any affida&its presented to him. 268 The e*amination must "e pro"in# and e*hausti&e% not merely routinary or pro forma, if the claimed pro"a"le cause is to "e esta"lished. The e*aminin# ma#istrate must not simply rehash the contents of the affida&its "ut must ta.e his/her own in)uiry on the intent and justification of the application. 289 5s.in# of leadin# )uestions to the deponent in an application for search warrant% and conductin# of e*amination in a #eneral manner% would not satisfy the re)uirements for issuance of a &alid search warrant. 281 -ersonal e*amination "y the jud#e of the complainant and his/her witnesses is necessary to ena"le him to determine the e*istence or non-e*istence of a pro"a"le cause% pursuant to 5rt. III% >ec. 1% par. ,% of the Constitution% and (ule 121% >ec. / of the (ules of Court% "oth of which prohi"it the issuance of warrants e*cept Aupon pro"a"le cause.A The determination of whether or not a pro"a"le cause e*ists calls for the e*ercise of jud#ment after a judicial appraisal of facts and should not "e allowed to "e dele#ated in the a"sence of any rule to the contrary. 282 19. (e)uisite of particular description of thin#s to "e sei;ed

2.5 2.6

Ma"a v. 5a#ona, supra, no"e 274. La C%e*i+e La2o+"e v. 7ernan!e-, supra, no"e 27.. 2.7 Ma"a v. 5a#ona, supra, no"e 274. 2.. Ma"a v. 5a#ona, supra, no"e 274. 2.9 Ma"a v. 5a#ona, supra, no"e 274. 290 Roan v. $on-ale+, L-71410, Nove*1er 25, 19.6, 145 SCR 6.6. 291 Nola+2o v. PaCo, $. R. No. 69.03, 42"o1er ., 19.5, 139 SCR 132( <uin"ero v. N58, supra, no"e 270( Silva v. Re3ional ;rial Cour" o0 Ne3ro+ 4rien"al, supra, no"e 272. 292 5a2%e v. Rui-, No. L-32409, 7e1ruar# 27, 1971, 37 SCR .23.

- 78 -

The description Ais re)uired to "e specific only in so far as the circumstances will ordinarily allowA and Awhere "y the nature of the #oods to "e sei;ed their descriptions must rather "e #eneral% as this would mean that no warrant would issue.A 28, Thus% the description Afraudulent "oo.s% in&oices and recordsA was found sufficient. 28/ >o also was the description A"oo.s% documents% receipts% lists% chits and other papers used "y him in connection with his/her acti&ities as moneylender% char#in# a usurious rate of interest% in &iolation of the law.O 280Justifyin# the sufficiency of the later description% the Court said+ Ta.in# into consideration the nature of the articles so descri"ed% it is clear that no other more ade)uate and detailed description could ha&e "een #i&en% particularly "ecause it is difficult to #i&e a particular description of the contents thereof. The description so made su"stantially complies with the le#al pro&isions "ecause the officer of the law who e*ecuted the warrant was there"y placed in a position ena"lin# him to identify the articles% which he did. 281 It was% howe&er% held in a much later case that search warrants descri"in# the effects to "e sei;ed as follows+ 'oo.s of accounts% financial records% &ouchers% journals% correspondence% receipts% led#ers% portfolios% credit journals% typewriters% and other documents and/or papers showin# all "usiness transactions includin# dis"ursements receipts% "alance sheets and related profit and loss statements. thus authori;in# the sei;ure of "oo.s of accounts and records Ashowin# all the "usiness transactionsA of certain persons% re#ardless of whether the transactions were le#al or ille#al% contra&ene the e*plicit command of the 'ill of (i#hts that the thin#s to "e sei;ed should "e particularly descri"ed and defeat its major o"jecti&e of eliminatin# #eneral warrants. 283 11. Tests to 4etermine -articularity 5 search warrant may "e said to particularly descri"e the thin#s to "e sei;ed+ 1! :hen the description therein is as specific as the circumstances will ordinarily allow; 286or 2! :hen the description e*presses a conclusion of fact - not of law "y which the warrant officer may "e #uided in ma.in# the search and sei;ure; 288or ,! :hen the thin#s descri"ed are limited to those which "ear direct relation to the offense for which the warrant is "ein# issued. ,99

293 294

People v. Ru1io, 57 P%il. 3.4 &1932'. People v. Ru1io, supra, 293. 295 lvare- v. Cour" o0 7ir+" 8n+"an2e o0 ;a#a1a+, supra, 272. 296 lvare- v. C78, supra, no"e 272. 297 S"one%ill v. ,ioAno, +upra, no"e 279. 29. People v. Ru1io, +upra, no"e 293. 299 81i!., !i++en" o0 J. 1a! San"o+. 300 Rule+ o0 Cour", Rule 126, Se2. 2.

- 79 -

Thus% if the articles desired to "e sei;ed ha&e any direct relation to an offense committed% the applicant must necessarily ha&e some e&idence% other than those articles% to pro&e the said offense; and the articles su"ject of search and sei;ure should come in handy merely to stren#then such e&idence. In this e&ent% the description contained in the disputed warrant should ha&e mentioned% at least% the dates% amounts% persons% and other pertinent data re#ardin# the receipts of payments% certificates of stoc.s and securities% contracts% promissory notes% deeds of sale% messa#es and communication% chec.s% "an. deposits and withdrawals% records of forei#n remittances% amon# others% enumerated in the warrant.
,91

12. 4escription of place to "e sei;ed It does not suffice% for a search warrant to "e deemed &alid% that it "e "ased on pro"a"le cause% personally determined "y the jud#e% it is essential% too% that it particularly describes the place to be searched, the manifest intention "ein# that the search "e confined strictly to the place also descri"ed. ,92 :here the affida&it for the search warrant and the search warrant itself descri"ed the "uildin# to "e searched as Athe "uildin# @o. 12/ Calle 5r;o"ispo% City of <anila% -hilippine Islands%A this is a sufficient desi#nation of the premises to "e searched. It is the pre&ailin# rule that a description of a place to "e searched is sufficient if the officer with the warrant can% with reasona"le effort% ascertain and identify the place intended. ,9,The police officers were accordin#ly authori;ed to "rea. down the door and enter the premises of the "uildin# occupied "y the so-called -arliamentary Clu". :hen inside% they then had the ri#ht to arrest the persons presuma"ly en#a#ed in a prohi"ited #ame% and to confiscate the e&idence of the commission of the crime. It has "een held that an officer ma.in# an arrest may ta.e from the person arrested any money or property found upon his/her person% which was used in the commission of the crime or was the fruit of the crime% or which may furnish the person arrested with the means of committin# &iolence or of escapin#% or which may "e used as e&idence on the trial of the case% "ut not otherwise. ,9/ 1,. 4etermination of :hether >earch :arrant 4escri"es -remises with -articularity In the determination of whether a search warrant descri"es the premises to "e searched with sufficient particularity% it has "een held Athat the e*ecutin# officer7s prior .nowled#e as to the place intended in the warrant is rele&ant. This would seem to "e especially true where the e*ecutin# officer is the affiant on whose affida&it the warrant had issued% and when he .nows that the jud#e who issued the warrant intended the "uildin# descri"ed in the affida&it. 5nd it has also "een said that the e*ecutin# officer may loo. to the affida&it in the official court file to resol&e an am"i#uity in the warrant as to the place to "e searched.A
,90

The principle does not apply where there is no am"i#uity on the face of the search warrant as to the description of the place to "e searched. The place to "e searched as set out in the warrant cannot "e amplified or modified "y the officer7s own personal .nowled#e of the premises% or the e&idence they adduced in support of their application for the warrant. * * * The particulari;ation of the description of the place to "e searched may properly "e done
301

5a2%e v. Rui-, supra, no"e 292( Colu*1ia Pi2"ure+ v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, $. R. No. 111267, Sep"e*1er 20, 1996, 262 SCR 219. 302 People v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, $. R. No. 126379, June 26, 199., 291 SCR 400. 303 S"eele v+. ).S. &1925', ).S. Supre*e Cour" !van2e 4pinion+, 1924-1925( 69 La@. e!., 757. 304 People v. /elo+o, 4. P%il. 169 &1925'. 305 5ur3o+ v. C%ie0 o0 S"a00, r*e! 7or2e+ o0 "%e P%ilippine+, supra, no"e 272.

- 80 -

only "y the Jud#e% and only in the warrant itself; it cannot "e left to the discretion of the police officers conductin# the search. ,91

I! PRO"ISIONAL RE#EDIES Rules o Court Rule 12$ Pro%isional Re&edies In Cri&inal Cases
306

People v. Cour" o0 ppeal+, supra, no"e 302.

- 81 -

Se2. 1. Availability of provisional remedies. ;%e provi+ional re*e!ie+ in 2ivil a2"ion+, in+o0ar a+ "%e# are appli2a1le, *a# 1e availe! o0 in 2onne2"ion @i"% "%e 2ivil a2"ion !ee*e! in+"i"u"e! @i"% "%e 2ri*inal a2"ion. Se2. 2. Attachment.- B%en "%e 2ivil a2"ion+ i+ properl# in+"i"u"e! in "%e 2ri*inal a2"ion a+ provi!e! in Rule 111, "%e o00en!e! par"# *a# %ave "%e proper"# o0 "%e a22u+e! a""a2%e! a+ +e2uri"# 0or "%e +a"i+0a2"ion o0 an# Du!3*en" "%a" *a# 1e re2overe! 0ro* "%e a22u+e! in "%e 0ollo@in3 2a+e+G 9a: B%en "%e a22u+e! i+ a1ou" "o a1+2on! 0ro* "%e P%ilippine+( 91: B%en "%e 2ri*inal a2"ion i+ 1a+e! on a 2lai* 0or *one# or proper"# e*1e--le! or 0rau!ulen"l# *i+applie! or 2onver"e! "o "%e u+e o0 "%e a22u+e! @%o i+ a pu1li2 o00i2er, o00i2er o0 a 2orpora"ion, a""orne#, 0a2"or, 1roAer, a3en" or 2lerA, in "%e 2our+e o0 %i+ e*plo#*en" a+ +u2%, or 1# an# o"%er per+on in a 0i!u2iar# 2apa2i"#, or a @ill0ul viola"ion o0 !u"#( 92: B%en "%e a22u+e! %a+ 2on2eale!, re*ove!, or !i+po+e! o0 %i+ proper"#, or i+ a1ou" "o !o +o( an! 9!: B%en "%e a22u+e! re+i!e+ ou"+i!e "%e P%ilippine+.

- 82 -