CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (The Bar Lecture Series)

By Williard B. Riano

CHAPTER I – Preliminary Considerations

 Adversarial or Accusatorial v. Inquisitorial System

- Adversarial or Accusatorial
 The system of procedure in our jurisdiction.
 Two contending parties before the court which hears them impartially and
renders judgment only after trial.
 The court takes a passive role and relies solely on the evidence presented by
both sides to the action in order to reach a verdict.
- Inquisitorial
 The court plays a very active role and is not limited to the evidence
presented before it. The court may utilize evidence gathered outside the
court and a judge or group of judges may actively participate in the gathering
of facts and evidence.
 Requisites for the Exercise of Criminal Jurisdiction
- Basic requirements before a court can acquire jurisdiction over criminal cases
 Jurisdiction over the subject matter (or offense charged)
 The authority of the court to hear and determine a particular criminal
case
 It is the law that confers jurisdiction (e.g. B.P. 129) and not the rules
 Jurisdiction over a criminal case is determined by the allegations in
the complaint or information
 Jurisdiction is determined by the penalty imposable by law on the
offense and not by the penalty imposed after trial
 Jurisdiction over the territory
 In criminal cases, venue is jurisdictional
 For jurisdiction to be acquired by the courts in criminal cases, the
offense should have been committed or any one of its essential
ingredients should have taken place within the territorial jurisdiction
of the court
 Jurisdiction over the person of the accused
 This kind of jurisdiction requires that the person charged of the
offense must be brought into its forum for trial by:
 warrant of arrest; or
 voluntary submission by the court
- Injunction will not be granted to restrain a criminal prosecution either a preliminary or final
injunction however, there are ex exceptions to said rule that are meant to apply in extreme
cases. (Brocka v. Enrile, 192 SCRA 183, 188)
- In our criminal justice system, the public prosecutor exercises the jurisdiction in determining
whether a criminal case shall be filed in court, and the court must respect the exercise of
such jurisdiction. (People v. Yecyec, 739 SCRA 719, 732)
- Mandamus is a remedial measure for parties aggrieved which shall be issued when “any
tribunal, corporation, board, officer or person unlawfully neglects the performance of an act
which the law specifically enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station.”
- The writ of mandamus is not available to control discretion.
CHAPTER II – Prosecution of Offenses (Rue 110)

 Institution of Criminal Action

- It depends upon whether or not the offense is one which requires a preliminary investigation.
(Sec. 1, Rule 110, Rules of Court)
 Where a preliminary investigation is required
 Instituted by the filing of the complaint with the proper officer for the
purpose of conducting preliminary investigation (Sec. 1, Rule 110,
Rules of Court)
 Penalty imposed is more than 4 years, 2 months and 1 day
 Filed at the office of the public prosecutor
 Where a preliminary investigation is not required
(a) By filing the complaint or information directly with the Municipal Trial
Court and Municipal Circuit Trial Court (direct filing)
(b) By filing the complaint with the office of the prosecutor (Sec. 1, Rule
110, Rules of Court)
- In Manila and other chartered cities, a special rule prevails, “the complaint shall be filed with
the office of the prosecutor unless otherwise provided in their charters.” (Sec. 1, Rule 110,
Rules of Court)
- There is no direct filing of an information or complaint with the Regional Trial Court because
its jurisdiction covers offenses which require preliminary investigation.
- Direct filing in court occurs in a case where a preliminary investigation is not to be conducted
and this refers to offenses for which the penalty prescribed by law is less than 4 years, 2
months and 1 day. This penalty is covered by the jurisdiction of the MTC.
- No direct filing with the Metropolitan Trial Court of Manila because in Manila and other
chartered cities, the complaints, as a rule, shall be filed with the office of the prosecutor,
unless otherwise provided in their charters. The charter shall prevail over the Rules of Court.
- The institution of criminal action shall interrupt the period of prescription of the offense
charged unless otherwise provided in special laws.
- Where preliminary investigation is not required, the filing of the information or complaint
directly with the MTC and MCTC shall interrupt the period of prescription of the offense
charged.
- Act No. 3326 is the law that governs the period of prescription for violations penalized by
special acts and municipal ordinances.
- In Zaldivia v. Reyes, a case involving an offense punishable by a municipal ordinance, held
that Act No. 3326 says that the period of prescription shall be suspended when proceedings
are instituted against the guilty person. The proceedings referred to are “judicial proceedings”
and not administrative proceedings. This ruling is not controlling in special laws.
- In Panaguiton Jr. v. Department of Justice, the court held that Act No. 3326 applies to
offenses under B.P. Blg. 22. An offense under B.P. Blg. 22 merits the penalty of
imprisonment of not less than thirty (30) days but not more than one (1) year or by a fine xxx.
- In SEC v. Interport Resources Corporation,
- Even the filing of the complaint in the Office of the Ombudsman effectively interrupts the
running of the prescriptive period.
- In Disini v. Sandiganbayan, irrespective of whether the offense charged is punishable by the
Revised Penal Code or by a special law, it is the filing of the complaint or information on the
office of the public prosecutor for purposes of preliminary investigation that interrupts the
period of prescription.
 - The running of the prescriptive period id interrupted with the filing of the action even if the
court which the action was first filed is without jurisdiction.

 Prosecution of the Criminal Action

- A criminal action is prosecuted under the direction and control of the public prosecutor. This
general rule applies to a criminal action commenced either by a complaint or information.
- The public prosecutor, in the exercise of his functions, has the power and discretion to:
1. Determine whether a prima facie case exists;
2. Decide which of the conflicting testimonies should be believed free from the
interference or control of the offended party; and
3. Subject only to the right against self-incrimination, determine which witnesses to
present in court. (Chua v. Padillo)
- Not even the Supreme Court can order the prosecution of a person against whom the
prosecutor does not find sufficient evidence to support at least a prima facie case. The only
possible exception to the rule is when there is an unmistakable showing of grave abuse of
discretion on the part of the prosecutor. (Chua v. Padillo)
- The public prosecutor may turn over the actual prosecution of the criminal case to the private
prosecutor he may, at any time, take over the actual conduct of the trial. (People v. Tan)
- The presence of a public prosecutor in the trial of criminal cases is necessary to protect vital
State interests.
- A criminal action in a Municipal Trial Court or in a Municipal Circuit Trial Court shall also be
prosecuted under the direction and control of the prosecutor (Sec. 5, Rule 110). However,
when the prosecutor assigned is not available, the action may be prosecuted by:
a. The offended party;
b. Any peace officer; or
c. Public officer charged with the enforcement of the law violated
- A dismissal of a criminal case by the trial court or of there is an acquittal of the accused, it is
only the OSG that may bring an appeal on the criminal aspect representing the People.
- The people are deemed the real parties in interest in the criminal case and, therefore, only
the OSG can represent them in criminal proceedings pending in the CA or in this Court.
- The private complainant or the offended party may, however, file an appeal without the
intervention of the OSG but only insofar as the civil liability of the accused is concerned.
- In criminal cases, the Solicitor General is regarded as the appellate counsel of the People of
the Philippines.
- General Rule: The Solicitor General is solely vested with the authority to represent the people
in the Court of Appeals or in the Supreme Court.
- Exception: In “all cases elevated to the Sandiganbayan and from the Sandiganbayan to the
Supreme Court, the Office of the Ombudsman, through its special prosecutor, shall represent
the People of the Philippines, except in cases filed pursuant to Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14
and 14A, issued in 1986”. (People v. Sandiganbayan, First and Third Divisions, 712 SCRA
359, 403)
- Where the offense is a violation of a special law, the same shall be prosecuted pursuant to
the provisions of said law. (Sec. 5, Rule 110)
- The prosecution of special laws does not detract from the public prosecutor having control
and supervision over the case. (Bureau of Customs v. Sherman, 648 SCRA 809, 814)
- A private prosecutor may prosecute the criminal action up to the end of the trial, even in the
absence of the public prosecutor, if he is authorized to do so in writing. The written
authorization shall be given by either the Chief of the Prosecution Office of the Regional State
 Prosecutor. The written authorization in order to be given effect must be approved by the
court.
- The private prosecutor shall continue to prosecute the case up to the end of the trial even in
the absence of a public prosecutor, unless the authority is revoked or otherwise withdrawn.

 Intervention of the Offended Party in the Prosecution of the Criminal Action

- “Every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable.” (Art. 100, RPC) Thus, a
person convicted of a crime is both criminally and civilly liable.
- The civil liability for a crime includes restitution, reparation of damage caused, and
indemnification for consequential damages. (Art. 104, RPC)
- The appointment of a private prosecutor is done by the offended party and is the mode by
which he intervenes in the prosecution of the offense.
- The intervention is only allowed where the civil action for recovery of the civil liability arising
from the offense charged is instituted in the criminal action pursuant to Rule 111.
- The offended party may not intervene in the prosecution of the offense through a private
prosecutor if the offended party:
a. waives the civil action;
b. reserves the right to institute it separately; or
c. institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action.
 Prosecution of “Private Crimes”
- The crime of adultery and concubinage shall not be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed
by the offended spouse.
- The action cannot be instituted against one party alone. It must be instituted against both
guilty parties unless one of them is no longer alive. (Sec. 5, Rule 110)
- The offenses of seduction, abduction and acts of lasciviousness shall not be prosecuted
except upon a complaint filed by the offended party or her parents, grandparents or guardian,
nor, in any case, if the offender has been expressly pardoned by any of them. (Sec. 5, Rule
110)
- If the offended party dies or become incapacitated before she can file the complaint, and she
has no known parents, grandparents or guardian, the State shall initiate the criminal action in
her behalf.
- In the order of those who may file the complaint, the State is the last and may only do so in
the absence of the persons mentioned in Sec. 5 of Rule 110:
 Parents
 Grandparents
 Guardian
 State
- The offended party, even if a minor, has the right to initiate the prosecution of the offense,
independently of her parents, grandparents or guardian except if she is incompetent or
incapable of doing so. (Sec. 5, Rule 110)
- If the minor fails to initiate the prosecution of the offense, the complaint may be filed by the
minor’s parents, grandparents or guardian. (Sec. 5, Rule 110)
- The crime of rape was reclassified as a crime against persons pursuant to an amendment of
R.A. 8353. Thus, prosecution for such crime may now be commenced in court even by the
filing of an information by the public prosecutor.
 The Complaint and Information
- Complaint – a sworn written statement charging a person with an offense, subscribed by the
offended party, any peace officer, or other public officer, charged with the enforcement of the
law violated. (Sec. 3, Rule 110)
- A complainant’s role is limited to that of a witness for the prosecution.
- Information – an accusation in writing charging a person with an offense subscribed by the
prosecutor and filed with the court. (Sec. 4, Rule 110)
- A complaint and an information is filed in the name of the People of the Philippines and
against all persons who appear to be responsible for the offense involved. (Sec. 2, Rule 110)
- Jeopardy does not attach where an accused pleads guilty to a defective indictment.
- A valid information signed by the competent officer, confers jurisdiction on the court over the
person of the accused and the subject matter of the accusation.
- A complaint or information is deemed sufficient if it contains the following:
a. name of the accused;
b. designation of the offense given by the statute;
c. acts or omissions complained of as constituting the offense;
d. name of the offended party;
e. approximate date of the commission of the offense; and
f. place where the offense was committed. (Sec. 6, Rule 110)
- The test to determine the sufficiency of the complaint or information is whether the crime is
described in intelligible terms with such particularity as to apprise the accused, with
reasonable certainty, of the offense charged to enable the accused to suitably prepare for his
defense (Lazarte Jr. v. Sandiganbayan) since he is presumed to have no independent
knowledge of the facts that constitute the offense. (People v. Cinco)
- An information is fatally defective when it is clear that it does not really charge an offense or
when an essential element of the crime has not been sufficiently alleged.
- Objections relating to the form of the complaint or information cannot be made for the first
time on appeal. The accused-appellant should move before arraignment either for:
 a bill of particulars, if he wants to know the exact date of the commission of
the allege offense; or
 the quashal of the information,, if it does not conform to the prescribed form.

If he fails to pursue either remedy, he is deemed to waive his objections to any

formal defect in the information. (People v. Teodoro)

- The failure to object the alleged defect before entering their pleas of not guilty amounted to a
waiver of the defect in the information. (People v. Mamaruncas)
- An accused is deemed to have waived his right to assail the sufficiency of the information
when he voluntarily entered a plea when arraigned and participated in the trial. (Frias v.
People)
- Where the objection is based on lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter, the same may be
raised or considered motu proprio by the court at any stage of the proceedings or on appeal.
(Fukuzume v. People)
- The real nature of the criminal charge is determined by the actual recital of the facts in the
complaint of information. (People v. Valdez)
- Every element of the offense must be stated in the information. The requirement of alleging
the elements of a crime in the information is to inform the accused of the nature of the
accusation against him so as to enable him to suitably prepare his defense. The presumption
is that the accused has no independent knowledge of the facts that constitute the offense.
(People v. Valdez)
- It is not necessary to state in the complaint or information the precise date the offense was
committed EXCEPT when the date of the commission is a material element of the offense.
The offense may be alleged to have been committed on a date as near as possible to the
actual date of its commission.
- Sec. 7, Rule 110 establishes the following rules in designating the name of the accused:
a. The complaint or information must state the name and surname of the
accused, or any appellation or nickname by which he has been or is known.
b. If his name cannot be ascertained, he must be described under a fictitious
name. A description of the accused under a fictitious name must be
accompanied by a statement that his true name is unknown.
c. If, later, his true name is disclosed by him or becomes known in some other
manner, his true name shall be inserted in the complaint or information and
in the records of the case.
- The first duty of the prosecution is to prove the identity of the accused for there can be no
conviction without proof of identity of the criminal beyond reasonable doubt. (People v.
Espera)
- In every criminal case, the task of the prosecution is always twofold:
1. to prove beyond reasonable doubt the commission of the crime charged; and
2. to establish with the same quantum of proof the identity of the person or
persons responsible therefor. (People v. Yau)
- Positive identification pertains essentially to proof of identity.
- The two types of positive identification:
1. Direct evidence – a witness may identify a suspect or accused in a criminal
case as the perpetrator of the crime as an eyewitness to the very act of the
commission of the crime.
2. Circumstancial evidence – although a witness may not have actually seen
the very act of commission of the crime, he still may be able to positively
identify a suspect of accused when the latter is the person or one of the
persons last seen with the victim immediately before and right after the
commission of the crime.
- The offended party is the person against whom or against whose property the offense was
committed. (Sec. 12, Rule 110)
- If the offended party is a juridical person, it is sufficient to state the name, or any name or
designation by which it is known or by which it is identified, without need of averring that it is
a juridical person or that it is organized in accordance with the law. (Sec. 12 [c], Rule 110)
- In offenses against property, if the name of the offended party is unknown, the property must
be described with such particularity as to properly identify the offense charged. (Sec. 12 [a],
Rule 110)
- In offenses against property, if the subject matter is:
1. generic and not identifiable, an error in the designation of the offended party
is fatal and would result in the acquittal of the accused.
2. specific and identifiable, an error in the designation of the offended party is
immaterial. (Senador v. People)
- In designating the offense, the following rules must be observed:
a. The name given to the offense by statute shall be stated in the complaint or
information.

If the statute gives no designation, then reference shall be made to the

section or subsection punishing it. (Sec. 8, Rule 110)
 b. To be included in the complete designation is an averment of the acts or
omissions constituting the offense. (Sec. 12 [c], Rule 110)
c. It shall specify the qualifying and aggravating circumstances of the offense.
(Sec. 12 [c], Rule 110)
-