You are on page 1of 28

COMPREHENSIVE RESEARCH ON 4.

Cases where civil courts of equal


CRIMINAL PROCEDURE rank are vested with concurrent
jurisdiction:
Rule 110 PROSECUTION of Offenses
1. Features stated in Art. 2, RPC
1. General Rule: MTC and RTC courts
gain jurisdiction over the offense upon Cognizable by proper court in which
the filing of complaint by a complainant charge is first filed
or an information by the prosecuting
officer 1. Continuing crimes committed in
different judicial regions
Court gains jurisdiction over the 2. Offenses wherein any of the
person of the accused upon arrest or essential elements were committed
surrender; such jurisdiction once gained in different territorial jurisdictions
cannot be lost even if accused escapes
(Gimenez vs. Nazareno) 3. Offenses committed aboard a train,
vehicle, aircraft or vessel (see
Jurisdiction of the court over the R110, 15)
offense is determined at the time of the
institution of the action and is retained i. Railroad, train, aircraft
even if the penalty for the offense is later
lowered or raised (People vs. Lagon) (1) Territory or municipality where
vehicle passed
2. Complaint sworn written statement
charging a person with an offense, (2) Place of departure
subscribed by the offended party, any
peace officer or other public official (3) Place of arrival
charged with the enforcement of the law
violated ii. Vessel

Information accusation in writing (1) First port of entry


charging a person with an offense,
subscribed by the fiscal and filed with the (2) Thru which it passed during voyage
court
e. Libel and written defamation
3. Complaint and Information
distinguished: 5. Remedies of offended party when
fiscal unreasonably refuses to file an
information or include a person therein
Complaint Information
as an accused
A sworn statement Need not be sworn
to 1. In case of grave abuse of
Subscribed by the Subscribed to by the discretion, action for mandamus
offended party, any fiscal 2. Lodge a new complaint against the
peace officer or offenders
other officer charged
with the 3. Take up matter with the Secretary
enforcement of the of Justice
law violated
4. Institute administrative charges
May be filed either Filed with the court against the erring fiscal
with the court or in
the fiscals office 5. File criminal charges under Art.
generally to 208, RPC (prosecution of offenses)
commence the
preliminary 6. File civil action under Art. 27, NCC
investigation of the for damages (PO refuses or
charges made neglects to perform official duty)

1
7. Secure appointment of another In all 3 above cases, such institution
fiscal shall interrupt the period of prescription
of the offense charged (Rule 110, 1)
8. Institute another criminal action if
no double jeopardy is involved d. Offenses subject to summary
procedure
6. Writs of injunction or prohibition to
restrain a criminal prosecution are not [i.e. (1) violation of traffic laws; (2)
available, EXCEPT violation of rental laws; (3) violation of
municipal or city ordinances; and (4)
1. To afford adequate protection to criminal cases where the penalty does
constitutional rights of accused not exceed 6 months or fine of P1000 or
2. Necessary for the orderly both, irrespective of other imposable
administration of justice or to avoid penalties and civil liabilities]
oppression or multiplicity of actions
The complaint or information shall be
3. Pre-judicial question which is sub
filed directly in court without need of a
judice
prior preliminary examination or
4. Acts of the officer are without or in preliminary investigation.
excess of authority
Zaldivia vs. Reyes since a criminal
5. Prosecution is under an invalid law, case covered by the Rules of Summary
ordinance or regulation Procedure shall be deemed commenced
only when it is filed in court, then the
6. Double jeopardy is clearly apparent running of the prescriptive period shall
7. Court has no jurisdiction over the be halted on the date the case is actually
case filed in court and not on any date before
that.
8. Case of persecution rather than
prosecution Reodica vs. CA [clarifies Zaldivia
above] Under Art. 91 of the RPC, the
9. Charges are manifestly false and period of prescription shall be interrupted
motivated by lust for vengeance by the filing of the complaint or
information. It does not distinguish
10. Clearly no prima facie case
whether the complaint is filed for
against the accused and MTQ on
preliminary examination or investigation
that ground had been denied
only, or for an action on the merits.
Thus, the filing of the complaint even
7. Institution of Criminal Actions:
with the fiscals office should suspend the
running of the Statute of Limitations. The
a. In RTC:
ruling in Zaldivia is not applicable to all
cases subject to the Rules on Summary
By filing a complaint with the
Procedure, since that particular case
appropriate officer for the purpose of
involved a violation of an ordinance.
conducting requisite preliminary
Therefore, the applicable law therein was
investigation therein.
not Art. 91 of the RPC, but Act No. 3326
(An Act to Establish Periods of
b. In Municipal Trial Courts and
Prescription for Violations Penalized by
Municipal Circuit Trial Courts:
Special Acts and Municipal Ordinances
and to Provide when Prescription Shall
By filing the complaint or information
Begin to Run), 2 of which provides that
directly with said courts, or a complaint
period of prescription is suspended only
with the fiscals office
when judicial proceedings are instituted
against the guilty party.
c. In Metropolitan Trial Courts
8. Contents of information
By filing the complaint ONLY with the
office of the fiscal
a. Name of the accused

2
Information may be amended as to the within the courts jurisdiction and
name of the accused, but such accused was not surprised by the
amendment cannot be questioned for the variance between the proof and the
first time on appeal (People vs. Guevarra) information

Error of name of the offended party: if Qualifying and inherent aggravating


material to the case, it necessarily circumstances need to be alleged as they
affects the identification of the act are integral parts of the crime. If proved,
charged. Conviction for robbery cannot but not alleged, become only generic
be sustained if there is a variance aggravating circumstances.
between the allegation and the proof as
to the ownership of the property stolen. 9. Amendment of information and
Substitution of information, distinguished
b. Designation of offense by statute (or
of section/subsection of statute violated) Amendment Substitution
Involves either Necessarily involves
Only one offense charged, EXCEPT
formal or substantial a substantial change
where law prescribes a single
changes
punishment for various offenses.
Without leave of Needs leave of court
If facts do not completely allege all the court if before plea as original
elements of the crime charged, the info information has to
may be quashed; however, the be dismissed
prosecution is allowed to amend the info Where only as to Another preliminary
to include the necessary facts (People vs. form, there is no investigation is
Purisima) need for another entailed and accused
preliminary has to plead anew
c. Acts or omissions complained of investigation and
constituting the offense retaking of plea of
accused
Information need only allege facts, not Refers to the same Requires or
include all the evidence which may be offense charged or presupposes that
used to prove such facts (Balitaan vs. which necessarily new info involves a
CFI) includes or is different offense
necessarily included which does not
d. Name of offended party in original charges, include or is not
hence, substantial included in the
e. Approximate time of commission amendments to info original charge,
after plea taken hence, accused
Approximation of time is sufficient; cannot be made cannot claim double
amendment as to time is only a formal over objections of jeopardy
amendment; no need to dismiss case accused for if
(People vs. Molero) original info is
withdrawn, accused
A significant discrepancy in the time could invoke double
alleged cannot be sustained since such jeopardy
would allow the prosecution to prove an
offense distantly removed from the 10. After plea, amendment only as to
alleged date, thus substantially impairing matters of form, provided
the rights of the accused to be informed
of the charges against him (People vs. 1. Leave of court is obtained; and
Reyes) 2. Amendment is not prejudicial to
rights of accused
f. Place of commission
11. When amendment is only as to form
Conviction may be had even if it
appears that the crime was committed 1. Neither affects or alters nature of
not at the place alleged, provided that offense charged
the place of actual commission was
3
2. Charge does not deprive accused c. Defamation (consisting of imputation
of a fair opportunity to present his of offenses in [a] or [b])
defense
Complainant must be offended party
3. Does not involve a change in basic
theory of prosecution The offended party may intervene in
the prosecution of the criminal case
12. Exceptions to rule on venue because of her interest in it (Banal vs.
Tadeo)
1. Felonies in Art. 2, RPC (cognizable
by proper court in which charge is 14. Procedure
first filed)
2. Continuing offenses 1. Complaint filed in MTC or info filed
in RTC where an essential
3. Piracy which is triable anywhere
ingredient of the crime took place
4. Libel (residence; or where first (territorial jurisdiction)
published) 1. Amendment as a matter of
right before plea
5. In exceptional cases, to ensure fair
trial and impartial inquiry 2. Amendment upon discretion
of the court after plea
13. Special cases (who may prosecute)
Inclusion of other accused is only a
a. Adultery and concubinage formal amendment which would not be
prejudicial to the accused and should be
Only offended spouse can be allowed (People vs. CA)
complainant
d. After plea and before judgment, if it
Both guilty parties must be included in appears there was a mistake in charging
complaint proper offense, court shall dismiss
original info upon the filing of a corrected
b. Crimes against chastity one, provided that the accused will not
be placed in double jeopardy
With consent of the offended party, (substitution)
offended spouse, grandparents,
guardian, or state as parens patriae, in Fiscal determines direction of
that order prosecution; complainant must ask fiscal
if he wants to dismiss the case; the
Offended party, even if minor, has motion to dismiss must be addressed to
right to initiate the prosecution of the the court which has discretion over the
case independently of parents, disposition of the case (Republic vs.
grandparents or guardian, unless she is Sunga)
incompetent/incapable on grounds other
than minority. Objection to the amendment of an
information or complaint must be raised
If offended party who is a minor fails to at the time the amendment is made;
file the complaint, her parents, otherwise, deemed to have consented
grandparents or guardian may do so. thereto.

In crimes against chastity, the consent 15. Remedies


of the victim is a jurisdictional
requirementretraction renders the a. Motion to quash
information void (People vs. Ocapan)
May be filed after arraignment but
If complexed with a public crime, the before plea on the grounds provided by
provincial fiscal may sign the complaint the rules (generally, a flaw in the info)
on his own
If duplicity of offense charged is not
raised in trial through a motion to quash
4
info, the right to question it is waived San Ildefonso Lines vs. CA past
(People vs. Ocapan) pronouncements of the SC that the
requirement in Rule 111 that a
b. Motion to dismiss reservation be made prior to the
institution of an independent civil action
May be filed after plea but before is an unauthorized amendment to
judgment on most of grounds for motion substantive law is now no longer
to quash controlling. Far from altering substantive
rights, the primary purpose of the
16. Duplicity of Offense (in information reservation requirement is to avoid
or complaint) multiplicity of suits, to prevent delays, to
clear congested dockets, to simplify the
Defined as the joinder of separate and work of the trial court, and in short, the
distinct offenses in one and the same attainment of justice with the least
information/complaint expense and vexation to parties-litigants.

Remedy: file a motion to quash; failure 3. Civil action suspended when criminal
is equivalent to a waiver action filed, EXCEPT

Exception: when existing laws 1. Independent civil action (Arts. 32,


prescribe a single punishment (complex 33, 34 and 2176 of NCC)
crimes) 2. Prejudicial civil action

Rule 111 Prosecution of Civil Action 3. Civil case consolidated with


criminal action
1. General Rule: The injured party may 4. Civil action not one intended to
file a civil action independent of the enforce civil liability arising from
criminal proceeding to recover damages the offense (e.g., action for legal
from the offender. separation against a spouse who
committed concubinage)
Article 32 is a valid cause of a civil
action for damages against public 4. Prejudicial question arises when
officers who impair the Constitutional
rights of citizens (Aberca vs. Ver)
1. The civil action involves an issue
similar or intimately related to the
Even if the private prosecutor issue raised in the criminal action
participates in the prosecution, if he is 2. The resolution of such issue will
not given the chance to prove damages, determine whether the criminal
the offended party is not barred from action will proceed or not
filing a separate civil action
Requisites for a prejudicial question:
2. Civil action for recovery of civil
liability impliedly instituted, EXCEPT 1. The civil action involves an issue
similar or intimately related to the
1. Waiver issue raised in the criminal action:
2. Reservation of right to institute and
separate action 2. The resolution of such issue
3. Institution of civil action prior to determines whether or not the
criminal action criminal action may proceed

NOTE: Under SC Circular 57-97, all Petition for suspension of criminal


criminal actions for violations of BP Blg. action is to be filed at any time before
22 shall be deemed to necessarily prosecution rests.
include the corresponding civil action,
and no reservation to file such civil action 5. Remedies
separately shall be allowed or
recognized.

5
a. Reservation of right to institute with the MTC without need of an
separate civil proceedings to recover civil information, which is merely
liability arising from crime recommendatory (Tandoc vs. Resultan)

Must be made before prosecution Absence of a preliminary investigation


presents evidence is NOT a ground for a motion to quash
the information; an information filed
Action instituted only after final without a preliminary investigation is
judgment in criminal action defective but not fatal; in its absence, the
accused may ask for one; it is the fiscals
b. Petition to suspend the criminal refusal to conduct a preliminary
action investigation when the accused demands
one which is a violation of the rights of
May be filed upon existence of a the accused (Doromal vs.
prejudicial question in a pending civil Sandiganbayan). Court should not
action dismiss the info, but hold the case in
abeyance and either: (1) conduct its own
Filed at any time before the investigation; or (2) require the fiscal to
prosecution rests hold a reinvestigation.

6. Extinction of penal action does not 2. GENERAL RULE: The fiscal conducts
carry with it extinction of the civil unless the preliminary investigation before filing
the extinction proceeds from a an information with the RTC, EXCEPT
declaration in a final judgment that the where the accused is lawfully arrested
fact from which the civil might arise did without a warrant and an inquest is
not exist. conducted.

Final judgment in civil absolving 3. Right to Preliminary Investigation


defendant from civil liability not a bar to
criminal action A personal right and may be waived

7. Filing fees: Waived by failure to invoke the right


prior to or at least at the time of the plea
1. Actual or compensatory damages
filing fees not required 4. Who conducts Preliminary
2. Moral, temperate and exemplary Investigation
filing fees required
1. Provincial or city fiscals and their
1. If alleged, fees must be paid by assistants
offended party upon filing of 2. Judges of MTC and MCTC
complaint or information
3. National and regional state
1. If not alleged, filing fees prosecutors
considered a first lien on the
judgment 4. Such other officers as may be
authorized by law
Rule 112 Preliminary Investigation 5. Duly authorized legal officers of
COMELEC
1. Preliminary investigation inquiry or
proceeding to determine if there is 1. The Ombudsman
sufficient ground to engender a well-
founded belief that a crime cognizable by 2. The PCGG, in cases of ill-
the RTC has been committed, and that gotten wealth
the respondent is probably guilty thereof,
and should be held for trial 5. Procedure

A preliminary investigation is only a. If conducted prior to arrest


necessary for an information to be filed
with the RTC; complaints may be filed i. Complainant files complaint with
6
(a) Provincial or city fiscal 1. City fiscal or state prosecutor
either dismisses the
(b) Regional or state prosecutor complaint or files the
information in court
(c) MTC or MCTC judge, excluding MTC
judge of Metro Manila or chartered cities Decision prevails over decision of the
MTC judge
(d) Other offices authorized by law
vii. Records will not form records of the
1. Investigating officer either case proper
dismisses complaint or asks by
subpoena complainant and Court on its own or on motion may
respondent to submit affidavits and order production of record
counter-affidavits
1. If the investigating officer b. If conducted after warrantless arrest
finds prima facie evidence,
he prepares an information 1. If accused waives Art. 125, RPC
and a resolution and asks for a preliminary
investigation, with the assistance
i.e., if fiscal finds reasonable ground to of counsel, then the procedure for
believe that a crime has been committed one prior to arrest is followed
and accused is probably guilty thereof 1. Inquest conducted as follows

Prima facie evidence is that evidence (a) Fiscal determines the validity of the
which, standing alone, unexplained and arrest
uncontradicted, would be enough to
merit a conviction of the accused (b) Fiscal determines existence of prima
facie evidence based on the statements
iv. Otherwise, he recommends the of the complainant, arresting officer and
dismissal of the complaint witnesses

If the investigating officer is an MTC (c) Fiscal either dismisses the complaint
judge, and he finds that probable cause and orders the immediate release of the
exists and that there is a need to place accused, OR prepares and files an
the accused under custody, then he may information
issue a warrant of arrest
While fiscal has quasi-judicial
Flores vs. Sumaling What discretion whether or not to file an
differentiates the present rule from the information, once it is filed with the
previous one is that while before, it was court, the court acquires jurisdiction
mandatory for the investigating judge to giving it discretion over the disposition of
issue a warrant for the arrest of the the case and the Sec. of Justice should
accused if he found probable cause, the refrain from entertaining petitions for
rule now is that the investigating judges review or appeals from the decision of
power to order the arrest of the accused fiscal (Crespo vs. Mogul; Velasquez vs.
is limited to instances in which there is a Undersecretary of Justice)
necessity for placing him in custody in
order not to frustrate the ends of NOTE: Information may be filed by
justice. It is therefore error for the offended party, peace officer or fiscal
investigating judge to order the issuance without preliminary investigation.
of a warrant of arrest solely on his finding
of probable cause, without making any 6. Remedies
finding of a necessity to place the
accused in immediate custody to prevent a. Motion for preliminary investigation
a frustration of justice.
Filed when accused is arrested without
1. Investigating officer forwards warrant
records to the city fiscal or chief
state prosecutor
7
Must be with assistance of counsel and Not all persons detained are arrested;
after waiving Art. 125, RPC only those detained to answer for an
offense.
b. Motion for preliminary investigation
Invitations are not arrests and are
Filed within 5 days after accused usually not unconstitutional, but in some
learns an information against him has cases may be taken as commands (Babst
been filed without a preliminary vs. NBI); however, the practice of issuing
investigation an invitation to a person who is
investigated in connection with an
c. Motion for re-investigation offense he is suspected to have
committed is considered as placing him
d. Appeal to DOJ under custodial investigation. (RA
7438)
Filed upon denial of his motion for a
preliminary investigation, on the ground Warrants of arrest remain valid until
that his rights to due process of law were arrest is effected, or the warrant is lifted
violated, ousting the court of jurisdiction
Arrest may be made at any time of the
e. Petition for prohibition day or night

Filed with appellate court to stop the 3. Warrantless arrests by a peace officer
criminal proceedings or a private person

Ordinarily, injunction will not lie but a. When person to be arrested is


may be granted in certain cases committing, attempting or has
committed an offense
When prohibition proper to restrain
criminal proceedings: b. When an offense has just been
committed and the person making the
1. When strong-arm tactics are used arrest has personal knowledge that the
for vindictive purposes (Salonga person to be arrested committed it
vs. Cruz-Pano)
2. When the accused is deprived of Warrantless arrest anytime for a
his rights continuing offense like rebellion,
subversion (Umil vs. Ramos)
3. When the statute on which the
charge is based is null and void The continuing crime, not the crime
finally charged, needs only be the cause
4. When it will aid the administration
of the arrest (Umil vs. Ramos)
of justice (Tatad vs.
Sandiganbayan)
c. When person to be arrested is an
5. When multiplicity of suits will be escaped detainee (either serving
avoided (Guingona vs. City Fiscal) sentence or with case pending)

Rule 113 Arrest 1. When a person lawfully arrested


escapes
1. Arrest taking a person into custody 2. Bondsman, for purpose of
in order that he may be bound to answer surrendering the accused
for the commission of some offense,
3. Accused attempts to leave country
made by an actual restraint of the person
without court permission
or by his submission to custody
4. Procedure
2. General Rule: No person may be
arrested without a warrant.
a. With warrant

1. Complainant files application with


affidavits attached
8
2. Judge conducts ex parte 1. Person arrested may waive
preliminary examination to right to Art. 125, RPC and ask
determine probable cause for preliminary investigation
or inquest
In determining probable cause, judge
must: Fiscal is not judicial authority
contemplated under Art. 125 (Sayo vs.
(1) Personally examine witness Chief of Police)

(2) Witness must be under oath 1. Fiscal files info

(3) Examination must be reduced to 5. Requisites for a warrant of arrest:


writing (Luna vs. Plaza)
1. Probable cause
In determining probable cause, the 2. Signed by judge
judge may rely on findings by responsible
officer (Lim vs. Felix) 3. Specifically naming or particularly
and sufficiently describing person
iii. Judge issues warrant of arrest to be arrested

If without preliminary examination, John Doe warrants are void for being
considered irregular (Bagcal vs. Villaraza) general warrants (Pangandaman vs.
Cesar)
iv. If peace officer is unable to serve
warrant 10 days after issuance, he must 6. Remedies
file a report and explanation with judge
within 10 days a. Petition for writ of habeas corpus

v. If warrant served Filed with any court, to effect


immediate release of the person
(1) Person informed that he is being detained
arrested
Filed when a person is being illegally
(2) Informed of cause of his arrest detained (without judicial process), or
was illegally arrested (void warrant or
(3) Officer may break door or window if unlawful warrantless arrest, or
admission to building is refused warrantless arrest beyond period with no
information filed)
(4) Person physically restrained
Habeas corpus is not allowed when:
For private citizens making an arrest
1. The person is in custody of an
May not do so except to do some officer under process of law, and
service to humanity or justice 2. The court had jurisdiction to issue
the process (Luna vs. Plaza)
(5) No violence or unnecessary force
may be used If an arrest is improper, the remedy is
a motion for quashal of the warrant of
(6) Officer may summon assistance arrest and/or a motion to quash the
information, not habeas corpus (Ilagan
(7) Person who escapes after arrest may vs. Enrile)
be immediately pursued
Habeas corpus is no longer available
vi. Person arrested is brought to after an information has been filed, the
nearest police station or jail information being the judicial process
required by law (Ilagan vs. Enrile)
b. Without warrant:
Habeas corpus is proper when a
1. Person is arrested person is being restrained illegally, e.g.,
9
imprisoned past maximum penalty 4. Definition of
allowed by law (Gumabon vs. Director of custodial
Prisons) investigation
questioned
b. Quashal of warrant of arrest
1. It begins
Filed with court which issued the only after
warrant of arrest when the warrant of arrest
arrest is fatally flawed 2. Police
investigatio
c. Motion to quash information ns prior to
arrest are
Filed with court when information not covered
against the person arrested has been
filed 3. The rights
may be
Must be made in a special waived, but
appearance before the court the rights
questioning only its lack of jurisdiction to be
over the person of the accused informed of
these
Otherwise, the voluntary appearance rights, i.e.,
of the person arrested by filing a motion to warning,
before the court would be deemed a may not be
submission to the authority of the court, waived
thus granting it whatever jurisdiction it
lacked over the person 4. Warning
must not
Any irregularity in the arrest is cured only be
when the petitioner submits himself to said, officer
the jurisdiction of the court, e.g., by filing must make
for bail (Bagcal vs. Villaraza) sure the
person
7. V.V. Mendoza, Rights to Counsel in arrested
Custodial Investigation understand
s them
Evolution of rights of the accused specifically
under custodial investigation
5. Present
rules
1. All involuntary confession were
inadmissible; accused had to prove 1. Volun
involuntariness tary
1. Involuntary confessions were confe
inadmissible only if they were ssion
false s are
admi
2. Revert to exclusionary rule:
ssible
any involuntary confession is
inadmissible 2. Test
of
1. Miranda rule: the
volun
accused must be
tarine
informed of his rights
ss
1. To remain silent deter
mine
2. Against self- d on
incrimination a
case-
3. To counsel to-
10
case Bail implies delivery of the accused to
basis the sureties who, though not holding him
prisoner, may seize him and imprison
3. Waiv him until they can deliver him to court
er of (US vs. Bonoan)
rights
must 2. General Rule: All persons are entitled
not to bail as a matter of right, except those
only charged with capital offenses.
be
with Right to bail traditionally unavailable
couns to military personnel facing court martial,
el but who are not in the same class as civilians
must (Comendador vs. de Villa)
be in
writin Bail should be available regardless of
g other circumstances or the merits of the
case, if the health or the life of the
Confessions made without assistance detainee is in danger (Dela Rama vs.
of counsel are inadmissible as evidence Peoples Court)
to incriminate the accused, but they may
be used to impeach the credibility of the Excessive bail is tantamount to denial
accused, or they may be treated as of bail, which is unconstitutional (Dela
verbal admission of the accused through Camara vs. Enage)
the testimony of the witnesses (People
vs. Molas) 3. When bail is a matter of right

Rule 114 Bail Before or after conviction by MTC,


MCTC, MJC
1. Bail security given for the release of
a person in custody of law, furnished by Before conviction by the RTC of an
him or a bondsman, conditioned upon his offense not punishable by death,
appearance before any court as required reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment
under the following conditions:
4. When bail is discretionary
1. Undertaking effective upon (application filed with court where case is
approval and remains in force at all pending)
stages until promulgation of
judgment, unless sooner cancelled 1. Upon conviction by RTC of an
2. Accused shall appear before court offense not punishable by death,
when required reclusion perpetua or life
imprisonment
3. Failure to appear despite notice to
2. Provisional liberty under same
him or the bondsman will waive his
circs. but during period to appeal
right to be present and trial shall
subject to consent of bondsman
proceed in absentia
3. In case he has applied for
4. Bondsman shall surrender accused
probation after final judgment, he
for execution of judgment
may be allowed temporary liberty
under his bail or recognizance
Bail applies to all persons detained,
not just to those charged with the offense
5. Procedure
(Herras vs. Teehankee)
a. Offense charged is not capital:
Court has power to prohibit person out
on bail from leaving the country
i. Accused applies for bail
(Manotoc, Jr. vs. CA)
(1) Where information against him was
filed or where case is pending
11
(2) Absent (1), in another branch of the 7. Recognizance
same court within the province or city
where he is held 1. Obligation of record entered into
before some court of magistrate
(3) If arrested in another province, city duly authorized to take it, with the
or municipality, file with the RTC condition to do some particular act,
the most usual condition in criminal
(4) Absent (3), with the MTC cases being the appearance of the
accused for trial
1. Judge sets bail 2. Does not require signature of
1. Accused may move to reduce accused for trial
bail, and hearing will be set
3. Does not require signature of
2. Accused posts bail and accused to be valid
deposits the same with the
Municipal/City/Provincial 8. Prosecution witnesses may be
Treasurer or, if cash, with the required to post bail to ensure their
Collector of Internal Revenue appearance at the trial, except:

3. Accused is released 1. Substitution of info (see R110, 14)


2. Court believes that material
b. Offense charged is capital: witness may not appear at the trial

1. Accused petitions for bail 9. When bail required under RA 6036


2. Judge sets hearing to determine (violation of ordinance, light felony,
whether evidence of guilt is strong criminal offense not higher that 6
month imprisonment and/or P2000 fine,
Ex-parte hearing on bail is arbitrary or both)
and unacceptable (Herras vs. Teehankee)
1. a. Caught in flagrante
1. Prosecution presents evidence 2. Confessed to commission of
1. Court may not force fiscal to offense unless repudiated (force
produce evidence (Herras vs. and intimidation)
Teehankee)
3. Previously escaped, evaded
2. If evidence is strong, bail is sentence or jumped bail
denied
4. Violation of Sec. 2 (fails to report to
1. Otherwise, judge sets clerk of court periodically under his
bail and procedure for recognizance)
non-capital offense is
followed 5. Recidivist, habitual delinquent
previously convicted for an offense
In capital crimes, judges discretion is to which the law or ordinance
limited to determining strength of attaches an equal or greater
evidence and does not cover determining penalty or for 2 or more offenses to
whether bail should be allowed (Herras which it attaches a lighter penalty
vs. Teehankee)
6. Committed offense while on parole
Evidence must be strong that the or under conditional pardon
accused is guilty of the capital offense 7. Previously pardoned by municipal
charged, not just of any offense or city mayor for violation of
(Bernardez vs. Valera) ordinance for at least 2 times
6. Bail bond an obligation under seal 10. Instances when accused may be
given by accused with one or more released on recognizance:
sureties and made payable to proper
officer with the condition to be void upon 1. Offense charged is a violation of an
performance by the accused of such acts ordinance, a light felony or criminal
as he may legally be required to perform
12
offense the imposable penalty to a. Accused fails to appear before court
which does not exceed 6 months when required
and or P2000 fine
2. Person has been in custody for a 30 days for bondsman to show cause
period equal to or more than the why judgment should not be rendered
minimum of the imposable against him
principal penalty, without
application of the Indeterminate b. Bondsman fails to produce him within
Sentence Law or any modifying 30 days
circumstance
c. Bondsman fails to satisfactorily
3. Accused has applied for probation explain to the court why accused did not
and before the same has been appear when first required to do so
resolved, but NO BAIL was filed or
accused is incapable of filing one Sureties guarantee only appearance of
the accused, not his conduct (US vs.
4. Youthful offender held for physical
Bonoan)
and mental examination, trial or
appeal, if unable to furnish bail
Sureties exonerated if appearance
made impossible by an act of God, the
11. Cancellation of bail
obligee or the law (US vs. Bonoan)
a. Upon application with the court and
14. Provisional forfeiture
due notice to the fiscal
1. Within 30 days, produce the body
1. Accused surrenders back to
or give reason for non-production
custody
AND
1. Accused dies
2. Explain satisfactorily the absence
of the accused when first required
b. Automatic cancellation
to appear
1. Case is dismissed
15. Remedies
1. Accused is acquitted

2. Accused is convicted and 1. Application for bail, when bail can


surrenders for execution of be availed of as a matter of right
judgment 2. Petition for bail, when the offense
charged is a capital offense
12. When bail cancelled or denied: after
RTC imposes imprisonment exceeding 6 For judge to set hearing for the
years, but not more than 20 years, and: determination of strength of evidence of
guilt
1. Accused is a recidivist, quasi-
recidivist, habitual delinquent or 16. Circumstances to be considered in
guilty of the aggravating fixing amount of bail:
circumstance of reiteration;
2. Provisionally escaped, evaded 1. Financial ability of accused to give
sentence, violated provisions of bail;
bail; 2. Nature and circumstances of
offense;
3. Committed offense while on
probation, parole, or conditional 3. Penalty of offense charged;
pardon;
4. Character and reputation of
4. Probability of flight; or accused;

5. Undue risk that during appeal, he 5. Age and health of accused


may commit another crime
6. Weight of evidence against
accused
13. When bail is forfeited
13
7. Probability of accused appearing of proceedings in the future and to
for trial; adduce evidence in his behalf (People vs.
Salas)
8. Forfeiture of other bonds;
1. To testify as witness on his own
9. Fact that accused was a fugitive
behalf, subject to cross-
from justice when arrested; and
examination on matters covered by
10. Pendency of other cases in direct examination; not to be
which the accused is under bond prejudiced by his silence
2. Not to be compelled to be a
17. Notes: witness against himself

3. To confront and examine the


1. Posting bail waives the right to
witnesses against him, including
question any irregularity attending
the right to use in evidence
the arrest of a person (Callanta vs.
testimony of a witness
Villanueva). However, this does
not result in waiver of the 4. Who is deceased, out of or cannot
inadmissibility of the articles seized with due diligence be found in the
incidentally to such illegal arrest. RP
2. Accused waived the right to
question any irregularity in the 1. Given in another proceeding
conduct of the preliminary
investigation when he failed to do 2. With the same parties
so before entering his plea (People 3. Same subject matter
vs. Dela Cerna)
4. Opportunity to cross-examine
3. Accused out on bail may be re-
arrested if he attempts to depart Prosecution has no privilege to
from the Philippines without prior withhold the identity of informers when
court permission (warrantless such informer was crucial in the
arrest allowed). operation itself; failure to present the
informer is a denial of the right to
Rule 115 Rights of Accused confront the witness which merits the
reversal of the conviction (People vs.
1. Right of the accused under the Rules Bagano)
a. To be presumed innocent until proven g. To have compulsory process to secure
guilty beyond reasonable doubt witnesses and evidence in his behalf
In an appeal from a conviction, the h. To have a speedy, impartial and
accused shall again be presumed public trial
innocent until and unless his conviction is
affirmed (Castillo vs. Felix) Unreasonable postponements of trial
amounts to a denial of the right to a
b. To be informed of the nature and speedy trial, entitling the accused to
cause of charges mandamus to compel dismissal of the
case, or to habeas corpus if he is
The right must be substantially detained
complied with; arraignment and later
proceedings must be in a language the i. To have the right of appeal
accused understands (People vs.
Crisologo) 2. Rights of the accused under the
Constitution
c. To be present at every stage of
proceedings, subject to waiver by bail a. To due process
If an accused escapes, he waives this b. Against self-incrimination
right and merits a trial in absentia; the
accused forfeits his rights to be notified
14
Right is limited to testimonies; ocular the accused pleaded
inspection of the body may be allowed guilty with the consent
(Villaflor vs. Summers) of the fiscal and the
offended party
Being informed of rights means a
meaningful transmission of information, 4. Exceptions to double jeopardy
without which confession made by the
accused is inadmissible (People vs. 1. The offense was made graver by
Nicandro) supervening events
2. The facts constituting the graver
Confessions obtained through coercion offense were only discovered after
are inadmissible (People vs. Opida) the filing of the earlier information

Right against self-incrimination and to No double jeopardy if the new fact


counsel do not apply during custodial which justified the new charge arose only
investigation (People vs. Ayson) after arraignment and conviction (People
vs. City Court)
During trial, the right against self-
incrimination takes the following form: No double jeopardy where the trial was
a sham since there was no competent
1. Accused may refuse to testify court (Galman vs. Sandiganbayan)
2. If he testifies, he may refuse to
answer those questions which may No double jeopardy if first case was
incriminate him in ANOTHER dismissed with consent of the accused
offense (Caes vs. IAC)

c. Against double jeopardy There is double jeopardy if a person is


charged twice under different penal
d. To be heard by himself and counsel statutes for the same acts (People vs.
Relova)
3. Double jeopardy
c. Plea of guilty to a lesser offense
1. First jeopardy must have attached without the consent of the fiscal and the
prior to the first offended party
2. First jeopardy attached and
terminated 5. Remedies

3. Valid complaint or information 1. Motion to quash


2. Motion to dismiss
1. Competent court with
jurisdiction
Both filed on the ground of violation of
2. Accused had pleaded accuseds rights, thereby ousting the
court of jurisdiction
3. Action ended in conviction,
acquittal or termination 6. NOTES:
without the consent of the
accused Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 1

c. Offense charged in later case is: No person shall be deprived of life,


liberty or property without due process of
1. Same as that in previous case law, nor shall any person be denied the
1. Necessarily includes or is equal protection of the laws.
included in the previous case
Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 14
2. An attempt or frustration of
the offense in previous case 1. No person shall be held to answer
1. An offense lesser than for a criminal offense without due
that charged to which process of law.

15
2. In all criminal prosecutions, the c. Court gives counsel time to confer
accused shall be presumed with accused at least an hour before
innocent until the contrary is arraignment
proved, and shall enjoy the right to
be informed of the nature and Period allowed for counsel de oficio to
cause of the accusations against confer with accused must be
him, to have a speedy, impartial substantially complied with; if not, case
and public trial, to meet the may be remanded for re-arraignment
witnesses face to face, and to have (People vs. Gonzaga)
compulsory process to secure the
attendance of witnesses and the 1. Accused given a copy of the
production of evidence in his information, which is read to him in
behalf. a language he understands
2. Accused is asked whether he
However, after arraignment, trial may pleads guilty or not guilty
proceed notwithstanding the absence of
the accused provided that he has been 3. Accused files a motion to quash or
duly notified and that his failure to makes plea
appear is unjustifiable. 4. Accused personally makes his plea
Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 16 5. Plea is entered into record

All persons shall have the right to a 6. If accused makes plea of not guilty,
speedy disposition of their cases before counsel has at least 2 days to
all judicial, quasi-judicial, or prepare for trial
administrative bodies.
People vs. Agbayani the right for 2
Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 17 days to prepare must be expressly
demanded. Only when so demanded
No person shall be compelled to be a does denial thereof constitute reversible
witness against himself. error and ground for new trial. Further,
such right may be waived, expressly or
Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 21 impliedly.

No person shall be twice put in jeopardy NOTE, HOWEVER, under SC Circular 38-
of punishment for the same offense. 98 (implementing Speedy Trial Act of
1997), accused must be given at least
If an act is punished by a law or 15 days to prepare for trial, which shall
ordinance, conviction or acquittal under commence within 30 days from receipt of
either shall constitute a bar to another Pre-Trial Order.
prosecution for the same act.
j. Case proceeds to pre-trial, trial or
Rule 116 Arraignment and Plea hearing, depending on the plea

1. Procedure Statement in the judgment that the


accused was arraigned and pleaded is
1. Court informs accused of his right sufficient; the manner of statement of
to counsel and asks him if he wants such fact is immaterial (People vs.
one Cariaga)
2. Court appoints counsel de oficio if
accused has none 2. Kinds of plea

If no such member of the available, 1. No plea a plea of not guilty shall


any person who is a resident of the be entered
province, of good repute for probity and 2. Conditional plea of guilt a plea of
ability to defend accused not guilty shall be entered

3. Not guilty case proceeds to trial


or pre-trial
16
4. Guilty to a lesser offense if fiscal c. A plea of not guilty may not be
and offended party consents, changed to guilty, as doing so would only
conviction under offense charged spare the prosecution of presenting
for purposes of double jeopardy evidence and still result in the conviction
of the accused.
5. Info may be amended
4. Remedies
1. Case goes to trial

2. Even if info is not amended, a. Motion for specification


and even if lesser offense is
not included in offense May be filed any time before plea,
charged, court may still find even after a MTQ
the accused guilty of that
lesser offense Filed when the information is
insufficient in form or is generally
e. Guilty to a capital offense worded, that a Bill of Particulars is
necessary to clarify the acts for which
Court conducts searching inquiry to the accused is being charged
determine if accused was aware of the
charges, of his plea, and its b. Motion to quash
consequences
May be filed at anytime before plea is
Court requires prosecution to present entered
evidence to prove guilt of accused and
determine his degree of culpability, and Based on grounds provided by the
accused may still establish presence of rules
mitigating circumstances in his favor
c. Motion to suspend arraignment
f. Guilty to a non-capital offense
Filed when the accused seems
Court receives evidence from the mentally unsound or if there is a
parties to determine penalty to impose prejudicial question in a pending civil
case
Plea of guilty not necessarily followed
by conviction. Upon receipt of d. Motion to withdraw an improvident
exculpatory evidence (if accused pleaded plea of guilt
guilty), trial court should consider the
plea withdrawn and in its place, order the May be filed at any time before
plea of not guilty judgment of conviction becomes final,
when it can be shown that the accused
Plea of guilty waives only defects which was not aware of the significance of
may be taken advantage of by motion to pleading guilty to the charges
quash or by plea in abatement; cannot
cure jurisdictional defects. Rule 117 Motion to Quash

3. Effects 1. Motion to quash a hypothetical


admission that even if all the facts
a. Entry of plea will waive alleged were true, the accused still
cannot be convicted due to other reasons
1. Right to question illegality of the
arrest 2. When to file Motion to Quash
2. Right to question any irregularity in
the preliminary investigation General Rule: Before entering plea; all
grounds not raised deemed waived
3. Right to file a motion to quash
Exception: The following grounds may
b. Improvident plea of guilty may be be used in MTQ even after plea
changed to not guilty any time before
judgment is rendered 1. No offense charged
17
2. Lack of jurisdiction over the offense informations for offenses committed
charged within Pampanga but outside Angeles
City. An information must be prepared
3. Extinction of the offense or of the and presented by the prosecuting
penalty attorney or someone authorized by law.
If not, the court does not acquire
4. Double jeopardy
jurisdiction. Although failure to file a
motion to quash the information is a
3. Grounds
waiver of all objections to it insofar as
formal objections to pleadings are
a. Information does not conform to
concerned, questions relating to want of
prescribed form
jurisdiction may be raised at any stage of
the proceedings. Moreover, since the
For the info to charge a complex crime,
complaint or information was insufficient
it is not necessary that it be defined by
because it was so defective in form or
law, only that it alleges that one offense
substance that conviction upon it could
was necessary to commit the other
not have been sustained, its dismissal
(People vs. Alagao)
without the consent of the accused
cannot be pleaded as prior jeopardy, and
b. Court has no jurisdiction
will not be a bar to a second prosecution.
1. No territorial jurisdiction
d. More than one offense was charged,
2. No jurisdiction over offense
EXCEPT where law prescribes single
charged may be raised at any
punishment for various offenses
time; no waiver considered even
upon failure to move to quash on
e. Facts alleged do not constitute an
such ground
offense
3. No jurisdiction over person of the
accused May be raised at any time

The court gained jurisdiction over the No waiver


person of the accused when he
voluntarily appeared for the pre- For charge to be complete, it is
suspension hearing (Layosa vs. necessary to state that it was exempted
Rodriguez) from any amnesty existing at the time

c. Accused would be put in double f. Criminal action or liability has been


jeopardy extinguished

Bars another prosecution g. Information contains allegations


which, if true, would be a legal excuse or
No waiver justification

No double jeopardy if first case was h. Officer who filed the information had
dismissed with the consent of the no authority
accused (Que vs. Cosico), unless ground
for dismissal is: (a) denial of right to Presentation of evidence cannot cure
speedy trial; or (b) insufficiency of an invalid information (People vs.
evidence. Asuncion)

If the first case was dismissed due to a NOTE: Court will consider no other
deficient information, then there was no grounds other than those raised, EXCEPT
valid information and there could be no lack of jurisdiction over offense charged.
double jeopardy (Caniza vs. People)
4. Requisites of Double jeopardy
Cudia vs CA it should be the
Provincial Prosecutor of Pampanga, not a. Valid information or complaint,
the City Prosecutor, who should prepare sufficient in form and substance

18
b. Before court of competent jurisdiction 1. Motion to dismiss if certain
grounds were not raised or denied
Doctrine of Jurisdiction by Estoppel: in a MTQ
depends upon whether the lower court 2. Trial
actually had jurisdiction or not. If it had
no jurisdiction, but the case was tried If there was really no basis for the info,
and decided upon the theory that it had then such could be proved in the trial
jurisdiction, the parties are not barred on
appeal, from assailing such jurisdiction, Upon denial of a MTQ, the proper
for the same must exist as a matter of remedy is to go on trial and later to
law, and may not be conferred by appeal, if necessary; mandamus or
consent of the parties or by estoppel. certiorari will only be granted if there is
However, if the lower court had not other plain, simple and adequate
jurisdiction, and the case was heard and remedy
decided upon a given theory, such, for
instance, as that the court had no 7. Failure to move to quash or to allege
jurisdiction, the party who induced it to any ground therefor deemed a waiver of
adopt such theory will not be permitted, such grounds, except:
on appeal, to assume an inconsistent
position that the lower court had 1. Failure to charge an offense
jurisdiction. Here, the principle of 2. Lack of jurisdiction over the offense
estoppel applies. The rule that charged
jurisdiction is conferred by law, and does
not depend upon the will of the parties, 3. Extinction of the offense or of the
has no bearing thereon. penalty

4. Double jeopardy
c. Accused had pleaded
Rule 118 Pre-Trial
d. Conviction, acquittal, or dismissal or
termination of case without consent of 1. Plea bargaining process whereby
accused the accused and the prosecution in a
criminal case work out a mutually
e. Bar to offense charged, attempt to satisfactory disposition of the case
commit the same or necessarily includes
subject to court approval. It usually
or is necessarily included involves the defendants pleading guilty
to a lesser offense or to only some of the
Conviction for physical injuries through counts of a multi-count indictment in
reckless imprudence constitutes double return for a lighter sentence than that for
jeopardy to the charge of damage to the greater charge.
property through reckless imprudence.
Under Speedy Trial Act of 1997, in all
5. Procedure criminal cases cognizable by the MTC,
MCTC, MeTC, RTC and Sandiganbayan,
1. MTQ filed pretrial is mandatory.
2. If based on defect in info which can
be cured, court shall order its Under SC Circular 38-98, implementing
amendment the Speedy Trial Act of 1997, an
3. Quashing the info shall NOT be a accused may plea guilty to a lesser
bar to subsequent prosecution offense only if said offense is necessarily
(accused has not pleaded yet), included in the offense charged.
EXCEPT when the ground is:
2. Stipulation of facts
1. Double jeopardy OR
Facts which both parties and
2. Extinction of criminal liability respective counsels agree on as
evidenced by their signatures; these
6. Remedies facts need not be proved by evidence in
trial
19
Stipulation is inadmissible if unsigned a. Parties notified of date of trial 2 days
by either accused or counsel; a later before trial date (R119, 1)
memo of confirmation, signed only by
counsel, cannot cure defect (Fule vs. CA) HOWEVER, under SC Circular 38-98,
accused must be given at least 15 days
3. Pre-trial order binds the parties, to prepare for trial, which shall
limits the trial to matters not yet commence within 30 days from receipt of
disposed of, and controls the course of Pre-Trial Order.
action during the trial
1. Accused may move that his
4. Procedure witnesses be examined
2. Defense witnesses examined by
1. Judge must calendar pre-trial any judge or lawyer
2. Either party may waive the pre-trial
3. Prosecution witnesses, if they
3. If court appoints counsel de oficio, would be unable to attend trial,
counsel has at least 2 days to may be examined by the judge
prepare handling the case

4. In the pre-trial conference 4. Trial continues from day to day,


unless postponed for a just cause
5. Plea bargaining
5. Prosecution presents evidence
6. Stipulation of facts
Presentation
7. Marking of evidence (does not
imply conceding to its admissibility
Testimonies: direct examination
or credibility)
8. Waiver of objections to Cross-examination
admissibility of evidence
Re-cross
9. Other matters which will promote a
fair and expeditious trial Offer

e. Judge issues pre-trial order 1. Accused may move for discharge


2. Prosecution rests
Rule 119 Trial
3. Defense may, with or without leave
1. In trial, the defense tries of court, file a demurrer to
evidence
1. To assail the admissibility of
4. Defense presents evidence
evidence which prove the elements
of the offense charged 5. Defense rests
2. To assail the credibility of such
evidence 6. Prosecution presents rebuttal
evidence
3. To prove another version, possibly
admitting certain evidence of the 7. Defense presents rebuttal evidence
prosecution and adding other
evidence to cast reasonable doubt 8. Trial is closed; case is submitted for
judgment
Even in summary procedure, the judge
cannot base his decision simply on 3. When mistake made in charging
affidavits; he must give the defendant proper offense
the chance to cross-examine (Combate
vs. San Jose) 1. If Accused cannot be convicted of
offense charged or offense
2. Procedure necessarily included therein
2. Accused detained, not discharged

20
3. Original case dismissed upon filing 8. Remedies
of proper information
a. Motion for separate trials
Example: Charged with theft. At trial,
appears that offense is estafa. The Filed by the fiscal to try several
prosecution can ask for the dismissal of accused separately
the info in order to file a new one for
estafa. No Double Jeopardy because no Granted at the courts discretion
valid info in the first case.
May also be ordered by the court motu
4. Application for examination of proprio
witnesses for accused before trial
b. Motion to consolidate
1. Sick or infirm; unable to attend trial
2. Resides more than 100 km. from Upon the courts discretion, separate
means of trial; no means to attend charges may be tried in one single case if
the offenses charged arise form the same
5. Application (prosecution) facts or form part of a series of similar
offenses
1. Sick or infirm
2. Has to leave the RP with indefinite Court allowed consolidation of rape
date of returning cases substantially committed in the
same manner (People vs. David)
6. Requisites for postponement due to
absence of a witness c. Motion for continuance filed to
postpone trial for just cause
1. Witness is really material and
appears to the court to be so d. Motion to exclude public
2. Party who applies for
postponement has not been guilty Excluding parties, counsels and court
of neglect personnel

3. Witness can be had at the time to May also be ordered by court motu
which the trial has been deferred proprio
4. No similar evidence could be
e. Motion for discharge
obtained
Filed before the prosecution rests
7. Requisites to discharge of an accused
as State Witness
Hearing to determine existence of
requisites for discharge
1. Testimony of accused absolutely
needed
Prosecution will present evidence and
2. No other direct evidence available
the sworn statement of the proposed
EXCEPT his testimony
state witness
3. Testimony can be corroborated on
material points Evidence adduced in this said hearing
automatically form part of trial; however,
4. Accused does not appear to be if court denies motion for discharge, his
most guilty sworn statement shall be inadmissible in
evidence.
5. Accused has never been convicted
of offense involving moral turpitude Discharge of the accused has the
effect of acquittal, unless accused fails or
Discharge of accused, when not all the refuses to testify against his co-accused
requisites were met, cannot be revoked in accordance with his statement (which
as long as he testified according to what formed the basis for his discharge)
was expected of him (People vs. Aninon)
f. Demurrer to evidence
21
May be made after the prosecution Accused cannot be convicted for an
rests its case offense graver than that charged (People
vs. Guevarra)
If the court finds the prosecutions
evidence insufficient, the case will be 4. Contents
dismissed
1. Written in official language
Otherwise, if demurrer denied 2. Personally prepared and signed by
the judge
1. If the demurrer was made with
leave of court, defense gets to 3. Contains facts proved
present evidence 4. Contains law upon which judgment
2. If the demurrer was made without is based
leave of court, defense is deemed
to have waived the right to present In case of conviction, judgment must
evidence and the case is submitted state:
for judgment
1. Legal qualification of offense and
Case may also be dismissed motu aggravating and mitigating
proprio circumstances
2. Level of participation
g. Motion to reopen
3. Penalty imposed
Filed after the case is submitted for
judgment but before judgment is actually 4. Civil liability for damages, unless
rendered right to separate civil action has
been reserved
To allow either side to present
additional evidence, if such could not be In case of acquittal, judgment must
found before state:

Granted on discretion of the judge 1. Civil liability for damages, unless


acts alleged clearly did not exist
The accused cannot move to reopen 2. Basis of liability
the case to allow him to adduce evidence
in his behalf when his failure to adduce 5. Procedure
them during the trial was his own fault
(People vs. Cruz) 1. Judge reads judgment in presence
of accused
Rule 120 Judgment 2. If judgment is of acquittal

3. It becomes final and executory


1. Judgment adjudication by the court
that the accused is guilty or not guilty of 4. It bars subsequent prosecution for
the offense charged, and the imposition the same offense
of the proper penalty and civil liability
provided by law on the accused c. If judgment is of conviction, remedy
is to file:
2. General Rule: If the accused is found
not guilty, he will be acquitted and the 1. Motion for reconsideration
acquittal immediately becomes final and 2. Motion for new trial
executory. If the accused is found guilty,
penalty and civil liability will be imposed 3. Notice of appeal
on him.
Or else, judgment becomes final and is
3. Accused may be convicted of entered in the book of Judgments

1. The offense charged 6. When judgment in a criminal case


2. A lesser offense necessarily becomes final:
included in the offense charged
22
1. After lapse of period for perfecting 9. Procedure for new trial
an appeal; or
2. When sentence partially or totally 1. Hearing shall be set and held
satisfied or served; or 2. All evidence not alleged to be in
error shall stand
3. Accused has expressly waived in
writing his right to appeal, EXCEPT 3. New evidence will be introduced
in cases of automatic review where
death penalty is imposed 4. Old judgment may be set aside and
a new one rendered
4. Accused has applied for probation
10. Notes:
7. Only a judgment in conviction can be
modified or set aside Suspension of sentence for youthful
offenders after conviction, minor is
1. Before judgment had been final committed to custody and care of DSWD
(otherwise double jeopardy); or any training institution until reaches
2. Before appeal had been perfected; 21 years of age, or a shorter period
or
Probation disposition under which a
3. To correct clerical errors in the defendant after conviction and
judgment sentences, is released subject to
conditions imposed by the court and to
8. Remedies the supervision of a probation officer

a. Appeal Parole the conditional release of an


offender from a penal or correctional
Filed within 15 days of promulgation of institution after he has served the
judgment minimum period of his prison sentence
under the continued custody of the state
Period is interrupted by filing of a and under conditions that permit his
motion for new trial or reconsideration reincarceration if he violated the
conditions of his release
On motion of accused or at its own
instance with consent of the accused Rule 121 New Trial or
Reconsideration
b. Motion for reconsideration
1. Reopening of the case
Filed when there are errors of law or
fact in the judgment 1. Made by the court before judgment
is rendered in the exercise of sound
Shall require no further proceedings discretion
2. Does not require consent of
Notice should be given to the fiscal accused

c. Motion for new trial 3. May be made at the instance of


either party who can thereafter
Notice should be given to the fiscal present additional evidence

Filed on the following grounds: 2. Motion for new trial

1. Error of law or irregularities have 1. Filed after judgment is rendered


been made during trial which are but before the finality thereof
prejudicial to the substantial rights 2. At the instance or with the consent
of the accused of the accused

ii. New evidence has been found which 3. The prosecution can move only for
could not have been found before and the reconsideration of the
which could change the judgment judgment but cannot present
additional evidence
23
3. Motion for New Trial is denied if: 7. Motion for Reconsideration

1. Only impeaching evidence is Grounds are errors of law or fact in


sought to be introduced as the judgment, which require no further
court had already passed upon proceedings.
issue of credibility
2. Only corroborative evidence is 8. Effects of Granting Motion for New
offered Trial or Reconsideration

3. Prisoner admits commission of a. Based on error of law or irregularities


crime with which accused is during trial:
charged (facility with which such
confession can be obtained and Proceedings and evidence not affected
fabricated) by irregularities stand, and those
affected are set aside. Court may allow
4. Alleged new evidence is inherently
introduction of new evidence
improbable and could easily be
concocted
b. Based on newly discovered evidence:
5. Alleged new evidence consists of
recantations of prosecution Evidence already taken shall stand;
witness, due to unreliability of such new evidence taken with the old
recantations, EXCEPT if no other
evidence to sustain conviction Rule 122 Appeal
aside from recanted testimony
1. Procedure
4. New Trial vs. Reconsideration
a. Filed with RTC, if original case was
Motion for recon is based on the with MTC
grounds of errors of law in the judgment
is court is not asked to reopen the case Notice served to lower court and to
for further proceedings, but to reconsider adverse party
its findings or conclusions of law and
make them conformable to the law b. Filed with the CA or SC, if original
applicable to the case on the judgment case was with RTC
the court has to render anew.
i. With CA: notice of appeal with court,
5. New Trial vs. Modification of and with copy on adverse party
Judgment
If CA is of opinion that penalty should
In New Trial, irregularities are be reclusion perpetua or higher, it shall
expunged from the record and/or new render judgment imposing said penalty,
evidence is introduced. In modification but refrain from entering judgment and
of judgment, no new hearings or then certify the case and the entire
proceedings of any kind or change in the record thereof to the SC for review
record or evidence. A simple (R124, 13)
modification is made on the basis of what
is on the record. CA may reverse, affirm, or modify
judgment of RTC, or remand case for new
6. New Trial vs. Reopening of the Case trial or re-trial, or dismiss the case

New trial presupposes that existence If RTC decided case in appellate


of a judgment to be set aside upon the jurisdiction: Petition for Review
granting of a new trial
ii. With SC: notice of appeal where
In reopening, no judgment has yet penalty imposed is life imprisonment, or
been rendered, although the hearing lesser penalty involving offenses
may have already been closed committed on the same occasion, or
arising out of same occurrence where
graver penalty of death is available but
24
life imprisonment is imposed; all other 4. When serving sentence, remedy is to
cases, by petition for review on certiorari petition for habeas corpus

If death penalty, automatic review 1. Filed when the law under which the
accused was convicted is repealed
iii. Withdrawal of appeal or declared unconstitutional
2. When a later judgment is rendered
May be made at any time before acquitting others for similar
judgment on the appeal is rendered circumstances

Lower court judgment becomes final Otherwise, equal protection is violated

Case remanded for execution of 1. When penalty is lowered and


judgment convict has already served more
than the maximum period of the
Once notice of appeal is filed, cannot new penalty
be validly withdrawn to give way for a
Motion for Recon or a Motion for New Habeas corpus is available when a
Trial, since the filing of the notice person is imprisoned beyond the
perfected the appeal, and the trial court maximum penalty imposed by law
loses its power to modify or set aside the (Gumabon vs. Dir. of Prisons)
judgment. The only valid withdrawal of
an appeal is where the accused decides NOTE: When dismissal is capricious,
to serve his sentence. certiorari lies and no double jeopardy
since validity and not correctness of
2. Effect of appeal by any of several dismissal is being challenged.
accused
Rule 126 Search and Seizure
1. Shall not affect those who did not
appeal, EXCEPT if favorable and 1. Search warrant an order in writing
applicable to them issued in the name of the People of the
2. Civil appeal by offended party shall Philippines, signed by a judge and
not affect criminal aspect of directed to a peace officer, commanding
judgment him to search for personal property
described therein and bring it before the
3. Execution of judgment on appellant court
will be stayed upon perfection of
appeal Cannot be issued to look for evidence
(Uy Khetin vs. Villareal)
3. When appeal by prosecution from
order of dismissal of criminal case will Seizing objects to be used as evidence
not result in double jeopardy is equivalent to forcing one to be a
witness against himself (Uy Khetin vs.
1. Dismissal made upon motion or Villareal)
with express consent of the
accused For a warrant to be valid, it must meet
2. Dismissal is not an acquittal nor the requirements set by law (Burgos vs.
based upon consideration of the Chief of Staff)
evidence or merits of the case
Tapping conversations is equivalent to
3. Question to be passed upon by the
a search and seizure (US vs. Katz)
appellate court is purely legal so
that if the dismissal is found
2. General Rule: No search or seizure can
incorrect, the case has to be
be conducted unless it is authorized by a
remanded to the court of origin to
search warrant. Evidence gathered from
determine the guilt or innocence of
an illegal search and seizure is
the accused
inadmissible.

25
Warrantless searches are illegal, c. Issuing judge personally examined, in
unreasonable and unconstitutional the form of searching questions, the
(Alvarez vs. CFI) appellant and his witness and took down
their written depositions
It is not the police action which is
impermissible, but the procedure and d. Search warrant particularly describes
unreasonable character by which it is or identifies the property to be seized
exercised (Guazon vs. de Villa)
Property which men may lawfully
Court gains jurisdiction over items possess may not be the object of a
seized by a valid search warrant and search warrant (Uy Khetin vs. Villareal)
returned to it, and such is not an
unconstitutional deprivation of property Nature of goods may allow description
(Villanueva vs. Querubin) to be general or not too technical
(Alvarez vs. CFI)
Evidence from an illegal search may
be used as evidence, if no objection is e. Particularly describes the place to be
raised (Stonehill vs. Diokno) searched

Right against unreasonable search and f. It shall issue only for one specific
seizure may be waived, but for the offense
waiver to be effective:
Otherwise, cannot be said to have
1. The right must exist issued upon probable cause (Asian
2. Person must be aware of the right Surety vs. Herrera)

3. Person clearly shows the intent to Absence of specific offense makes


relinquish such right impossible determination of probable
cause (Stonehill vs. Diokno)
No waiver against unreasonable
search and seizure when one g. Was not issued for more than 10 days
compromises the criminal proceedings prior to a search made pursuant thereto
(Alvarez vs. CFI) (search warrant becomes void after 10
days)
There is no waiver of right when
evidence of coercion is present (Roan vs. h. Indicates time, if to be served at
Gonzales) night

3. Requisites of a valid search warrant 4. When a search warrant may be said to


particularly describe the thing to be
a. Issued upon probable cause seized

Probable cause such facts and 1. Description is as specific as


circumstances which would lead a circumstances allow
reasonably prudent man to believe that a 2. Expresses a conclusion of fact by
crime has been committed and the thing which the warrant officer may be
to be searched for and seized is in the guided
place to be searched
3. Things described are limited to
b. Probable cause is personally those which bear a direct relation
determined by the issuing judge to the offense for which the
warrant is issued
Hence, signed by him
5. Procedure
By any RTC, to be served anywhere in
the country, for an offense which a. Complainant files application,
occurred anywhere in the country attaches affidavits
(Malaloan vs. CA)

26
Oath requires that the person taking it 7. When a search may be validly
personally knows the facts of the case conducted without a warrant
(People vs. Sy Juco)
1. Without consent of person
Affidavits submitted must state that searched
the premises is occupied by the person 2. When the search is incident to a
against whom the warrant is issued, that lawful arrest
the objects to be seized are fruits or
means of committing a crime, and that 3. Personal knowledge of the
they belong to the same person, thus, arresting person (Posadas vs. CA)
not affecting third persons (People vs. Sy 4. Limited to:
Juco)
(1) Immediate time of arrest
When complainants knowledge is
hearsay, affidavits of witnesses are (2) Immediate vicinity of the arrest
necessary (Alvarez vs. CFI)
(3) Weapons and things which may be
b. Judge conducts ex parte preliminary used as proof of offense charged
examination of complainant and (Nolasco vs. Pano)
witnesses under oath to determine
probable cause iii. Subject in an offense which is mala
prohibita cannot be summarily seized
Judge must ask probing questions, not (Roan vs. Gonzales)
just repeat facts in the affidavit (Roan vs.
Gonzales) iv. May extend beyond arrestee to
include premises and surrounding under
c. Judge issues search warrant good for his immediate control
10 days
1. Border searches (customs, mail
d. Peace officer in presence of occupant, and airport)
members of the family OR 2 witnesses of 2. Vessels and aircrafts for violation of
sufficient age and discretion residing in Tariff and Customs Code, EXCEPT
the same locality dwelling houses
Search may last for more than a day 3. Plain view
as long as it is part of the same search
for the same purpose and of the same 4. Moving vehicle
place (Uy Khetin vs. Villareal)
5. Hot pursuit
e. Peace officer leaves receipt with 6. Stop-and-frisk, reasonable check-
occupant at place searched points

f. Peace officer files return of search 7. Private searches with no state


warrant and inventory, and surrenders action (People vs. Marti)
items seized to receiving court (not
necessarily court which issued the 8. Inspection of building and premises
warrant) for enforcement of fire, sanitary
and building regulations
Items seized illegally must remain in
custodia legis pending resolution of the 8. Person making the arrest may take
case (Roan vs. Gonzales) from the arrestee

6. Remedies from an unlawful search 1. Properties used in the commission


of the crime
1. MTQ the warrant 2. Fruits or proceeds thereof
2. Motion to suppress as evidence the 3. Property which may furnish the
objects illegally taken arrestee with a weapon against the
3. Return of property illegally seized arresting person
27
4. Property which may be used as
evidence at the trial

9. NOTES:

Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 2

The right of the people to be secure in


their persons, papers, houses and effects
against unreasonable searches and
seizures of whatever nature and for any
purpose shall be inviolable, and no
search warrant or warrant of arrest shall
issue except upon probable cause to be
determined personally by the judge after
examination under oath or affirmation of
the complainant and the witnesses he
may produce, and particularly describing
the place to be searched and the persons
or things to be seized.

Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 3

1. The privacy of communication and


correspondence shall be inviolable
except upon lawful order of the
court, or when public safety or
order requires otherwise as
prescribed by law.
2. Any evidence obtained in violation
of this or the preceding section
shall be inadmissible for any
purpose in the proceeding.

Rule 127 Provisional Remedies in


Criminal Cases

1. Attachment as provisional remedy in


criminal cases

1. Accused is about to abscond from


RP
2. Criminal action is based on a claim
for money or property embezzled
or fraudulently misapplied or
converted to the use of the
accused who is a public officer, or
any officer of a corporation, or an
attorney, factor, broker, agent or
clerk in a fiduciary capacity, in
willful violation of duty

3. Accused has concealed, removed


or disposed of his property, or is
about to do so

4. Accused resides outside the RP

28