Table of Contents

JURISDICTION OVER THE SUBJECT MATTER ........................................................................................................................................................... 2

JURISDICTION OVER THE PERSON OF THE ACCUSED........................................................................................................................................... 2
REQUISITES FOR EXERCISE OF CRIMINAL JURISDICTION ...................................................................................................................................... 3
PLACE WHERE ACTION IS TO BE INSTITUTED? Sec 15, Rule 110 .......................................................................................................................... 3
JURISDICTION OF CRIMINAL COURTS .................................................................................................................................................................... 4
Rule 110: Prosecution of Offenses ............................................................................................................................................................................ 10
CRIMINAL ACTIONS, HOW INSTITUTED ................................................................................................................................................................. 10
EFFECT OF THE INSTITUTION OF CRIMINAL ACTION ON THE PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD ....................................................................................... 11
CASES THAT CANNOT BE PROSECUTED DE OFICIO ........................................................................................................................................... 11
WHO MAY FILE A COMPLAINT? ............................................................................................................................................................................ 11
EFFECT OF: DEATH OF OFFENDED PARTY ............................................................................................................................................................ 11
DESISTANCE BY OFFENDED PARTY ....................................................................................................................................................................... 12
PARDON BY OFFENDED PARTY ............................................................................................................................................................................. 12
CRIMINAL ACTIONS, WHEN ENJOINED................................................................................................................................................................ 12
CONTROL OF PROSECUTION ................................................................................................................................................................................ 12
EXTENT OF THE PROSECUTOR’S CONTROL PRIOR TO THE FILING OF THE CASE ............................................................................................. 12
EFFECTS OF THE LACK OF INTERVENTION BY THE FISCAL IN THE TRIAL ............................................................................................................. 13
SUFFICIENCY OF COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION .............................................................................................................................................. 13
COMPLAINT DEFINED ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 13
INFORMATION DEFINED ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 13
DESIGNATION OF OFFENSE ................................................................................................................................................................................... 13
CAUSE OF THE ACCUSATION ................................................................................................................................................................................ 13
DUPLICITY OF THE OFFENSE; EXCEPTION ............................................................................................................................................................. 14
SEVERAL MODES OF COMMITTING OFFENSE NOT DUPLICITOUS ..................................................................................................................... 14
AMENDMENT OR SUBSTITUTION OF COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION [SEC. 14, RULE 110] ............................................................................. 14
Distinction between substitution and amendment.......................................................................................................................................... 15
INTERVENTION OF OFFENDED PARTY [SEC. 16, RULE 110] ................................................................................................................................. 15
Rule 111: Prosecution of Civil Action ........................................................................................................................................................................ 16
RULE ON IMPLIED INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ACTION WITH CRIMINAL ACTION .................................................................................................... 16
WHEN CIVIL ACTION MAY PROCEED INDEPENDENTLY ..................................................................................................................................... 17
SEPARATE ACTION FILED BY THE ACCUSED ........................................................................................................................................................ 17
WHEN SEPARATE CIVIL ACTION IS SUSPENDED................................................................................................................................................... 17
EFFECT OF THE DEATH OF ACCUSED [SEC. 4, RULE 111] ................................................................................................................................... 17
PREJUDICIAL QUESTION [SECS. 6 AND 7, RULE 111] .......................................................................................................................................... 17
EFFECT ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 18
WHERE TO FILE PETITION FOR SUSPENSION IS FILED [SEC. 6, RULE 111] ............................................................................................................ 18
RULE ON FILING FEES IN CIVIL ACTION DEEMED INSTITUTED WITH THE CRIMINAL ACTION FILING FEES OF CIVIL ACTION DEEMED
INSTITUTED IN CRIMINAL ACTION.......................................................................................................................................................................... 19
Rule 112 : Preliminary Investigation .......................................................................................................................................................................... 19
PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION, DEFINED .............................................................................................................................................................. 19
NATURE OF THE RIGHT TO PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION by ........................................................................................................................... 19
RIGHT TO PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION .............................................................................................................................................................. 19
PURPOSES OF PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION ...................................................................................................................................................... 20
SCOPE OF PI ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ 20
WHO MAY CONDUCT DETERMINATION OF EXISTENCE OF PROBABLE CAUSE .............................................................................................. 20
WHEN WARRANT OF ARREST MAY ISSUE ............................................................................................................................................................. 22
CASES NOT REQUIRING A PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION NOR COVERED BY RULE ON SUMMARY PROCEDURE [SEC.8, RULE 112] ...... 22
REMEDIES OF ACCUSED IF THERE WAS NO PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION ..................................................................................................... 23
INQUEST ................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 24
PROCEDURE FOR INQUEST PROCEEDINGS ......................................................................................................................................................... 24
Rule 113: Arrest ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ 26
ARREST, HOW MADE .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 26
ARREST WITHOUT WARRANT, WHEN LAWFUL ...................................................................................................................................................... 26
METHOD OF ARREST ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 29
A. BY OFFICER WITH WARRANT ............................................................................................................................................................................. 29
Duties of arresting officer without warrant......................................................................................................................................................... 30
Duties of private person effecting an arrest ...................................................................................................................................................... 30
DISTINGUISH PROBABLE CAUSE OF FISCAL ......................................................................................................................................................... 31
FROM THAT OF A JUDGE ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 31
Rule 114 Bail ................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 31
DEFINITION ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 31
WHEN A MATTER OF RIGHT; EXCEPTIONS ............................................................................................................................................................ 31
WHEN BAIL NOT AVAILABLE .................................................................................................................................................................................. 32
Capital Offense...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 32
Bail in EXTRADITION PROCEEDINGS ..................................................................................................................................................................... 32
Right to bail is not available: ................................................................................................................................................................................ 32
WHEN A MATTER OF DISCRETION [RULE 114, SEC. 5] ......................................................................................................................................... 32
WHEN APPLICATION FOR BAIL AFTER CONVICTION SHALL BE DENIED: .......................................................................................................... 32
HEARING OF APPLICATION FOR BAIL IN CAPITAL OFFENSES [SEC. 8, RULE 114] ........................................................................................... 33
REGARDING MINORS CHARGED WITH A CAPITAL OFFENSE ............................................................................................................................ 33
DUTY OF JUDGE TO CONDUCT HEARING ........................................................................................................................................................... 33
WHERE THE APPLICATION IS FILED: [SEC. 17, RULE 114; AS AMENDED BY AM 05-08-26] .............................................................................. 33
GUIDELINES IN FIXING AMOUNT OF BAIL [RULE 114, SEC. 9] ............................................................................................................................. 34
BAIL WHEN NOT REQUIRED [SEC. 16, RULE 114] ................................................................................................................................................. 34
FORFEITURE OF BAIL [RULE 114, SEC. 21] ............................................................................................................................................................. 35
CANCELLATION OF BAIL [RULE 114, SEC. 22] ..................................................................................................................................................... 35
APPLICATION NOT A BAR TO OBJECTIONS IN ILLEGAL ARREST, LACK OF OR IRREGULAR PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION....................... 35
HOLD DEPARTURE ORDER & BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION WATCHLIST .............................................................................................................. 35
RULE 115 RIGHTS OF ACCUSED AT THE TRIAL .......................................................................................................................................................... 38
1. TO BE PRESUMED INNOCENT UNTIL THE CONTRARY IS PROVED BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT....................................................... 38
2. TO BE INFORMED OF THE NATURE AND CAUSE OF ACCUSATION AGAINST HIM ................................................................................ 38

1 of 40
 3. TO BE PRESENT AND DEFEND IN PERSON AND BY COUNSEL AT EVERY STAGE OF THE PROCEEDINGS ............................................ 38
4. TO TESTIFY AS WITNESS IN HIS BEHALF......................................................................................................................................................... 39
6. RIGHT TO CONFRONTATION ....................................................................................................................................................................... 39
7. RIGHT TO COMPULSORY PROCESS TO SECURE THE ATTENDANCE OF WITNESSES AND THE PRODUCTION OF WITNESSES IN HIS
BEHALF. .................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 40
8. RIGHT TO SPEEDY, IMPARTIAL, AND PUBLIC TRIAL .................................................................................................................................... 40
9. RIGHT TO APPEAL ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 40
RIGHTS OF PERSONS UNDER CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION [SEC. 2, RA 7438] .................................................................................................. 41
2. TO REMAIN SILENT .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 41
3. TO BE INFORMED, IN A LANGUAGE KNOWN TO AND UNDERSTOOD BY HIM, OF HIS RIGHTS TO REMAIN SILENT ................................ 41
4. TO HAVE COMPETENT AND INDEPENDENT COUNSEL, PREFERABLY OF HIS OWN CHOICE, WHO SHALL AT ALL TIMES BE ALLOWED
TO CONFER PRIVATELY WITH THE PERSON ARRESTED, DETAINED OR UNDER CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION .............................................. 41
Rule 116 Arraignment and Plea ................................................................................................................................................................................ 42
ARRAIGNMENT........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 42
DUTY OF THE COURT BEFORE ARRAIGNMENT..................................................................................................................................................... 42
Remedies the accused my avail BEFORE ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA............................................................................................................ 42
How Arraignment is Made.................................................................................................................................................................................... 42
When should Arraignment be made? ............................................................................................................................................................... 42
INSTANCES WHEN A PLEA OF NOT GUILTY TO BE ENTERED FOR THE ACCUSED [RULE 116, SEC. 1(C)]....................................................... 43
WHEN ACCUSED MAY ENTER A PLEA OF GUILTY TO A LESSER OFFENSE [RULE 116, SEC. 2] ........................................................................ 43
DUTY OF THE COURT WHEN ACCUSED PLEADS GUILTY TO A CAPITAL OFFENSE [SEC. 3, RULE 116]........................................................... 44
IMPROVIDENT PLEA OF GUILTY TO A CAPITAL OFFENSE ................................................................................................................................... 44
WHEN IMPROVIDENT PLEA MAY BE WITHDRAWN .............................................................................................................................................. 44
GROUNDS FOR SUSPENSION OF ARRAIGNMENT [RULE 116, SEC. 11] ............................................................................................................. 44

JURISDICTION OVER THE SUBJECT MATTER

The right to act or the power and authority to hear and determine a cause [Gomez v. Montalban
(548 SCRA 693)]
General Rule: It is conferred by law and determined by the allegations of the complaint

Principle of adherence of jurisdiction/continuing jurisdiction- Once a court acquires jurisdiction

over a controversy, it shall continue to exercise such jurisdiction until the final determination of the
case.

Exception: Where the succeeding statute expressly provides, or is construed that it is intended to
operate to actions pending before its enactment [Palana v. People (2007)]

JURISDICTION OVER THE PERSON OF THE ACCUSED

Acquired either by:
(1) ARREST of accused; or
(2) VOLUNTARY APPEARANCE/SUBMISSION of the accused to the jurisdiction of the court.
Voluntary appearance of the accused is accomplished by:
(a) By filing pleadings seeking affirmative relief
Exception: Special appearance to challenge the jurisdiction of the court over the person
is not voluntary submission [Garcia v. Sandiganbayan (2009)];
(b) By GIVING BAIL

Jurisdiction Over the Subject Matter Jurisdiction Over The Person of the Accused

Conferred by law; Can never be May be acquired by consent of the accused or

acquired by acquiescence of the by waiver of objections.
parties

Right to object is never waived Right to object may be waived

The absence of court’s jurisdiction over Failure of the accused to make objection in time
the subject matter may be raised at any would constitute a waiver of the objection.
stage of the proceeding.

(Bar matter) Jurisdiction over the person of the accused vs. Custody of the law
Custody of the law is required before the court can act upon the application for bail, but is
not required for the adjudication of other reliefs sought by the defendant where the mere
application therefor constitutes a waiver of the defense of lack of jurisdiction over the person
of the accused. Custody of the law is accomplished either by arrest or voluntary surrender,
while jurisdiction over the person of the accused is acquired upon his arrest or voluntary
2 of 40
 appearance. ONE CAN BE UNDER THE CUSTODY OF THE LAW BUT NOT YET SUBJECT TO THE
JURISDICTION OF THE COURT OVER HIS PERSON, such as when a person arrested by virtue of a
warrant files a motion before arraignment to quash the warrant. ON THE OTHER HAND, ONE
CAN BE SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT OVER HIS PERSON, AND YET NOT BE IN
THE CUSTODY OF THE LAW, such as when an accused escapes custody after his trial has
commenced. Being in the custody of the law signifies restraint on the person, who is thereby
deprived of his own will and liberty, binding him to become obedient to the will of the law.
Custody of the law is literally custody over the body of the accused. It includes, but is not
limited to, detention.

REQUISITES FOR EXERCISE OF CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

(1) Jurisdiction over the SUBJECT MATTER - WON the court has jurisdiction over the offense by virtue
of the imposable penalty and its nature;

(2) Jurisdiction over the PERSON of the accused;

(3) TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION - WON the action has been filed within the TERRITORIAL JURIDICTION
of the court:
Refers to VENUE (see below) or the place where the case is to be tried. The action should be
instituted and tried in the municipality or territory where offense has been committed or where
any one of the essential ingredients thereof took place. [Sec 15(a), Rule 110]

FOR TRANSITORY/ CONTINUING OFFENSES, the courts of the territories where the essential
ingredients of the crime took place have concurrent jurisdiction. The first court taking cognizance
of the case will exclude the others [People vs Grospe (1988)].

Note: Venue is he same as jurisdiction in criminal cases.

Bar (2003)
In complex crimes, how is the jurisdiction of a court determined? 4%
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
In a complex crime, jurisdiction over the whole complex crime must be lodged with the trial court having jurisdiction
to impose the maximum and most serious penalty imposable on an offense forming part of the complex crime.
(Cuyos v. Garcia, 160 SCRA 302 [1988]).

PLACE WHERE ACTION IS TO BE INSTITUTED? Sec 15, Rule 110

a) Subject to existing laws, the criminal action shall be instituted and tried in the court of the
municipality or territory where the offense was committed or where any of its essential
ingredients occurred.
(b) Where an offense is committed in a TRAIN, AIRCRAFT, OR OTHER PUBLIC OR PRIVATE VEHICLE
while in the course of its trip, the criminal action shall be instituted and tried in the court of any
municipality or territory where such train, aircraft or other vehicle passed during its trip,
including the place of its DEPARTURE AND ARRIVAL.
(c) Where an offense is committed on a VESSEL in the course of its voyage, the criminal action
shall be instituted and tried in the court of the FIRST PORT OF ENTRY or of any municipality or
territory where the vessel passed during such voyage, subject to the generally accepted
principles of international law.
(d) Crimes committed outside the Philippines but punishable under Article 2 of the Revised Penal
Code shall be cognizable by the court WHERE THE CRIMINAL ACTION IS FIRST FILED.
Note: The SC may order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid a miscarriage of justice.

Special cases:
a) Perjury: MTC- committed in two ways:
(1) falsely testifying under oath in a proceeding other than a criminal or civil case; and
(2) making a false affidavit before a person authorized to administer an oath on any material
matter where the law requires an oath.
Venue: Union Bank of the Phil vs. Desi Tomas:
The crime of perjury committed through the MAKING OF A FALSE AFFIDAVIT under Article
183 of the RPC is committed at the time the affiant subscribes and swears to his or her
affidavit since it is at that time that all the elements of the crime of perjury are executed.
When the crime is committed through FALSE TESTIMONY UNDER OATH in a proceeding that
is neither criminal nor civil, venue is at the place where the testimony under oath is given.
3 of 40
 If in lieu of or as supplement to the actual testimony made in a proceeding that is neither
criminal nor civil, a written sworn statement is submitted, venue may either be at the place
where the sworn statement is submitted or where the oath was taken as the taking of the
oath and the submission are both material ingredients of the crime committed. In all cases,
determination of venue shall be based on the acts alleged in the Information to be
constitutive of the crime committed.

b) Libel: RTC
a) If complainant is a private individual:
1) where the complainant actually resides at the time of the commission of the
offense; or
2) where the alleged defamatory article was printed and first published
b) If the complaint is a public official
1) where he held office at the time of the commission of the offense
2) where the alleged defamatory article was printed and first published

Agbayani vs Sayo (1979): In order to obviate controversies as to the venue of the criminal
action for written defamation, the complaint or information should contain allegations as
to whether, at the time the offense was committed, the offended party was a public
officer or a private individual and where he was actually residing at that time. Whenever
possible, the place where the written defamation was printed and first published should
likewise be alleged. That allegation would be a sine qua non if the circumstance as to
where the libel was printed and first published is used as the basis of the venue of the
action.

Bonifacio vs RTC of Makati (2010): To credit Gimenez’s premise of equating his first “access”
to the defamatory article on petitioners website in Makati with “printing and first
publication” would spawn the very ills that the amendment to Article 360 of the RPC sought
to discourage and prevent. It hardly requires much imagination to see the chaos that
would ensue in situations where the websites author or writer, a blogger or anyone who
posts messages therein could be sued for libel anywhere in the Philippines that the private
complainant may have allegedly accessed the offending website.

c) BP 22 Cases:
Action shall be filed in the place where the check was dishonored or issued.
In case of a cross-check, in the place of the depositary or collecting bank
Bar (1997)
Where is the proper venue for the filing of an information in the following cases? a) The theft of a car in Pasig City
which was brought to Obando, Bulacan, where it was cannibalized. b) The theft by X, a bill collector of ABC
Company, with main offices in Makati City, of his collections from customers in Tagaytay City. In the contract of
employment, X was detailed to the Calamba branch office, Laguna, where he was to turn in his collections. c) The
malversation of public funds by a Philippine consul detailed in the Philippine Embassy in London.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(a) The proper venue is in Pasig City where the theft of the car was committed, not in Obando where it was
cannibalized. Theft is not a continuing offense. (People v Mercado, 65 Phil 665).
(b) If the crime charged is theft, the venue is in Calamba where he did not turn in his collections. If the crime of X
is estafa, the essential ingredients of the offense took place in Tagaytay City where he received his collections, in
Calamba where he should have turned in his collections, and in Makati City where the ABC Company was based.
The information may therefore be filed in Tagaytay City or Calamba or Makati which have concurrent territorial
Jurisdiction. (Catingub vs. Court of Appeals, 121 SCRA 106
(c) The proper court is the Sandiganbayan which has jurisdiction over crimes committed by a consul or higher
official in the diplomatic service. (Sec. 4(c). PD 1606, as amended by RA. No. 7975). The Sandiganbayan is a
national court. (Nunez v. Sandiganbayan, 111 SCRA 433 [1982]. It has only one venue at present, which is in Metro
Manila, until RA. No. 7975, providing for two other branches in Cebu and in Cagayan de Oro, is implemented.

JURISDICTION OF CRIMINAL COURTS

MTC/MeTC/MCTC RTC SANDIGANBAYAN

(1) Exclusive original (1) Exclusive original (1) Exclusive original

jurisdiction over all jurisdiction in all criminal jurisdiction in those cases
violations of city/mun. cases not within the expressly enumerated in
ordinances committed exclusive jurisdiction of

4 of 40
 within their respective any court/ tribunal/ PD 1606, as amended by
territorial jurisdiction. body. [Sec. 20, BP129] RA 8249, violations of:
[Sec. 32(1), BP 129]
(2) Exclusive appellate a) RA 3019,
(2) Exclusive original jurisdiction over all cases
jurisdiction over all decided by the MTC b) RA 1379, and
offenses punishable with within its territorial c) Chapter II, Section
imprisonment not jurisdiction [Sec. 22, BP
exceeding 6 years 129] 2, Title VII, Book II of
irrespective of the
the RPC
amount of fine, and (3) Criminal cases where
regardless of other one or more of the
where one or more of the
imposable accessory or accused is below 18
accused are officials
other penalties, years of age but not less
occupying the following
than 15 years, or where
including the civil positions in the government,
one or more of the
liability arising from such whether in a permanent,
offenses or predicated victims is a minor at the
acting or interim capacity,
thereon, irrespective of time of the commission
at the time of the
kind, nature, value, or of the offense [RA 9344]
commission of the offense:
amount thereof. [Sec. (4) Cases against minors
32(2), BP 129] (a) Officials of the
cognizable under the
executive branch
(3) Exclusive original Dangerous Drugs Act, occupying the
jurisdiction over offenses as amended [RA 8369, positions of regional
involving damage to Family Courts Act of director and higher,
1997] otherwise classified as
property through
Grade '27' and higher,
criminal negligence (5) Violations of Republic of the Compensation
they shall have exclusive Act No. 7610, the Child and Position
original jurisdiction Abuse Act. Classification Act of
thereof. [Sec. 32(2), BP 1989 (RA 6758),
129; RA 7691] (6) Cases of domestic specifically including:
violence against (a) Provincial
Exception (for Nos. 1-3): women and children. If governors, vice-
Cases falling within the an act committed governors, members
exclusive jurisdiction of against women and of the sangguniang
the RTC and of the children likewise panlalawigan, and
Sandiganbayan constitute a criminal provincial treasurers,
offense, the accused or assessors, engineers,
(4) Cases classified under
batterer shall be subject and other provincial
the Revised Rules on
to criminal proceedings department heads:
Summary Procedure:
[SC Resolution, October and the corresponding
penalties. [RA 8369, (b) City mayors,
15, 1991]
Family Courts Act of vice-mayors,
1997] members of the
sangguniang
(a) Violations of traffic (7) Violations of intellectual panlungsod, city
laws/rules/ regulations; property rights [A.M. No. treasurers, assessors,
03-03- 03-SC (2003); RA engineers, and
8293] other city
(b) Violations of rental (8) department heads;
Money Laundering
law; Cases [RA 9160]
(c) Officials of the
diplomatic service
occupying the
5 of 40
 (c) Cases where the Exception: those position of consul
penalty prescribed by committed by public and higher;
law for the offense officers and private
charged is imprisonment persons who are in (d) Philippine army
not exceeding 6 months, conspiracy with such and air force
or a fine not exceeding public officers shall be colonels, naval
P1,000, or both, under the jurisdiction of captains, and all
irrespective of other the Sandiganbayan officers of higher
imposable penalties, rank;
Note: That the AMLC
accessory or otherwise,
does not exercise
or of the civil liability (e) Officers of the
quasi-judicial powers
arising therefrom Philippine National
and is simply an
Police while
investigatory body.
occupying the
(Subido et. al. vs. CA,
(d) Offenses involving position of provincial
2016)
damage to property director and those
through criminal (9) Libel holding the rank of
negligence(imposable senior
fine does not exceed superintendent and
P10,000) higher;

(5) Violations of BP 22 [A.M. (f) City and

No. 00- 11-01-SC (2003)] provincial
regardless of the amount prosecutors and
involved. their assistants, and
officials and
(6) Special jurisdiction to
prosecutors in the
decide on applications
Office of the
for bail in criminal cases
Ombudsman and
in the absence of all RTC
special prosecutor;
judges in a province or
city [Sec. 35, BP 129]
(g) Presidents,
directors or trustees,
or managers of
government-owned
or controlled
corporations, state
universities or
educational
institutions or
foundations.

(b) Members of Congress

and officials thereof
classified as Grade'27'
and up under the
Compensation and
Position Classification Act
of 1989

(c) Members of the judiciary

without prejudice to the
6 of 40
 provisions of the
Constitution

(d) Chairmen and members

of Constitutional
Commissions, without
prejudice to the
provisions of the
Constitution

(e) All other national and

local officials classified as
“Grade 27”

(2) Other offenses or felonies

whether simple or
complexed with other
crimes committed by the
public officials and
employees mentioned in
subsection a. of this
section in relation to their
office

Requisites:

(a) Accused is any one of

the public officials
enumerated in
subsection (a) of Sec. 4 of
RA 8249, grade 27 or
higher

(b) Accused commits any

other offense or felony,
than those specified in
subsec. (a), whether
simple or complexed with
other crimes

(c) The offender commits

such other offense or
felony in relation to his
office

Note: There is a need to

allege that the offense is
committed in relation to
his office. BUT, if the
offense is a violation of
RA 1309, RA 1379 or
C2,S2, T2, B2 of RPC there
is no need to allege.

7 of 40
 “In relation to his office” –
means that the offense
charged in the
information in intimately
related with the office
and is alleged to have
been perpetrated while
the accused was in the
performance of his
official functions. The test
is whether the offense
cannot exist w/o the
office.

Bar matter: Note however

that the allegation that
the offense was
committed in relation to
his office is not sufficient.
What is controlling is the
specific factual
allegations in the
information that would
indicate the close
intimacy between the
discharge of official
function and the
commission of the
offense charged.- pp vs
Montejo.

(3) Civil and criminal cases

filed in pursuant to and in
connection with EO 1, 2, 14,
14-A, issued in 1986

Bar Matter: Amendments

introduced by RA 10660
(Sec 2, amending Section 4
of PD1606)

SEC. 2. Section 4 of the same decree, as amended, is hereby further amended to read as
follows:

“SEC. 4. Jurisdiction. – The Sandiganbayan shall exercise exclusive original jurisdiction in all
cases involving:

8 of 40
 xxx

“Provided, That the Regional Trial Court shall have exclusive original jurisdiction where the
information: (a) does not allege any damage to the government or any bribery; or (b) alleges
damage to the government or bribery arising from the same or closely related transactions or
acts in an amount not exceeding One million pesos (P1,000,000.00).

“Subject to the rules promulgated by the Supreme Court, the cases falling under the
jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court under this section shall be tried in a judicial region other
than where the official holds office.

“In cases where none of the accused are occupying positions corresponding to Salary Grade
’27’ or higher, as prescribed in the said Republic Act No. 6758, or military and PNP officers
mentioned above, exclusive original jurisdiction thereof shall be vested in the proper regional
trial court, metropolitan trial court, municipal trial court, and municipal circuit trial court, as the
case may be, pursuant to their respective jurisdictions as provided in Batas Pambansa Blg.
129, as amended.

“The Sandiganbayan shall exercise exclusive appellate jurisdiction over final judgments,
resolutions or orders of regional trial courts whether in the exercise of their own original
jurisdiction or of their appellate jurisdiction as herein provided.

“The Sandiganbayan shall have exclusive original jurisdiction over petitions for the issuance of
the writs of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, habeas corpus, injunctions, and other ancillary
writs and processes in aid of its appellate jurisdiction and over petitions of similar nature,
including quo warranto, arising or that may arise in cases filed or which may be filed under
Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A, issued in 1986: Provided, That the jurisdiction over these
petitions shall not be exclusive of the Supreme Court.

“The procedure prescribed in Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, as well as the implementing rules that
the Supreme Court has promulgated and may hereafter promulgate, relative to
appeals/petitions for review to the Court of Appeals, shall apply to appeals and petitions for
review filed with the Sandiganbayan. 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 14-A, issued in 1986.

“In case private individuals are charged as co-principals, accomplices or accessories with the
public officers or employees, including those employed in government-owned or controlled
corporations, they shall be tried jointly with said public officers and employees in the proper
courts which shall exercise exclusive jurisdiction over them.

“Any provisions of law or Rules of Court to the contrary notwithstanding, the criminal action
and the corresponding civil action for the recovery of civil liability shall at all times be
simultaneously instituted with, and jointly determined in, the same proceeding by the
Sandiganbayan or the appropriate courts, the filing of the criminal action being deemed to
necessarily carry with it the filing of the civil action, and no right to reserve the filing of such
civil action separately from the criminal action shall be recognized: Provided, however, That
where the civil action had heretofore been filed separately but judgment therein has not yet
been rendered, and the criminal case is hereafter filed with the Sandiganbayan or the
appropriate court, said civil action shall be transferred to the Sandiganbayan or the
appropriate court, as the case may be, for consolidation and joint determination with the
criminal action, otherwise the separate civil action shall be deemed abandoned.”

Notes:
a) If the penalty is destierro(6mons. to 6 yrs.) , it is within the jurisdiction of the MTC.
b) Habitual Delinquency is not a penalty.
c) Note: Section 13 of R.A. No. 3019 reads: “Any public officer against whom any criminal
prosecution under a valid information under this Act or under the provisions of the
Revised Penal Code on bribery is pending in court, shall be suspended from office.
Should he be convicted by final judgment, he shall lose all retirement or gratuity
9 of 40
 benefits under any law, but if he is acquitted, he shall be entitled to reinstatement and
to the salaries and benefits which he failed to receive during suspension, unless in the
meantime administrative proceedings have been filed against him.”
 Information vs. Public Officer; Jursdiction: SB if covered under Sec. 4 of Pd1606,
REGARDLESS OF PENALTY;if not, RTC/MTC depending on the penalty.
 SUSPENSION is Mandatory in nature
 GUIDELINES for the lower courts in the exercise of the power of suspension (Luciano
vs. Mariano):

“(a) upon the filing of such information, the trial court should issue an order
with proper notice requiring the accused officer to show cause at a
specific date of hearing why he should not be ordered suspended from
office pursuant to the cited mandatory provisions of the Act. Where either
the prosecution seasonably files a motion for an order of suspension or
the accused in turn files a motion to quash the information or challenges
the validity thereof, such show-cause order of the trial court would no
longer be necessary. What is indispensable is that the trial court duly hear
the parties at a hearing held for determining the validity of the
information, and thereafter hand down its ruling, issuing the
corresponding order of suspension should it uphold the validity of the
information or withholding such suspension in the contrary case.

(b) No specific rules need be laid down for such pre-suspension hearing.
Suffice it to state that the accused should be given a fair and adequate
opportunity to challenge the validity of the criminal proceedings against
him, e.g. that he has not been afforded the right of due preliminary
investigation; that the acts for which he stands charged do not constitute
a violation of the provisions of Republic Act No. 3019 or of the bribery
provisions of the Revised Penal Code which would warrant his mandatory
suspension from office under section 13 of the Act; or he may present a
motion to quash the information on any of the grounds provided in Rule
117 of the Rules of Court.”

MILITARY COURTS
General rule: Ordinary courts will have jurisdiction over cases involving members of the armed
forces, and other persons subject to military law, regardless of who the co-accused or victims are.

Exception: When the offense is service-oriented, then it will be tried by the court martial.
PROVIDED: the President may, in the interest of justice, order/direct at any time before
arraignment that any such crimes/offenses be tried by the proper civil courts

Rule 110: Prosecution of Offenses

CRIMINAL ACTIONS, HOW INSTITUTED
The criminal action is commenced when the complaint or information is filed in court

For offenses which require a preliminary investigation (Section 1 of Rule 112, where the penalty
prescribed by law is at least four years, two months and one day), the criminal action is instituted
by filing the complaint with the appropriate officer for the conduct of PI.

For all other offenses, or in offenses cognizable by inferior courts (Municipal Trial Courts or
Municipal Circuit Trial Courts), the complaint or information is filed directly with said courts or the
complaint is filed with the fiscal. [Sec. 1(b), Rule 110]

In Metropolitan Manila and other chartered cities, the complaint shall be filed with the office of
the public prosecutor unless otherwise provided in their charters. [Sec. 1(b), Rule 110]

Note: There is no direct filing in the RTC’s, MeTC’c and MTCC’s

Bar (2004)
SPO1 CNC filed with the MTC in Quezon City (MeTCQC) a sworn written statement duly subscribed by him, charging
RGR (an actual resident of Cebu City) with the offense of slight physical injuries allegedly inflicted on SPS (an actual

10 of 40
 resident of Quezon City). The Judge of the branch to which the case was raffled thereupon issued an order
declaring that the case shall be governed by the Rule on Summary Procedure in criminal cases. Soon thereafter,
the Judge ordered the dismissal of the case for the reason that it was not commenced by information, as required
by said Rule. Sometime later, based on the same facts giving rise to the slight physical injuries case, the City
Prosecutor filed with the same MeTC-QC an information for attempted homicide against the same RGR. In due
time, before arraignment, RGR moved to quash the information on the ground of double jeopardy and after due
hearing, the Judge granted his motion. Was the dismissal of the complaint for slight physical injuries proper? Was
the grant of the motion to quash the attempted homicide information correct?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, the dismissal of the complaint for slight physical injuries is proper because in Metropolitan Manila and in
chartered cities, the case has to be commenced only by information. (Sec. 11, Revised Rule on Summary
Procedure).
No, the grant of the motion to quash the attempted homicide information on the ground of double jeopardy was
not correct, because there was no valid prosecution for slight physical injuries.
Bar (2008)
Jose, Alberto and Romeo were charged with murder. Upon filing the information, the RTC judge issued warrants
for their arrest. Learning of the issuance of the warrants, the three accused jointly filed a motion for reinvestigation
and for the recall of the warrants of arrest. On the date set for hearing of their motion, none of accused showed
up in court for fear of being arrested. The RTC judge denied their motion because the RTC did not acquire
jurisdiction over the persons of the movants. Did the RTC rule correctly?
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The RTC was not entirely correct in stating that it had no jurisdiction over the persons of the
accused. By filing motions and seeking affirmative reliefs from the court, the accused voluntarily submitted
themselves to the jurisdiction of the court. However, the RTC correctly denied the motion for reinvestigation. Before
an accused ca move for reinvestigation and the recall of his warrant of arrest, he must first surrender his person to
the court (Miranda, et al. vs. Tuliao, G.R. No. 158763, 31 March 2006).

Bar (2010)
What is "res judicata in prison grey"? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: “Res judicata in prison grey” is the criminal concept of double jeopardy, as “res judicata” is
the doctrine of civil law (Trinidad vs. Office of the Ombudsman, G.R. No. 166038, December 4, 2007). Described as
“res judicata in prison grey,” the right against double jeopardy prohibits the prosecution of a person for a crime of
which he has been previously acquitted or convicted. The purpose is to set the effects of the first prosecution
forever at rest, assuring the accused that he shall not thereafter be subjected to the danger and anxiety of a
second charge against him for the same offense (Joel B. Caes vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, November 6,
1989).

EFFECT OF THE INSTITUTION OF CRIMINAL ACTION ON THE PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD

General Rule: The institution of a criminal action shall interrupt the running of the period of
prescription of the offense charged unless otherwise provided in special laws. [Sec. 1, Rule 110]

(Bar Matter)In People v. Pangilinan, G.R No. 152662, June 13, 2012, the Court made a
pronouncement to the effect that “there is no more distinction between cases under the RPC
and those covered by special laws with respect to the interruption of the period of prescription.”
CASES THAT CANNOT BE PROSECUTED DE OFICIO
(1) Adultery/concubinage [Sec. 5, Rule 110]
(2) Seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness
(3) Defamation which consists of imputation of any of the foregoing offenses.
WHO MAY FILE A COMPLAINT?
(1) Adultery and concubinage – The offended spouse.
Both guilty parties should be included if both are alive. [Sec 5, Rule 110] However, prosecution will
not prosper if the offended party consented to the offense.

(2) Seduction, abduction and acts of lasciviousness –

The offended party or her parents, grandparents, or guardian, nor, in any case, if the offender
has been expressly pardoned by them. [Sec 5, Rule 110]

General rule: If the offended party is a MINOR, he or she has the right to initiate the prosecution
of such offenses independently of his/her parents, grandparents, or guardians

Exceptions: If the minor is: (a) Incompetent, or (b) Incapable of doing so

(3) Oral defamation – can only be brought upon instance and upon complaint of the offended
party.
EFFECT OF: DEATH OF OFFENDED PARTY
Death after filing the complaint would not deprive the court of the jurisdiction.
The State shall initiate the action on behalf of the offended party in case of his death/incapacity
AND he has no known parents/grandparents/ guardians.
11 of 40
In adultery/concubinage, death does not extinguish the criminal liability of accused.
DESISTANCE BY OFFENDED PARTY
It does not bar the People of the Philippines from prosecuting the criminal action, but it operates
as a waiver of the right to pursue civil indemnity.
PARDON BY OFFENDED PARTY
(a) In rape, seduction, abduction and acts of lasciviousness of a minor – The pardon will be
effective if given by both parents AND the offended party.
(b) In seduction, abduction and acts of lasciviousness
Express pardon by the offended party, parents, grandparents OR guardian will prevent
prosecution. [Rule 110, Sec. 5]
(c) The parents/grandparents/guardian of the offended minor (in that order) cannot extend a
valid pardon without conformity of the offended party, even if the latter is a minor. [US v. Luna
(1902)]
(d) If the offended woman is of age and not incapacitated, only she can extend a valid pardon
which would absolve the offender.

General rule: Pardon must be made before the filing of the criminal complaint in court.
Exception: In rape, where marriage between the offender and the offended party would be
effective as pardon even when the offender has already commenced serving his sentence.

If there is more than one accused, the pardon must be extended to all offenders. Pardon or
desistance extinguishes civil liability. Pardon or express condonation has the effect of waiving the
civil liability with regard to the interest of the injured party. Liability arising from an offense is
extinguished in the same manner as other obligations.

Pardon Consent

Refers to past acts Refers to future acts

In order to absolve the accused from In order to absolve the accused from
liability, it must be extended to both liability, it is sufficient even if granted only
offenders to the offending spouse

CRIMINAL ACTIONS, WHEN ENJOINED

(Bar 1999)
Will injunction lie to restrain the commencement of a criminal action? Explain. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
As a general rule, injunction will not lie to restrain a criminal prosecution except:
a) To afford adequate protection to the constitutional rights of the accused;
b) When necessary for the orderly administration of justice or to avoid oppression or multiplicity of actions;
c) When double jeopardy is clearly apparent;
d) Where the charges are manifestly false and motivated by the lust for vengeance; e) Where there is clearly no
prima facie case against the accused and a motion to quash on that ground has been denied.

CONTROL OF PROSECUTION
General Rule: All criminal actions commenced by a complaint or information shall be
prosecuted under the DIRECTION and CONTROL of the prosecutor. [Sec. 5, Rule 110]

Exception: In case of heavy work schedule of the public prosecutor OR in the event of
lack of public prosecutors.

The private prosecutor may be authorized in writing by the Chief of the Prosecution Office or the
Regional State Prosecutor to prosecute the case SUBJECT to the approval of the court.

EXTENT OF THE PROSECUTOR’S CONTROL PRIOR TO THE FILING OF THE CASE

Matters within the control and supervision of the prosecutor:
(1) What case to file
(2) Whom to prosecute
(3) Manner of prosecution
(4) Right to withdraw information before arraignment even without notice and hearing

12 of 40
AFTER A CASE IS FILED
It is the prosecutor’s duty to proceed with the presentation of his evidence.
The prosecutor has no power to dismiss the action without the court’s consent.

EFFECTS OF THE LACK OF INTERVENTION BY THE FISCAL IN THE TRIAL

Although the private prosecutor had previously been authorized by the special counsel to
present the evidence for the prosecution, in view of the absence of the City Fiscal at the hearing,
it cannot be said that the prosecution of the case was under the control of the City Fiscal. It
follows that the evidence presented by the private prosecutor at said hearing could not be
considered as evidence for the plaintiff [People v. Beriales, (1976)].

SUFFICIENCY OF COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION

COMPLAINT DEFINED
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]

INFORMATION DEFINED
An accusation in writing, charging a person with an offense, subscribed by the prosecutor and
filed with the court. [Sec. 4, Rule 110; People vs Cinco (2009)]
Note:
a) Information need not be under oath.
b) Complaint may be filed in the prosecutor’s office or in court; while an information
can only be filed in court.

Bar (1999)
Distinguish a Complaint from Information. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
In criminal procedure, a complaint is a sworn written statement charging a person with an offense, subscribed by
the offended party, any peace officer or other peace officer charged with the enforcement of the law violated.
(Sec. 3, Rule 110, 1985 Rules of Criminal Procedure); while an information is an accusation in writing charging a
person with an offense subscribed by the prosecutor and filed with the court. (Sec. 4, Id.)

FORM & SUBSTANCE

Sufficiency of complaint or information
(Bar Matter)A complaint or information is sufficient if it states: (NDANAP)
(1) the name of the accused;
(2) the designation of the offense given by the statute;
(3) the acts or omissions complained of as constituting the offense;
(4) the name of the offended party;
(5) the approximate date of the commission of the offense; and
(6) the place where the offense was committed. [Sec. 6, Rule 110]

Test for 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. [Lazarte, Jr. vs Sandiganbayan (2009)]

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 (2007)]

Consequently, objections as to form cannot be made for the first time on appeal. The accused
should have moved for a bill of particulars or for quashal of information before arraignment,
otherwise he is deemed to have waived his objections to such a defect. [People v. Teodoro
(2009)]

DESIGNATION OF OFFENSE
Specify the qualifying and aggravating circumstances [Sec. 8 and 9,Rule 110)] This is a procedural
requirement to safeguard the right of the accused to be informed of the nature and cause of
the accusation against him.

CAUSE OF THE ACCUSATION

WHAT TO ALLEGE
13 of 40
General rule: Where the law alleged to have been violated prohibits generally acts therein
defined AND is intended to apply to all persons indiscriminately, BUT prescribes certain
limitations/exceptions from its violation, the indictment/information is sufficient if it alleges facts
which the offender did as constituting a violation of law, without explicitly negating the
exception, as the exception is a matter of defense which the accused has to prove.

Exception: Where the statute alleged to have been violated applies only to specific classes of
persons and special conditions and the exemptions from its violation are so incorporated in the
language defining the crime that the ingredients of the offense cannot be accurately and clearly
set forth if the exemption is omitted, then the indictment must show that the accused does not
fall within the exemptions.

Qualifying and aggravating circumstances must be alleged; otherwise, they are not to be
considered even if proven during the trial. [Sec. 8, Rule 110]

Where complex crime is charged

Where what is alleged in the information is a complex crime and the evidence fails to support the
charge as to one of the component offenses, the defendant can only be convicted of the offense
proven.

DUPLICITY OF THE OFFENSE; EXCEPTION

DUPLICITY OF OFFENSE in an information or complaint means the joinder of two or more separate
and distinct offenses in one and the same information or complaint.

General rule: The information must charge only one offense.[Sec. 13, Rule 110]
Objection to a complaint or information which charges more than one offense must be timely
interposed before trial. [Sec 3, Rule 120] Failure to do so constitutes a waiver, [People v Tabio
(2008)] and the court may convict him of as many offenses as are charged and proved, and
impose on him the penalty for each offense. [Sec 3, Rule 120]

Exception: When the law prescribes a single punishment for various offenses

Remedy: The filing of a motion to quash BEFORE ARRAIGNMENT is the remedy in case of duplicity
of offense in an information. Otherwise, he is deemed to have waived the objection.

SEVERAL MODES OF COMMITTING OFFENSE NOT DUPLICITOUS

General rule: In case of crimes susceptible of being committed in various modes, the allegations
in the information of the various ways of committing the offense would be regarded as a
description of only one offense and information is not rendered defective.
Exceptions:
(a) Complex crimes
(b) Special complex crimes
(c) Continuous crimes
(d) Crimes susceptible of being committed in various modes
(e) Crimes which another offense is an ingredient [People v. Camerino (1960)]

AMENDMENT OR SUBSTITUTION OF COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION [SEC. 14, RULE 110]

I. AMENDMENTS IN FORM AND SUBSTANCE BEFORE PLEA-leave of court is not necessary

General rule: It must be made BEFORE the accused enters his plea.
Exception: If the amendment (a) downgrades the nature of the offense charged in, or
(b)excludes any accused from, the complaint/information, it can be made only upon motion of
the prosecutor, with notice to the offended party and with leave of court. The court is mandated
to state its reasons in resolving the motion of the prosecutor and to furnish all parties, especially
the offended party, of copies of its order.

II. AMENDMENTS MADE AFTER PLEA AND DURING TRIAL

Formal amendment only– can only be made under two conditions
(1) Leave of court must be secured
(2) It does not cause prejudice to the rights of the accused. [Sec 14, Rule 110]

14 of 40
The test as to WON a defendant is prejudiced by the amendment of information is:
(a) WON a defense under the information as it originally stood would be available after the
amendment is made, and
(b) WON any evidence defendant might have would be equally applicable to the information
in the one form as in the other. [People vs Casey (1981)]
(c) An amendment is only in form

Substantial amendment– proscribed. [People vs. Zulueta (1951)]

Substantial matter in a complaint is the recital of facts constituting the offense charged and
determinative of the jurisdiction of the court. All other matters are merely of form. [Almeda vs
Villaluz (1975)]
Exception: if it is beneficial to the accused. [Ricarzevs CA (2007)]

III. AMENDMENT BEFORE PLEA, BUT THE PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT IS:

a) to downgrade the nature of the offense
b) excludes any accused
> it requires: 1) motion by the prosecutor, 2) Leave of court, AND 3) notice to the
offended party

(Bar Matter) WHAT IS SUBSTITUTION?

Substitution – a complaint or information may be substituted if it appears at any time before
judgment that a mistake has been made in charging the proper offense, the court shall dismiss
the original complaint or information UPON THE FILING OF A NEW ONE CHARGING THE PROPER
OFFENSE, provided the accused would not be placed in double jeopardy. [Sec 14, Rule 110]

Subject to the Sec 19, Rule 119, when it becomes manifest at any time before judgment that a
mistake has been made in charging the proper offense and the accused cannot be convicted
of the offense charged or any other offense necessarily included therein, THE ACCUSED SHALL
NOT BE DISCHARGED IF THERE APPEARS GOOD CAUSE TO DETAIN HIM. The court shall commit the
accused to answer the proper offense and dismiss the original case upon the filing of the proper
information.

Limitations:
(1) No judgment has yet been rendered
(2) The accused cannot be convicted of the offense charged or of any other offense necessarily
included therein
(3) The accused would not be placed in double jeopardy

Distinction between substitution and amendment

Amendment Substitution

Changes may be Formal or Substantial Substantial change only

Can be effected without leave of court Must be with leave of court

(before plea)

Only as to form, there is no need for another PI Another PI is required and accused has to
and retaking of plea plead anew

Amended information refers to the same Involves a different offense which does not
offense charged in the original information or include those provided in the original charge;
to an offense which is included in the original cannot invoke double jeopardy
charge; can invoke double jeopardy

INTERVENTION OF OFFENDED PARTY [SEC. 16, RULE 110]

General rule: An offended party has the right to intervene in the prosecution of a crime
Note: This is still subject to the control of the prosecutor. [Phil. Rabbit Bus Lines vs People (2004)]
Exceptions:

15 of 40
(1) Where, from the nature of the crime and the law defining and punishing it, no civil liability
arises in favor of a private offended party.
(2) Where, from the nature of the offense, the private offended party is entitled to civil indemnity
arising therefrom but he has waived the same or has expressly reserved his right to institute a
separate civil action or he has already instituted such action.
(3) Offended party has already instituted action for civil claims

Bar (2001)
Amando was charged with frustrated homicide. Before he entered his plea and upon the advice of his counsel,
he manifested his willingness to admit having committed the offense of serious physical injuries. The prosecution
then filed an amended information for serious physical injuries against Amando. What steps or action should the
prosecution take so that the amended information against Amando which downgrades the nature of the offense
could be validly made? Why? (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
In order that the amended information which downgrades the nature of the offense could be validly made, the
prosecution should file a motion to ask for leave of court with notice to the offended party. (Sec.14 of Rule 110,
Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure). The new rule is for the protection of the interest of the offended party and to
prevent possible abuse by the prosecution.

Bar (2002)
A. D and E were charged with homicide in one information. Before they could be arraigned, the prosecution
moved to amend the information to exclude E therefrom. Can the court grant the motion to amend? Why? (2%)
B. On the facts above stated, suppose the prosecution, instead of filing a motion to amend, moved to withdraw
the information altogether and its motion was granted. Can the prosecution re-file the information although this
time for murder? Explain (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. Yes, provided notice is given to the offended party and the court states its reasons for granting the same. (Rule
110, sec. 14).
B. Yes, the prosecution can re-file the information for murder in substitution of the information for homicide because
no double jeopardy has as yet attached. [Galvez v. Court of Appeals, 237 SCRA 685 (1994)].

Bar (1997)
A was accused of homicide for the killing of B. During the trial, the public prosecutor received a copy of the
marriage certificate of A and B.
(a) Can the public prosecutor move for the amendment of the information to charge A with the crime of parricide?
(b) Suppose instead of moving for the amendment of the information, the public prosecutor presented in evidence
the marriage certificate without objection on the part of the defense, could Abe convicted of parricide?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(a) No. The Information cannot be amended to change the offense charged from homicide to parricide. Firstly,
the marriage is not a supervening fact arising from the act constituting the charge of homicide. (Sec. 7[a] of Rule
117). Secondly, after plea, amendments may be done only as to matters of form. The amendment is substantial
because it will change the nature of the offense. (Sec. 14 of Rule 110; Dionaldo us. Dacuycuy. 108 SCRA 736).
(b) No. A can be convicted only of homicide not of parricide which is a graver offense. The accused has the
constitutional rights of due process and to be informed of the nature and the cause of the accusation against him.
(Secs. 1, 14 (1) and (2} Art. III. 1987 Constitution)

Bar (2003)
After the requisite proceedings, the Provincial Prosecutor filed an Information for homicide against X. The latter,
however, timely filed a Petition for Review of the Resolution of the Provincial Prosecutor with the Secretary of Justice
who, in due time, issued a Resolution reversing the resolution of the Provincial Prosecutor and directing him to
withdraw the Information.
Before the Provincial Prosecutor could comply with the directive of the Secretary of Justice, the court issued a
warrant of arrest against X. The Public Prosecutor filed a Motion to Quash the Warrant of Arrest and to Withdraw
the Information, attaching to it the Resolution of the Secretary of Justice. The court denied the motion. (6%) a) Was
there a legal basis for the court to deny the motion? b) If you were the counsel for the accused, what remedies, if
any, would you pursue?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a. Yes, there is a legal basis for the court to deny the motion to quash the warrant of arrest and to withdraw the
information. The court is not bound by the Resolution of the Secretary of Justice. (Crespo v. Mogul, 151 SCRA 462
[1987]).
b. If I were the counsel for the accused, I would surrender the accused and apply for bail because the offense is
merely homicide, a non-capital offense. At the pre-trial, I would make a stipulation of facts with the prosecution
which would show that no offense was committed.

Rule 111: Prosecution of Civil Action

RULE ON IMPLIED INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ACTION WITH CRIMINAL ACTION
HOW INSTITUTED
General rule: When the criminal action is instituted, the civil action for the recovery of civil liability
arising from the offense charged is deemed instituted. [Sec. 1, Rule 111]

Exception [Sec. 1, Rule 111]: If the offended party:

16 of 40
(1) Waives the civil action;
(2) Institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action; or
(3) Reserves the right to institute it separately

WHEN CIVIL ACTION MAY PROCEED INDEPENDENTLY

Under the Rules, only civil liability ARISING FROM the crime charged is deemed instituted, hence,
the civil actions under the Civil Code, specifically Arts. 32, 33, 34, and 2176, remain separate,
distinct, and independent of any criminal prosecution although based on the same act.
[Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines Inc. v. People (2004)]

When reservation is made: The reservation of the right to institute separately the civil action shall
be made before the prosecution starts presenting its evidence and under circumstances
affording the offended party a reasonable opportunity to make such reservation [Sec. 1, Rule 111]
SEPARATE ACTION FILED BY THE ACCUSED
No counterclaim, cross-claim or 3rd-party complaint may be filed by the accused in the criminal
case, but any cause of action which could have been the subject thereof may be litigated in a
separate civil action. [Sec. 1, Rule 111]
WHEN SEPARATE CIVIL ACTION IS SUSPENDED
AFTER THE CRIMINAL ACTION HAS BEEN COMMENCED, the separate civil action arising therefrom
cannot be instituted until final judgment has been entered in the criminal action. [Sec 2, Rule 111]

The civil action, which should be suspended after the institution of the criminal action, is that
arising from delict or crime.

Civil actions under Arts. 32-34 and 2176 of the Civil Code are exempted from the rule that after a
criminal action has been commenced, the civil action which has been reserved cannot be
instituted until final judgment has been rendered in the criminal action. [Sec. 3, Rule 111]
EFFECT OF THE DEATH OF ACCUSED [SEC. 4, RULE 111]
(1) Criminal liability is extinguished [Art. 89, RPC]
(2) As regards civil liability:
Death is before arraignment: Dismissal of case without prejudice to filing of civil action against
estate of the deceased

Death is after arraignment and during pendency of criminal action: Extinguishes civil liability arising
from the delict

Death during pendency of APPEAL: Criminal liability and civil liability based thereon [People vs
Ayochok (2010)]
Exception: Independent civil actions instituted under Arts. 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of the Civil Code,
or those instituted to enforce liability arising from other sources of obligation may be continued
against the estate or legal representative of the accused after proper substitution or against his
estate.

As regards the parties in the civil action:

The heirs of the accused may be substituted without requiring the appointment of an
executor/administrator.
Court may appoint guardian ad litem for the minors. Court shall order legal representative/s to
appear and be substituted within 30 days from notice.

PREJUDICIAL QUESTION [SECS. 6 AND 7, RULE 111]

(Bar 1999) What is a prejudicial question?
A prejudicial question is an issue involved in a civil action which is similar or intimately related to
the issue raised in the criminal action, the resolution of which determines whether or not the
criminal action may proceed. (Sec. 5 of Rule 111.)

The elements of a prejudicial question are:

(a) the civil action must be instituted prior to the criminal action.
(b) the previously instituted civil action involves an issue similar or intimately related to the issue
raised in the subsequent criminal action, and
(c) the resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action may proceed;

17 of 40
When a civil action may be considered prejudicial:
(a) the civil case involves facts intimately related to those upon which the criminal prosecution
would be based;
(b) in the resolution of the issue/s raised in the civil action, the guilt/innocence of the accused
would necessarily be determined;
(c) jurisdiction to try the action is lodged in another tribunal [Basis of a) to c): Magestrado v.
People (2009)]
(d) Action is instituted prior to the institution of the criminal action [Pimentel v. Pimentel (2010)]

Rationale: to avoid two conflicting decisions in the civil case and in the criminal case. [Sy Thiong
Siou vs Sy Chim (2009)]
EFFECT
General rule: Where both a civil and a criminal case arising from the same facts are filed in court,
the criminal case takes precedence [Sec 2, Rule 111]
Exception: If there exists a prejudicial question which should be resolved first before an action
could be taken in the criminal case.

WHERE TO FILE PETITION FOR SUSPENSION IS FILED [SEC. 6, RULE 111]

A petition for the suspension of the criminal action based upon the pendency of a prejudicial
question in a civil case may be filed in the Office of the prosecutor (in the PI stage); Court
conducting the PI; or Court where criminal action has been filed for trial, at any time before the
prosecution rests.

Q: May the court suspend the criminal action motu proprio?

A: The suspension of the criminal case is not automatic; it must be by motion of the accused.
Bar (1999)
What is a prejudicial question? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A prejudicial question is an issue involved in a civil action which is similar or intimately related to the issue raised in
the criminal action, the resolution of which determines whether or not the criminal action may proceed. (Sec. 5 of
Rule 111.)
ANOTHER ANSWER:
A prejudicial question is one based on a fact distinct and separate from the crime but so intimately connected
with it that it determines the guilt or innocence of the accused.

Bar (2000)
CX is charged with estafa in court for failure to remit to MM sums of money collected by him (CX) for MM in payment
for goods purchased from MM, by depositing the amounts in his (CX’s) personal bank account. CX files a motion
to suspend proceedings pending resolution of a civil case earlier filed in court by CX against MM for accounting
and damages involving the amounts subject of the criminal case. As the prosecutor in the criminal case, briefly
discuss your grounds in support of your opposition to the motion to suspend proceedings. (5%).
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
As the prosecutor, I will argue that the motion to suspend is not in order for the following reasons:
1. The civil case filed by CX against MM for accounting and damages does not involve an issue similar to or
intimately related to the issue of estafa raised in the criminal action.
2. The resolution of the issue in the civil case for accounting will not determine whether or not the criminal action
for estafa may proceed. (Sec. 5, Rule 111, Rules of Criminal Procedure.)

Bar (1999)
A allegedly sold to B a parcel of land which A later also sold to X. B brought a civil action for nullification of the
second sale and asked that the sale made by A in his favor be declared valid. A theorized that he never sold the
property to B and his purported signatures appearing in the first deed of sale were forgeries. Thereafter, an
Information for estafa was filed against A based on the same double sale that was the subject of the civil action.
A filed a "Motion for Suspension of Action" in the criminal case, contending that the resolution of the issue in the
civil case would necessarily be determinative of his guilt or innocence. Is the suspension of the criminal action in
order? Explain. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes. The suspension of the criminal action is in order because the defense of A in the civil action, that he never sold
the property to B and that his purported signatures in the first deed of sale were forgeries, is a prejudicial question
the resolution of which is determinative of his guilt or innocence. If the first sale is null and void, there would be no
double sale and A would be innocent of the offense of estafa. (Ras v. Rasul, 100 SCRA 125.)

Bar (1999)
A allegedly sold to B a parcel of land which A later also sold to X. B brought a civil action for nullification of the
second sale and asked that the sale made by A in his favor be declared valid. A theorized that he never sold the
property to B and his purported signatures appearing in the first deed of sale were forgeries. Thereafter, an
Information for estafa was filed against A based on the same double sale that was the subject of the civil action.
A filed a "Motion for Suspension of Action" in the criminal case, contending that the resolution of the issue in the

18 of 40
 civil case would necessarily be determinative of his guilt or innocence. Is the suspension of the criminal action in
order? Explain. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes. The suspension of the criminal action is in order because the defense of A in the civil
action, that he never sold the property to B and that his purported signatures in the first deed of sale were forgeries,
is a prejudicial question the resolution of which is determinative of his guilt or innocence. If the first sale is null and
void, there would be no double sale and A would be innocent of the offense of estafa. (Ras v. Rasul, 100 SCRA
125.)

Bar (2000)
CX is charged with estafa in court for failure to remit to MM sums of money collected by him (CX) for MM in payment
for goods purchased from MM, by depositing the amounts in his (CX’s) personal bank account. CX files a motion
to suspend proceedings pending resolution of a civil case earlier filed in court by CX against MM for accounting
and damages involving the amounts subject of the criminal case. As the prosecutor in the criminal case, briefly
discuss your grounds in support of your opposition to the motion to suspend proceedings. (5%).
SUGGESTED ANSWER: As the prosecutor, I will argue that the motion to suspend is not in order for the following
reasons: 1. The civil case filed by CX against MM for accounting and damages does not involve an issue similar to
or intimately related to the issue of estafa raised in the criminal action. 2 The resolution of the issue in the civil case
for accounting will not determine whether or not the criminal action for estafa may proceed.

RULE ON FILING FEES IN CIVIL ACTION DEEMED INSTITUTED WITH THE CRIMINAL ACTION FILING FEES
OF CIVIL ACTION DEEMED INSTITUTED IN CRIMINAL ACTION
General Rule: No filing fees shall be required for actual damages. [Sec. 1, Rule 111]
When the amount of damages, other than actual, is specified in the complaint or information
filed in court, then the corresponding filing fees shall be paid by the offended party upon the
filing thereof in court for trial;
In any other case—i.e., when the amount of damages is not so alleged in the complaint or
information filed in court, the corresponding filing fees need not be paid and shall simply
constitute a first lien on the judgment, except on an award for actual damages. [General vs
Claravall (1991)]
Exceptions: In criminal actions for violation of BP22, the amount of the check involved shall be
considered as the actual damages for which no separate civil action is allowed.

In estafa cases, the filing fees shall be paid based on the amount involved. [A.M. No. 04- 2-04]

When paid: Upon the filing of the criminal action

Bar (2001)
Saturnino filed a criminal action against Alex for the latter’s bouncing check. On the date of the hearing after the
arraignment, Saturnino manifested to the court that he is reserving his right to file a separate civil action. The court
allowed Saturnino to file a civil action separately and proceeded to hear the criminal case. Alex filed a motion for
reconsideration contending that the civil action is deemed included in the criminal case. The court reconsidered
its order and ruled that Saturnino could not file a separate action. Is the court’s order granting the motion for
reconsideration correct? Why? (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, the court’s order granting the motion for reconsideration is correct. The Rules provide that the criminal action
for violation of B.P. Blg. 22 shall be deemed to include the corresponding civil action, and that no reservation to
file such civil action separately shall be allowed. [Sec. 1(b), Rule 111, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure]

Rule 112 : Preliminary Investigation

NATURE OF RIGHT
PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION, DEFINED
It is an inquiry or proceeding to determine whether there is sufficient ground to engender a well-
founded belief that a crime has been committed and the respondent is probably guilty thereof,
and should be held for trial. [Sec. 1, Rule 112]
NATURE OF THE RIGHT TO PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION by
It is a statutory right in those instances where it is required, and to withhold it would violate the
constitutional right to due process.
Not a mere formal or technical right but a substantial right.
RIGHT TO PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION
The right to preliminary investigation is a personal right which the accused may waive either
expressly or by implication.
When the accused waives his right to preliminary investigation, the fiscal may forthwith file the
corresponding information with the proper court. [People vs Perez (1960)]
An application for or admission to bail shall not bar the accused from assailing the regularity or
questioning the absence of a preliminary investigation of the charge against him provided that
he raises the challenge before entering his plea [Sec. 26, Rule 114].
19 of 40
INSTANCES WHEREIN THE RIGHT TO PI IS DEEMED WAIVED:
(1) Express waiver or by silence [Herrera, Vol. IV, p. 278, 2007 ed.]
(2) Failure to invoke it during arraignment [People v. De Asis, GR No. 105581, Dec. 7, 1993]; and
(3) Consenting to be arraigned and entering a plea of not guilty without invoking the right to PI
[People v. Bulosan, GR No. 58404, April 15, 1988]

The right to PI cannot be raised for the first time on appeal [Pilapil v. Sandiganbayan, GR No.
101978, April 7, 1993]

INSTANCES WHEREIN THE RIGHT TO PI IS NOT DEEMED WAIVED:

(1) Failure to appear before the prosecutor during the clarificatory hearing or when
summoned,when the right was invoked at the start of the proceeding [Larranaga v. CA, GR No.
130644, March 13, 1998]; or
(2) When the accused filed an application for bail and was arraigned over his objection and the
accused demand that preliminary investigation be conducted [Go v. CA, GR No. 101837, Feb.
11, 1992]

PURPOSES OF PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION

To secure the innocent against hasty, malicious and oppressive prosecution, and to protect him
from an open and public accusation of a crime, from the trouble, expense, anxiety of a public
trial, and also protect the state from useless and expensive trials.
[Tandoc vs. Resultan (1989)]
SCOPE OF PI
A PI is “merely inquisitorial, and it is often the only means of discovering the persons who may
reasonably be charged with a crime, to enable the prosecutor to prepare his complaint or
information. It is not a trial of the case on the merits” and does not place the persons against
whom it is taken in jeopardy.

WHO MAY CONDUCT DETERMINATION OF EXISTENCE OF PROBABLE CAUSE

Generally [Rule 112, Sec. 2 as amended by A.M. No. 05-8-26-SC]
1) Provincial/city prosecutors and their assistants;
2) National and regional state prosecutors;
3) Other officers as may be authorized by law.

The prosecutor
If the determination of probable cause is for purposes of indictment; such finding will not be
disturbed by the court unless there is finding of grave abuse of discretion

The Court
If the determination of probable cause is for purposes of issuance of warrant of arrest

COMELEC, when vested

COMELEC may conduct investigation as regards election offenses. [Sec. 2(6), Art. IX-C, Consti;
Sec. 265, Omnibus Election Code]

Ombudsman
The Ombudsman and his Deputies, as protectors of the people, shall act promptly on complaints
filed in any form or manner against public officials or employees of the Government, or any
subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof, including GOCCs and shall, in appropriate cases,
notify the complainants of the action taken and the result thereof. [Sec. 12, Art. XI, Constitution]

The Ombudsman is authorized to conduct preliminary investigation and to prosecute all criminal
cases involving public officers and employees, not only those within the jurisdiction of the
Sandiganbayan, but also those within the jurisdiction of regular courts as well.

Note: RTC judges have NO power to conduct PI; and MTC judges cannot conduct PI anymore
after A.M. No. 05-8-26-SC eliminated judges of the MTC and MCTC from those authorized to
conduct a PI effective October 3, 2005.

I. Filing of the complaint [Sec. 3(a), Rule 112]

20 of 40
(1) Stating the respondent’s name and address
(2) Include the affidavits of complainant and the witnesses, and other documents to establish
probable cause, which must be subscribed and sworn to before a prosecutor or government
official authorized to administer oath or notary public
(3) In such number of copies as there are respondents, plus 2 copies for the official file

II. Action of the investigating officer [Sec. 3(b), Rule 112]

(1) Within 10 days after the filing of the complaint, the investigating officer will either:
(2) Dismiss, if he finds no ground to continue; or
(3) Issue a subpoena to the respondent, attaching the complaint and other documents.If
subpoena is not possible, the investigating officer shall decide based on what complainant
presented.
(4) Respondent has the right to examine the evidence submitted by complainant, and copy
evidence at his expense.

III. Defendant’s counter-affidavit

Must be made within 10 days from receipt of complaint, and must comply with the same
requirements as a complaint. [Sec. 3(c), Rule 112]
If not made within 10 days, the investigating officer shall resolve the complaint based on the
evidence presented by the complainant [Sec. 3(d), Rule 112]

IV. Clarificatory Hearing [Sec. 3(e), Rule 112]

The investigator must conduct a hearing within 10 days from receipt of the counter-affidavit. The
hearing must be finished in 5 days.
Hearing is conducted only if there are such facts and issues to be clarified from a party or a
witness.
Parties may present evidence, but they have no right to examine or cross-examine. Questions of
parties shall be submitted to the investigating officer.
Within 10 day after the investigation, the officer shall determine WON there is sufficient ground to
hold respondent for trial.

PROCEDURE FOR PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION [Sec. 3, Rule 112 of Rules of Criminal Procedure]

I. RESOLUTION OF INVESTIGATING PROSECUTOR[SEC. 4, RULE 112]

(Bar Matter) If he finds probable cause to hold respondent for trial, he shall prepare a resolution
and certify under oath in the information that:
a. He has personally examined the complainant and his witnesses;
b. That there is reasonable ground to believe that a crime has been committed and that the
accused is probably guilty thereof;
c. That the accused was informed of the complaint and evidences against him;
d. That he was given opportunity to submit controverting evidence If he finds no probable cause,
he shall recommend the dismissal of the complaint

II. REVIEW [SEC. 4, RULE 112]

Within 5 days from resolution, the investigating officer will forward the case to the prosecutor or
to the Ombudsman in cases cognizable by the Sandiganbayan in the exercise of its original
jurisdiction.
No complaint/information may be filed or dismissed by an investigating prosecutor without the
prior written authority or approval of the prosecutor or Ombudsman.
In case the investigation officer recommends the dismissal of the complaint but the
prosecutor/Ombudsman disagrees, the latter may file the information himself or any deputy or
order any prosecutor to do so without conducting a new PI.
Within 10 days from receipt of the resolution, the prosecutor/Ombudsman will act on the case.

Note: The DOJ Secretary may file the information without conducting another PI or dismiss the
information filed by the prosecutor. The DOJ Secretary may review resolutions, via petition for
review to the Secretary of Justice, of his subordinates in criminal cases despite the information
being filed in court (Community Rural Bank of Guimba v. Talavera, AM No. RTJ-05-1909, April 6,
2005) See also DOJ Circular No. 70

21 of 40
III. REMEDY OF AN AGGRIEVED PARTY AGAINST THE RESOLUTION OF THE DOJ SECRETARY
Such resolution may be nullified in a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 on grounds of grave abuse
of discretion resulting to lack or excess of jurisdiction [Ching v. Sec. of Justice, 2006]
The DOJ resolution is appealable administratively before the Office of the President and the
decision of the latter may be appealed before the CA pursuant toRule43 [De Ocampo v. Sec, of
Justice, 2006]

Bar (2012)
After an information for rape was filed in the RTC, the DOJ Secretary, acting on the accused's petition for review,
reversed the investigating prosecutor's finding of probable cause. Upon order of the DOJ Secretary, the trial
prosecutor filed a Motion to Withdraw Information which the judge granted. The order of the judge stated only the
following: "Based on the review by the DOJ Secretary of the findings of the investigating prosecutor during the
preliminary investigation, the Court agrees that there is no sufficient evidence against the accused to sustain the
allegation in the information. The motion to withdraw Information is, therefore, granted." If you were the private
prosecutor, what should you do? Explain. (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
If I were the private prosecutor, I would file a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 with the Court of Appeals (Cerezo
vs. People, G.R. No.185230, June 1, 2011). It is well-settled that when the trial court is confronted with a motion to
withdraw an Information (on the ground of lack of probable cause to hold the accused for trial based on resolution
of the DOJ Secretary), the trial court has the duty to make an independent assessment of the merits of the motion.
It may either agree or disagree with the recommendation of the Secretary. Reliance alone on the resolution of the
Secretary would be an abdication of the trial court‟s duty and jurisdiction to determine a prima facie case. The
court must itself be convinced that there is indeed no sufficient evidence against the accused. Otherwise, the
judge acted with grave abuse of discretion if he grants the Motion to Withdraw Information by the trial prosecutor.
(Harold Tamargo vs. Romulo Awingan et. al. G.R. No. 177727, January 19, 2010).

WHEN WARRANT OF ARREST MAY ISSUE

If the judge finds probable cause, he shall issue a warrant of arrest, or a commitment order if the
accused has already been arrested, and hold him for trial.
The PI conducted by the prosecutor is EXECUTIVE in nature, it is for the purpose of determining
whether or not there exists sufficient ground for the filing of information;
The PI conducted by the judge which is properly called PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION is for the
warrant of arrest [P/Supt. Cruz v. Judge Areola, AM No. RTJ-01-1642, March 6, 2002]

CASES NOT REQUIRING A PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION NOR COVERED BY RULE ON SUMMARY

PROCEDURE [SEC.8, RULE 112]
Cases punishable by imprisonment of less than 4 years, 2 months and 1 day, filed with the
prosecutor or MTC/MCTC

22 of 40
REMEDIES OF ACCUSED IF THERE WAS NO PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION
1. The accused may refuseto enter a plea upon arraignment and object to further
proceedings upon such grounds;
2. Insist on a preliminary investigation;
3. Raise lack of preliminary investigation;
4. File petition for certiorari;
5. File petition for prohibition.

EFFECT OF DENIAL OF RIGHT TO PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION

The absence of PI:
23 of 40
(1) does not impair the validity of the information or otherwise render it defective;
(2) neither does it affect the jurisdiction of the court; (Bar Matter)
(3) nor constitute a ground for quashing the information.

The trial court, instead of dismissing the information, should hold in abeyance the proceedings
and order the public prosecutor to conduct a PI. [Villaflor v. Vivar(2001)]

IF PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION IS BEING CONDUCTED

Injunction and writs of restraint
General rule: The power of the Fiscal to investigate crimes committed within his jurisdiction will,
ordinarily, not be restrained.

Exception: Extreme cases may exist where relief in equity may be availed of to stop a purported
enforcement of a criminal law where it is necessary (a) for the orderly administration of justice;
(b) to prevent the use of the strong arm of the law in an oppressive and vindictive manner; (c) to
avoid multiplicity of actions; (d) to afford adequate protection to constitutional rights; and (e) in
proper cases, because the statute relied upon is unconstitutional, or was "held invalid." [Ladlad v.
Velasco (2007)]

INQUEST
DEFINITION
An informal and summary investigation conducted by a public prosecutor in criminal cases
involving persons lawfully arrested without the benefit of a warrant of arrest issued by the court
for the purpose of determining whether or not said persons should remain under custody and
correspondingly charged in court.
PROCEDURE FOR INQUEST PROCEEDINGS
Considered commenced upon receipt by the Inquest Officer from the law enforcement
authorities of the complaint/referral documents which should include:
(a) affidavit of arrest, investigation report, statement of the complainant and witnesses, all of
which must be subscribed and sworn to before him should remain under custody and
correspondingly be charged in court. (DOJ-NPS Manual)

General rule: PI is required to be conducted before a complaint/ information is filed for an

offense where the penalty prescribed by law is at least 4 years, 2 months and 1 day, without
regard to the fine. [Sec. 1, Rule 112]
Exception: When a person is lawfully arrested without a warrant involving an offense that
requires a PI, a complaint/information may be filed without conducting the PI if the necessary
inquest is conducted.

However, before the complaint or information is filed, the person arrested may ask for a PI,
but he must sign a waiver of the provisions of Art. 125, RPC in the presence of his counsel.
Notwithstanding the waiver, he may apply for bail and the investigation must be terminated
within 15 days from its inception.

After the filing of the complaint/ information in court without a PI, the accused may within 5
days from the time he learns of its filing, ask for a PI with the same right to adduce evidence
in his defense as provided in Rule 112. [Sec. 6, Rule 112]

(b) other supporting evidence gathered by the police in the course of the latter's investigation of
the criminal incident involving the arrested or detained person.
It must be terminated within the period prescribed under the provisions of Article 125 of the
RPC, as amended.

24 of 40
Bar (1999)
A filed with the Office of the Fiscal a Complaint for estafa against B. After the preliminary investigation, the Fiscal
dismissed the Complaint for lack of merit. May the Fiscal be compelled by mandamus to file the case in court? Explain.
(2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No. The public prosecutor may not be compelled by mandamus to file the case in court because the determination
of probable cause is within the discretion of the prosecutor. The remedy is an appeal to the Secretary of Justice. (Sec.
4 Rule 112.)

Bar (2012)
X was arrested, en flagrante, for robbing a bank. After an investigation, he was brought before the office of the
prosecutor for inquest, but unfortunately no inquest prosecutor was available. May the bank directly file the complaint
with the proper court? If in the affirmative, what document should be filed? (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, the bank may directly file the complaint with the proper court. In the absence or unavailability of an inquest
prosecutor, the complaint may be filed by the offended party or a peace officer directly with the proper court on the
basis of the affidavit of the offended party or arresting officer or person (Section 6, Rule 112)

Bar (2013)
Yvonne, a young and lonely OFW, had an intimate relationship abroad with a friend, Percy. Although Yvonne comes
home to Manila every six months, her foreign posting still left her husband Dario lonely so that he also engaged in his
own extramarital activities. In one particularly exhilarating session with his girlfriend, Dario died. Within 180 days from
Dario’s death, Yvonne gives birth in Manila to a baby boy. Irate relatives of Dario contemplate criminally charging
Yvonne for adultery and they hire your law firm to handle the case. (A) Is the contemplated criminal action a viable
option to bring? (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: No. Section 5 of Rule 110 provides that the crimes of adultery and concubinage shall not be
prosecuted except upon complaint filed by the offended spouse. Since the offended spouse is already dead, then
the criminal action for Adultery as contemplated by offended party‟s relatives is no longer viable. Moreover, it appears
that the adulterous acts of Yvonne were committed abroad. Hence, the contemplated criminal action is not viable as
the same was committed outside of the Philippine courts.

Bar (2010)
X was driving the dump truck of Y along Cattleya Street in Sta. Maria, Bulacan. Due to his negligence, X hit and injured
V who was crossing the street. Lawyer L, who witnessed the incident, offered his legal services to V. V, who suffered
physical injuries including a fractured wrist bone, underwent surgery to screw a metal plate to his wrist bone. On
complaint of V, a criminal case for Reckless Imprudence Resulting in Serious Physical Injuries was filed against X before
the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of Sta. Maria. Atty. L, the private prosecutor, did not reserve the filing of a separate civil
action. V subsequently filed a complaint for damages against X and Y before the Regional Trial Court of Pangasinan
in Urdaneta where he resides. In his "Certification Against Forum Shopping," V made no mention of the pendency of
the criminal case in Sta. Maria. (a) Is V guilty of forum shopping? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, V is not guilty of forum shopping because the case in Sta. Maria, Bulacan, is a criminal action filed in the name of
the People of the Philippines, where civil liability arising from the crime is deemed also instituted therewith; whereas the
case filed in Urdaneta, Pangasinan, is a civil action for quasi-delict in the name of V and against both X and Y for all
damages caused by X and Y to V, which may be beyond the jurisdiction of MTC. Hence, the tests of forum shopping,

25 of 40
which is res adjudicate or litis pendencia, do not obtain here. Moreover, substantive law (Art. 33, Civil Code) and Sec.
3, Rule 111, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, expressly authorize the filing such action for damages entirely separate
and distinct from the criminal action.
(b) Instead of filing an Answer, X and Y move to dismiss the complaint for damages on the ground of litis pendentia. Is
the motion meritorious? Explain. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, the motion to dismiss base on alleged litis pendencia is without merit because there is no
identity of parties and subject matter in the two cases. Besides, Art. 33 of the Civil Code and Rule 111, Sec. 3 of the
Rules of Criminal Procedure authorize the separate civil action for damages arising from physical injuries to proceed
independently.
(c) Suppose only X was named as defendant in the complaint for damages, may he move for the dismissal of the
complaint for failure of V to implead Y as an indispensable party? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, X may not move for dismissal of the civil action for damages on the contention that Y is an indispensable party
who should be impleaded. Y is not an indispensable party but only necessary party. Besides, nonjoinder and misjoinder
of parties is not a ground for dismissal of actions (Rule 3, Sec. 11, Rules of Court).
(d) X moved for the suspension of the proceedings in the criminal case to await the decision in the civil case. For his
part, Y moved for the suspension of the civil case to await the decision in the criminal case. Which of them is correct?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Neither of them is correct. Both substantive law (Art. 33 of the Civil Code) and procedural law (Rule 111, Sec. 3, Rules
of Criminal Procedure) provide for the two actions to proceed independently of each other, therefore, no suspension
of action is authorized. (e) Atty. L offered in the criminal case his affidavit respecting what he witnessed during the
incident. X’s lawyer wanted to cross-examine Atty. L who, however, objected on the ground of lawyer-client privilege.
Rule on the objection. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The objection should be overruled. Lawyer-client privilege is not involved here. The subject on
which the counsel would be examined has been made public in the affidavit he offered and thus, no longer privileged,
aside from the fact that it is in respect of what the counsel witnessed during the incident and not to the communication
made by the client to him or the advice he gave thereon in his professional capacity.

Rule 113: Arrest

DEFINITION
The TAKING OF A PERSON INTO CUSTODY in order that he may be BOUND TO ANSWER for the
commission of an offense. (Rule 113, Sec. 1)

IMMUNITY FROM ARREST

Parliamentary Immunity
SENATORS AND MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, while Congress is in session and for
offenses punishable by not more than 6 years imprisonment. (Art. VI, Sec. 11, 1987 Constitution)

Diplomatic Immunity
Ambassadors and ministers of foreign countries and their duly registered domestics subject to the
principle of reciprocity (RA 75)

ARREST, HOW MADE

MODES OF EFFECTING ARREST
(1) By an actual restraint of a person to be arrested.
(2) By his submission to the custody of the person making the arrest. (Rule 113, Sec. 2, Par. 1)
It is enough that there be an intent on the part of one of the parties to arrest the other and an
intent on the part of the other to submit, under the belief and impression that submission is
necessary.

NO UNNECESSARY VIOLENCE
No violence or unnecessary force shall be used in making an arrest. (Rule 113, Sec. 2, Par. 2)

TIME TO MAKE ARREST

An arrest may be made on any day and at any time of the day or night. (Rule 113, Sec. 6)

ARREST WITHOUT WARRANT, WHEN LAWFUL

General rule: No peace officer or person has the power or authority to arrest anyone without a
warrant except in those cases expressly authorized by law. [Umil v. Ramos (1991)]
Exceptions (Rule 113, Sec. 5)
1. In flagrante delicto
2. Hot pursuit arrest
3. Arrest of escaped prisoner

26 of 40
In flagrante delicto
When the person to be arrested:
(a) has committed,
(b) is actually committing, or
(c) is attempting to commit an offense in the presence of the peace officer OR private person
who arrested him. (Rule 113, Sec. 5(a))
Requisites:
(i) The person to be arrested must execute an OVERT act indicating that he has just
committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit a crime; and
(ii) Such overt act is done in the presence or within the view of the arresting officer.

“In his presence” means: [People v. Evaristo (1992)] He sees the offense, even though at a
distance; He hears the disturbances created by the offense and proceeds at once to the scene;
or Offense is continuing or has been consummated at the time arrest is made.

Entrapment
An arrest made after an entrapment does not require a warrant inasmuch as it is considered
a valid warrantless arrest pursuant to Rule 113, Sec. 5(a) of the Rules of Court. [Teodicio v. CA
(2004)]

Buy-bust operation
When the appellant is caught in flagrante as a result of the buy-bust operation, the policemen
are not only authorized but are also under obligation to apprehend the drug pusher even
without a warrant of arrest. [People v. de Lara (1994)]

Hot pursuit arrest

When an offense HAS JUST BEEN COMMITTED and the officer or private person has PROBABLE
CAUSE TO BELIEVE, based on PERSONAL knowledge of facts or circumstances, that the person to
be arrested has committed it (Rule 113, Sec. 5(b))
Requisites:
(i) An offense has just been committed; and There must be a large measure of immediacy
between the time the offense was committed and the time of the arrest. If there was an
appreciable lapse of time between the arrest and the commission of the crime, a warrant
of arrest must be secured [People v. del Rosario (1999); People v. Agojo (2009)];

(ii) The person making the arrest has probable cause to believe, based on personal
knowledge of facts, that the person to be arrested has committed it.
Probable cause must be based on personal knowledge which means an actual belief or
reasonable grounds of suspicion [Abelita III v. Doria (2009)].

Arrest of escaped prisoner

When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped: (Rule 113, Sec. 5(c))
(a) From a penal establishment or place where he is serving final judgment OR temporarily
confined while his case is pending; or
(b) While being transferred from one confinement to another.
Escapee may be immediately pursued or re-arrested without a warrant at any time and in any
place within the Philippines. (Rule 113, Sec. 13)

Rationale: At the time of arrest, the escapee is in continuous commission of a crime (i.e. evasion
of service of sentence).

Notes: Where a warrantless arrest is made under the in flagrante and hot pursuit exceptions, the
person arrested without a warrant shall forthwith arrested delivered to the nearest police station
or jail. (Rule 113, Sec. 5, last par.)

A WARRANTLESS arrest maybe made not only by a peace officer but also by a private person.

Other lawful warrantless arrest

(a) Where a person who has been lawfully arrested escapes or is rescued (Rule 113, Sec. 13) Any
person may immediately pursue or retake him without a warrant at any time and in any place
within the Philippines.
27 of 40
(b) By the bondsman, for the purpose of surrendering the accused. (Rule 114, Sec. 23)
(c) Where the accused who is released on bail attempts to leave the country withoutpermission
of the court where the case is pending. (Rule 114, Sec. 23)

Bar (2004)
AX swindled RY in the amount of P10,000 sometime in mid-2003. On the strength of the sworn statement given by
RY personally to SPO1 Juan Ramos sometime in mid-2004, and without securing a warrant, the police officer
arrested AX. Forthwith the police officer filed with the City Prosecutor of Manila a complaint for estafa supported
by RY"s sworn statement and other documentary evidence. After due inquest, the prosecutor filed the requisite
information with the MM RTC. No preliminary investigation was conducted either before or after the filing of the
information and the accused at no time asked for such an investigation. However, before arraignment, the
accused moved to quash the information on the ground that the prosecutor suffered from a want of authority to
file the information because of his failure to conduct a preliminary investigation before filing the information, as
required by the Rules of Court. Is the warrantless arrest of AX valid? Is he entitled to a preliminary investigation
before the filing of the information? Explain. (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No. The warrantless arrest is not valid because the alleged offense has not just been committed. The crime was
allegedly committed one year before the arrest. (Sec. 5 (b) of Rule 113).

Yes, he is entitled to a preliminary investigation because he was not lawfully arrested without a warrant (See Sec.
7 of Rule 112). He can move for a reinvestigation.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
He is not entitled to a preliminary investigation because the penalty for estafa is the sum of P10,000 does not
exceed 4 years and 2 months. Under Sec. 1, second par., Rule 112, a preliminary investigation is not required. (Note:
The penalty is not stated in the question.)

Bar (1997)
A was killed by B during a quarrel over a hostess in a nightclub. Two days after the incident, and upon complaint
of the widow of A, the police arrested B by: sirdondee@gmail.com Page 40 of 66 without a warrant of arrest and
searched his house without a search warrant. a) Can the gun used by B in shooting A, which was seized during the
search of the house of B, be admitted in evidence? b) Is the arrest of B legal? c) Under the circumstances, can B
be convicted of homicide?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(a) No. The gun seized during the search of the house of B without a search warrant is not admissible in evidence.
(Secs. 2 and 3[2], Art. III of Constitution). Moreover, the search was not an incident to a lawful arrest of a person
under Sec. 12 of Rule 126.
(b) No. A warrantless arrest requires that the crime has in fact just been committed and the police arresting has
personal knowledge of facts that the person to be arrested has committed it. (Sec. 5, Rule 113). Here, the crime
has not just been committed since a period of two days had already lapsed, and the police arresting has no such
personal knowledge because he was not present when the incident happened. (Go vs. Court of Appeals. 206
SCRA 138).
(c) Yes. The gun is not indispensable in the conviction of A because the court may rely on testimonial or other
evidence.

Bar (2003)
In a buy-bust operation, the police operatives arrested the accused and seized from him a sachet of shabu and
an unlicensed firearm. The accused was charged in two Informations, one for violation of the “Dangerous Drug
Act”, as amended, and another for illegal possession of firearms.
The accused filed an action for recovery of the firearm in another court against the police officers with an
application for the issuance of a writ of replevin. He alleged in his Complaint that he was a military informer who
had been issued a written authority to carry said firearm. The police officers moved to dismiss the complaint on the
ground that the subject firearm was in custodia legis. The court denied the motion and instead issued the writ of
replevin.
(a) Was the seizure of the firearm valid?
(b) Was the denial of the motion to dismiss proper? 6%
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(a) Yes, the seizure of the firearm was valid because it was seized in the course of a valid arrest in a buy-bust
operation. (Sec. 12 and 13 of Rule 126) A search warrant was not necessary. (People v. Salazar, 266 SCRA 607
[1997]).
(b) The denial of the motion to dismiss was not proper. The court had no authority to issue the writ of replevin
whether the firearm was in custodia legis or not. The motion to recover the firearm should be filed in the court
where the criminal action is pending.

Bar (2007)
(a) On his way home, a member of the Caloocan City police force witnesses a bus robbery in Pasay City and
effects the arrest of the suspect. Can he bring the suspect to Caloocan City for booking since that is where his
station is? Explain briefly. (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, the arresting officer may not take the arrested suspect from Pasay City to Caloocan City.
The arresting officer is required to deliver the person arrested without a warrant to the nearest police station or jail
(Rule 112, Sec. 5, 2000 Rules of Criminal Procedure). To be sure, the nearest police station or jail is in Pasay City
where the arrest was made, and not in Caloocan City.

28 of 40
 (b) In the course of serving a search warrant, the police find an unlicensed firearm. Can the police take the firearm
even if it is not covered by the search warrant? If the warrant is subsequently quashed, is the police required to
return the firearm? Explain briefly. (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, the police may take with him the “unlicensed” firearm although not covered by the
search warrant. Possession of an “unlicensed firearm” is a criminal offense and the police officer may seize an
article which is the “subject of an offense.” Thus us especially so considering that the “unlicensed firearm” appears
to be in “plain view” of the police officer when the conducted the search. Even if the warrant was subsequently
quashed, the police are not mandated to return the “unlicensed firearm.” The quashal of the search warrant did
not affect the validity of the seizure of the “unlicensed firearm.” Moreover, returning the firearm to a person who is
not otherwise allowed by law to possess the same would be tantamount to abetting a violation of the law.

RULES ON ILLEGALITY OF ARREST

(Bar Matter) Effects of illegal arrest:
1. The legality of the arrest affects only the jurisdiction of the court over the person of the
accused [People v. Nuevas (2007)].
2. A waiver of the right to question an illegal warrantless arrest does not also mean a waiver
of the inadmissibility of evidence seized during an illegal warrantless arrest [People v.
Nuevas, supra].

Waiver of the illegality of the arrest

Any objection involving the arrest or the procedure in the court’s acquisition of jurisdiction over
the person of an accused must be made BEFORE he enters his plea; otherwise the objection is
deemed waived [Zalameda v. People (2009)].

There is waiver if the accused voluntarily enters his plea and participates during trial, WITHOUT
previously invoking his objections thereto [Leviste v. Hon Alameda (2010);

An application for or admission to bail shall not bar the accused from challenging the validity of
his arrest or the legality of the warrant issued, provided that he raises the objection before he
enters his plea. (Rule 114, Sec. 26).

When illegality of arrest is cured

When the accused voluntarily submits to the jurisdiction of the trial court [Dolera v. People (2009);
People v. Alunday (2008)].

By the filing of an information in court and the subsequent issuance by the judge of a warrant of
arrest [Sanchez v. Demetriou (1993)

METHOD OF ARREST
A. BY OFFICER WITH WARRANT
Duties of the arresting officer
(1) Execution of warrant (Rule 113, Sec. 4)
The head of the office to whom the warrant of arrest was delivered shall cause the warrant to
be executed within 10 days from its receipt.
The officer to whom it was assigned for execution shall make a report to the judge who issued
the warrant within 10 days after expiration of the period to execute.

In case of the officer’s failure to execute, he shall state the reasons therefor.

(2) The officer shall inform the person to be arrested of (1) the cause of the arrest and (2) the fact
that a warrant has been issued for his arrest. (Rule 113, Sec. 7)
Exceptions:
(a) When he flees;
(b) When he forcibly resists before the officer has opportunity to so inform him;
(c) When the giving of such information will imperil the arrest.

The officer need not have the warrant in his possession at the time of the arrest BUT after the
arrest, if the person arrested so requires, the warrant shall be shown to him as soon as
practicable. (Rule 113, Sec. 7)
This is not a case of a warrantless arrest but merely an instance of an arrest effected by the
police authorities without having the warrant in their possession at that precise moment.
[Mallari v. CA (1996)]

29 of 40
(3) The officer executing the warrant shall arrest the accused and deliver him to the nearest police
station or jail without unnecessary delay (Rule 113, Sec. 3)

(4) No violence or unnecessary force shall be used in making an arrest. (Rule 113, Sec. 2, last par.).

Rights of the arresting officer

(1) To summon assistance (Rule 113, Sec. 10)
He may orally summon as many persons as he deems necessary to assist him in effecting the
arrest.

(2) To break into building or enclosure (Rule 113, Sec. 11)

Requisites:
(a) The person to be arrested is or is reasonably believed to be in said building;
(b) He has announced his authority and purpose of entering therein; and
(c) He has requested and been denied admittance.
Also applicable where there is a valid arrest without a warrant.

(3) To break out from the building/enclosure when necessary to liberate himself (Rule 113, Sec.
12)
Also applicable where there is a valid warrantless arrest.

(4) To search the person arrested for dangerous weapons or anything which may have been
used or constitute proof in the commission of an offense without a warrant (Rule 126, Sec. 13)

B. BY OFFICER WITHOUT WARRANT

Duties of arresting officer without warrant
The officer shall inform the person to be arrested of
(1) his authority and (2) the cause of the arrest. (Rule 113, Sec. 8)
Exceptions:
(a) When the person to be arrested is engaged in the commission of the offense;
(b) When he is pursued immediately after its commission;
(c) When he has escaped, flees or forcibly resists before the officer has the opportunity to
so inform him; or
(d) When the giving of such information will imperil the arrest.

BY PRIVATE PERSON (CITIZEN’S ARREST)

Duties of private person effecting an arrest
(1) The private person shall inform the person to be arrested of
(1) the intention to arrest him and
(2) the cause of the arrest. (Rule 113, Sec. 9)
Exceptions: Same as those for arrest by an officer without a warrant.

(2) The private person must deliver the arrested person to the nearest police station or jail, and he
shall be proceeded against in accordance with Rule 112, Sec. 7. Otherwise, the private person
may be held liable for illegal detention.

REQUISITES OF A VALID WARRANT OF ARREST

(ART. III, SEC. 2, 1987 CONSTITUTION)

Must be issued upon probable cause determined PERSONALLY by the judge after examination
under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce; and

The warrant must particularly describe the person to be arrested.

INSTANCES WHEN JUDGE ISSUES WARRANT OF ARREST

Upon the filing of the information by the public prosecutor and after personal evaluation by the
judge of the prosecutor’s resolution and supporting evidence.(Rule 112, Sec. 5(a))

30 of 40
The judge does not have to personally examine the complainant and his witnesses. Established
doctrine provides:
He shall personally evaluate the report and the supporting documents submitted by the fiscal
regarding the existence of probable cause and, on the basis thereof, issue a warrant of arrest;
OR
If on the basis thereof he finds NO probable cause, he may disregard the fiscal’s report and
require the submission of supporting affidavits of witnesses.[People v. Gray (2010); AAA v.
Carbonell (2007))]

DETERMINATION OF PROBABLE CAUSE FOR ISSUANCE OF WARRANT OF ARREST

Probable cause test
Probable cause, in connection with the issuance of a warrant of arrest, assumes the existence of
facts and circumstances that would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that
a crime has been committed and that it was likely committed by the person sought to be
arrested. [People v. Tan (2009)]

DISTINGUISH PROBABLE CAUSE OF FISCAL

FROM THAT OF A JUDGE

Fiscal Judge

Executive determination of PC Judicial determination of PC

Determination of PC to hold a person for trial Determination of PC to issue a warrant of

arrest

W/N there is reasonable ground to believe W/N a warrant of arrest should be issued
that the accused is guilty of the offense
charged and should be held for trial

Rule: The determination of probable cause for issuing a warrant of arrest is made by the judge.
The preliminary investigation proper---whether or not there is a reasonable ground to believe that
the accused is guilty of the offense charged---is the function of the investigating prosecutor [AAA
v. Carbonell (2007)].
Bar (2000)
FG was arrested without a warrant by policemen while he was walking in a busy street. After preliminary
investigation, he was charged with rape and the corresponding information was filed in the RTC. On arraignment,
he pleaded not guilty. Trial on the merits ensued. The court rendered judgment convicting him. On appeal, FG
claims that the judgment is void because he was illegally arrested. If you were the Solicitor General, counsel for
the People of the Philippines, how would you refute said claim? (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Any objection to the illegality of the arrest of the accused without a warrant is deemed waived when he pleaded
not guilty at the arraignment without raising the question. T is too late to complain about a warrantless arrest after
trial is commenced and completed and a judgment of conviction rendered against the accused. (People v.
Cabiles, 284 SCRA 199,]

Rule 114 Bail

DEFINITION
Bail is the security given for the release of a person in custody of the law, furnished by him or a
bondsman, to guarantee his appearance before any court as required under conditions
hereinafter specified. [Rule 114, Sec. 1]
(Bar Matter)
General Rule: Custody of the law is required before the court can act on an application for bail
[Miranda v. Tuliao (2006)]
Exceptions (When witness/es post bail):
(1) When bail is required to guarantee the appearance of a material witness [Sec. 14, Rule 119];
(2) When bail is required to guarantee the appearance of a prosecution witness in cases where
there is substitution of the information [Riano, citing Sec. 14, Rule 110]
WHEN A MATTER OF RIGHT; EXCEPTIONS
(1) Before or after conviction pending appeal by the MTC.

31 of 40
(2) Before conviction by RTC of all offenses punishable by penalty lower than death, reclusion
perpetua, or life imprisonment.
(3) Before conviction by RTC of all offenses punishable by penalty death, reclusion perpetua, or
life imprisonment AND THE EVIDENCE OF GUILT IS NOT STRONG.
WHEN BAIL NOT AVAILABLE
When evidence of guilt is strong in capital offenses or those punishable by death, reclusion
perpetua or life imprisonment.
Exception: When the accused is a minor, he is entitled to bail regardless of whether the evidence
of guilt is strong.
Note: A summary hearing is required to determine whether the evidence of guilt is strong or
not.
Capital Offense
An offense which under the law existing at the time of commission and of the application for
admission to bail is punishable by death. [Rule 114, Sec. 6]

The capital nature of the offense is determined by the penalty prescribed by law and not the one
actually imposed.

Note: R.A. 9346 (An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of Death in the Philippines) enacted on June
24, 2006 (which repealed R.A. No. 8177 and R. A. No. 7659) prohibited the imposition of death
penalty. Under R.A. 9346, it stated that:
Section 7. Capital offense or an offense punishable by reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment
Bail in EXTRADITION PROCEEDINGS
Basis: [Gov. of USA vs Purganan & Jimenez (2002)]
General Rule: Right to bail is available only in criminal proceedings and does not apply to
extradition proceedings because extradition courts do not render judgments of conviction or
acquittal.
Exception: Only upon a clear and convincing evidence:
(a) that once granted, the applicant will not be flight risk or will not pose danger to the
community; and
(b) that there exists special humanitarian and compelling circumstances.

Note: Bail is a matter of discretion in extradition proceedings [Government of Hong Kong

Special Administrative Region v. Olalia (2007)]
Right to bail is not available:
(1) To military personnel accused under general courts martial [Comendador v. de Villa (1991)]
(2) After a judgment of conviction has become final. If he applied for probation before finality,
he may be allowed temporary liberty under his bail. [Rule 114, Sec. 24].
(3) After the accused has commenced to serve his sentence [Rule 114, Sec. 24]
WHEN A MATTER OF DISCRETION [RULE 114, SEC. 5]
(1) Before conviction, in offenses punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment
and evidence of guilt is strong
(2) Upon conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life
imprisonment.

It may be filed in and acted upon by the RTC despite the filing of notice of appeal, provided that
it has not transmitted the original record to the appellate court.

If the RTC decision changed nature of the offense from non-bailable to bailable, the application
for bail can be resolved only by the appellate court.

Note: In hearing the petition for bail, the prosecution has the burden of showing that the evidence
of guilt is strong. [Rule 114, Sec. 8]

In deportation proceedings, bail is discretionary upon the Commissioner of Immigration and

Deportation. [Harvey v. Defensor-Santiago (1990)]

WHEN APPLICATION FOR BAIL AFTER CONVICTION SHALL BE DENIED:

If the penalty imposed by the trial court is imprisonment exceeding 6 years, the accused shall be
denied bail or his bail shall be cancelled upon showing by the prosecution, with notice to the
accused, of any of the following: (REPFU)
32 of 40
 (1) That the accused is a Recidivist, quasi-recidivist, or habitual delinquent, or has committed
the crime aggravated by the circumstance of reiteration;
(2) The accused previously escaped from legal confinement, evaded sentence or violated
bail conditions without valid justification.
(3) That he committed the offense while under probation, parole or conditional pardon by the
accused.
(4) That the circumstances of his case indicate the probability of flight if released on bail; or
(5) That there is Undue risk that he may commit another crime during pendency of appeal.

HEARING OF APPLICATION FOR BAIL IN CAPITAL OFFENSES [SEC. 8, RULE 114]

Note: RA 9346, Section 7. Capital offense or an offense punishable by reclusion perpetua or life
imprisonment or life imprisonment

CONVICTION
This refers to conviction by the trial court, which has not become final, as the accused still has the
right to appeal. After conviction by the trial court, the accused convicted of a capital offense is
no longer entitled to bail, and can only be released when the conviction is reversed by the
appellate court. [Section 13, Article III, Const.]

PROSECUTION HAS BURDEN OF PROOF

At the hearing of an application for bail filed by a person in custody for the commission of an
offense punishable by reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, the prosecution has the burden of
showing that evidence of guilt is strong.

Evidence of Guilt in the Constitution and the Rules refers to a finding of innocence or culpability,
regardless of the modifying circumstances.

REGARDING MINORS CHARGED WITH A CAPITAL OFFENSE

If the person charged with a capital offense is admittedly a minor, which would entitle him, if
convicted, to a penalty next lower than that prescribed by law, he is entitled to bail regardless of
whether the evidence of guilt is strong.

DUTY OF JUDGE TO CONDUCT HEARING

Duties of the trial judge in a petition for bail
(a) Notify the prosecutor of the hearing and require him to submit his recommendation;
(b) Conduct a hearing of the application regardless of whether or not prosecution refuses to
present evidence to show that the guilt of the accused is strong;
(c) Decide whether the evidence of guilt of the accused is strong based on the summary of the
evidence of the prosecution;
(d) If the guilt of the accused is not strong, discharge the accused upon the approval of the bail
bond. Otherwise, petition should be denied. [Riano, citing Narciso v. Santa Romana-Cruz, 328
SCRA 505]
(Bar Matter) Note: Evidence presented during the bail hearing are automatically reproduced at
the trial [Sec. 8, Rule 114]

WHERE THE APPLICATION IS FILED: [SEC. 17, RULE 114; AS AMENDED BY AM 05-08-26]
(Bar Matter) General Rule: The application may be filed with the court where the CASE IS
PENDING.
Exceptions:
(a) If the judge of the court where the case is pending is absent or unavailable, the application
may be filed with any RTC/MTC/MeTC/MCTC judge in the province, city or municipality.
(b) Where the accused is arrested in a province, city/municipality other than where the case is
pending, the application may be filed with any RTC of the said place. If no judge is available,
then with any MeTC/MTC/MCTC judge in the said place. Judge who accepted the
application shall forward it, together with the order of release and other supporting papers
where the case is pending
(c) When a person is in custody but not yet charged, he may apply with any court in the province
or city/municipality where he is held.

33 of 40
Note: Where the grant of bail is a matter of discretion, or the accused seeks to be released on
recognizance, the application may only be filed in the court where the case is pending, on trial,
or appeal.

GUIDELINES IN FIXING AMOUNT OF BAIL [RULE 114, SEC. 9]

Primarily, but not limited to, the following factors:
(1) Financial ability of the accused
(2) Nature and circumstances of the offense
(3) Penalty for the offense charged
(4) Character and reputation of the accused
(5) Age and health of the accused
(6) Probability of the accused appearing at the trial
(7) Forfeiture of other bail
(8) Fact that accused was a fugitive from justice when arrested
(9) Forfeiture of other bail
(10) Pendency of other cases where the accused is on bail.

BAIL WHEN NOT REQUIRED [SEC. 16, RULE 114]

a. When a person has been in custody for a period equal to or more than the possible
maximum imprisonment of the offense charged to which he may be sentenced.
b. If the maximum penalty is destierro, he shall be released after 30 days of preventive
imprisonment.
c. In cases filed with the MTC/MCTC for an offense punishable by an imprisonment of less
than 4 yrs, 2 mos. and 1 day, and the judge is satisfied that there is no necessity for placing
the accused under custody. [Riano, citing Sec. 8, Rule 112]
d. In cases where a person is charged with violation of a municipal/city ordinance, a light
felony and/or criminal offense, the penalty of which is not higher than 6mos imprisonment
and/or a fine of P2,000 or both where it is established that he is unable to post the required
cash or bail bond. [Sec. 1, RA 6036]
Exceptions:
(a) Caught committing the offense in flagrante
(b) When accused confesses to the commission of the offense unless he later
repudiates the same in a sworn statement or in open court as having been
extracted through force or intimidation
(c) Found to have previously escaped legal confinement, evaded sentence, or
jumped bail
(d) Found to have violated Sec. 2 of RA 6036 which provides that the violation of the
accused of the sworn statement (required instead of bail) shall justify the court to
order his immediate arrest, if the accused’ failure to report is not justified
(e) Accused is a recidivist or habitual delinquent or has been previously convicted for
an offense to which the law/ordinance attaches an equal/greater penalty or for
two/more offenses to which it attaches a lighter penalty
(f) Accused committed the offense while on parole or under conditional pardon
(g) Accused has previously been pardoned for violation of municipal/city ordinance
for at least two times [Riano, citing Sec. 1, RA 6036]

INCREASE OR REDUCTION OF BAIL

After the accused is admitted to bail and for good cause, the court may increase or decrease
the amount.

INCREASED BAIL
Accused may be committed to custody if he does not give bail in the increased amount within
a reasonable period of time. [Rule 114, Sec. 20]

REDUCED BAIL
Person in custody for a period equal to or more than the minimum of the principal penalty
prescribed for the offense charged, without application of the Indeterminate Sentence Law or
any modifying circumstances, shall be released on a reduced bail or on his own recognizance
at the discretion of the court. [Rule 114, Sec. 16]

34 of 40
FORFEITURE OF BAIL [RULE 114, SEC. 21]
If the accused failed to appear in person as required, bondsmen are given 30 days within which
to:
(1) Produce the body of the principal or give reason for the non-production. Bondsmen may:
(a) Arrest the accused;
(b) Cause him to be arrested by a police officer or any other person of suitable age or
discretion upon written authority endorsed on a certified copy of the undertaking.

(2) Explain why the accused failed to appear.

(a) If the bondsmen fail to do these, judgment is rendered against them, jointly and severally,
for the amount of the bail.
(b) Bondsmen’s liability cannot be mitigated or reduced, unless the accused has been
surrendered or is acquitted.

CANCELLATION OF BAIL [RULE 114, SEC. 22]

Application by bondsmen
Upon (1) application of the bondsmen with (2) due notice to the prosecutor, bail may be
cancelled upon:
(a) surrender of the accused; OR
(b) proof of his death

AUTOMATIC Cancellation
(1) Upon acquittal of the accused
(2) Upon dismissal of the case
(3) Upon execution of judgment of conviction

APPLICATION NOT A BAR TO OBJECTIONS IN ILLEGAL ARREST, LACK OF OR IRREGULAR

PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION

Bail is no longer a waiver of these objections. Provided that the proper objections are timely raised
(i.e., before accused enters a plea), an application or an admission to bail shall NOT bar the
accused from challenging or questioning the:
(1) Validity of his arrest.
(2) Legality of the arrest warrant.
(3) Regularity of preliminary investigation
(4) Absence of preliminary investigation

The court shall resolve the objections as early as practicable but not later than the start of the trial
of the case.

HOLD DEPARTURE ORDER & BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION WATCHLIST

Bondsmen can prevent accused from leaving country by arresting him or asking for him to be re-
arrested by a police officer upon written authority. [Rule 114, Sec. 23]

If the accused released on bail attempts to depart from the Philippines without the permission of
the court, he may be re-arrested without warrant. [Rule 114, Sec. 23]

Hold-Departure/ Watchlist/ Allow Departure Orders

A hold-departure order may be issued by the RTCs in criminal cases within their exclusive
jurisdiction. [SC Circular No. 39-97 (June 19, 1997)]

SC Circular 39-97 deals with criminal cases pending in the RTC. This created a void, as to those
cases pending in the MTC as well as those under preliminary investigation. Thus the DOJ
promulgated DOJ Circular No. 41 governing the issuance of HDO, Watchlist Orders, and Allow
Departure Orders. [Whereas clause of DOJ Circular No. 41] Hence, HDO may be issued either by
the RTC or DOJ.

Hold Departure Order Watchlist Order

35 of 40
When it may issue Against the accused, Against the accused,
irrespective of nationality, in irrespective of nationality, in
criminal cases falling within criminal cases pending
the jurisdiction of first-level before the RTC
courts (MeTC, MTC, MCTC)

Against the respondent,

Against the alien whose irrespective of nationality, in
presence is required either as criminal cases pending
a defendant, respondent, or preliminary investigation, PFR,
witness in a civil or labor case or MR before the DOJ or any
pending litigation, or any case of its prosecution offices
before an administrative
agency of the government.
Against any person pursuant
to the “Anti-Trafficking in
Against any person, either Persons Act of 2003” (RA 9208)
motu proprio, or upon the or in the interest of national
request by the Head of a security, public safety or
Department of the public health
Government, the Chief
Justice of the Supreme Court
for the Judiciary; the Senate
President or the House
Speaker for the Legislature,
when the adverse party is the
Government or any of its
agencies or instrumentalities,
or in the interest of national
security, public safety or
public health.

Validity 5 years reckoned from the 60 days reckoned from the

date of its issuance, unless date of its issuance, unless
sooner terminated sooner terminated or
extended for a non-
extendible period of not more
than 60 days

Grounds for lifting or When the validity period has When the validity period has
cancellation already expired already expired

When the accused has been When the accused has been
allowed to leave the country allowed by the court to leave
during the pendency of the the country during the
case, or has been acquitted pendency of the case, or has
of the charge, or the case in been acquitted of the charge
which the warrant/order of
arrest was issued has been
dismissed or the warrant/order
of arrest has been recalled.

36 of 40
 When the PI is terminated, or
when the PFR or MR has been
denied and/or dismissed

When Allow Departure Orders (ADOs) may issue: for exceptional reasons to allow the person to
leave upon submission of the following:
(1) An affidavit of purpose, including an undertaking to report to the DOJ immediately upon
return
(2) Authority to travel or travel clearance from the court or appropriate government office or
from the investigating prosecutor

Bar (2002)
D was charged with murder, a capital offense. After arraignment, he applied for bail. The trial court ordered the
prosecution to present its evidence in full on the ground that only on the basis of such presentation could it
determine whether the evidence of D’s guilt was strong for purposes of bail. Is the ruling correct? Why? (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the prosecution is only required to present as much evidence as is necessary to determine whether the
evidence of D’s guilt is strong for purposes of bail.(Rule 114, sec. 8).

Bar (1998)
In an information charging them of Murder, policemen A, B and C were convicted of Homicide. A appealed from
the decision but B and C did not. B started serving his sentence but C escaped and is at large. In the Court of
Appeals, A applied for bail but was denied. Finally, the Court of Appeals rendered a decision acquitting A on the
ground that the evidence pointed to the NPA as the killers of the victim.
1 Was the Court of Appeal's denial of A's application for bail proper? [2%]
2 Can B and C be benefited by the decision of the Court of Appeals? [3%]
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
1, Yes, the Court of Appeals properly denied A's application for bail. The court had the discretion to do so. Although
A was convicted of homicide only, since he was charged with a capital offense, on appeal he could be convicted
of the capital offense. (Obosa vs. Court of Appeals, 266 SCRA 281.)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
2. B, who did not appeal, can be benefited by the decision of the Court of Appeals which is favorable and
applicable to him. (Sec. 11 [a]. Rule 122, Rules of Criminal Procedure.) The benefit will also apply to C even if his
appeal is dismissed because of his escape.

Bar (2002)
If an information was filed in the RTC-Manila charging D with homicide and he was arrested in Quezon City, in what
court or courts may he apply for bail? Explain. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
D may apply for bail in the RTC-Manila where the information was filed or in the RTC-Quezon City where he was
arrested, or if no judge, thereof is available, with any metropolitan trial judge, municipal trial judge or municipal
circuit trial judge therein. (Rule 114, sec. 17).

Bar (1999)
In what forms may bail be given? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Bail may be given by a corporate surety, or through a property bond, cash deposit or recognizance.

Bar (1999)
When the accused is entitled as a matter of right to bail, may the Court refuse to grant him bail on the ground that
there exists a high degree of probability that he will abscond or escape? Explain. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
If bail is a matter of right, it cannot be denied on the ground that there exists a high degree of probability that the
accused will abscond or escape. What the court can do is to increase the amount of the bail. One of the guidelines
that the judge may use in fixing a reasonable amount of bail is the probability of the accused appearing in trial.

Bar (1999)
May the Court require a witness to post bail? Explain your answer. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes. The court may require a witness to post bail if he is a material witness and bail is needed to secure his
appearance. The rules provide that when the court is satisfied, upon proof or oath, that a material witness will not
testify when required, it may, upon motion of either party, order the witness to post bail in such sum as may be
deemed proper. Upon refusal to post bail, the court shall commit him to prison until he complies or is legally
discharged after his testimony is taken. (Sec. 6, Rule 119)

Bar (2012)

37 of 40
 A was charged with a non-bailable offense. At the time when the warrant of arrest was issued, he was confined in
the hospital and could not obtain a valid clearance to leave the hospital. He filed a petition for bail saying therein
that he be considered as having placed himself under the jurisdiction of the court. May the court entertain his
petition? Why or why not? (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, the court may not entertain his petition as he has not yet been placed under arrest. A
must be “literally” placed under the custody of the law before his petition for bail could be entertained by the
court (Miranda vs. Tuliao, G.R. No. 158763, March 31, 2006). ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Yes, a person is deemed to be
under the custody of the law either when he has been arrested or has surrendered himself to the jurisdiction of the
court. the accused who is confined in a hospital may be deemed to be in the custody of the law if he clearly
communicates his submission to the court while he is confined in the hospital. (Paderanga vs. Court of Appeals,
G.R. No. No. 115407, August 28, 1995).

Bar (2010)
While window-shopping at the mall on August 4, 2008, Dante lost his organizer including his credit card and billing
statement. Two days later, upon reporting the matter to the credit card company, he learned that a one-way
airplane ticket was purchased online using his credit card for a flight to Milan in mid- August 2008. Upon extensive
inquiry with the airline company, Dante discovered that the plane ticket was under the name of one Dina Meril.
Dante approaches you for legal advice. (a) What is the proper procedure to prevent Dina from leaving the
Philippines? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: I would advise:
(1) The filing of an appropriate criminal action cognizable by the RTC against Dina and the filing in said criminal
action a Motion for the issuance of a Hold Departure Order; (2) thereafter, a written request with the Commissioner
of the Bureau of Immigration for a Watch List Order pending the issuance of the Hold Departure Order should be
filed; (3) then, the airline company should be requested to cancel the ticket issued to Dina.

RULE 115 RIGHTS OF ACCUSED AT THE TRIAL

1. TO BE PRESUMED INNOCENT UNTIL THE CONTRARY IS PROVED BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT

The presumption of regularity in the performance of official duty cannot by itself overcome the
presumption of innocence nor constitute proof beyond reasonable doubt. [People v. Sanchez
(2008)]

The Rules or the law may, however, provide for a presumption of guilt. [Hizon v. CA (2009)]
In this case, the Court stressed that the statutory presumption is merely prima facie. At no instance
can the accused be denied the right to rebut the presumption.

Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean such a degree of proof as, excluding possibility
of error, produces absolute certainty. Moral certainty only is required, or that degree of proof
which produces conviction in an unprejudiced mind. [Rule 133, Sec.2]

Where the evidence in a criminal case is evenly balanced, the constitutional presumption of
innocence titlts the scales in favor of the accused [People v. Erguioza (2008)]. This is the “equipoise
rule.”

2. TO BE INFORMED OF THE NATURE AND CAUSE OF ACCUSATION AGAINST HIM

Charge must be set forth with sufficient particularity to enable the accused to intelligently
prepare his defense.

The title of the complaint, or the designation of the offense charged or the particular law violated
is not controlling. No information for a crime will be sufficient if it does not accurately and clearly
allege the elements of the crime charged. [People v. Dimaano (2005)]

3. TO BE PRESENT AND DEFEND IN PERSON AND BY COUNSEL AT EVERY STAGE OF THE

PROCEEDINGS
Right to be present
General Rule: Presence of the accused during the criminal action is not required and shall be
based on his sole discretion.

Exception: Presence of the accused is mandatory:

(a) For purposes of identification;
(b) At arraignment; [Rule 116, Sec. 1(b)]
(c) At the promulgation of judgment;
Exception: If the conviction is for a light offense. [Rule 120, Sec. 6]

38 of 40
This right may be waived when:
(1) The accused is absent without just cause at the trial of which he had notice; or
(2) The accused under custody escapes, until custody over him is regained.

Trial in absentia
Requisites: [Parada v. Veneracion (1997)]
(a) Prior arraignment;
(b) Proper notice of the trial;
(c) Failure to appear is unjustifiable.
Effects: Waiver of right to be present, right to present evidence and right to cross-examine
witnesses. [Gimenez v. Nazareno (1988)]

Right to counsel
(a) It means reasonably effective legal assistance. [Gideon v. Wainright (1963)]
(b) It is absolute and may be invoked at all times, even on appeal. [Telan v. CA (1991)]
(c) Duty to appoint counsel de oficio is mandatory only at the time of arraignment. [Sayson
v.People (1988)]
(d) Violation of this right entitles the accused to new trial. [People v. Serzo (1997)]The right to
counsel may be waived but to insure that the waiver is voluntary and intelligent, the waiver
must be in writing and in the presence of the counsel of the accused [People v. Del Castillo
(2004)]. It must also not be contrary to law, public order, public policy, morals or good customs.
(e) Even a person under investigation for an offense shall the right to have a “competent and
independent counsel preferably of his own choice” Included in this right is the right to be
informed of his right to counsel [Sec. 12[1], Art. II, 1987 Constitution; Sec 2(b) RA 7438].

Right to defend in person

Only when it sufficiently appears that he can protect his rights without the assistance of counsel
[Sec. 1[b], Rule 115, Rules of Court]

4. TO TESTIFY AS WITNESS IN HIS BEHALF

But subject to cross-examination on any matter covered by his direct examination. (Sec. 1[d]Rule
115) Silence will not, in any manner, prejudice him.

5. RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION (2005 BAR)

The right against self-incrimination has no application to juridical persons. [BASECO v. PCGG
(1987)]

The constitutional guaranty, that no person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a
witness against himself, is limited to a prohibition against compulsory testimonial self-incrimination.
The corollary to the proposition is that, an ocular inspection of the body of the accused is
permissible. [Villafor vs. Summers (1920)] The proviso is that torture of force shall be avoided.

The right is applicable to one who is compelled to produce a document, and one who is
compelled to furnish a specimen of his handwriting, for in both cases, the witness is required to
furnish evidence against himself. [People v. Nicandro (1986)]

An accused “occupies a different tier of protection from an ordinary witness.”

He is entitled 1) to be exempt from being a witness against himself, and 2) to testify as witness in
his own behalf; BUT if he offers himself as a witness he may be cross-examined as any other witness;
however, his neglect or refusal to be a witness shall not in any manner prejudice or be used
against him. [People v. Judge Ayson (1989)]

Thus, the right may be waived by the failure to timely assert the right, that is, by answering an
incriminating question [Beltran v. Samson (1929)] when the accused testifies in his own behalf and
is cross-examined on matters covered by the direct examination. [Sec. 1(f), Rule 115] The
questions on cross examination should be on matters related to his direct examination. [People
v. Judge Ayson, supra]

6. RIGHT TO CONFRONTATION
Where the adverse party is deprived of the right to cross-examine the persons who executed the
affidavits, said affidavits are generally rejected for being hearsay. [Estrella v. Robles, Jr. (2007)]
39 of 40
(Bar Matter)HOWEVER, either party may utilize as part of its evidence the testimony of a witness
who is deceased, out of or cannot with due diligence be found in the Philippines, unavailable or
otherwise unable to testify, given in another case or proceeding, judicial or administrative,
PROVIDED they involve the same parties and subject matter and the adverse party had the
opportunity to cross-examine him. [Sec. 1(f), Rule 115]

This right is waived by non-appearance. [Carredo v. People (1990)]

The right does not apply in a preliminary investigation. The parties may, however, submit to the
investigating officers questions which may be asked to the party or witness concerned. [Sec.3(e),
Rule 112]

7. RIGHT TO COMPULSORY PROCESS TO SECURE THE ATTENDANCE OF WITNESSES AND THE

PRODUCTION OF WITNESSES IN HIS BEHALF.
If a subpoena is issued and the witness failed to appear, the court should order the arrest of the
witness if necessary. [People v. Montejo (1967)]

8. RIGHT TO SPEEDY, IMPARTIAL, AND PUBLIC TRIAL

In determining whether or not the right to speedy disposition of cases has been violated, this Court
has laid down the following guidelines [Tan v. People (2009); Olbes v. Buemio (2009)]:
(a) Length of the delay;
(b) Reasons for such delay;
(c) Assertion or failure to assert such right by the accused; and
(d) Prejudice caused by the delay.

Remedy against denial of right:

(a) Motion to Dismiss [Corpuz v Sandiganbayan (2004)]
The accused is not entitled to a dismissal where such delay was caused by proceedings or
motions instituted by him. A dismissal based on a violation of the right to speedy trial is
equivalent to an acquittal and double jeopardy may attach even if the dismissal is with the
consent of the accused. [Condrada v. People (2003)]

(b) Mandamus. [Lumanlao v. Hon. Peralta (2006)]

Bar (2007)
L was charged with illegal possession of shabu before the RTC. Although bail was allowable under his indictment,
he could not afford to post bail, and so he remained in detention at the City Jail. For various reasons ranging from
the promotion of the Presiding Judge, to the absence of the trial prosecutor, and to the lack of notice to the City
Jail Warden, the arraignment of L was postpones nineteen times over a period of two years. Twice during that
period, L’s counsel filed motions to dismiss, invoking the right of the accused to speedy trial. Both motions were
denied by the RTC. Can L file a petition for mandamus. Reason briefly.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, L can file a petition for mandamus to enforce his constitutional right to a speedy trial
which was capriciously denied to him. There is absolutely no justification for postponing an arraignment of the
accused nineteen (19) times and over a period of two (2) years. The numerous, unreasonable postponements of
the arraignment demonstrate an abusive exercise of discretion (Lumanlaw v. Peralta, 482 SCRA 396 [2006]).
Arraignment of an accused would not take thirty minutes of the precious time of the court, as against the
preventive imprisonment and deprivation of liberty of the accused just because he does not have the means to
post bail although the crime charged is bailable.
The right to a speedy trial is guaranteed by the Constitution to every citizen accused of a crime, more so when is
under preventive imprisonment. L, in the given case, was merely invoking his constitutional right when a motion to
dismiss the case was twice filed by his counsel. The RTC is virtually enjoined by the fundamental law to respect such
right; hence a duty. Having refused or neglected to discharge the duty enjoined by law whereas there is no appeal
nor any plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law, the remedy of mandamus may be
availed of.

9. RIGHT TO APPEAL
An appeal in criminal case opens the ENTIRE case for review and the appellate court may correct
even unassigned errors. [People v. Tambis (2008)]

If the accused escapes from confinement, appeal is not allowed unless he voluntarily surrenders
within period for appeal. [People v. Omar (1991)]

40 of 40
(Bar Matter) The right to appeal is lost by the unjustified failure to appear at the promulgation of
judgment of conviction [Villena v. People, (2011)]

RIGHTS OF PERSONS UNDER CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION [SEC. 2, RA 7438]

Custodial Investigation involves any questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a
person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any
significant way.

It shall include the practice of issuing an “invitation” to a person who is investigated in connection
with an offense he is suspected to have committed, without prejudice to the liability of the
“inviting” officer for any violation of law.

1. TO BE ASSISTED BY COUNSEL AT ALL TIMES

Waiver of the right to counsel must be made with the assistance of counsel. [Art. 3, Sec. 12(1),
Constitution]

Requisites for the validity of an extrajudicial confession made by a person arrested,

detained or under custodial investigation:
(1) It shall be in writing and signed by such person; and
(2) It must be signed in the presence of his counsel OR, in the latter’s absence, upon a
valid waiver; In the event of a valid waiver, it must be signed in the presence of any of the
parents, elder brothers and sisters, his spouse, the municipal mayor, the municipal judge,
district school supervisor, or priest or minister of the gospel as chosen by him.

(c) Signing of the waiver to the provisions of Art. 125, RPC.

The modifier competent and independent in the 1987 Constitution is not an empty rhetoric. It
stresses the need to accord the accused, under the uniquely stressful conditions of a custodial
investigation, an informed judgment on the choices explained to him by a diligent and capable
lawyer [Lumanog v. People (2010)]

If he cannot afford to have his own counsel, he must be provided with a competent and
independent counsel by the investigating officer.

Assisting counsel may be any lawyer, except those:

(a) Directly affected by the case;
(b) Charged with conducting preliminary investigation;
(c) Charged with the prosecution of crimes. [Sec. 3, RA 7438)

2. TO REMAIN SILENT

3. TO BE INFORMED, IN A LANGUAGE KNOWN TO AND UNDERSTOOD BY HIM, OF HIS RIGHTS TO

REMAIN SILENT

4. TO HAVE COMPETENT AND INDEPENDENT COUNSEL, PREFERABLY OF HIS OWN CHOICE, WHO
SHALL AT ALL TIMES BE ALLOWED TO CONFER PRIVATELY WITH THE PERSON ARRESTED, DETAINED
OR UNDER CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION

5. TO BE ALLOWED VISITS BY OR CONFERENCES WITH:

Any member of his immediate family ("Immediate family" includes his or her spouse, fiancé or
fiancée, parent or child, brother or sister, grandparent or grandchild, uncle or aunt, nephew or
niece, and guardian or ward), or Any medical doctor or Priest or religious minister, chosen by him
or by any member of his immediate family or by his counsel, or by any national NGO duly
accredited by the Commission on Human Rights or by any international NGO duly accredited by
the Office of the President.

41 of 40
Rule 116 Arraignment and Plea
ARRAIGNMENT
The stage where the complaint or information is read to the accused in open court and in a
language or dialect known to him and and asking him whether he pleads guilty or not guilty.
[Rule 116,Sec. 1(a)]

DUTY OF THE COURT BEFORE ARRAIGNMENT

The court shall [Rule 116, Sec. 6]:
(a) Inform the accused of his right to counsel;
(b) Ask him if he desires to have one; and
(c) Must assign a counsel de officio to defend him; unless the accused:
(1) Is allowed to defend himself in person; or
(2) Has employed a counsel of his choice.

Remedies the accused my avail BEFORE ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA

(1) Bill of particulars – to enable him to properly plead and prepare for trial
(2) Suspension of arraignment – upon motion, the proper party may ask for suspension of
arraignment to pursue a petition for review before the DOJ Secretary under Sec. 11, Rule 116;
period of suspension shall not exceed 60 days from filing of petition with the reviewing office
(3) Motion to Quash – at anytime before entering his plea, the accused may move to quash the
complaint or information on any of the grounds under Sec. 3, Rule 117 in relation to Sec. 1,
Rule 117
(4) Challenge the validity of the arrest or legality of the warrant or assail the regularity or question
the absence of preliminary investigation of the charge, PROVIDED that if the accused does
not question the legality of the arrest or search, this objection is deemed waived.

(Bar Matter) The time of the pendency of a motion to quash or for a bill of particulars or other
causes justifying suspension of the arraignment shall be excluded in computing the period. [Rule
116, Sec. 1(g)]

How Arraignment is Made

(a) In open court where the complaint or information has been filed or assigned for trial
(b) By the judge or clerk of court
(c) By furnishing the accused with a copy of the complaint or information
(d) Reading it in a language or dialect known to the accused
(e) Asking the accused whether he pleads guilty or not guilty

When should Arraignment be made?

General Rule: Accused should be arraigned within 30 days from the date the court acquires
jurisdiction over his person.
Exception: Unless a shorter period is provided for by law:
(1) When an accused is under preventive detention, his case should be raffled within 3 days from
filing and accused shall be arraigned within 10 days from receipt by the judge of the records
of the case (RA 8493 Speedy Trial Act)
(2) Where the complainant is about to depart from the Philippines with no definite date of return,
the accused should be arraigned without delay (RA 4908)
(3) Cases under RA 7610 (Child Abuse Act), the trial shall be commenced within 3 days from
arraignment
(4) Cases under the Dangerous Drugs Act
(5) Cases under SC AO 104-96, i.e. heinous crimes, violations of the Intellectual Property Rights
Law, these cases must be tried continuously until terminated within 60 days from
commencement of the trial and to be decided within 30 days from the submission of the case

In case of failure of the OFFENDED PARTY to appear despite due notice, the court may allow the
accused to enter a plea of guilty to a lesser offense which is necessarily included in the offense
charged with the conformity of the trial prosecutor alone. [Sec. 1(f), Rule 116]

In case of failure of ACCUSED to appear despite due notice, there is NO ARRAIGNMENT IN

ABSENTIA [Nolasco v. Enrile (1985)] -The presence of the accused is not only a personal right but
also a public duty, irrespective of the gravity of the offense and the rank of the court.

42 of 40
(Bar Matter)There can be no trial in absentia without first arraigning the accused; otherwise, the
judgment is null and void.

If the accused is under preventive detention

The case shall be raffled and its records transmitted to the judge to whom the case was raffled
within 3 days from the filing of the information or complaint.
The accused shall be arraigned within 10 days from the date of the raffle.

SPECIFIC RULES ON ARRAIGNMENT

(a) Trial in absentia may be conducted only after valid arraignment.
(b) Accused must personally appear during arraignment and enter his pleal; counsel cannot
enter plea for the accused.
(c) Accused is presumed to have been validly arraigned in the absence of proof to the contrary.
(d) Generally, judgment is void if accused has not been validly arraigned.
(e) If accused went into trial without being arraigned, subsequent arraignment will cure the error
provided that the accused was able to present evidence and cross examine the witnesses of
the prosecution during trial.

If an information is amended in substance which changes the nature of the offense, arraignment
on the amended information is MANDATORY.
EXCEPT if the amendment is only as to form See Teehankee, Jr. v. Madayag, GR No. 103102,March
6, 1992

INSTANCES WHEN A PLEA OF NOT GUILTY TO BE ENTERED FOR THE ACCUSED [RULE 116, SEC. 1(C)]
(a) When the accused so pleaded
(b) When he refuses to plead
(c) When he makes a conditional or qualified plea of guilt
(d) When the plea is indefinite or ambiguous
(e) When he pleads guilty but presents exculpatory evidence

If the accused who pleaded guilty presents exculpatory evidence, his plea of guilt is withdrawn.
The judge must order the accused to plead again or at least direct that a new plea of “not guilty”
be entered for him, otherwise there shall be no standing plea for the accused. This is significant
because if there is no standing plea, the accused cannot invoke double jeopardy later on.

WHEN ACCUSED MAY ENTER A PLEA OF GUILTY TO A LESSER OFFENSE [RULE 116, SEC. 2]
PLEA TO A LESSER OFFENSE DURING ARRAIGNMENT
At arraignment, the accused, with the consent of the offended party and prosecutor, may be
allowed by the trial court to plead guilty to a lesser offense which is necessarily included in the
offense charged.

PLEA TO A LESSER OFFENSE AFTER ARRAIGNMENT BUT BEFORE TRIAL

(Bar Matter) After arraignment but before trial, the accused may still be allowed to plead guilty
to said lesser offense after withdrawing his plea of not guilty. No amendment of the complaint or
information is necessary.

PLEA TO A LESSER OFFENSE AFTER TRIAL HAS BEGUN

After the prosecution has rested its case, a change of plea to a lesser offense may be granted
by the judge, with the approval of the prosecutor and the offended party if the prosecution does
not have sufficient evidence to establish the guilt of the accused for the crime charged. The
judge cannot on its own grant the change of plea.
Bar (2002)
D was charged with theft of an article worth p15,000.00. Upon being arraigned, he pleaded not guilty to the offense
charged. Thereafter, before trial commenced, he asked the court to allow him to change his plea of not guilty to
a plea of guilt but only to estafa involving P5,000.00. Can the court allow D to change his plea?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, because a plea of guilty to a lesser offense may be allowed if the lesser offense is necessarily included in the
offense charged. (Rule 116, sec. 2). Estafa involving P5,000.00 is not necessarily included in theft of an article worth
P15,000.00

43 of 40
DUTY OF THE COURT WHEN ACCUSED PLEADS GUILTY TO A CAPITAL OFFENSE [SEC. 3, RULE 116]
(1) Conduct a searching inquiry into the voluntariness and full comprehension of the
consequences of the pleas
(2) Require prosecution to present evidence to prove the guilt and precise degree of culpability
of the accused
Note: The accused may present evidence in his behalf.

“SEARCHING INQUIRY”
The procedure in Sec. 3, Rule 116 is MANDATORY. The plea must be clear, definite and
unconditional. It must be based on a free and informed judgment.

IMPROVIDENT PLEA OF GUILTY TO A CAPITAL OFFENSE

DEFINITION Plea without proper information as to all the circumstances affecting it; based upon
a mistaken assumption or misleading information/advice.

General rule: An improvident plea should not be accepted. If accepted, it should not be held to
be sufficient to sustain a conviction. [People v. De Ocampo Gonzaga (1984)] The case should be
remanded to the lower court for further proceedings.

Exception: If the accused appears guilty beyond reasonable doubt from the evidence adduced
by the prosecution and defense.

WHEN IMPROVIDENT PLEA MAY BE WITHDRAWN

At any time before judgment of conviction becomes final, the court may permit an improvident
plea of guilty to be withdrawn and be substituted by a plea of not guilty.

(Bar Matter)The withdrawal of a plea of guilty is not a matter of right of the accused but of sound
discretion of the trial court [People v. Lambino, 103 Phil 504, 1958]

The reason for this is that trial has already begun and the withdrawal of the plea will change the
theory of the case and put all past proceedings to waste. Moreover, at this point, there is a
presumption that the plea was made voluntarily

GROUNDS FOR SUSPENSION OF ARRAIGNMENT [RULE 116, SEC. 11]

1. UNSOUND MENTAL CONDITION OF THE ACCUSED AT THE TIME OF THE ARRAIGNMENT

(1) When the accused can neither comprehend the full import of the charge nor can he give an
intelligent plea.
(2) The court shall order his mental examination and, if necessary, his confinement.
(3) The need for suspension may be determined from physical and outward manifestations at the
time of arraignment indicative of a mental disorder which the court had observed and
defense counsel had called attention to. [People v. Alcalde (2002)]

2. PREJUDICIAL QUESTION EXISTS

Rationale: A prejudicial question would be determinative of guilt or innocence.
It may be raised during PI. If the information is filed in court, it may be raised as ground to suspend
the arraignment.

3. PENDING PETITION FOR REVIEW OF THE RESOLUTION OF THE PROSECUTOR WITH THE DOJ OR
OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT.

The accused should file a motion to suspend and to secure a ruling on his petition for review within
60 days from the filing of the petition. (DOJ Circular No. 70)

(Bar Matter) With the arraignment of the accused, the DOJ Secretary can no longer entertain the
appeal or petition for review because petitioner had already waived or abandoned the
same.[Gandarosa v. Flores, July 17, 2007]

PENDING MOTION TO QUASH

If petition for review is not resolved within 60 days, court may insist on arraigning already

44 of 40