Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Part II. The Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, as amended (Dec.1, 2000)
Villon, 297 SCRA 679; Chua vs. Padillo, April 24, 2007; Verzano vs. Paro, et al., Aug.8,2010,
Tan vs. People, April 21, 2009;People vs. Nunez, 591 SCRA 394; Hoey vs. Prov.Fiscal of Rizal,
130 SCRA 242; Roberts vs. CA, 254 SCRA 651
Prosecution of the crimes of adultery, concubinage, seduction, abduction and acts of
lasciviousness; offenses which cannot be prosecuted de officio*Note: Art. 344, Revised Penal Code; RA7610, Child Abuse Law
Prosecution of defamation. Rules.
Section 6. Sufficiency of complaint or information. Sections 7-12
Cases: 435 SCRA 371; Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan, Feb.26, 2002; 193 SCRA 216; 301 SCRA
298; 427 SCRA 528; Gabionza vs. CA, March 30, 2001; 350 SCRA 679; Catiis vs CA, Feb.9,
2006; 446 SCRA 166; Borlongan vs. Pena, 538 SCRA 221
Section 13. Duplicity of the offense. A complaint or information must charge only one offense.
Rule and Purpose.
note: Rule 117, Sec.3 (f)
*Exceptions*Effect where the accused does not object to the multiple offenses in the information.
Note: Sec.3, Rule 120
April 27, 2007; Ricarze vs. CA, Feb.9, 2007; Jarantilla vs. CA, March 21, 1989;Casupanan vs.
Laroya, 388 SCRA 28;Cheng vs. Sy 592 SCRA 155, July 7, 2009.
Circular No. 57-97, Sept. 16/97-Rules and Guidelines in the filing and prosecution of criminal
cases under BP22
Sec. 2- When separate civil action is suspended-note: Rules to govern when- (1) Criminal
action filed ahead of the civil actionThe separate civil action arising from the crime cannot be
instituted until final judgment has been entered in the criminal action; (2) Civil action filed ahead
of the criminal action (criminal action filed after)the civil action shall be suspended at
whatever stage it may be before judgment on the merit, until final judgment is rendered in the
criminal action. The civil action may be consolidated with the criminal action in the court trying
the criminal case.
*Rules for Consolidation. Purpose.
Effects of Extinction of the criminal action-Rule: THE extinction of the penal action does not
carry with it extinction of the civil action.- UNLESS there is a finding in a final judgment in
the criminal action that the act or omission from which the civil liability may arise did not exist.
Sapiera vs. CA, the civil liability is not extinguished by acquittal if: 1. The acquittal is
based on reasonable doubt, 2. Where the court expressly declares that the liability of the accused
is not criminal but civil in nature, 3. Where the civil liability is not derived from or based on the
criminal act of which the accused is acquitted.
Section 3. When civil action may proceeded independently.
Note: Articles 32, 33, 34, 2176 Civil Code of the Philippines ; DMPI Employees Credit
Coop.Inc. vs. Hon Velez, 371 SCRA 72; Phil. Rabbit Bus Corp. vs. People, 427 SCRA 456
Section 4. Effect of death on civil actions.
Cases: People vs. Bayotas, Sept. 2, 1994, 236 SCRA 239; People vs. Abungan, 341 SCRA 258;
ABS CBN Corp. vs. Ombudsman, Oct.15, 2008, People vs. Jayme, August 25, 2010
Section 5. Judgment in civil action not a bar.
Section 6. Suspension by reason of prejudicial question.
Section 7. Elements of prejudicial question.
Prejudicial Question. Concept. An issue involved in a civil action which is similar or intimately
related to the issue in the criminal case, the resolution of such issue determines whether or not
the criminal action may proceed.
Elements: 1)The previously instituted civil action involves an issue similar or intimately related
to the issue raised in a subsequent criminal action and 2) The resolution of such issue determines
whether or not the criminal action may proceed.
Landicho vs. Relova, Feb.23, 1968; Apa vs. Fernandez, 242 SCRA 509; Ark Travel Express, Inc.
vs. RTC Makati City B.150 Hon. Abrogar, Violeta Baguio, 410 SCRA 148; Land Bank of the
Phils. vs. Jacinto, 626 SCRA 315, Aug.3, 2010
Section 5.When warrant of arrest may issue. (a) By the Regional Trial Court.
People vs. Hon. CA,Ting, et al G.R. No. 161083, Aug.3, 2010 626 SCRA 352
(b) By the Municipal Trial Court (c) When warrant of arrest not necessary.
Section 6. When accused lawfully arrested without warrant. Warrantless arrest
*Inquest proceeding. Nature.
*Note: RA7438
* Leviste vs. Hon. Alameda, G.R. No. 182677 August 3, 2010, 626 SCRA 575
Section 7-8.
Tabujara vs. People, Oct. 29, 2008; Ramos vs. People, July 13, 2010 625 SCRA 39; Flores vs.
Hon. Gonzalez, 626 SCRA 661, Aug.3, 2010
RULE 113.Arrest
Section 1. Definition of arrest. The taking of a person into custody in order that he may be
bound to answer for the commission of an offense.
Magtoto vs Manguerra, 63 SCRA 4; people vs. Joson, 46 Phil 381; People vs. Barba, 29 SCRA
662;loIM VS. Felix, 194 SCRA 292; Tabujara III vs. People, Oct.29, 2008; Borlongan, Jr. vs.
Pena, 620 SCRA 106 ;Leviste vs. Alameda, 626 SCRA 575;People vs. Tan, 634 SCRA
773;Dolera vs. People, 598 SCRA 484
*Jurisdiction over the person of the accused how acquired.
*Necessity of finding of probable cause for the issuance of a warrant of arrest
*Sec.2, Art III, 1987 Constitution
RA 7438-An Act Defining Certain Rights of Person Arrested, Detainedor Under Custodial
Investigation As Well As Duties of the Arresting Officers and Providing Penalties for Violations
Thereof.
Section 2. Arrest; how made.
Section 3. Duty of arresting officer. * RA 7438; People vs. Albior, 163 SCRA 332
Section 4. Execution of warrant. *Note-lifetime of the warrant
Section 5. Arrest without warrant; when lawful. Warrantless Arrest
Cases: 538 SCRA 611; 626 SCRA 633; San Agustin vs. People, Aug.31, 2004; People vs.
Alunday, Sept. 3, 2008; 623 SCRA343; 299 SCRA 635; 163 SCRA 402; 283 SCRA 159; 301
SCRA 668; 352 SCRA 174; 373 SCRA 585; 429 SCRA 364; 163 SCRA 332; 206 SCRA 138;
305 SCRA 236
Objection to the illegality of arrest must be raised before arraignment, otherwise it is deemed
waived.[ Sec.26, Rule 114]
*RA 7438- An Act Defining Certain Rights of Person Arrested, Detained or Under Custodial
Investigation As Well As Duties of the Arresting Officers and Providing Penalties for Violations
Thereof
.Section 14. Right of attorney or relative to visit person arrested.
*Note: RA 7438- An Act Defining Certain rights of Person Arrested, Detaines or Under
Custodial Investigation As Well As Duties of the Arresting Officers and Providing Penalties for
Violations Thereof
RULE 114.Bail
Section 1. Bail defined. The security given for the release of a person in custody of the law,
furnished by him or a bondsman, to guarantee his appearance before any court as required under
the conditions specified.
Why is bail allowed?
*Fundamental Principle.
*Sec.13, Art. III 1987 Constitution; Sec.14, Art.III 1987 Constitution
Cases: Paderanga vs. Court of Appeals, 247 SCRA 741; Serapio vs. Sandiganbayan, 396 SCRA
443; Commendador et al. vs. De Villa, 200 SCRA 80; Trillianes IV vs. Hon. Pimentel, Sr. 556
SCRA 471; Docena-Caspe vs. Bagtas, 400 SCRA 37; People vs. Gako, 348 SCRA 334; Leviste
vs. CA, 615 SCRA 619; Leviste vs. Alameda, 626 SCRA 575; Bongcac vs. Sandiganbayan, 588
SCRA 537; 403 SCRA 123;389 SCRA 443;521 SCRA 470; 421 SCRA 500; 322 SCRA 559; 555
SCRA 193
Bail. when as a matter of right; of discretion; when not allowed
Capital offense.defined. Burden of proof in bail application4 Duties of the trial judge in case an application for bail is filed by an accused charged with
capital offense: 1. Notify the fiscal about the hearing 2.hearing 3. Decide whether the evidence of
guilt is strong 4. Discharge the accused if the evidence of guilt is not strong.( Basco vs.
Rapatalo, March 5, 1997)
Section 15. Recognizance. An obligation of record entered into before a court guaranteeing the
appearance of the accused for trial.
*RA 6036
Section 17. Bail, where filed.
Section 26. Bail not a bar to objections on illegal arrest, lack of or irregular preliminary
investigation. People vs. Ejandra, 429 SCRA 364; Yusop vs. Sandiganbayan,352 SCRA 587
RULE 115.Rights of Accused
Section 1. Rights of accused at the trial.
*Note: Sec.14 Art III, 1987 Constitution; RA 8493 Speedy Trial Act
Cases: 237 SCRA 685; People vs. Ong, June 21, 2004; 235 SCRA 39; 297 SCRA 679; 247
SCRA 652; 170 SCRA 489; 210 SCRA 246; 423 SCRA 374;184 SCRA 395;580 SCRA 279;442
SCRA 360
RULE 117.Motion to Quash
Section 1-16. Codal. Rule: Continuous Trial until terminated. Avoidance of unnecessary delays
Note: RA 8493 Speedy Trial Act;
Sec
14 (2) Art. III 1987 Constitution; Sec.1 (h) Rule 115
*Remedy where accused is not brought to trial within the time limit- dismissal
Section 17. Discharge of accused to be state witness. Note: 523 SCRA 147; 231 SCRA 783
Section 18. Discharge of accused operates as acquittal.
*Discharge of accused to be state witness-not a matter of right.
*Conditions before accused can be discharge as state witness
*Procedural Requirements for the discharge
Can a person be discharge from the information even without the approval of the court? Yes.*RA
6981- An Act Providing for a Witness Protection, Security and Benefit Program and for
other Purposes
Cases: Webb vs. De Leon 247 SCRA 652; People vs. Chavez, 397 SCRA 228; People vs.Sunga,
399 SCRA 624
Section 19. When mistake has been made in charging the proper offense *.Galvez vs. CA, 237
SCRA 685
Section 20-21. Codal
Section 22. Consolidation of trials of related offenses.
Section 23. Demurrer to evidence. Concept.
*Basis for the filing of a demurrer to evidence*Rule for filing demurrer to evidence-
whole case wide open for review. The reviewing tribunal can correct errors or even reverse the
trial courts decision on grounds other than those that the parties raise as errors.
Section 8-18. Codal
*Sec.11. Scope of Judgment of the Court of Appeals.
*Sec.12. Power of the Court of Appeals to Receive Evidence.
* Sec13. Quorum of the Court; Certification or Appeal of Cases to Supreme Court
* A.M.00-5-03 SC, Oct.15, 2004 (amending Sec. 12 & 13 of Rule 124)
decision is reached, the court shall reverse the judgment of conviction of the lower court and
acquit the accused.
S3. Failure to obtain required votes in division.where the necessary majority of 3 votes is not
obtained in a case in a division, the case shall be elevated to the court en banc.
Rule 15. Finality of Decision and Resolution.
S3. 2nd Motion for Reconsideration.--- higher interest of justice (en banc, 2/3 votes)
-in the Division, a vote of 3 members shall be required to elevate a 2nd motion for recon to the
court en banc
Rule 16., S1. Entry of judgment.xxx the date of entry of judgment shall be the date such
decision or resolution becomes executor, unless the court directs its immediate execution.
-0-0-0-