Cruz vs Mina

FACTS:
* Cruz, a third year law student, filed before the MeTC a motion to appear as private prosecutor in a
criminal case for Grave Threats.
* Cruz avers that his appearance is with prior conformity with the public prosecutor and that he
intends to proceed with the civil aspect of the said criminal case.
* The MeTC denied his motion, so Cruz elevated his petition to the RTC.
* RTC denied his petition, stating that the intervention of a private prosecutor is not legally tenable
there being no claim for civil indemnity in the said criminal case.

ISSUE: W/N the civil aspect arising from the criminal case of grave threats should be allowed to
prosper despite the absence of a claim for civil liability YES

HELD:
Under Article 100 of the RPC, every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable. The basic
rule applies in the instant case.

Sec 1 Rule 111: When a criminal action is instituted, the civil action for the recovery of civil liability
arising from the offense charged shall be deemed instituted with the criminal action unless the
offended party waives the civil action, reserves the right to institute it separately or institutes the
civil action prior to the criminal action.

There being no reservation, waiver, nor prior institution of the civil aspect in the criminal case, it
follows that the civil aspect arising from grave threats is deemed instituted with the criminal action.

Therefore, the private prosecutor may rightfully intervene to prosecute the civil aspect.