Manual For Continuous Trial PDF

CONTINUOUS TRIAL
AND SKILLS DEVELOPMENT

TRAINING MANUAL
Briefing for Clerks of Courts of Pilot Courts
Supreme Court Training Center
SC Centennial Building, Padre Faura, Manila
14 August 2015
This manual is made possible by the support of the American People through the Unit-
ed States Agency for International Development (USAID). The contents of
this manual are the sole responsibility of the Supreme Court Special Committee on
Speedy Trial and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States
Government.
Message from the
Chief JusƟce
As I cross the country talking to judges, court personnel, and
the different justice stakeholders, the pleasant revelations have been
that there is an intense desire across all sectors to see improvement in
how justice is being administered, and that some of our judges have
self-initiated docket management techniques. The latter have, using
their own unique approaches, actually implemented speedy trial with
their own versions of continuous trial, in their passion to prevent jus-
tice from being delayed.
It is time that the judiciary be transformed – from a group of individuals some of whom
are trying home-grown solutions to address the problem of delay – into a fighting force of well-
trained professionals who with all confidence will bring about the fulfillment of the dream of
administering justice real-time.
It is thus to these first fifty two (52) individual judges who have volunteered to imple-
ment continuous trial in selected criminal cases in their courts, that much gratitude is owed by
the Supreme Court and the Filipino people. If they succeed in proving that continuous trial can
be the procedural norm in the first pool of hundreds of cases to be tried on a continuous basis,
then the Filipino judiciary will have shattered another popular belief: that here in the Philip-
pines, the public has to resign itself to a turtle-paced justice system. I believe that this first batch
of volunteer judges will prove the stereotype wrong, as they pioneer in a trailblazing way, con-
tinuous trial of criminal cases, documented under a monitoring system that should provide basis
for the Court to move judicial reform further and faster.
I would also like to extend my warmest congratulations to the Members of the Special
Committee on Speedy Trial for seeing this initiative through. Also, the Members of the Tech-
nical Working Group on Continuous Trial deserve special commendation for jumpstarting this
initiative. Your efforts, as well as those of our volunteer judges, provide the most effective
proof that the judiciary is poised to fulfill its goal of setting the gold standard in public service.
Maraming salamat po at mabuhay tayong lahat!
MARIA LOURDES P. A. SERENO

Chief Justice
Message from the Special Com-
miƩee on Speedy Trial
The Lower courts account for a majority of the justice sys-

tem’s total caseload, with more than 600,000 cases pending in dock-
ets each year for the past ten (10) years. These overwhelming figures
may be a hard pill to swallow but they make up the current realities
that we are facing today.
The Supreme Court has acknowledged the necessity to address this persistent problem in
the judicial system. Oftentimes, due to the clogged court dockets, some of our people are re-
signed to a reality of delay in the administration of justice. Most lament that justice delayed is
justice denied. The Court deemed it urgent to initiate programs and innovate the current ones
to efficiently deliver the Court’s mandate to the people.
Acting on these concerns, the Special Committee on Speedy Trial, headed by the under-
signed, was created in order to address the court’s congestion issues. These issues include,
among other things, the need to review the current application of existing rules on speedy trial
in criminal cases and the need to issue new guidelines to truly fulfill the objective of expediting
the trial and resolution of criminal cases.
One of the flagship projects of the Special Committee is the drafting of the Continuous
Trial Guidelines and templates, followed by a lecture series to develop the skills of judges in
order to speed-up the adjudication of cases and to teach them valuable trial techniques that
would dispose of pending incidents expeditiously, competently, and most importantly, resolv-
ing them within the periods or even shorter than the periods required by law or the Rules.
In my recent trip to the United States, I have observed the vast difference in the disposi-
tion of their cases, particularly, in the period within which they are resolved. Time limitations in
criminal cases are included in their system to safeguard due process and to prevent unreasona-
ble delays in bringing cases against the accused. Their trial periods take only months before res-
olution and there is no reason why we cannot emulate it if proper skills training and resources
are adequately provided.
It is hoped that these Court initiatives would immensely contribute to the realization of
the Court’s vision where undue delay in the dispensation of justice will be eradicated or at the
very least drastically diminished and the adage “justice delayed is justice denied” will be buried
in oblivion and only become a dark part of the history of our judicial system.
HON. DIOSDADO M. PERALTA

Associate Justice of the Supreme Court
Members of the
Special Committee on Speedy Trial
HON. LUCAS P. BERSAMIN, A ssociate Justice of the Supreme Court

HON. MARTIN S. VILLARAMA, JR., A ssociate Justice of the Supreme Court
HON. JOSE CATRAL MENDOZA, A ssociate Justice of the Supreme Court
HON. MAGDANGAL M. DE LEON, A ssociate Justice of the Court of A ppeals

HON. MARIO V. LOPEZ, A ssociate Justice of the Court of A ppeals
HON. ALEXANDER G. GESMUNDO, A ssociate Justice of the Court of A ppeals
HON. MARIA FILOMENA D. SINGH, A ssociate Justice of the Court of A ppeals
HON. JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ, Court A dministrator
ATTY. JASON J. ZAPANTA, Secretariat

ATTY. CRISOSTOMO URIBE, Secretariat
ATTY. JILLIANE JOYCE R. DE DUMO, Secretariat
Members of the
Technical Working Group
Judge Selma Palacio Alaras RTC Br. 62, Makati City

Judge Jose Lorenzo R. dela Rosa RTC Br. 4, Manila
Judge Rico Sebastian D. Liwanag RTC Br. 136, Makati
Judge Caridad Walse-Lutero RTC Br. 223, Quezon City
Judge Maria Rowena Modesto-San Pedro RTC Br. 158, Pasig City
Atty. Roberto Mendoza Private practitioner
Contents
FLOWCHARTS AND MOTIONS THAT DELAY THE PROCEEDINGS
PROCEDURAL INCIDENTS
JURISDICTION – IN GENERAL
Introduction
Criminal Jurisdiction Defined
Elements of Jurisdiction
Penalty Attached
Nature of the Offense Charged
Territorial Jurisdiction over Place of Crime Commission
Requisites for Valid Exercise

Jurisdiction over Subject Matter
Jurisdiction over Territory Where Offense Committed
General Rule
Exceptions
Change of Venue by Supreme Court Order
When the Law Provides Otherwise
Continuing Crime Committed During a Voyage
Jurisdiction Determined by Averments of Information
Jurisdiction over the Person of Accused
JURISDICTION – IN PARTICULAR
Expanded Exclusive Original Jurisdiction of Municipal Trial Courts

Violations of Ordinances
All Offenses Punishable by Prison Sentences not Exceeding 6
Years
Damage to Property through Reckless Imprudence
Imposable Penalty is Destierro
Special Jurisdiction in Absence of RTC Judges
Jurisdiction of Regional Trial Courts

Regular Cases
Special Cases
Jurisdiction of Family Courts

Original and Exclusive Jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan
Jurisprudence Involving Crimes Committed by Public Officials and Employees
Meaning of Crime Committed “In Relation to Office”
What should be Alleged in the Information?
III. PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES

Institution of Criminal Action
Complaint or Information
Requisites
Definitions
Institution of Criminal Action
Preliminary Investigation - Purpose
Preliminary Investigation - Precondition to Filing in Court; General Rule
Exception to General Rule
Effect of Institution of Criminal Action
Who Must Prosecute?
Intervention of offended party by counsel
Distinction Between Control of Prosecution by Public Prosecutor and Control by

Court
Control by Prosecution
Control by Court Once Case is Filed
Limitations on Control by Court
Testing Sufficiency of Complaint or Information
Strict Scrutiny of Averments in Complaint or Information, Particularly in

Heinous Crimes
Cause of the Accusation
Duplicity of the Offense and Continuing Crimes

Duplicity of the Offense
Exceptions to Rules on Duplicity
No Duplicity in Rape with Homicide
No Duplicity in Charge of Estafa
Continuing Crimes: The Principle of Delito Continuado
Rule on Complex Crimes

Illegal Possession of Firearm and Unlawful Killing with the Use Thereof
Reckless Imprudence Cases
Amendment or Substitution
IV. PROSECUTION OF CIVIL ACTION
General Rule
Civil Liability Not Arising from Crime, Not Extinguished by Acquittal
Separate Civil Action to Recover Civil Liability Allowed for Obligations Not Arising
from Crime, e.g., quasi delict
Extinction of Penal Action Does Not Extinguish Civil Action
Exception – Prejudicial Civil Action
V.MOTION TO QUASH
VI. PROCEDURAL CHECKLISTS ON CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

For Cases Cognizable by the First Level Courts
For Cases Cognizable by the Regional Trial Courts
Common Procedures in First and Second Level Courts
VII. CONDUCTING THE TRIAL

Trial
Compliance with the Constitutional Limitations on Periods
Pertinent Rules
How to Deal with Accused’s Motion for Examination of His/Her Witness Before Tri-
al
How to Deal with Prosecution’s Motion for Examination of its Witness Before Trial
If a Motion to Determine Competency to Stand Trial is Filed
Demurrer to Evidence
VIII. JUDGMENT
Definition
Damages that may be Awarded

Promulgation of Judgment
What to Do
Modification of Judgment
Modify or Set Aside a Judgment of Conviction Only
Entry of Judgment
IX. MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL OR RECONSIDERATION

Grounds for New Trial
Ground for Reconsideration
Requisites for a Motion for a New Trial or Reconsideration
PROBATION
XI. APPEAL
Cases where Death Penalty is Imposed
XII. ISSUANCE OF SEARCH WARRANTS

Rule on Forum Shopping
Seizure of Personal Property
Requisites for Issuance
Examination of Complaint
Meaning of Probable Cause
Basis of Probable Cause; Personal Knowledge

Meaning of Knowledge; Test is Liability for Perjury
Insufficiency of Affidavits
Illustrative Case
Factors that may be Considered in the Determination of Probable Cause: Time of Applica-
tion in Relation to Alleged Offense Considered in Determination of Probable Cause
Specific Offense Must be Charged and Not Violations of Codes
The Need for Searching Questions and Answers by the Judge
Requisite of Particular Description of Things to be Seized
Tests to Determine Particularity
Description of Place to be Seized
Determination of Whether Search Warrant Describes Premises with Particularity
XIII. PROVISIONAL REMEDIES

Availability of Provisional Remedies
Attachment
Suggested Forms
CONTINUOUS TRIAL TRAINING MANUAL
FLOWCHARTS
The arraignment, pre-trial dates, trial dates, and promulgation of judgment

should conform with the periods under the Regular Rules and Special Rules.
REGULAR RULES
RULES ON CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Promulgation:
Ninety (90) Days from Submission or Three (3) Months7
1
Rules on Criminal Procedure, Rule 116, Section 1(e)
(e) When the accused is under preventive detention, his 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. The pr e-trial conference of his case shall be held within ten (10) days after his
arraignment. (n)
2
Rules on Criminal Procedure, Rule 116, Section 1(g).
(g) Unless a shorter period is provided by special law or Supreme Court Circular, the
arraignment shall be held within thirty (30) days from the date the court acquires jurisdiction
over the person of the accused. 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. (Sec. 2, Cir. 38-98)
3
Rules on Criminal Procedure, Rule 116, Section 1(e).
4
Rules on Criminal Procedure, Rule 118, Section 1.
Sec. 1. Pre-trial; mandatory in criminal cases. – In all criminal cases cognizable by the
Sandiganbayan, Regional Trial Court, Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court in
Cities, Municipal Trial Court and Municipal Circuit Trial Court, the court shall, after
arraignment and within thirty (30) days from the date the court acquires jurisdiction
over the person of the accused, unless a shor ter per iod is pr ovided for in special laws or
circulars of the Supreme Court, order a pre-trial conference to consider the following:
Page 10
 Marking for identification of evidence of the parties

 Waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence
 Modification of the order of trial if the accused admits the charge but interposes a
lawful defense; and
 Such matters as will promote a fair and expeditious trial of the criminal and civil
aspects of the case. (Secs. 2 and 3, Cir. 38-98)
5
Sec. 1. Time to prepare for trial. – After a plea of not guilty is entered, the accused shall have
at least fifteen (15) days to prepare for trial. The trial shall commence within thirty (30) days
from receipt of the pre-trial order. (Sec. 6, Cir. 38-98)
6
Sec. 2. Continuous trial until terminated; postponements – Trial once commenced shall
continue from day to day as far as practicable until terminated. It may be postponed for a
reasonable period of time for good cause. (2a)
The court shall, after consultation with the prosecutor and defense counsel, set the case for
continuous trial on a weekly or other short-term trial calendar at the earliest possible time so as
to ensure a speedy trial. In no case shall the entire period exceed one hundred eighty (180)
days from the first day of trial except as otherwise authorized by the Supreme Court.
(Sec. 8, Cir. 38-98)
The time and limitations provided under this section and the preceding section shall not apply
where special laws or circulars of the Supreme Court provide for a shorter period of trial. (n)
7
Constitution, Article VIII, Section 15(1).
Section 15. (1) All cases or matters filed after the effectivity of this Constitution must be
decided or resolved within twenty-four months fr om date of submission for the Supr eme
Court, and, unless reduced by the Supreme Court, twelve months for all lower collegiate
courts, and three months for all other lower courts.
Page 11
SUPREME COURT RESOLUTION

GUIDELINES FOR LITIGATION IN QUEZON CITY TRIAL COURTS
A.M. No. 11-6-10-SC, February 21, 2012
Promulgation:
Within the Periods Allowed by the Rules or Special Law3
1
Guidelines for Litigation in Quezon City Trial Courts, C 1(a).
1. Schedule of arraignment. – (a) The arraignment shall be set within seven (7) days from
receipt by the court of the case, for detained accused, and within twenty (20) days from receipt
by the court of the case, for non-detained accused.
2
Guidelines for Litigation in Quezon City Trial Courts, C 5(a).
5. Pre-trial. – (a) The court shall schedule the arraignment and pre-trial on the same date in all
cases, except in cases which require mediation and/or judicial dispute resolution. The pre-trial
proper in the latter cases must be scheduled immediately upon conclusion of mediation and/or
judicial dispute resolution.
3
Guidelines for Litigation in Quezon City Trial Courts, C 7(b).
(b) When the defense rests its case, unless the prosecution expressly moves to present rebuttal
evidence, the court shall require the parties to submit their memoranda and in the same order,
schedule the date of promulgation of the judgment, within the period required by the law or the
rules.
Page 12
SPECIAL RULES
RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CASES
A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC
April 13, 2010
Promulgation:
The court may require the parties to submit their respective memoranda
within a non-extendible period of thirty (30) days from the date the case is
submitted for decision. With or without any memoranda filed, the court shall
have a period of sixty (60) days to decide the case counted from the last day of the
30-day period to file the memoranda.4
* The court shall dispose the case within a period of ten (10) months from
the date of arraignment5
1
Environmental Rules, Rule 15, Section 1.
Sec. 1. Arraignment — The court shall set the arraignment of the accused within fifteen (15) days from
the time it acquires jurisdiction over the accused, with notice to the public prosecutor and offended party
or concerned government agency that it will entertain plea-bargaining on the date of the arraignment.
2
Sec. 1. Setting of pre-trial conference — After the arraignment, the court shall set the pre-trial conference
within thirty (30) days. It may refer the case to the branch clerk of court, if warranted, for a preliminary
conference to be set at least three (3) days prior to the pre-trial.
3
Sec. 1. Continuous trial — The court shall endeavor to conduct continuous trial which shall not exceed
three (3) months from the date of the issuance of the pre-trial order.
4
Sec. 3. Submission of memoranda. — The court may require the parties to submit their respective
memoranda and if possible, in electronic form, within a non-extendible period of thirty (30) days from
the date the case is submitted for decision.
With or without any memoranda filed, the court shall have a period of sixty (60) days to decide the case
counted from the last day of the 30-day period to file the memoranda.
Page 13
SPECIAL RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS CASES
A.M. No. 10-3-10-SC
October 18, 2011
Promulgation:
Sixty (60) Days from the Time the Case is Submitted for Decision, with or
without Memoranda.6
1
As stated in RPIPC, Rule 13, Section 1, “if the accused is in custody for the crime charged, he shall be
immediately arraigned.”
2
As stated in, it should be conducted in accordance with Rule 116 of the Rules of Court; Rules on Criminal
Procedure, Rule 116, Section 1(g).
Section 1(g), Rule 116, Rules of Court, “Unless a shorter period is provided by special law, the
arraignment shall be held within thirty (30) days.”
3
Rules of Procedure for Intellectual Property Rights Cases, Rule 13, Section 2.
SEC. 2. Referral to mediation. — Before conducting the trial, the court shall call the parties to a pre
-trial.
Upon appearance of the parties during pre-trial, the judge shall order the parties to appear before the
Philippine Mediation Center for court-annexed mediation on the civil aspect of the criminal action.
The pre-trial judge shall suspend the court proceedings while the case is undergoing mediation.
Upon termination of the mediation proceedings, the court shall continue with the pre-trial.
4
Sec. 3. Pre-trial. — During the pre-trial, a stipulation of facts may be entered into, or the propriety
of allowing the accused to enter a plea of guilty to a lesser offense may be considered, or such other
matters as may be taken up to clarify the issues and to ensure a speedy disposition of the case.
However, no admission by the accused shall be used against him unless reduced to writing and
signed by the accused and his counsel. A refusal or failure to stipulate shall not prejudice the
accused.
The pre-trial shall be terminated not later than thirty (30) days from the date of its commencement,
excluding the period for mediation and JDR.
5
SEC. 2. Conduct of trial. — The court shall conduct hearings expeditiously so as to ensure speedy
trial. Each party shall have a maximum period of sixty (60) days to present his evidence-in-chief on
Page 14
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9165 OR THE

COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF 2002
1
R.A. No. 9165, Article XI, Section 90.
Sec. 90. — Trial of the case under this Section shall be finished by the court not later than
sixty (60) days from the date of the filing of the information. Decision on said cases shall be
rendered within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of submission of the case for
resolution.
2
Id.
Page 15
MOTIONS THAT DELAY THE PROCEEDINGS
1. Motions filed before Arraignment:

1.1. Motion for Judicial Determination for Probable Cause
This particular motion is intended to convince the court that it must

first conduct a hearing before the issuance of a warrant of arrest. Under Rule
112, Section 6,* this particular motion is superfluous because the court is
already mandated to determine the existence of probable cause within ten (10)
days from receipt of the Information. Hence, before the issuance of a warrant
of arrest, the court should first peruse the Information and records of the
preliminary investigation submitted by the prosecution. And if it finds
probable cause, issue an order that reads:
Sample Order:
Issuance of a Warrant of Arrest
“Upon examination and perusal of the Information and

the records of the preliminary investigation attached to the
Information, the court finds probable cause to issue warrant of
arrest.
Let warrant of arrest issue for the apprehension of the
accused.
SO ORDERED.”
* Section 6. When warrant of arrest may issue. — (a) By the Regional Trial Court. — Within ten (10)
days from the filing of the complaint or information, the judge shall personally evaluate the resolution
of the prosecutor and its supporting evidence. He may immediately dismiss the case if the evidence on
record clearly fails to establish probable cause. If he finds probable cause, he shall issue a warrant of
arrest, or a commitment order if the accused has already been arrested pursuant to a warrant issued by
the judge who conducted the preliminary investigation or when the complaint or information was filed
pursuant to section 7 of this Rule. In case of doubt on the existence of probable cause, the judge may
order the prosecutor to present additional evidence within five (5) days from notice and the issue must
be resolved by the court within thirty (30) days from the filing of the complaint of information.
(b) By the Municipal Trial Court. — When required pursuant to the second paragraph of section 1 of
this Rule, the preliminary investigation of cases falling under the original jurisdiction of the
Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Municipal Trial Court, or Municipal Circuit
Trial Court may be conducted by either the judge or the prosecutor. When conducted by the prosecutor,
the procedure for the issuance of a warrant or arrest by the judge shall be governed by paragraph (a) of
this section. When the investigation is conducted by the judge himself, he shall follow the procedure
provided in section 3 of this Rule. If the findings and recommendations are affirmed by the provincial
or city prosecutor, or by the Ombudsman or his deputy, and the corresponding information is filed, he
shall issue a warrant of arrest. However, without waiting for the conclusion of the investigation, the
judge may issue a warrant of arrest if he finds after an examination in writing and under oath of the
complainant and his witnesses in the form of searching question and answers, that a probable cause
exists and that there is a necessity of placing the respondent under immediate custody in order not to
Page 16
1.2. Motion for Reconsideration or Motion for Reinvestigation
If the crime charged in the Information is one where preliminary

investigation is not required under the Rules, like those cognizable by the First
Level Court, a Motion for Reconsideration or Motion for Reinvestigation is not
a proper remedy, because there is nothing to reinvestigate.
If, however, preliminary investigation was conducted, the grant of a

Motion for Reconsideration or Reinvestigation must be the exception rather
than the rule, because any resolution of the Public Prosecutor as to the grant of
reconsideration or reinvestigation does not bind the court; hence, if the court
finds that there is no plausible reason to grant the Motion for Reconsideration
or Reinvestigation, the same should be dismissed. If, however, under
exceptional circumstances there is a need to grant the Motion for
Reconsideration or Motion for Reinvestigation, the arraignment previously
scheduled will have to be suspended. However, the arraignment should be
reset and that the movant-accused must be warned that if no resolution from
the Public Prosecutor within the period fixed by the court which is not more
than thirty (30) days from the time the motion was granted, the arraignment
shall proceed.
Sample Order:
“Acting on the Motion for Reconsideration (or Motion for

Reinvestigation) filed by the accused and finding the same to be
meritorious, today’s arraignment is hereby cancelled and reset to _____
(Thirty [30] days from the date of issuance of the Order).
The Public Prosecutor is hereby ordered to submit to the court its

resolution on the motion not later than thirty (30) days from today. The
court shall proceed with the arraignment of the accused if the resolution
is not submitted by the Public Prosecutor within the 30-day period.
The Public Prosecutor and the Accused and his counsel are
notified of this Order in open court.
SO ORDERED.”
Page 17
2. Motion for Preliminary Investigation
When the conduct of a preliminary investigation is required by Sec. 1, Rule

112 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure and the accused was not accorded it, the
accused can file a Motion for Preliminary Investigation within a period of five (5)
days from the time he had knowledge that an Information was filed against him. If it
was filed beyond the five-day period, the motion should be denied. If, however, the
accused filed the motion within the allowable period and the court grants the motion,
the court should warn the Prosecution that the arraignment of the accused shall
nevertheless proceed after the period to conduct the investigation that was granted by
the court has been exhausted.
Sample Order:
Order Granting a Motion for Preliminary Investigation
“Acting on the Motion for Preliminary Investigation filed by the

accused, having been filed within the five-day period allowed by the
Rules and finding the same to be meritorious, the Public Prosecutor is
hereby granted sixty (60) days from today within which to terminate
and file its resolution on the Preliminary Investigation.
Accordingly, today’s arraignment is hereby cancelled and reset

to ___ (on the 61st day from the date of the Order), at 8:30 in the
morning. Failure to to submit the resolution on or before the expiry
date of the 60-day period, the court shall proceed with the arraignment
of the accused without delay.
The parties are already notified of this Order in open court.
SO ORDERED.”
Page 18
3. Bail
If a Petition for Bail is filed, proceed with the arraignment of the accused and
start receiving the evidence of the Prosecution but limit the presentation of those
witnesses which are necessary in establishing if the evidence of guilt of the accused is
strong.
Sample Order:
Petition for Bail Hearing
“When the accused was arraigned, by reading the Information in a language

known and understood by him, assisted by counsel de parte/de oficio, the accused
entered a plea of “Not Guilty”.
The reception of evidence for the prosecution to establish if the evidence of

guilt of the accused is strong is hereby set on ____ (one [1] day apart). The court
shall not entertain motions for postponement, except only on exceptional
grounds.*
The prosecution shall present only those witnesses that are necessary and
essential in establishing if the guilt of the accused is strong. Witnesses that merely
tend to corroborate the testimonies of the essential witnesses may not be allowed,
while witnesses that are intended to establish or to recover damages shall not be
allowed.
The accused, his/her counsel, and the Public Prosecutor are notified of this
Order in open court.
SO ORDERED.”
* The missed trial date shall be deducted from the previously scheduled trial dates and
should terminate the presentation of its evidence and rest its case on the last date
allotted to it.
Page 19
4. Petition for Review
If a Petition for Review has been filed with the Department of Justice before
the filing of the Information in court, the court is constrained to grant the accused’s
Motion to Suspend the Arraignment based on such ground and reset the same sixty
(60) days from the date of issuance of the order granting the motion.* However, in the
said order, there should be a warning that if there is no resolution of the Petition for
Review within the sixty-day period from the date of its filing with the Department of
Justice, the court will proceed with the arraignment of the accused.
If a Motion for Leave of Court to File Petition for Review is filed before the
court, the court is not obliged to grant the same especially if the grounds are not
plausible; it is discretionary upon the court. It may be denied outright and proceed to
arraignment.
Sample Order:
Granting a Motion to Suspend Arraignment based on a pending Petition for Review
before the Department of Justice
“Acting on the manifestation of the accused that a Petition for

Review was filed with the Department of Justice prior to the filing of an
Information before the court, today’s arraignment is hereby cancelled and
reset to _____ (the 61st day from the filing of the petition with the
reviewing office).
The resolution of the Petition for Review should be filed before the
court not later than the date of the rescheduled arraignment (Sixty [60]
days from the filing of the petition). Failure to submit the resolution on or
before the expiry date of the 60 day-period, the court shall proceed with the
arraignment of the accused without delay.
SO ORDERED.”
* Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 116, Section 11(c).
Page 20
5. Motion for Bill of Particulars
A Motion for Bill of Particulars should only be granted if the accused

conformed with the provisions of Rule 116, Rules of Criminal Procedure, which
provides:
SEC. 9. Bill of particular — The accused may, before

arraignment, move for a bill of particulars to enable him properly to
plead and prepare for trial. The motion shall specify the alleged defects
of the complaint or information and the details desired.
Moreover, in resolving the motion, the judge should prudently determine if the
alleged defects in the complaint or information will violate the accused fundamental
right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him. If no such
violation exists, the motion should be denied outright, without the need of requiring
the Public Prosecutor to submit a comment thereto.
Page 21
6. Motion to Quash
As a rule, the denial of a Motion to Quash is not correctible by the special civil
action of Certiorari, except those grounds which cannot be waived (i.e. the facts
charged do not constitute an offense; no jurisdiction over the offense charged;
extinguishment of criminal liability; and double jeopardy or the case was dismissed or
terminated without his consent [Sec. 9, Rule 117, Rules on Criminal Procedure])
because there is an adequate and available remedy under the law, which is to proceed
to trial.
6.1. Motion to Quash which is not based on any of the grounds enumerated
under Sec. 3, Rule 117, Rules on Criminal Procedure, should be denied
outright without requiring the public prosecutor to comment thereto.
Examples:
That the accused is innocent
That the testimonies of the witnesses are incredible,
That there was a violation of the right to preliminary investigation
6.2. Motion to Quash based on any of the grounds under Rule 117
If the ground for a Motion to Quash is based on a defect in the
Information which can easily be corrected, the correction may be made in open
court before the arraignment of the accused by requiring the Public Prosecutor
to insert or delete something in the Information in order to correct it and then
countersigning the amendment to validate it. This proceeding should be
recorded by the court. Take note that the amendment of the Information is a
matter of right before arraignment. In such instances, there is no need to
require the prosecution to comment on the Motion to Quash. (See Rules of
Criminal Procedure, Rule 117, Sec. 4, 1st Par.)
6.3. Motion to Quash based on the Ground that the Facts Charged Do Not
Constitute any Offense
The court should give the prosecution an opportunity to correct the

defect in the Information by amendment; however, the court should specify the
period within which to make such amendment. ( See Rules of Criminal
Procedure, Rule 117, Sec. 4, 2nd Par.)
Sample Order:
Order Directing the Prosecutor to Submit an Amended Information
“Acting on the Motion to Quash the Information on the ground that
the facts charged in the Information do not constitute an offense, the
Prosecution is hereby given ten (10) days from today within which to submit
the amended Information.
Accordingly, today’s arraignment is hereby cancelled and reset to ___
(ten [10] days from the date of the order). If the Prosecution fails to submit
Page 22
6.4. If the Motion to Quash is Based on Grounds that are not Waivable
If the Motion to Quash is based on grounds that cannot be waived, i.e.

extinguishment of criminal liability and double jeopardy or the case was
dismissed or terminated without his consent (Sec. 9, Rule 117, Rules on Criminal
Procedure), before resolving the motion, the judge should judiciously study the
grounds relied upon and determine if the motion is meritorious before requiring
the Public Prosecutor to comment. If the ground is baseless, deny the Motion to
Quash. If, however, the ground relied upon is meritorious, the Public Prosecutor
should file its comment on the motion within ten (10) days from notice of the
order. If the order was made orally, the ten-day period shall be counted from the
date the motion was heard.
Sample Order:
Order if Motion to Quash based on Extinguishment of Criminal Liability or
Double Jeopardy or the Case was Dismissed or Terminated without the
Consent of the accused Appears to be Meritorious
“Acting on the Motion to Quash the Information based on

(extinguishment of criminal liability or double jeopardy or the case was
dismissed or terminated without his consent) filed by the accused, the
Public Prosecutor is hereby given ten (10) days from today within
which to submit its comment on or objection to the motion. After the
ten-day period, with or without comment, the motion shall be
considered submitted for resolution.
Accordingly, the arraignment of the accused previously

scheduled is cancelled. Without prejudice to the resolution of the
motion, the arraignment of the accused is re-set to _____ (give ten (10)
days from submission of the incident for resolution to resolve the
incident).
SO ORDERED.”
Page 23
6.5. If the Motion to Quash is Based on the Ground of Lack of Jurisdiction Over the
Offense Charged.
If the Motion to Quash appears to be meritorious, the judge should require

the Public Prosecutor to submit its comment on or objection to the motion within
ten (10) days from notice of the Order, or if it is made during the hearing, ten
(10) days from the date of the hearing. Also, the order to suspend the
arraignment should contain a resetting of the arraignment.
Sample Order:
Order when the Motion to Quash is Based on the Ground of Lack of
Jurisdiction Over the Offense Charged
“Acting on the Motion to Quash based on Lack of Jurisdiction Over

the Offense Charged filed by the accused, the Public Prosecutor is hereby
given ten (10) days from today within which to submit its comment on or
objection to the motion. After the ten-day period, with or without comment,
the motion shall be considered submitted for resolution.
Accordingly, the arraignment of the accused previously scheduled is

cancelled. Without prejudice to the resolution of the motion, the arraignment
of the accused is re-set to _____ (give ten (10) days from submission of the
incident for resolution to resolve the incident).
SO ORDERED.”
Sample Order:
Order when the Motion to Quash is Based on the Ground of Lack of
Jurisdiction Over the Offense Charged Appears to be Meritorious
“Acting on the Motion to Quash based on Lack of Jurisdiction Over

the Offense Charged filed by the accused, the Public Prosecutor is hereby
given ten (10) days from today within which to submit its comment on or
objection to the motion. After the ten-day period, with or without comment,
the motion shall be considered submitted for resolution.
Accordingly, the arraignment of the accused previously scheduled is

cancelled. Without prejudice to the resolution of the motion, the arraignment
of the accused is re-set to _____ (give ten (10) days from submission of the
incident for resolution to resolve the incident).
SO ORDERED.”
If the court finds that it has jurisdiction over the offense charged, the
court must proceed with the arraignment of the accused as re-scheduled. If the
court finds that it has no jurisdiction over the offense charged, the court should
only dismiss the Information once it is satisfied that the Information has been
Page 24
7. Prejudicial Question
Its essential elements are: (a) the civil action involves an issue similar or
intimately related to the issue raised in the criminal action; (b) the resolution of such
issue determines whether or not the criminal action may proceed; and (c) the
cognizance of the prejudicial question pertains to another tribunal.*
7.1. In resolving a motion based on a pending civil case, the outcome of which is
prejudicial to the outcome of the criminal case, the judge should diligently study
the facts and the grounds relied upon by the accused. The Public Prosecutor should
be required to submit its comment on or objection to the motion within ten (10)
days from notice of the order. With or without the comment or objection, the
motion should be resolved not more than ten (10) days after the expiration of the
ten-day period. If there is indeed a prejudicial question, the criminal case should
be suspended until the civil case is resolved.**
* RULES OF COURT, Rule 111, Sec. 7.; See also People v. A ragon, 94 Phil. 357 (1954);
Philippine Agila Satellite, Inc. v. Lichauco, et al., G. R. No. 134887, July 27, 2006, 496 SCRA
588.
** RULES OF COURT, Rule 111, Sec. 6.
Sample Order:
Order Granting a Motion to Suspend Proceedings based on a Prejudicial
Question
“Acting on the Motion to Suspend Proceedings on the ground of a

prejudicial question, it appearing that the resolution of the civil case is
prejudicial to the outcome of the criminal case before this court, the
proceedings of this criminal case is suspended until the resolution of the civil
case.
SO ORDERED.”
7.2 If, however, the civil case has not been filed in court or was filed after the
filing of the criminal case, the motion should be dismissed outright. Likewise,
even if the civil case was filed ahead of the criminal case but the court determined
that no prejudicial question exists, the motion should still be dismissed.
Sample Orders:
Order Denying a Motion to Suspend Proceedings Based on a
Prejudicial Question because the Civil Case has not been filed in court
or was Filed after the Filing of the Criminal Case
Page 25

prejudicial question, it appearing that the civil case (has not yet been filed or
the civil case having been filed after the institution of the criminal case), the
motion is hereby denied.
Let the Arraignment proceed immediately.
SO ORDERED.”
Sample Order:
Order Denying a Motion to Suspend Proceedings Based on a
Prejudicial Question because no Prejudicial Question Actually Exists

prejudicial question, it appearing that the outcome of the pending civil case
is not prejudicial to the outcome of the criminal case, the motion is hereby
denied.
SO ORDERED.”
In case of Bigamy, where a civil case for annulment of the first or second
marriage have been filed ahead of the criminal case, the same shall likewise be
denied because without a judicial declaration of the nullity of the first marriage,
the first marriage is presumed to be subsisting. Any decision in the civil case
action for nullity would not erase the fact that the accused entered into a second
marriage during the subsistence of a first marriage.*
Sample Orders:
Denial of a Motion to Suspend Proceedings in a case for Bigamy based
on a civil case for annulment of the first marriage
“Acting on the Motion to Suspend Proceedings on the ground of

a prejudicial question, it appearing that the accused contracted the
second marriage during the subsistence of a first marriage, the motion
is hereby denied.
SO ORDERED.”
* Jarillo v. People, G.R. No. 164435, September 29, 2009, 601 SCRA 236; See also
Capili v. People, G.R. No. 183805. July 3, 2013.
Page 26
8. Motion for Reconsideration of an Interlocutory Order
When a Motion for Reconsideration of an Interlocutory Order is filed before

the court by the accused, the judge should order the Public Prosecutor to submit its
comment on the motion within a period of ten (10) days from notice of the order. If
the order was made orally, the ten-day period shall be counted from the date the
motion was heard. After the ten-day period, with or without the comment, the court
should resolve the motion within five (5) days.
It should be noted that the pendency of the Motion for Reconsideration should
not stop the arraignment of the accused or the continuation of the trial.
Sample Order:
Order Directing the Prosecutor to File is Comment on the Motion for
Reconsideration of an Interlocutory Order
“Acting on the Motion for Reconsideration of the Order

_______ dated ________ filed by the accused, the Public Prosecutor is
hereby given ten (10) days from today (if orally argued) within which
to submit its comment on or objection to the motion. After the ten-day
period, with or without comment, the motion shall be considered
submitted for resolution.
Let the arraignment today proceed (or Let the trial today
proceed).
SO ORDERED.”
Page 27
9. How to Avoid the Filing of a Motion for Inhibition
A judge should appear to be impartial and fair to the parties inside and
outside the court.
Page 28
PROCEDURAL INCIDENTS WARRANTING CASE DISMISSAL
Page 29
JURISDICTION If the court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the
case
SERVICE OF If the court has acquired jurisdiction over the
SUMMONS / person, e.g. summons have been served or
ARREST accused has been arrested
If the court has territorial jurisdiction – in criminal cases
COMPLETE- Compliance with technical rules on the form and sub-
NESS OF stance of the initiatory pleading
INITIATORY Certification on non-forum shopping
PLEADING / Verification
P\ERFECTION Certificate to file action from barangay
OF APPEAL Appeal filed within the reglamentary period
and with requirements satisfied
PRESCRIP- For civil cases, whether or not the case has been filed
TION OF within the prescriptive period for filing the case
OFFENSE For criminal cases, whether or not the case has been
filed within the prescriptive period for the crime
SERVICE OF In criminal cases, whether the period of detention of
SENTENCE IN accused is equivalent or has exceeded the period of
DETENTION the penalty for the crime
Page 30
SPEEDY TRIAL Compliance with the rules on speedy trial

MEDIATION Whether or not the case can be referred for mediation,
and/or if successfully mediated, can be dismissed.
PLEA BARGAIN Compliance with rules on pre-trial such as appear-
PRE-TRIAL ance filing of pre-trial brief
MODES OF Compliance with orders pertaining to discovery of
DISCOVERY evidence
ARCHIVING Requirements for archiving present, or if archived
whether or nott he ground for archiving ceases to
exist and the case can be revived, and eventually
dismissed
FAILURE TO Determination of failure to prosecute on the part of the
PROSECUTE plaintiff
COLLUSION In annulment cases, determination by the prosecutor of
collusion between parties
Identification of the above incidents can assist the Court in deciding whether the
case is appropriate for dismissal, for archiving or for mediation.
Some of these incidents can become the basis for the court to motu proprio issue
an order for dismissal or archiving of the case. In others, there is a still a need to
file a motion to dismiss.
Page 31
I. JURISDICTION - IN GENERAL
A. Introduction
1. Criminal jurisdiction defined

Criminal jurisdiction is the authority to hear and try a particular offense and
impose the punishment for it,1 if conviction results.
2. Elements of jurisdiction
2.1. Penalty attached;
The jurisdiction of a court in criminal cases is determined by the penalty
imposable, and not by the penalty ultimately imposed..
The additional penalty for habitual delinquency is not considered in

determining which court shall have jurisdiction over a criminal case because
such delinquency is not a crime.
2.2. Nature of the offense charged; and

Crimes committed by public officers’ fall within the jurisdiction of the
Sandiganbayan
2.3. Territorial jurisdiction over place of crime commission.

The absence of any of these elements may be challenged by an accused at any
stage of the proceedings in the court below or on appeal. Failing to comply
with anyone of them, the resulting judgment of conviction is null and void.
B. Requisites for valid exercise
1. Jurisdiction over subject matter

Philippine courts have no common law jurisdiction or power, but only those
expressly conferred by the Constitution and statutes together with those
necessarily implied to make the express grant of jurisdiction effective.
The question of jurisdiction of the court over the case filed before it is to be
resolved on the basis of the law or statute providing for or defining its
jurisdiction.
The jurisdiction of a court to try a criminal action is determined not by the law
in force at the time of the commission of the offense, but by the law in force at
Page 32
the time of the institution of the action. Once vested, jurisdiction cannot be
withdrawn or defeated by a subsequent valid amendment of the information.
2. Jurisdiction over territory where offense was committed

2.1. General Rule
A criminal case should be instituted and tried in the place where the offense
was committed or any of its essential ingredients took place.
2.2. Exceptions:
2.2.1. Change of venue by Supreme Court Order.
2.2.2. When the law provides otherwise – e.g., Sandiganbayan in Quezon City
has jurisdiction over crimes committed elsewhere.
2.2.3. Continuing crimes committed during a voyage.
2.2.4. Offenses committed under R.A. 9372 Human Security Act of 2007.
3. Jurisdiction determined by allegations of Complaint or Information

The averments in the complaint or information identify the crime charged and
determine the court before which it must be tried.
To determine the jurisdiction of the court in a criminal case, the complaint or

information must be examined to ascertain if the facts set out therein and the
penalty prescribed by law fall within the jurisdiction of the court, regardless of
the court’s findings after the trial.
4. Jurisdiction over the person of the accused.

Jurisdiction over the person of the accused is acquired either by his/her arrest
or voluntary appearance in court.
The voluntary appearance of the accused is accomplished either by his: 1)

pleading to the merits (such as by filing a motion to quash or other pleadings
requiring the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction), 2) appearing for arraignment
(entering trial), or 3) by filing bail. On the matter of bail, since the same is
intended to obtain the provisional liberty of the accused, as a rule, the same
cannot be posted before custody of the accused has been acquired by the
judicial authorities, either by his arrest or voluntary surrender.
Page 33
II. JURISDICTION - IN PARTICULAR
A. Expanded Exclusive Original Jurisdiction of Municipal Trial Courts
1. Violations of city or municipal ordinances committed within their respective

territorial jurisdictions;
2. All offenses punishable with imprisonment not exceeding six (6) years, (1)
irrespective of the amount of the fine, and (2) regardless of other imposable
accessory or other penalties, including the civil liability arising from such offenses
or predicated thereon, irrespective of kind, nature, value, or amount thereof.
2.1. A municipal trial court has jurisdiction over a case of simple seduction,
penalized under Article 338 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, with
arresto mayor, regardless of the civil liability, such as support and
acknowledgment of the offspring that may be imposed under Article 345 of the
same Code.
2.2. Imposable accessory penalties that should not be considered in determining
jurisdiction of MTCs refer to the accessory penalties accompanying (1) prision
correccional prescribed in Article 43; (2) arresto menor prescribed in Article
44; and (3) confiscation and forfeiture of the proceeds and instruments of the
crime prescribed in Article 45 of the Revised Penal Code.
2.3. Where the offense charged is within the exclusive competence of the
Municipal Trial Court by reason of the penalty (imprisonment, etc.), it shall
have jurisdiction to try and decide the case, even if the civil liability (such as
actual, compensatory, etc.) claimed exceeds its civil jurisdiction
3. Offenses involving damage to property through criminal negligence, regardless of

the value of the property.
Page 34
4. Where the imposable penalty is destierro, the case falls within the exclusive
jurisdiction of the Municipal Trial Court, considering that in the hierarchy of
penalties under Article 71 of the Revised Penal Code, destierro follows arresto
mayor which involves imprisonment.
5. In the absence of all Regional Trial Court Judges in a province or city, any
Metropolitan Trial Judge, Municipal Trial Judge, and Municipal Circuit Trial
Judge may hear and decide petitions for a writ of habeas corpus or applications for
bail in criminal cases in the province or city where the absent Regional Trial
Judges sit.
B. Jurisdiction of Regional Trial Courts
1. Regular cases
1.1.Offenses committed by public officers and employees in relation to their
office, including those employed in government-owned or controlled corporations,
whether simple or complexed with other crimes, where the penalty prescribed by
law is imprisonment exceeding six (6) years, or a fine exceeding P4,000.00, when
the offender’s position carries a salary scale lower than grade 27.
1.2.All other offenses where the imposable penalty prescribed by law is
imprisonment exceeding six (6) years, irrespective of the fine, regardless of other
imposable accessory or other penalties, including the civil liability arising from
such offense or predicated thereon, irrespective of kind, nature, value, or amount
thereof.
2. Special cases
2.1. Libel is punishable by prision correccional in its minimum and maximum
periods or fine or both. Libel committed by public officers in relation to their
office is within the exclusive original jurisdiction of RTC. This would be normally
under the exclusive jurisdiction of
MTCs. However, by law this was expressly placed under the jurisdiction of the
RTCs.
2.2. Dangerous Drugs cases
Sec. 90. Jurisdiction. – The Supreme Court shall designate special courts from
among the existing Regional Trial Courts in each judicial region to exclusively try
and hear cases involving violations of this Act. The number of courts designated in
each judicial region shall be based on the population and the number of cases
pending in their respective jurisdictions. xxx
2.3. Violations of the Intellectual Property Code (Rep. Act No. 8293)
regardless of the imposable penalty.
C. Jurisdiction of Family Courts

Family courts have original and exclusive jurisdiction over criminal cases:
Page 35
1. Where an accused or victim is a minor at the time of the commission of the

offense;
2. Against minors charged under the Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 (Rep. Act No.
9165);
3. Involving violations of Rep. Act No. 7610 (Anti-Child Abuse Act), as amended
by Rep. Act No. 7658 [1993];
4. Rep. Act No. 9208 (Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003);
5. Involving domestic violence against women and children under Rep. Act No.
9262 (Anti-Violence Against Women and their Children Act of 2004); and
6. Involving child pornography (Rep. Act No. 9775 [2009]).
D. Original and Exclusive Jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan

The Sandiganbayan has exclusive and original jurisdiction over cases
involving:
1. Violations of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act;

2.Violations of Chapter II, Sec. 2, Title VII, Book II of the Revised Penal Code,
where one or more of the accused are officials occupying the following positions
in the government, whether in a permanent, acting or interim capacity, at the time
of the commission of the offense:
1) Officials of the executive branch occupying the positions of regional

director and higher, otherwise classified as Grade '27' and higher, specifically
including:
a) Provincial governors, vice-governors, members of the sangguniang
panlalawigan, and provincial treasurers, assessors, engineers, and other city
department heads;
b) City mayors, vice-mayors, members of the sangguniang panlungsod, city
treasurers, assessors, engineers, and other city department heads;
c) Officials of the diplomatic service occupying the position of consul and
higher;
d) Philippine army and air force colonels, naval captains, and all officers of
higher rank;
e) Officers of the Philippine National Police while occupying the position of
provincial director and those holding the rank of senior superintendent or
higher;
f) City and provincial prosecutors and their assistants, and officials and
prosecutors in the Office of the Ombudsman and special prosecutor;
Page 36
g) Presidents, directors or trustees, or managers of government- owned or

controlled corporations, state universities or educational institutions or
foundations;
h) Members of Congress and officials thereof classified as Grade '27' and
higher;
i) Members of the judiciary, without prejudice to the provisions of the
Constitution;
j) Chairmen and members of Constitutional Commissions, without prejudice
to the provisions of the Constitution; and
k) All other national and local officials classified as Grade'27' and higher
under the Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989.
3. Other offenses or felonies, whether simple or complexed with other crimes,

committed by the public officials and employees mentioned in Subsec. a of this
Section in relation to their office.
4. Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection with Executive
Order Nos. 1 (Creating the Presidential Commission on Good Government); 2
(Regarding the Funds, Moneys, Assets, and Properties Illegally Acquired or
Misappropriated by Former President Ferdinand E. Marcos xxx); 14 (Defining the
Jurisdiction Over Cases Involving the Ill-gotten Wealth of Former President
Ferdinand E. Marcos xxx); and 14-A (Amending Executive Order No.14), issued
in 1986.
5. Violation of Anti-Money Laundering Act.
E. Jurisprudence involving crimes committed by public officials and employees:
1. Meaning of crime committed “in relation to their office.” The Offense need not
be connected with official duties. It is enough that it is in relation to office.
2. What should be alleged in the information?

A public official and employee commits a crime “in relation to their office” if
the offense was intimately connected with the office of the offender and
perpetuated while he is in the performance of his official function. Mere
allegation in the Information that the offense was committed by the accused
public officer 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 the accused’s official duties and the
commission of the offense charged, in order to qualify the crime as having
been committed in relation to public office.
Page 37
III. PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES
A. Institution of Criminal Action
1. Complaint or Information
1.1. Requisites
The complaint or information shall be in writing, in the name of the People of
the Philippines, and against all persons who appear to be responsible for the
offense involved.
1.2. Definitions
A complaint is 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.
Page 38
An information is an accusation in writing charging a person with an offense,

subscribed by the prosecutor, and filed with the court.
2. Institution of criminal action

2.1. Preliminary investigation - purpose.
Preliminary investigation is an evidence-screening procedure “for the purpose
of determining whether there is a sufficient ground to engender a well founded
belief that a crime punishable by at least four (4) years two (2) months and one
(1) day without regard to the fine has been committed and that the respondent
is probably guilty thereof, and should be held for trial.”
2.2. Preliminary investigation – precondition to filing in court. General rule.
“No complaint or information for an offense punishable by at least 4 years, 2
months and 1 day shall be filed without a preliminary investigation having
been first conducted.”
2.3. Exceptions to general rule
A complaint for an offense punishable by less than four years, 2 months and 1
day may be filed directly with the first level courts, except in Metro Manila
and other chartered cities where the complaint is required to be filed only with
the Office of the City Prosecutor
2.4. Effect of institution of criminal action
The institution of the criminal action shall interrupt the running of the period
of prescription of the offense charged, unless otherwise provided in special
laws.
3. Who must prosecute?

All criminal actions, either commenced by complaint or information, shall be
prosecuted under the direction and control of a public prosecutor. However, 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. Once so authorized to prosecute the
criminal action, the private prosecutor shall continue to prosecute the case up to
the end of the trial even in the absence of a public prosecutor, unless the authority
is revoked or otherwise withdrawn.
The crimes of adultery and concubinage shall not be prosecuted except upon a
complaint filed by the offended spouse. The offended party cannot institute
criminal prosecution without including the guilty parties, if both are alive, nor, in
any case, if the offended party has consented to the offense or pardoned the
offenders.
The offenses of seduction, abduction, and acts of lasciviousness shall not be

prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by the offended party or her parents,
grandparents or guardian, nor, in any case, if the offender has been expressly
pardoned by any of them. If the offended party dies or becomes incapacitated
Page 39
before she can file the complaint, and she has no known parents, grandparents or
guardian, the State shall initiate the criminal action in her behalf.
The offended party, even if a minor, has the right to initiate the prosecution of the
offenses of seduction, abduction and acts of lasciviousness independently of her
parents, grandparents, or guardian, unless she is incompetent or incapable of doing
so. Where the offended party, who is a minor, fails to file the complaint, her
parents, grandparents, or guardian may file the same. The right to file the action
granted to parents, grandparents, or guardian shall be exclusive of all other persons
and shall be exercised successively in the order herein provided, except as stated in
the preceding paragraph.
No criminal action for defamation which consists in the imputation of any of the
offenses mentioned above shall be brought except at the instance of and upon
complaint filed by the offended party.
The prosecution for violation of special laws shall be governed by the provisions
thereof.
4. Intervention of the offended party by counsel.

Where the civil action for recovery of civil liability is instituted in the criminal
action pursuant to Rule 111, the offended party may intervene by counsel in the
prosecution of the offense.
B. Distinction between control of prosecution by public prosecutor and control

by court
1. Control by Prosecution
1.1. What charge to file.
1.2. Who to prosecute.
1.3. How to prosecute.
1.4. Right of Prosecution to withdraw Information before arraignment even
without notice and hearing.
2. Control by Court Once Case is Filed

2.1. Reinvestigation.
2.3. Prosecution by Fiscal.
2.4. Dismissal.
3. Limitations on Control by Court
3.1. Prosecution entitled to notice of hearing.
3.2. Court must await result of petition for review.
3.3. Prosecution’s stand to maintain prosecution should be respected by the court.
3.4. Ultimate test of court’s independence is where the prosecutor files a motion to
dismiss or to withdraw information.
Page 40
3.5. Court has authority to review (power of judicial review) the Secretary’s
recommendation and reject it if there is grave abuse of discretion.
The Resolution of the Secretary of Justice may be appealed to the Office of the
President only in offenses punishable by death or reclusion perpetua.
3.6. To reject or grant a motion to dismiss, the court must make its own
independent assessment of evidence.
3.7. Judgment is void if there is no independent assessment and finding of grave
abuse of discretion.
C. Testing Sufficiency of Complaint or Information
A complaint or information is sufficient if it states the name of the accused, the

designation of the offense given by the statute, the acts or omissions complained of as
constituting the offense, the name of the offended party, the approximate date of the
commission of the offense; and the place where the offense was committed.
When an offense is committed by more than one person, all of them shall be included
in the complaint or information.
D. Strict Scrutiny of Averments in Complaint or Information, Particularly in

Heinous Crimes
1. Cause of the accusation

The acts or omissions complained of as constituting the offense and the qualifying and
aggravating circumstances must be stated in ordinary and concise language and not
necessarily in the language used in the statute, but in terms sufficient to enable a
person of common understanding to know what offense is being charged, as well as its
qualifying and aggravating circumstances, and for the court to pronounce judgment.
Pursuant to Section 11 of the amendatory statute, the death penalty may be imposed in
rape cases under Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code, when the rape is
committed with any of the following aggravating/qualifying circumstances:
1. when the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender is a parent,
ascendant, step-parent, guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity within the
third civil degree, or the common law spouse of the parent of the victim;
2. when the victim is under the custody of the police or military authorities or any
law enforcement or penal institution;
3. when the rape is committed in full view of the spouse, any of the children or
other relatives within the third degree of consanguinity;
4. when the victim is a religious engaged in legitimate religious vocation or calling
and is personally known to be such by the offender before or at the time of the
commission of the crimes;
5.when the victim is a child below seven (7) years old;
Page 41
6. when the offender knows that he is afflicted with Human Immuno-Deficiency

Virus (HIV)/Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) or any other
sexually transmissible disease and the virus or disease is transmitted to the victim;
7. when committed by any member of the Armed Forces of the Philippines or para
-military units thereof or the Philippine National Police or any law enforcement
agency or penal institution, when the offender took advantage of his position to
facilitate the commission of the crime;
8. when by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim has suffered
permanent physical mutilation or disability.
9. when the offender knew of the pregnancy of the offended party at the time of
the commission of the crime; and
10. when the offender knew of the mental disability, emotional disorder and/or
physical handicap of the offended party at the time of the commission of the
crime.
The need to allege qualifying circumstances to justify finding of qualified rape and
the imposition of death penalty was stressed in several cases. The additional
attendant circumstances introduced by Rep Act No. 8353 should be considered as
special qualifying circumstances distinctly applicable to the crime of rape and if not
pleaded as such, could only be appreciated as generic aggravating
circumstances.Without allegation of relationship in cases of statutory rape, proof
alone of relationship, unless specifically alleged in the information, would not
warrant imposition of the death penalty.
Thus, the concurrence of the minority of the victim and her relationship with the
offender is a special qualifying circumstance which should both be alleged and
proved with certainty in order to warrant the imposition of the death penalty. In this
case, complainant never said she was below eighteen (18) years of age when she was
allegedly raped by her father on any of the dates stated in the complaint.
The Information alleged that the accused, who is the stepfather of complainant,
succeeded in having carnal knowledge of the latter who was then below eighteen
(18) years of age, however, the evidence shows that the accused is not the
complainant’s stepfather because he and complainant’s mother were not really
married but only lived in common- law relationship. Thus, although a husband is
subject to punishment by death in case he commits rape against his wife’s daughter,
the death penalty cannot be imposed because the relationship alleged in the
information is different from that actually proven.
E. Duplicity of the Offense and Continuing Crimes
1. Duplicity of the offense

A Complaint or Information must charge only one offense, except when the law
prescribes a single punishment for various offenses.
Page 42
2. Exceptions to Rule on Duplicity

The rule on duplicity of offenses does not apply where the law prescribes a
single penalty for various offenses, such as a complex crime under Article 48 of the
Revised Penal Code, or special complex crime, such as robbery with homicide or with
rape, or rape with homicide, or rebellion complexed with murder, robbery and
kidnapping.
3. No Duplicity in Rape with Homicide

There is no duplicity in an Information for rape with homicide.
Where seven persons committed rape with homicide in conspiracy with each other,
every one of the seven accused may separately be charged for rape with homicide.
4. No Duplicity in Charge of Estafa

There is no duplicity in a charge for estafa committed by the accused for
misappropriation of the purchase price of several lots owned by Hometrust
Corporation, which was fraudulently received by the accused from seven lot buyers on
the pretext that she was authorized to do so and which she misapplied to her personal
use, instead of remitting the money to the owner corporation. The crime of estafa
committed against the corporation and those committed against the lot buyers are
definitely separate felonies. They were dictated by different criminal intents,
committed under different modes of commission provided by the law on estafa,
perpetrated by different acts, consummated on different occasions, and caused injury
to different parties.
F. Continuing Crimes: The Principle of Delito Continuado
1. Examples
The original Information charged petitioner with performing a single criminal
act - that of approving the application for legalization of aliens qualified under the law
to enjoy such privilege. The 32 Amended Informations reproduced verbatim the
allegations of the original Information, except that instead of the word “aliens” in the
original Information, each amended information stated the name of the individual
whose stay was legalized.
The 32 Amended Informations charge what is known as delito continuado or

“continued crime” and sometimes referred to as “continuous crime.”
According to Cuello Calon, for delito continuado to exist, there should be a

plurality of acts performed during a period of time; unity of penal provision violated;
and unity of criminal intent or purpose, which means that two or more violations of
the same penal provisions are united in one and the same intent or resolution leading
to the perpetration of the same criminal purpose or aim.
Page 43
According to Guevarra, in appearance, a delito continuado consists of several

crimes, but in reality there is only one crime in the mind of the perpetrator.
1.1. The single larceny rule
a. The theft of 13 cows belonging to two different owners committed by the
accused at the same place and at the same period of time;
b. The theft of six roosters belonging to two different owners from the same
coop and at the same period of time;
c. The theft of two roosters in the same place and on the same occasion.
d. The illegal charging of fees for services rendered by a lawyer every time he
collects veterans’ benefits on behalf of a client, who agreed that the attorney’s
fees shall be paid out of said benefits;
1.2. The concept of delito continuado not applied in the following cases:
a. Two estafa cases, one of which was committed during the period from
January 1955 to December 1955 and the other from January 1956 to July 1956.
The said acts were committed on two different occasions.
b. Several malversations committed in May, June and July 1936, and
falsifications to conceal the same offenses committed in August and October
1936. The malversations and falsifications “were not the result of only one
purpose, or of only one resolution to embezzle and falsify xxx.”
c. Two estafa cases, one committed in December 1963 involving the failure of
the collector to turn over the installments for a radio, and the other in June
1964 involving the pocketing of the installments for a sewing machine.
d. 75 estafa cases committed by the conversion by the agent of collection from
customers of the employer made on different dates.
e. Robbery and fencing are two separate crimes. Principle of Delito
Continuado is not applicable.
f. In a single information for murder for shooting three persons where evidence
did not show that a single shot had slain three different persons, the appellant
was properly held liable for three separate murders and sentenced to three
separate penalties of reclusion perpetua.
g. Death of several victims from separate shots constitute separate offenses,
and if there is no objection for duplicity, the accused should be convicted of all
offenses charged in one information.
G. Rule on Complex Crimes
The precise language of the statute used in alleging the commission of the crime is not
necessary as long as in charging the commission of a complex offense, like that of
robbery with homicide, the Information alleges each element of the component
offenses with the same precision that would be necessary if they were made the
subject of a separate prosecution.
Page 44
Thus, although the phrase “by reason or on occasion of the robbery,” as provided for
by the Revised Penal Code, was not literally used in the recital of facts alleging the
commission of the two crimes of robbery with homicide, the Information as filed
sufficiently and distinctly alleges the commission of the two crimes of robbery and
homicide and adequately informs the accused of the crimes charged.
Under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code, when a single act constitutes two or more
grave or less grave felonies, or when an offense is a necessary means for committing
the other, the penalty for the most serious crime shall be imposed, the same to be
applied in its maximum period.
The throwing of a hand grenade at the President with the intention of killing him,
resulting in the death and injuries of several persons, constitutes the complex crime of
murder with attempted murder.
For a criminal Complaint or Information to charge the commission of a complex

crime, the allegations contained therein do not necessarily have to charge a complex
crime as defined by law. It is sufficient that the Information contains allegations which
state that one offense was a necessary means to commit the other. The Information in
question in the present case contains allegations properly charging the commission of
the complex crime of incriminatory machinations through unlawful arrest, and the
court a quo committed error when it ordered its dismissal.
1. Illegal Possession of Firearm and Unlawful Killing with the Use Thereof
The new gun law, particularly Sec. 29, Article V of Republic Act No. 10591 or the
Comprehensive Firearms and Ammunition Regulation Act, provides:
SEC. 29. Use of Loose Firearm in the Commission of a Crime. – The use of a
loose firearm, when inherent in the commission of a crime punishable under the
Revised Penal Code or other special laws, shall be considered as an aggravating
circumstance: Provided, That if the crime committed with the use of a loose
firearm is penalized by the law with a maximum penalty which is lower than that
prescribed in the preceding section for illegal possession of firearm, the penalty for
illegal possession of firearm shall be imposed in lieu of the penalty for the crime
charged: Provided, further, That if the crime committed with the use of a loose
firearm is penalized by the law with a maximum penalty which is equal to that
imposed under the preceding section for illegal possession of firearms, the penalty
of prision mayor in its minimum period shall be imposed in addition to the penalty
for the crime punishable under the Revised Penal Code or other special laws of
which he/she is found guilty.
If the violation of this Act is in furtherance of, or incident to, or in connection with
the crime of rebellion of insurrection, or attempted coup d’ etat, such violation
Page 45
shall be absorbed as an element of the crime of rebellion or insurrection, or

attempted coup d’ etat.
If the crime is committed by the person without using the loose firearm, the
violation of this Act shall be considered as a distinct and separate offense.
2. Reckless Imprudence Cases
Reckless imprudence resulting in slight physical injuries and damage to property is not
a complex crime and cannot be the subject of a single information; they are separate
offenses subject to distinct penalties.
The two offenses, however, may be consolidated, since under the expanded
jurisdiction of the municipal trial courts, damage to property through reckless
imprudence now falls under its jurisdiction.
H. Amendment or Substitution
A Complaint or Information may be amended, in form or substance, without leave of

court at any time before the accused enters his/her plea. After the plea and during the
trial, a formal amendment may only be made with leave of court and when it can be
done without causing prejudice to the rights of the accused.
However, any amendment before plea, which downgrades the nature of the offense
charged in or excludes any accused from the Complaint or Information, can be made
only upon motion by the prosecutor, with notice to the offended party and with leave
of court. The court shall state its reasons in resolving the motion and copies of its
order shall be furnished all parties, especially the offended party.
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, in accordance with Section 19, Rule
119, provided the accused should not be placed in double jeopardy. The court may
require the witnesses to give bail for their appearance at the trial.
Page 46
IV. PROSECUTION OF CIVIL ACTION
A. General Rule: Implied institution of action to r ecover civil liability ar ising

from the crime with the criminal action
Section 1. Institution of criminal and civil actions. –
(a) When a criminal action is instituted, the civil action for the recovery of civil
liability arising from the offense charged shall be deemed instituted with the
criminal action, unless the offended party waives the civil action, reserves the right
to institute it separately or institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action.
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.
When the offended party seeks to enforce civil liability against the accused by
way of moral, nominal, temperate, or exemplary damages without specifying the
amount thereof in the complaint or information, the filing fees therefor shall
constitute a first lien on the judgment awarding such damages.
Where the amount of damages, other than actual, is specified in the complaint
or information, the corresponding filing fees shall be paid by the offended party
upon the filing thereof in court.
Except as otherwise provided in these Rules, no filing fees shall be required for
actual damages.
No counterclaim, cross-claim or third-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.
(b) The criminal action for violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 shall be deemed to
include the corresponding civil action. No reservation to file such civil action
separately shall be allowed.
Upon filing of the aforesaid joint criminal and civil actions, the offended party
shall pay in full the filing fees based on the amount of the check involved, which
Page 47
shall be considered as the actual damages claimed. Where the complaint or

information also seeks to recover liquidated, moral, nominal, temperate or
exemplary damages, the offended party shall pay the filing fees based on the
amounts alleged therein. If the amounts are not so alleged but any of these
damages are subsequently awarded by the court, the filing fees based on the
amount awarded shall constitute a first lien on the judgment.
Where the civil action has been filed separately and trial thereof has not yet
commenced, it may be consolidated with the criminal action upon application with
the court trying the latter case. If the application is granted, the trial of both actions
shall proceed in accordance with section 2 of this Rule governing consolidation of
the civil and criminal actions.
The 2000 Rules on Criminal Procedure deems as instituted with the criminal
action only the civil liability arising from the offense charged. The civil liability is
“deemed instituted” – not merely “impliedly” instituted AS THE OLD RULES
STATE – with the institution of the criminal action. The independent civil actions
under Articles 32, 33, 34, and 2176 of the Civil Code are no longer deemed or
impliedly instituted with the criminal action, or considered as waived even if there is
no reservation. The reservation applies only to the civil liability arising from the
offense charged. The employer may no longer be held civilly liable for quasi-delict in
the criminal action, as ruled in Maniago v. Court of A ppeals, San Ildefonso Lines, Inc.
v. Court of Appeals, and all other similar cases, since quasi-delict is not deemed
instituted with the criminal action. If at all, the only civil liability of the employer in
the criminal action would be his/her subsidiary liability under the Revised Penal Code.
The rule has also done away with third-party complaints and counterclaims in criminal
actions. Third-party complaints and counterclaims in criminal actions have to be
ventilated in a separate civil action.
B. Civil liability not arising from crime not extinguished by acquittal

Acquittal in a criminal action bars the civil action arising therefrom where the
judgment of acquittal holds that the accused did not commit the criminal acts imputed
to him.
The civil liability that is deemed extinguished is the civil liability based on
crime, and not the civil liability based on sources of obligation other than the criminal
offense, although arising from the same act or omission. Article 29 of the Civil Code
expressly provides that when the accused in a criminal prosecution is acquitted on the
ground that his/her guilt has not been proven beyond reasonable doubt, a civil action
for damages for the same act or omission may be instituted. Such action requires only
a preponderance of evidence.
The civil liability, therefore, under Articles 32, 33, 34, and 2176 of the Civil
Code or those where the source of civil obligation is not based on the criminal offense
is not affected by the result of the criminal action.
In other words, the extinction of the civil liability referred to in paragraph (e)
of Section 3, Rule 111 (1964 Rules of Court), refers exclusively to the civil liability
founded on Article 100 of the Revised Penal Code, whereas the civil liability for the
Page 48
same act considered as a quasi-delict only and not as a crime is not extinguished even
by a declaration in the criminal case that the criminal act charged has not happened or
has not been committed by the accused. Briefly stated, culpa aquiliana includes
voluntary and negligent acts which may be punishable by law. It results, therefore, that
the acquittal of Reginald Hill in the criminal case did not extinguish his/her liability
for quasi-delict, hence, that acquittal is not a bar to the instant action against him.
The only civil liability that may thus be imposed in a criminal action is that
arising from and consequent to the criminal liability of the accused on the principle
that every person criminally liable is also civilly liable. This includes restitution,
reparation of damages caused, and indemnification of consequential damages.
Complementary thereto are the subsidiary civil liability of innkeepers, tavern keepers
and proprietors of establishments, employers, teachers, persons and corporations
engaged in any kind of industry, for felonies committed by their servants, pupils,
workmen, apprentices, and employees in the discharge of their duties.
C. Separate civil action to recover civil liability allowed for obligations not
arising from the crime, e.g. quasi-delict
A separate civil action for damages lies against the offender in a criminal act,
whether or not he is criminally prosecuted and found guilty or acquitted, provided that
the offended party is not allowed to recover damages on both scores, and would be
entitled in such eventuality only to the bigger award of the two, assuming the awards
made in the two cases vary.
D. Extinction of penal action does not extinguish civil action

But while every person criminally liable is also civilly liable, the converse is
not true. Extinction of the penal does not carry with it extinction of the civil action,
unless there is a declaration in the final judgment that the fact from which the civil
liability might arise did not exist.
Similarly, a final judgment rendered in a civil action absolving the defendant
from the civil liability is no bar to a criminal action,
E. Exception – prejudicial civil action involving an issue similar ly or intimately

related to the issue raised in the criminal action, the resolution of which determines
whether or not the criminal action may proceed.
Page 49
V. MOTION TO QUASH
The accused may move to quash the complaint or information on any of the
following grounds:
a) That the facts charged do not constitute an offense;

b) That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the offense charged;
c) That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the person of the accused;
d) That the officer who filed the information had no authority to do so;
e) That it does not conform substantially to the prescribed form;
f) That more than one offense is charged, except when a single punishment for
various offenses is prescribed by law;
g) That the criminal action or liability has been extinguished;
h) That it contains averments which, if true, would constitute a legal excuse or
justification; and
Page 50
i) That the accused has been previously convicted or acquitted of the offense
charged, or the case against him was dismissed or otherwise terminated without
his express consent.
An order sustaining the motion to quash is not a bar to another prosecution for the
same offense, unless the motion was based on the grounds specified in Section 3, sub-
sections (g) and (i) of the Rules of Court.
In Dimayacyac v. Court of A ppeals, the court proceeded with the arraignment

of the accused against whom a previous criminal case had been filed. Since the
dismissal of the previous criminal case against petitioner was by reason of his motion
for the quashal of the information, petitioner is thus deemed to have expressly given
his consent to such dismissal. There could then be no double jeopardy in this case
since one of the requisites therefor, i.e., that the dismissal be without accused's express
consent, is not present.
To recapitulate, quashal and provisional dismissal are different concepts whose

respective rules refer to different situations that should not be confused with one
another. If the problem relates to an intrinsic or extrinsic deficiency of the complaint
or information, as shown on its face, the remedy is a motion to quash under the terms
of Section 3, Rule 117. All other reasons for seeking the dismissal of the complaint or
information, before arraignment and under the circumstances outlined in Section 8,
fall under provisional dismissal.
VI. PROCEDURAL CHECKLISTS ON CRIMINAL ROCEDURE
A. For Cases Cognizable by the First Level Courts
Resolution, dated August 30, 2005, was issued by the Supreme Court En Banc in
A.M. No. 05-8-26-SC Re: Amendment of Rules 112 and 114 of the Revised Rules on
Criminal Procedure by Removing the Conduct of Preliminary Investigation from
Judges of the First Level Courts,
The pertinent provisions of Rule 112, as amended, are as follows:
Page 51
Section 1. Preliminary investigation defined, when required. — Preliminary

investigation 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.
Except as provided in Section 6 of this Rule, a preliminary investigation is
required to be conducted before the filing of a complaint or information for an
offense where the penalty prescribed by law is at least four (4) years, two (2)
months and one (1) day without regard to the fine.
xxxx
Sec. 5. When warrant of arrest may issue. –

xxxx
(b) By the Municipal Trial Court – When required pursuant to the second
paragraph of section 1 of this Rule, the preliminary investigation of cases falling
under the original jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial
Court in Cities, Municipal
Trial Court or Municipal Circuit Trial Court shall be conducted by the
prosecutor. The procedure for the issuance of a warrant of arrest by the judge shall
be governed by paragraph (a) of this section.
Checklist I
Things to Check/Do Upon Receipt of Complaint or Information
1. If the offense charged is not within the court’s jurisdiction, dismiss complaint or
information.
2. If the offense charged is within the court’s jurisdiction and is covered by the Rule
on Summary Procedure, issue an order that the case shall be covered by said rule.
Page 52
If the complaint or information is filed with the Municipal Trial Court or

Municipal Circuit Trial Court for an offense covered by Section 8, Rule 112 of the
Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure, observe the procedure in section 3(a) of
said Rule.
2.1. If within ten (10) days after the filing of the complaint or information, the
judge finds no probable cause after personally evaluating the evidence, or after
personally examining in writing and under oath the complainant and his
witnesses in the form of searching questions and answers dismiss the
complaint or information.
2.2. Require the submission of additional evidence, within ten (10) days from
notice, to determine further the existence of probable cause. If no probable
cause is still found despite the additional evidence, dismiss the case within ten
(10) days from its submission or expiration of said period.
2.3. Upon finding probable cause, issue a warrant of arrest, or a commitment
order if the accused had already been arrested, and hold him for trial. Issue
summons instead of a warrant of arrest if satisfied that there is no necessity for
placing the accused under custody.
3. “Searching Questions and Answers” means taking into consideration the purpose of
the preliminary examination which is to determine whether there is a reasonable
ground to believe that an offense has been committed and the accused is probably
guilty thereof, so that a warrant of arrest may be issued and the accused held for trial,
such questions have the tendency to show the commission of a crime and the
perpetrator thereof. What would be searching questions would depend on what is
sought to be inquired into, such as: the nature of the offense, the date, time, and the
place of its commission, the subject, his/her age, education, status, financial and social
circumstances, his/her attitude toward the investigation, social attitudes, opportunities
to commit the offense, the victim, his/her age, status, family responsibilities, financial
and social circumstances, characteristics, etc. The points that are subject of inquiry
may differ from case to case. The questions, therefore, must to a great degree depend
upon the judge making the investigation.
3.1. Suggested Searching Questions for Simple Theft

(The witness is duly sworn to and gives his/her name and other personal
circumstances)
Q - Are you the same complainant in this complaint for simple theft?
A-
Q - Describe the ring allegedly stolen from you.
A-
Q - When and how did you learn that your ring was stolen?
A-
Q - When and how did you come to know the accused?
A-
Q - Where does the accused reside?
A-
Page 53
Q - Do you know the accused’s present whereabouts?

A-
Q - Is the accused related to you by blood or marriage?
A-
Q- Did you have any kind of dealing with the accused before the date in
question? If so, what?
A-
Q- Do you know of any reason why the accused would take your ring
without your consent?
A-
Q- Do you owe the accused anything?
A-
Q - When and how did you acquire the ring?
A-
Q -What is the approximate value of the ring?
A-
Q- Did you actually witness the taking of your ring?
A-
Q- State the name or names of the person or persons, if any, who know the
alleged theft.
A-
Q- Do you wish to state anything else?
Page 54
Checklist II
Things to Check/Do After The Issuance of Arrest Warrant and Before
Trial Stage
1. If the arrest warrant was properly released and a report has been properly submitted,
but the accused could not be apprehended for a considerable length of time, issue alias
arrest warrant and order the archiving of the case.
1.1 If the report is submitted that the accused was arrested but did not post bail
forthwith, issue corresponding commitment order and have it served on the warden
or head of the jail or place of detention, together with the corresponding notice to
produce the accused before the court for arraignment on the date and time fixed by
the court.
1.2 If the accused files bail bond, cash bond deposit, or recognizance, check
sufficiency of documentation, particularly the corresponding signatures on the
requisite documents, and if in order, approve it and issue corresponding release
order for immediate service on the officer concerned.
2. At the scheduled arraignment, inform the accused, who appears without counsel, of
his/her right to counsel and ask accused if he desires to have one.
2.1. In proper cases, appoint counsel de oficio for the accused who appears without
counsel.
3. Arraignment must be in open court; accused must be furnished a copy of the

complaint or information; the accused must be present at the arraignment and plea
must be made of record; if the accused refuses to plead, or he makes a conditional plea
of guilty (e.g., entering a plea of guilty provided the penalty to be meted shall only be
a fine), then enter a plea of not guilty for the accused.
4. If the accused wants to plead guilty to a lesser offense, check that both prosecutor
and offended party consents thereto.
5. If the accused pleads guilty, impose corresponding sentence, unless you desire to
receive evidence to determine the penalty to be imposed, including civil indemnity in
the proper cases.
6. If the plea is not guilty, set case for pre-trial and trial.
Page 55
B. For Cases Cognizable by the Regional Trial Courts
Checklist I
Things to Do Upon Receipt of Complaint or Information Up to Issuance
of the Warrant of Arrest
1. Check if, on the face of the information/complaint, the court has jurisdiction over
the case; otherwise, dismiss it and order the release of the accused if under
detention insofar as said case is concerned.
2. Check if a claim for damages other than actual is alleged in the information/
complaint and, if in the affirmative, ascertain whether appropriate filing/docket
fees have been paid at the time of the filing of the information/complaint, if not,
issue an order to the offended party to pay the requisite filing/docket fees within a
reasonable time.
3. If the accused is detained, issue a commitment/detention order to the warden/jailer;
if the accused is at large, issue a warrant for his/her arrest, in accordance with the
succeeding steps.
4. When warrant of arrest may issue
Within ten (10) days from the filing of the complaint or information,
personally evaluate the resolution of the prosecutor and its supporting evidence
and immediately dismiss the case if the evidence on record clearly fails to
establish probable cause. If probable cause is found, issue a warrant of arrest.
In case of doubt on the existence of probable cause, order the prosecutor to
present additional evidence within five (5) days from notice and resolve the
issue within thirty (30) days from the filing of the complaint or information.
5. If not satisfied upon the filing of Information/Complaint that probable cause exists,
order the prosecutor to submit the records of the case and, if based thereon, there is
probable cause, issue a warrant of arrest. Otherwise, dismiss the case.
6. If the charge is bailable, fix the amount of bail, either in the commitment/detention
order or warrant of arrest.
7. Under the Human Security Act of 2007, in cases where a person is charged with or
suspected of the crime of terrorism or the crime of conspiracy to commit terrorism,
the judge to whom said person was presented has the duty to ascertain the identity
of the police or law enforcement personnel and the person/s they arrested, to
inquire why they have arrested the person and determine whether the suspect has
been subjected to physical, moral or psychological torture by whom and why.
Then submit a written report of observations to the proper court that has
Page 56
jurisdiction over the case of the arrested person, within three (3) calendar days
from the time the suspect was brought to his/her residence or office.
8. The Dangerous Drugs Act provides that when the preliminary investigation of
such cases was conducted by a public prosecutor, the corresponding Information
shall be filed within twenty-four (24) hours from the termination of the
investigation. Trial shall be finished within sixty (60) days from the date of the
filing of the Information. The decision on said cases shall be rendered within
fifteen (15) days from the date of submission of the case for resolution.
The Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency shall take charge and have custody
of all dangerous drugs, plant sources of dangerous drugs, controlled precursors and
essential chemicals, as well as instruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratory equipment
so confiscated, seized and/or surrendered. When the criminal case has been filed,
within seventy-two (72) hours, conduct an ocular inspection of the confiscated, seized
and/or surrendered dangerous drugs, plant sources of dangerous drugs, and controlled
precursors and essential chemicals, including the instruments/paraphernalia and/or
laboratory equipment, and within twenty-four (24) hours, destroy or burn the same.
Page 57
Checklist II
Incidents after Issuance of Warrant of Arrest or
Commitment Order
1. Once the accused is arrested, or otherwise taken into custody, issue a commitment
order and set the case for arraignment.
2. When the accused is under preventive detention, his/her case shall be raffled and
its records transmitted to the judge to whom the case was raffled within three (3)
days from the filing of the Information or Complaint. The accused shall be
arraigned within ten (10) days from the date of raffle. The pre-trial conference
shall be held within ten (10) days after arraignment.
3. Unless a shorter period is provided by special law or Supreme Court circular, the
arraignment shall be held within thirty (30) days from the date the court acquires
jurisdiction over the person of the accused. 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.
4. If there is failure to execute the warrant of arrest or no report is made within ten
(10) days from receipt of the warrant by the executing officer, issue an alias
warrant and order the archiving of the case, furnishing a copy of the said order to
the complainant.
5. If bail is a matter of right, and the accused files bail, ascertain if all the
requirements for the bail are complied with, as follows:
5.1. Cash Bond
5.1.1. The official receipt or certificate of deposit of the amount of bail fixed
by the court issued by the government officer concerned, is attached to records
of the case.
5.1.2. The written undertaking, executed by the accused containing all the
conditions contained in Section 2 of Rule 114 of the Revised Rules on
Criminal Procedure, as amended, is attached to the records of the case.
Page 58
5.2. Corporate Surety

5.2.1. Photocopy of the Certification issued by the Supreme Court,
accompanied by the photocopies of receipts of payment by the surety company
of the requisite fees to the Supreme Court is attached to the bond.
5.2.2. Certificate of the Clerk of Court of the Regional Trial Court where the
case is filed and pending, showing that the bonding company does not have
any pending obligations/liabilities to the government, consisting of writs of
execution and/or confiscated bonds in criminal cases and that the bonding
company was issued a Certificate of Authority by the Insurance Commission
and has updated its obligation.
5.2.3. Certificate of Authority issued by the Insurance Commission
5.3. Property Bond
5.3.1. Affidavit of surety/sureties taken before the judge or submitted to the
judge stating therein that each of the sureties possesses the qualifications as
provided for in Section 12 of Rule 114 of the Rules of Court and describing the
property offered as bond for the accused, the nature of the title of the property,
the encumbrances thereon, the number and amount of other bonds entered by
him/them and remaining undischarged, and his/her/their other liabilities, if any.
5.3.2. Owner’s duplicate of the Original Certificate of Title of the surety/
sureties covering the property offered as bond, if registered under the Torrens
system or the Owner’s copy of the Declaration of Real Property, if
unregistered.
5.3.3. Certificates of Payment of Realty Taxes on the property offered as bond.
If the property is sufficient, and the requisite affidavit is submitted to the court,
approve the bond and order the accused to cause the annotation of the lien,
within ten (10) days from the receipt by the accused of the order of the court,
at the back of the title to the property, if registered, or in the Registration Book,
if unregistered, and on the corresponding tax declaration in the Office of the
Provincial and Municipal Assessor concerned.
Upon compliance by the accused of the Order of the court, issue an order
releasing the accused from detention.
6. In either case, require the accused to submit photographs (passport size) taken
within the last six (6) months showing the face, the left and right profiles of the
accused and attached to the records, and the written undertaking containing the
conditions set forth in Section 2 of Rule 114 of the Rules of Court, as amended.
7. If the accused fails to comply with the Order of the court for the annotation of the
lien and for the registration of the annotation, cancel the property bond.
8. If the accused applies for release on recognizance, set the hearing of the
application and give reasonable notice of the hearing to the prosecutor with the
requirement to submit the comment and recommendation on the application.
8.1. Definition of Recognizance
An obligation of record, entered into before some court or magistrate duly
authorized to take it, with the condition to do some particular act, the most usual
condition in criminal cases being the appearance of the accused for trial; a contract
Page 59
between the sureties and the State for the prosecution of the principal at the
required time.
8.2. Recognizance may be allowed in the following instances:
8.2.1. The charge against the accused is for violation of a municipal or city
ordinance, a light felony and/or a criminal offense the prescribed penalty for
which is not higher than six (6) months imprisonment and/or a fine of
P2,000.00 or both, provided the accused has established, to the satisfaction of
the court, the inability to post the required cash or bail bond.
8.2.2. When the accused has been in custody for a period equal to, or more
than, the possible maximum imprisonment of the offense charged to which he/
she may be sentenced. However, if the maximum penalty to which the accused
is sentenced is destierro, he shall be released after thirty (30) days of
preventive imprisonment.
8.2.3. At the discretion of the court, if the accused has been in custody for a
period equal to or more than the minimum of the principal penalty prescribed
for the offense charged, without applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law or
any modifying circumstances.
8.2.4. Under Rep. Act No. 9344, a child fifteen (15) years old or below taken
into custody shall be released to his/her parents or guardian, or in the absence
thereof, the child's nearest relative. If the parents, guardian or nearest relatives
cannot be located, or if they refuse to take custody, the child may be released
to any of the following: a duly registered non-governmental or religious
organization; a barangay official or a member of the Barangay Council for the
Protection of Children (BCPC) a local social welfare and development officer,
or, when and where appropriate, the Department of Social Welfare and
Development (DSWD).
The same Act provides that children detained pending trial may be
released on bail or recognizance as provided for under Sections 34 and 35. In
all other cases and whenever possible, detention pending trial may be replaced
by alternative measures, such as close supervision, intensive care or placement
with a family or in an education setting or home. Institutionalization or
detention of the child pending trial shall be used only as a measure of last
resort and for the shortest possible period of time.
Application for bail where the accused is charged with a capital offense
Where the accused is charged with a capital offense which, under the law at the time
of the application for bail is punishable by death or reclusion perpetua, and the
accused files an application for bail, give reasonable notice of the hearing to the
prosecutor or require him to submit his/her recommendation.
If petition for bail is filed by the accused who is charged with an offense punishable
by death or reclusion perpetua:
Page 60
1. Set the petition for hearing and require the prosecutor to comment thereon,
either by way of recommendation or opposition. Such notice of hearing should
also be served upon all other accused, if any.
2. If the prosecutor opposes the petition, allow him to present his/her evidence to
show that the prosecutor’s available evidence is strong. Hearing may be
summary or otherwise. Cross-examination by the petitioner and any other
accused shall be allowed. Petitioner shall also be allowed to offer and present
evidence. Summary hearing is one that focuses on quantity and character of
proof in anticipation of that to be presented at the regular trial but not to be
sham or mere pretense.
3. Even if the prosecutor recommends bail or interposes no objection to the
petition for bail, the court must still set the case for hearing.
4. Resolve the petition for bail with a narration of the evidence collectively
deemed either strong or weak to justify the conclusion made.
5. Indispensable requirements
There must be a hearing. Evidence of guilt must be strong. Prosecution must
be given full opportunity to present evidence.
Note: The Court may not grant bail simply for the refusal of the prosecutor to
adduce evidence in opposition to the application for bail, but may ask the
prosecution such questions as would ascertain the strength of the State’s
evidence or judge the adequacy of the amount of the bail.
6. Duties of a Judge in an application for bail for crimes punishable by reclusion
perpetua or higher.
In the light of the applicable rules on bail and the jurisprudential principles just
enunciated, the Court laid down the duties of the trial judge in case an
application for bail is filed:
6.1. Notify the prosecutor of the hearing of the application for bail or require
him to submit his/her recommendation;
6.2. Conduct a hearing of the application for bail, regardless of whether or not
the prosecution refuses to present evidence to show that the guilt of the
accused is strong for the purpose of enabling the court to exercise its sound
discretion;
6.3. Decide whether the evidence of guilt of the accused is strong based on the
summary of evidence of the prosecution;
6.4. If the guilt of the accused is not strong, discharge the accused upon the
approval of the bailbond. Otherwise, petition should be denied.
7. If the case is not dismissed and the accused is under arrest, order the branch
clerk of court to schedule the arraignment of the accused with notice to the
complainant.
Page 61
TEN COMMANDMENTS FOR A JUDGE ON

APPLICATIONS FOR BAIL
1. Do not grant bail unless the accused is in legal custody.

2. Do not act on an application for bail or set it for hearing unless you have
jurisdiction over the person of the accused and of the case.
3. Do not grant bail in non-bailable offenses without application and notice to the
prosecutor and, in bailable offenses, without notice to or recommendation of the
prosecutor.
4. Do not grant bail in non-bailable offenses without a hearing. (Even if the
prosecutor in filing the information had recommended bail.)
5. Do not grant bail in non-bailable offenses without giving the prosecution full
opportunity to present its evidence.
6. Do not grant bail in non-bailable offenses simply because of the prosecutor’s
refusal to adduce evidence in opposition to the application for bail.
Page 62
7. Do not grant bail on appeal after the accused has been convicted of a non-bailable
offense or from a non-bailable offense to a bailable offense. This should be
addressed to the appellate court.
8. Do not grant bail when the penalty imposed by the Regional Trial Court exceeds
six (6) years where any of the circumstances mentioned in Section 5, Rule 114 is
present.
9. Do not grant bail after the judgment has become final, unless the accused has
applied for probation before commencing to serve sentence, the penalty and the
offense being within the purview of the probation law.
10. Do not grant bail after the accused had commenced to serve sentence.
C. Common procedures in First and Second Level Courts
Checklist I
Things to Do at the Arraignment of the Accused
1. The accused must be arraigned before the court where the Complaint or
Information was filed or assigned for trial. The arraignment shall be made in open
court by the judge or clerk by furnishing the accused with a copy of the Complaint
or Information, reading the same in the language or dialect known to him, and
asking him whether he pleads guilty or not guilty. The prosecution may call at the
trial witnesses other than those named in the Complaint or Information.
Page 63
2. The accused must be present at the arraignment and must personally enter his/her
plea. Both arraignment and plea shall be made of record, but failure to do so shall
not affect the validity of the proceedings.
3. Before the reading of the Information, where the accused is not assisted by counsel
de oficio, inform him/her of his/her right to counsel and inquire from him/her if he/
she desires to engage his/her own counsel. Unless the accused is allowed to defend
himself in person, and the accused is amenable to a counsel de oficio, appoint a
competent and responsible counsel de oficio for him.
4. Whenever a counsel de oficio is appointed by the court to assist the accused at the
arraignment, give a reasonable time for him to consult with the accused as to his/
her plea before proceeding with the arraignment.
5. When the accused refuses to plead or makes a conditional plea, enter a plea of not
guilty for him/her.
6. When the accused pleads guilty but presents exculpatory evidence, consider his/
her plea withdrawn and enter a plea of not guilty for him/her.
7. Require the private offended party to appear at the arraignment for purposes of
plea-bargaining, determination of civil liability, and other matters requiring his/her
presence. 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. Unless the civil action has been reserved, waived or otherwise
instituted ahead, reset the case for the reception of evidence to determine the civil
liability and the imposable penalty.
8. Plea of guilty to a lesser offense
At arraignment, allow the accused, with the consent of the offended party and
the prosecutor, to plead guilty to a lesser offense which is necessarily included
in the offense charged. After arraignment but before trial, the accused to
withdraw plea of not guilty and substitute to a guilty plea for said lesser
offense.
9. Plea of guilty to capital offense; reception of evidence
When the accused pleads guilty to a capital offense, conduct a searching
inquiry into the voluntariness and full comprehension of the consequences of
his/her plea and (b) require the prosecution to prove his/her guilt and the
precise degree of culpability. Allow the accused to present evidence on his/her
behalf.
10. Plea of guilty to non-capital offense; reception of evidence, discretionary
When the accused pleads guilty to a non-capital offense, allow the parties to
adduce evidence to determine the penalty to be imposed.
11. Withdrawal of improvident plea of guilty
At any time before the judgment of conviction becomes final, permit an
improvident plea of guilty be withdrawn and be substituted by a plea of not
guilty.
12. If a “Not Guilty” plea is entered, schedule the pre-trial of the case with due notice
to the offended party/arresting officer.
Page 64
13. If the accused is under preventive detention, the pre-trial conference of the case
within ten (10) days after arraignment.
14. In other cases, unless a shorter period is provided by special law or Supreme Court
circular, conduct the arraignment within thirty (30) days from the date the court
acquires jurisdiction over the person of the accused. In computing the said period,
exclude the time of the pendency of a motion to quash or for a bill of particulars or
other causes justifying suspension of the arraignment.
15. Upon motion of the accused, suspend his/her arraignment on any of the following
grounds:
15.1. The accused appears to be suffering from an unsound mental condition
which effectively renders him unable to fully understand the charge against
him and to plead intelligently thereto. In such case, order his/her mental
examination and, if necessary, his/her confinement for such purpose.
15.2. There exists a prejudicial question.
15.3. A petition for review of the resolution of the prosecutor is pending at
either the Department of Justice, or the Office of the President; provided, that
the period of suspension shall not exceed sixty (60) days counted from the
filing of the petition with the reviewing office.
Note: In People v. A licando, the Supreme Court held that a conviction in capital
offenses cannot rest alone on a plea of guilt. The trial court must require the
prosecution to prove the guilt of the appellant and the precise degree of his/her
culpability beyond reasonable doubt.
Checklist II
Pre-Trial
Page 65
Pre-trial; mandatory in criminal cases. — In all criminal cases cognizable by the

Sandiganbayan, Regional Trial Court, Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial
Court in Cities, Municipal Trial Court and Municipal Circuit Trial Court, after
arraignment and within thirty (30) days from the date the court acquires jurisdiction
over the person of the accused, unless a shorter period is provided for in special laws
or circulars of the Supreme Court, order a pre- trial conference to consider the
following:
(a) plea bargaining;
(b) stipulation of facts;
(c) marking for identification of evidence of the parties;
(d) waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence;
(e) modification of the order of trial if the accused admits the charge but interposes
a lawful defense; and
(f) such matters as will promote a fair and expeditious trial of the criminal and
civil aspects of the case.
Things To Do Before Arraignment

1. Issue an order directing the public prosecutor to submit the record of the
preliminary investigation to the Branch Clerk of Court, who shall attach the same
to the record of the criminal case.
2. When the accused is under preventive detention, raffle the case and transmit its
records to the judge to whom the case was raffled, within three (3) days from the
filing of the Complaint or Information.
3. Arraign the accused within ten (10) days from the date of the raffle.
4. Hold the pre-trial of case within ten (10) days after arraignment, unless a shorter
period is provided by law.
Things To Do After Arraignment

1. Forthwith set the pre-trial conference within thirty (30) days from the date of
arraignment.
2. Issue an order:
2.1. Requiring the private offended party to appear thereat for purposes of plea-
bargaining, except for violation of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of
2002, and for other matters requiring his presence.
2.2. Referring the case to the Branch Clerk of Court, if warranted, for a
preliminary conference to be set at least three (3) days prior to the pre-trial to:
a. assist the parties in reaching a settlement of the civil aspect of the case;
b. mark the documents or exhibits to be presented by the parties and copies
thereof to be attached to the records after comparison;
c. ascertain from the parties the undisputed facts and admissions on the
genuineness and due execution of documents marked as exhibits; and
d. consider such other matters as may aid in the prompt disposition of the case.
The proceedings during the preliminary conference shall be recorded in
the Minutes of Preliminary Conference to be signed by both parties and
Page 66
counsel. The Minutes of Preliminary Conference and the exhibits shall be

attached by the Branch Clerk of Court to the case record before the pre-trial.
2.3. Upon motion, cause subpoena to be issued:
Subpoena ad testificandum may be signed by the clerk or branch clerk of court.
But subpoena duces tecum must be signed by the judge (who must determine that
the subject thereof is prima facie relevant).
2.4. Inform the parties that no evidence shall be allowed to be presented and
offered during the trial other than those identified and marked during the pre-trial,
except when allowed by the court for good cause shown.
3. In mediatable cases, the judge shall refer the parties and their counsel to the PMC
unit if available, for purposes of mediation.
Before the Pre-Trial Conference

Study the allegations in the Information, the statements in the affidavits of
witnesses, and other documentary evidence which form part of the record of the
preliminary investigation.
During the Pre-Trial Conference

1. Except for violations of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002,
consider, with the parties and counsel, mutually satisfactory plea-bargaining
arrangements, such as, for example, the following:
1.1. for the accused to change his/her plea to a lesser or different offense in return
for the dismissal of other court/s with or without credit, for the plea of guilty as a
mitigating circumstance; or
1.2. for the accused to change his/her plea of not guilty to that of guilty to one or
some of the counts of a multi-count indictment in return for the dismissal of other
counts with or without credit for the plea of guilty as a mitigating circumstance; or
1.3. for the accused to change his/her plea of not guilty to that of guilty to the
offense charged, in return for the offended party’s waiver of the whole or part of
the civil liability or damages; or,
1.4. for the accused to change his/her plea of not guilty to that of guilty to the
offense charged, in return for the elimination of one, some, or all of the generic
aggravating circumstances alleged in the Information/Complaint; or
1.5. for the accused to plea bargain on the nature, duration or the amount of the
imposable penalty within the allowable range.
2. The agreements or admissions made or entered during the pre- trial conference
shall be reduced into writing and duly signed by the parties, particularly, by the
accused and his/her counsel, such stipulation, admission, and/or agreement as may
be directly related to any essential element of the offense/s charged, in order that
Page 67
they may be used against the accused. Approve the agreements covering the
matters referred to in Sec. 1, Rule 118 (Sec. 2, Rule 118).
This requirement is necessary in order to encourage the accused to go into plea

bargaining during which it may become necessary for him or his counsel to go into
tentative pleas to certain offenses. The accused does not usually welcome plea
bargaining, unless explanations are made on the benefits to be gained.
Where the State and the Defense agree during the pre-trial conference to adopt in
the criminal case their respective evidence in the civil case and reduce the
agreement into writing, the accused cannot subsequently disavow the contents of
the agreement.
When There Is Plea Bargaining

1. The accused and his/her counsel shall manifest that they agree to enter into plea
bargaining on any of the forms above-described. If the prosecution and offended
party agree to the plea offered by the accused, issue an order making on record the
plea bargaining arrived at and duly implemented.
2. In case of any such change of plea to one of guilty, proceed to receive evidence on
the civil aspect before rendering judgment, unless the offended party waives civil
action or his/her claim for civil liability or damages, reserves the right to institute
the civil action separately, or has instituted the civil action before the criminal
action.
3. Render and promulgate judgment of conviction, including therein, in the proper
case, the civil liability or damages duly established by the evidence.
When There Is No Plea Bargaining

1. Adopt the Minutes of Preliminary Conference as part of the pre- trial proceedings.
2. Confirm the markings of exhibits or substituted photocopies and admissions on the
genuineness and due execution of documents and list object and testimonial
evidence.
3. Scrutinize every allegation of the Information and the statements in the affidavits
and other documents which form part of the record of the preliminary investigation
and other documents identified and marked as exhibits in determining further
admissions of facts, documents and, in particular, as to the following:
3.1. the identity of the accused;

3.2. the court’s territorial jurisdiction relative to the offense charged;
3.3. the qualification of expert witness/es;
3.4. the amount of damages;
3.5. the genuineness and due execution of documents; and/or,
3.6. the cause of death or injury in proper cases;
3.7. the adoption of any evidence presented during the preliminary investigation;
Page 68
3.8. the disclosure of defenses of alibi, insanity, self-defense, exercise of public

authority and justifying or exempting circumstances; and
3.9. such other matters that would limit the facts in issue.
4. Formulate factual and legal issues.

5. Ask parties to agree on the specific trial dates and adhere to the flow chart
determined by the court which shall contain the time frames for the different
stages of the proceedings up to the promulgation of decision, and use the time
frame for each stage in setting the trial dates.
6. Require the parties to submit to the Branch Clerk of Court the names, addresses,
and contact numbers of witnesses that need to be summoned by subpoena; and
7. Consider modification of order of trial if the accused admits the charge but
interposes a lawful defense.
8. Determine and consider with the parties and counsel the following and such other
matters as will promote a fair and expeditious trial, to wit:
8.1. the number of witnesses to be presented;

8.2. the approximate number of hours that will be required by the parties for the
presentation of their respective evidence; and,
8.3. the specific trial dates needed to complete evidence presentation by all the
parties, which must be within a period of three (3) months from the first trial.
9. Fix the trial dates for the parties’ presentation of their respective evidence,
inclusive of evidence-in-chief and rebutting evidence, and cause the parties and
their respective counsel to affix their signatures in the minutes to signify their
availability on the scheduled dates.
10. Also require the parties to submit to the branch clerk, before leaving the court
premises, the names and addresses of witnesses that need to be summoned by
subpoena, so that the necessary subpoena may be issued on time. Counsel or their
representatives may be allowed to serve the subpoenas to insure service thereof
and the submission of the returns on time.
11. Impose sanctions for the non-appearance at pre-trial of the prosecutor or the
defense counsel, upon finding such absence to be without acceptable excuse. (Sec.
3, Rule 118).
12. Note that unless specially ordered by the court, there is no requirement for the
personal appearance of the accused or the offended party at the pre-trial.
In People v. Judge Tac-an, the SC held that the absence during the pre-
trial of any witness of the Prosecution listed in the Information, whether or not
such witness is the offended party or the complaining witness, is not a valid
ground for the dismissal of the criminal action. Although under Sec. 2, Rep.
Act No. 8493 (Speedy Trial Act of 1998), the pre-trial is mandatory in a
criminal case, the presence of the private complainant or the complainant is not
required. Even the presence of the accused is not required, unless the court has
ordered him to appear. It is enough that the accused is represented by his
Page 69
counsel. Accordingly, even if none of the State’s witnesses appear, the pre-trial
should proceed. The public prosecutor is vested with the authority to consider
the matters catalogued in Sec. 2, Rep. Act No. 8493.
13. All proceedings during the pre-trial shall be recorded, the transcripts prepared, and
the minutes signed by the parties and/or their counsels.
After the Pre-Trial Conference

Issue a Pre-trial Order within ten (10) days after the termination of the pre-trial setting
forth:
1. The actions taken during the pre-trial conference;

2. The facts stipulated;
According to Bayas v. Sandiganbayan, there is nothing irregular or unlawful in

stipulating facts in criminal cases. The policy encouraging it is consistent with the
doctrine of waiver, which recognizes that “xxx everyone has a right to waive and
agree to waive the advantage of a law or rule made solely for the benefit and
protection of the individual in his private capacity, if it can be dispensed with and
without detriment to the community at large.”
3. The admissions made;

4 The evidence marked;
5. The number of witnesses to be presented; and,
6. The schedule of trial.
Page 70
Checklist III
Incidents during Trial
What To Do When There Is Application
To Discharge Accused To Be State Witness
1. When applicable
Two or more persons jointly charged with the commission of the offense.
Whether to discharge more than one depends upon the need of the prosecutor and
the discretion of the trial judge.
2. When to apply
Upon motion of the prosecution before resting its case.
3. Things the Court should do

a. Require prosecution to present evidence and hold in abeyance or defer
resolution on the motion until the prosecution had presented all its evidence.
b. Require submission of a sworn statement of each proposed witness at a hearing
in support of the discharge and ascertain if the conditions fixed by Section 17 of
Rule 119 are complied with, namely:
b.1. There is absolute necessity for the testimony of the defendant whose
discharge is requested.
The prosecutor must show that there is absolute necessity for the testimony of
the defendant whose discharge he seeks, in order to be a witness for the
prosecution, or the accused is the only one who has knowledge of the crime,
and not when his/her
testimony would simply corroborate or otherwise strengthen the evidence in
the hands of the prosecution.
Page 71
Example: Where the prosecution itself admitted that one of the government
witnesses named Michael Yu, testified that he saw and recognized the accused,
Domingo Can, as one of those who committed the robbery, such testimony is
direct evidence of Can’s participation and clearly negates the absolute
necessity of Daria’s testimony in identifying Can as one of the perpetrators of
the crime. If at all, Daria’s testimony would be merely corroborative and not
essential.
b.2. There is no other direct evidence available for the proper prosecution of
the offense committed, except the testimony of said defendant.
b.3. The testimony of said accused can be substantially corroborated in its
material points.
b.4. Said accused does not appear to be the most guilty.
· Meaning of not the most guilty, not the least guilty. The rule does not require
that he be the “least guilty” but only that he not be the “most guilty.”
· Absolute certainty is not required in concluding on “necessity for the
testimony of the accused whose discharge is requested”; “as to the availability
or non-availability direct or corroborative evidence”; which of the accused is
the “most guilty”; and the like. The judge must rely in a large part upon the
suggestions and information furnished by the state prosecutors.
b.5. Said accused has not at any time been convicted of any offense involving
moral turpitude.
· Concept of moral turpitude. Moral turpitude has been described as an act of
baseness, vileness, and depravity in the private and social duty which a man
owes to us fellowmen or to society in general, done out of spirit of cruelty,
hostility or revenge, but there is also authority to the effect that an act is not
done when it is prompted by the sudden resentment of an injury calculated in
no slight degree to awaken passion. In the absence, therefore, of any evidence
to show the gravity and the nature of the malicious mischief committed, or at
least, the value of the property destroyed and/or the circumstances under
which the act of destroying was committed, we should not make haste in
declaring that the crime of malicious mischief involves moral turpitude.
· Examples of crimes involving moral turpitude. Estafa, abduction with
consent, and concubinage. There is no moral turpitude for conviction for
playing mahjong.
Effects on Accused Discharged as State Witness
1. Evidence adduced in support of the discharge shall automatically form part of the
trial. (If the court denies the motion to discharge of the accused as state witness, his/
her sworn statement shall be inadmissible in evidence.)
2. Discharge of accused operates as an acquittal and a bar to further prosecution for

the same offense, unless the accused fails or refuses to testify against his/her co-
Page 72
accused in accordance with his/her sworn statement constituting the basis of his/her
discharge.
2.1. Failure to testify refers exclusively to defendant’s will or fault.

2.2. Extrajudicial Confession: Admissibility; where an accused who turns State
witness on a promise of immunity, but later retracts and fails to keep his/her part
of the agreement, his/her confession of his/her participation in the commission of
the crime is admissible as evidence against him/her.
3. Erroneous or improper discharge of state witness does not affect the competency
and quality of the testimony of the discharged defendant.
When A Motion/Petition To Suspend A Criminal Action Based Upon The Alleged

Pendency Of A Prejudicial Question In A Civil Action Is Filed In The Criminal
Action
1. At the hearing of the motion, ask the prosecution to comment on the motion if no
such comment or opposition has yet been filed.
2. Thereafter, determine if a prejudicial question exists. A prejudicial question is a

question 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. Its essential
elements are: (a) the civil action involves an issue similar or intimately related to the
issue raised in the criminal action; (b) the resolution of such issue determines whether
or not the criminal action may proceed; and (c) the cognizance of the prejudicial
question pertains to another tribunal.
2.1. Examples
Where a man was charged with bigamy by his second wife, a civil action
filed by him against her for the annulment of their marriage on the ground that he
was forced to contract said subsequent marriage is a prejudicial question to the
criminal action. The question of validity of said marriage cannot ordinarily be
decided in the criminal action for bigamy, but in the civil action for annulment.
The annulment on the aforesaid ground would prove that his act of contracting that
marriage was involuntary; hence, no criminal liability would attach.
In a civil action brought by plaintiff to annul the sale of land by defendant
to a third party – the plaintiff alleging that the same land was previously sold by
the defendant to him, but defendant raised the defense that his signature appearing
on the deed of sale to plaintiff has been forged – the question of validity of the sale
to plaintiff, to be determined in the civil action, is prejudicial to the criminal action
of estafa filed by plaintiff against said defendant.
The law limits a prejudicial question to a previously instituted civil action,
not to a subsequent one.
Note that the present Rule does not specify who may file the motion or
petition for suspension of the criminal proceedings on the ground of pendency of a
Page 73
prejudicial question, and, therefore, any party – the prosecutor, the accused, or the
private prosecutor – may file the petition.
Finally, note that while such petition to suspend may be filed in the office
of the prosecutor, it may be filed before the court trying the criminal action only
“before the prosecution rests.”
Accordingly, the petition should be denied if it is filed after the prosecution
has rested.
If a petition to suspend is filed with the Prosecutor’s Office, and the same
is denied, the petition to suspend may again be filed before the court. The
determination of its finality is only provisional.
What to do if Accused is reported to have died
1. Ascertain veracity of report with submission of Death Certificate and Comment

from prosecution.
2. If the accused dies before arraignment, THE CASE without prejudice to any civil
action the offended party may file against the estate of the deceased.
3. Note that the death of the accused after arraignment and during the pendency of the
criminal action shall extinguish the civil liability arising from the delict.
4. Note however, the independent civil action instituted under Section 3 of Rule 111 or
which thereafter is instituted to enforce liability arising from other sources of
obligation may continue against the estate or legal representative of the accused
after proper substitution or against said estate, as the case may be. The heirs of the
accused may be substituted for the deceased without requiring the appointment of
an executor or administrator and the court may appoint a guardian ad litem for the
minor heirs.
5. Before ordering substitution, direct counsel for the accused to inform the court of
the names and addresses of the decedent’s heirs or whether or not his/her estate is
under administration and has a duly appointed administrator.
6. Forthwith order said legal representative or representatives to appear and be

substituted within a period of thirty (30) days from notice.
7. Amend the title of the case to show its civil aspect by including the name of the
offended party as plaintiff and the legal representative or heir of the accused
substituted as defendant.
Page 74
8. A final judgment entered in favor of the offended party shall be enforced in the
manner especially provided in these Rules for prosecuting claims against the estate
of the deceased.
VII. CONDUCTING THE TRIAL
A. Trial
1. Unless the docket of the court requires otherwise, not more than four (4) cases
shall be scheduled for trial daily.
2. The Presiding Judge shall make arrangements with the prosecutor and the
Public Attorney’s Office (PAO) so that a relief prosecutor and a PAO attorney
are always available in case the regular prosecutor or the PAO attorney is
absent.
Page 75
3. Contingency measures must likewise be taken for any unexpected absence of

the stenographer and other support staff assisting in the trial.
4. Subpoena shall be issued and served.
5. The judge shall conduct trial with utmost dispatch, with judicious exercise of
the court’s power to control trial proceedings to avoid delay.
6. The judge must take notes of the material and relevant testimonies of witnesses
to facilitate his decision-making.
7. The trial shall be terminated within ninety (90) days from initial hearing.
Appropriate disciplinary sanctions may be imposed on the judge and the
lawyers for failure to comply with this requirement due to causes attributable
to them.
8. Each party is bound to complete the presentation of his evidence within the
dates assigned to him. After the lapse of said dates, the party is deemed to have
completed the presentation of evidence. However, upon verified motion based
on compelling reasons, the judge may allow a party additional trial dates in the
afternoon; provided, that said extension will not go beyond the three-month
limit computed from the first trial date, except when authorized in writing by
the Court Administrator, Supreme Court.
“Implementing the Provisions of Republic Act No. 8493 (An Act to Ensure a
Speedy Trial of All Cases Before the Sandiganbayan, Regional Trial Court,
Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Municipal Trial Court, and
Municipal Circuit Trial Court, Appropriating Funds Therefor, and for Other
Purposes)”
B. Compliance with the Constitutional Limitations on Periods

1. As a constant reminder of what cases must be decided or resolved, the judge must
keep a calendar of cases submitted for decision, noting therein the exact day,
month and year when the ninety (90)-day period is to expire. As soon as a case is
submitted for decision, it must be noted in the calendar of the judge; moreover, the
records shall be duly collated with the exhibits and transcripts of stenographic
notes, as well as the trial notes of the judge, and placed in the judge’s chamber.
2. In criminal cases, the judge will do well to announce in open court at the
termination of the trial the date of the promulgation of the decision, which should
be set within ninety (90) days from the submission of the case for decision
3. All Judges must scrupulously observe the period prescribed in Section 15, Article
VIII of the Constitution.
Page 76
C. Pertinent Rules
1. Time to prepare for trial

After the plea of not guilty is entered, the accused shall have at least fifteen (15)
days to prepare for trial. The trial shall commence within thirty (30) days from
receipt of the pre-trial order.
2. Continuous trial until terminated; postponements

Trial, once commenced, shall continue from day to day as far as practicable until
terminated. It may be postponed for a reasonable period of time for good cause.
The court shall, after consultation with the prosecutor and defense counsel, set
the case for continuous trial on a weekly or other short-term trial calendar at the
earliest possible time as to ensure speedy trial. In no case shall the entire trial
period exceed one hundred eighty (180) days from the first day of trial, except as
otherwise authorized by the Supreme Court.
The time limitations provided under this section and the preceding section shall
not apply where special laws or circulars of the Supreme Court provide for a
shorter period of trial.
3. Exclusions
The following periods of delay shall be excluded in computing the time within
which trial must commence:
3.1. Any period of delay resulting from other proceedings concerning the
accused, including delays resulting from:
a) an examination of the physical and mental condition of the accused;
b) proceedings with respect to other criminal charges against the accused;
c) extraordinary remedies against interlocutory orders;
d) pre-trial proceedings; Provided, that the delay does not exceed thirty (30)
days;
e) orders of inhibition, or proceedings relating to change of venue of cases or
transfer from other courts;
f) a finding of the existence of a prejudicial question; and
g) any proceeding concerning the accused is actually under advisement but not
exceeding thirty days
h) the mental incompetence or physical inability of the accused to stand trial;
i) the grant any court motu proprio, or on motion of either the accused or his
counsel or the prosecution, if the court granted the continuance on the basis of
his findings set forth in the Order that the ends of justice is better served by
taking such action and outweighs the best interest of the public and the accused
in a speedy trial;
Page 77
k) joinder for trial of a co-accused over whom the court has not acquired
jurisdiction, or as to whom the time for trial has not run and no motion for
separate trial has been granted.
3.2. If the Information is dismissed upon motion of the prosecution and, thereafter,
a charge is filed against the accused for the same offense, any period of delay from
the date the charge was dismissed to the date the time limitation would commence
to run as to the subsequent charge had there been no previous charge.
4. Factors for granting continuance

The following factors, among others, shall be considered by a court in determining
whether to grant a continuance under subparagraph (f) of Section 9 of SC Circular
No. 38-98.
4.1.Whether or not the failure to grant a continuance in the proceeding would be

likely to make a continuation of such proceeding impossible or result in a
miscarriage of justice; and
4.2. Whether or not the case taken as a whole is so novel, unusual and complex,
due to the number of accused or the nature of the prosecution or otherwise, that it
is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation within the periods of time
established therein.
In addition, no continuance under Section 9(f) of SC Circular 38-98 shall be
granted because of congestion of the court’s calendar or lack of diligent
preparation or failure to obtain available witnesses on the part of the prosecutor.
5. Time limit following an order for new trial

If the accused is to be tried again, pursuant to an Order for new trial, the trial shall
commence within thirty (30) days from notice of the Order, provided that if the
period becomes impractical due to unavailability of witnesses and other factors, the
court may extend it but not to exceed one hundred eighty (180) days from notice of
said order for a new trial.
6. Extended time limit

Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 1(g), Rule 116 and Section 1, SC
Circular No. 38-98, for the first twelve-calendar month period following its
effectivity on September 15, 1998, the time limit with respect to the period from
arraignment to trial imposed by said provision shall be one hundred eighty (180)
days. For the second twelve-month period, the time limit shall be one hundred
twenty (120) days, and for the third twelve-month period, the time limit shall be
eighty (80) days.
7. Public attorney’s duties where accused is imprisoned

If the public attorney assigned to defend a person charged with a crime knows that
the latter is preventively detained, either because he is charged with a bailable
Page 78
crime and has no means to post bail, or is charged with a non-bailable crime, or is
serving a term of imprisonment in any penal institution, it shall be his duty to do the
following:
7.1. Shall promptly undertake to obtain the presence of the prisoner for trial, or
cause a notice to be served on the person having custody of the prisoner requiring
such person to so advise the prisoner of his right to demand trial.
7.2. Upon receipt of that notice, the custodian of the prisoner shall promptly advise
the prisoner of the charge and of his right to demand trial, if at any time thereafter
the prisoner informs the custodian that he demands such trial, the latter shall cause
notice to that effect to be sent promptly to the public attorney.
7.3. Upon receipt of such notice, the public attorney shall promptly seek to obtain
the presence of the prisoner for trial.
7.4. When the custodian of the prisoner receives from the public attorney a
properly supported request for the availability of the prisoner for purposes of trial,
the prisoner shall be made available accordingly.
8. Sanctions
In any case in which private counsel for the accused, the public attorney, or the
prosecutor:
8.1. Knowingly allows the case to be set for trial without disclosing that a
necessary witness would be unavailable for trial;
8.2. Files a motion solely for delay which he knows is totally frivolous and without
merit;
8.3. Makes a statement for the purpose of obtaining continuance which he knows
to be false and which is material to the granting of a continuance; or
8.4. Willfully fails to proceed to trial without justification consistent with the
provisions thereof, the court may punish such counsel, attorney, or prosecutor, as
follows:
1) By imposing on a counsel privately retained in connection with the defense

of an accused, a fine not exceeding P20,000.00;
2) By imposing on any appointed counsel de oficio, public attorney, or
prosecutor a fine not exceeding P5,000.00; and
3) By denying any defense counsel or prosecutor the right to practice before
the court trying the case for a period not exceeding thirty (30) days. The
punishment provided for by this Section shall be without prejudice to any
appropriate criminal action or other sanction authorized under these rules.
9. Remedy where accused is not brought to trial within the time limit
If the accused is not brought to trial within the time limit required by Section 1(g),
Rule 116 and Section 1, as extended by Section 6 of this Rule, the Information may
be dismissed on motion of the accused on the ground of denial of his right to
Page 79
speedy trial. The accused shall have the burden of proving the motion, but the
prosecution shall have the burden of going forward with the evidence to establish
the exclusion of time under Section 3 of this Rule. The dismissal shall be subject to
the rules on double jeopardy.
Failure of the accused to move for dismissal prior to trial shall constitute a waiver
of the right to dismiss under this Section.
10. Law on speedy trial not a bar to provision on speedy trial in the Constitution
No provision of law on speedy trial and no rule implementing the same shall be
interpreted as a bar to any charge of denial of the right to speedy trial guaranteed by
Section 14(2), Article III of the 1987 Constitution.
11. Order of trial

The trial shall proceed in the following order:
1) The prosecution shall present evidence to prove the charge and, in the proper
case, the civil liability.
2) The accused may present evidence to prove his defense and damages, if any,
arising from the issuance of a provisional remedy in the case.
3) The prosecution and the defense may, in that order, present rebuttal and sur-
rebuttal evidence, unless the court, in furtherance of justice, permits them to
present additional evidence bearing upon the main issue.
4) Upon admission of the evidence of the parties, the case shall be deemed
submitted for decision, unless the court directs them to argue orally or to submit
written memoranda.
5) When the accused admits the act or omission charged in the Complaint or
Information but interposes a lawful defense, the order of trial may be modified.
D. How to deal with accused’s Motion for Examination of His/Her witness before
trial
1. Check sufficiency of the motion, particularly as regards notice and service thereof,
and the contents of the motion, keeping in mind that the governing rule requires
the following:
1.1. there be notice to all other parties:

1.2. the motion shall state: (1) the name and residence of the witness; (2) the
substance of his/her testimony; and (3) that the witness is so sick or infirm as to
afford reasonable ground for believing that he will not be able to attend the trial, or
resides more than 100 kilometers from the place of trial and has no means to
attend the same, or that, apart from the foregoing, other circumstances exist that
would make him unavailable or prevent him from attending the trial; and
Page 80
1.3. the motion shall be supported by affidavit of the accused and such other
evidence as the court may require.
2. If the motion does not comply with the notice requirement, issue an Order requiring
compliance by movant with the notice requirement, with the warning that the
motion shall be disallowed if not complied with.
3. If the motion complied with the notice requirement, hear the motion at the time set
therein.
4. If the motion is found to be unmeritorious, issue an Order denying it, with a concise
statement of the reason(s) for the denial.
5. If satisfied that the examination of the witness is necessary, issue an Order directing
and providing, conformably with the governing rule, that:
5.1. the witness be examined at a specified date, time, and place before the judge
ordering the examination (or before any other judge or, if not practicable, any
member of the Bar in good standing so designated in the order); or if order be
made by a court of superior jurisdiction, before an inferior court so to be
designated;
5.2. a copy of the Order be served on the prosecutor at least three days before the
scheduled examination;
5.3. the examination shall proceed notwithstanding the prosecutor’s absence, if it
appears that he was duly notified of the hearing; and
5.4. a written record of the testimony shall be taken.
E. How to deal with prosecution’s Motion for Examination of its witness before
trial
1. Check sufficiency of the motion, particularly, as regards notice and service

thereof, and the contents of the motion, keeping in mind that the governing rule
requires (a) that there be notice to the accused and (b) that there be a showing that
the witness is too sick or infirm to appear at the trial or has to leave the Philippines
with no definite date of returning thereto.
1.1. The motion does not comply with the notice requirement, issue an Order
requiring compliance by movant with the notice requirement, with warning that
the motion shall be disallowed if not complied with.
1.2. The motion complied with the notice requirement, hear the motion at the time
set therefor.
2. If the motion is found to be unmeritorious, issue an Order denying it, with a

concise statement of the reason(s) for the denial.
Page 81
3. If the motion is found to be meritorious, issue an Order directing and providing,

conformably with the said governing rule, as follows:
3.1. the witness be examined before the court at a specified time, such
examination to be conducted in the same manner as an examination at the trial;
3.2. a copy of the Order be served on the accused within a given time prior to that
fixed for the examination;
3.3. the accused shall attend the said examination and his/her failure or refusal to
do so, despite due notice, shall be deemed a waiver; and
3.4. the statement thus taken may be admitted in behalf of or against the accused.
4. At the same time set therefor, hold the hearing for the examination of the witness,
the same to be conducted in the same manner as an examination at the trial, in the
presence of the accused or notwithstanding his/her absence, if it appears that he was
duly notified of the hearing.
5. Rule 119 categorically states that the conditional examination of a prosecution

witness shall be made before the court where the case is pending. There is nothing
in the rule which may remotely be interpreted to mean that such requirement
applies only to cases where the witness is within the jurisdiction of said court and
not when he is kilometers away. The court may not introduce exceptions or
conditions. Neither may it engraft into the law (or the Rules) qualifications not
contemplated.
F. If a motion to determine competency to stand trial is filed.
1. Set the motion for hearing on the date suggested by the movant or fixed by the
court, with notice to the parties, their counsel, the prosecutor and the person
having charge of the accused or his/her relatives.
2. If the accused appears to be suffering from an unsound mental condition which

effectively renders him unable to fully comprehend or stand trial:
2.1.Suspend the proceedings and order his/her mental condition and/or

confinement in the National Center for Mental Health or any mental institution in
the locality recognized by the government, with a directive to the Director of the
hospital or mental institution to submit a quarterly report on the accused’s mental
condition.
2.2. On the basis of the report that the accused has fully recovered and can stand
trial, order his/her immediate discharge and set the case for the continuation of the
proceedings.
G. Demurrer to Evidence
Page 82
1. A demurrer to evidence is a motion to dismiss the case on the ground that the
evidence submitted by the prosecution is insufficient to prove the guilt of the
accused.
2. After the prosecution rests its case, the court may dismiss the action on the ground
of insufficiency of evidence (1) on its own initiative after giving the prosecution the
opportunity to be heard, or (2) upon demurrer to evidence filed by the accused with
or without leave of court.
3. The motion for leave of court to file demurrer to evidence shall specifically state its
grounds and shall be filed within a non-extendible period of five (5) days after the
prosecution rests its case. The prosecution may oppose the motion within a non-
extendible period of five (5) days from its receipt.
Checklist
When Demurrer to Evidence is Filed
1. Determine whether the filing of the demurrer to evidence is made after the
prosecution has rested its case; otherwise, deny the motion for being prematurely filed.
2. If the demurrer to evidence is properly filed, give the prosecution an opportunity to
be heard whether in oral argument or in writing.
3. If leave of court is granted, REQUIRE the accused TO file the demurrer to evidence
within a non-extendible period of ten (10) days from notice. The prosecution may
oppose the demurrer to evidence within a similar period from its receipt.
4. Exercise discretion in the grant or denial of demurrer to evidence.
Judicial action on a demurrer to evidence or motion to dismiss is left to the
exercise of sound judicial discretion. In the absence of a clear showing of grave abuse
thereof, amounting to lack of jurisdiction, the trial court’s denial of the motion may
not be disturbed and may only be reviewed in the ordinary courts of law by an appeal
from the judgment after trial.
Certiorari does not lie to challenge the trial court’s interlocutory order
denying the accused’s motion to dismiss.
5. When demurrer to evidence is denied
Upon denial of the demurrer to evidence:
5.1 If filed with leave of court, allow the accused to adduce evidence in his/her
defense.
5.2 If filed without leave of court, consider the case submitted for judgment on the
basis of the evidence for the prosecution.
6. The order denying the motion for leave of court to file demurrer or the demurrer
itself shall not be reviewable by appeal or by certiorari before judgment.
7. Dismissal on demurrer to evidence amounts to acquittal
Page 83
The dismissal is one on the merits which is equivalent to an acquittal; hence,

the prosecution cannot appeal as it would place the accused in double jeopardy.
8. Reopening
At any time before finality of the judgment of conviction, the judge may, motu
proprio or upon motion, with hearing in either case, reopen the proceedings to avoid
a miscarriage of justice. The proceedings shall be terminated within thirty (30) days
from the order granting it.
VIII. JUDGMENT
A. Definition
Judgment means the adjudication by the court that the accused is guilty or is not guilty
of the offense charged, and the imposition of the proper penalty and civil liability
provided for by law on the accused.
Checklist
1. Personally write and prepare the judgment and directly in the official language and
sign the same. This holds true for orders of dismissal;
2. See to it that the judgment contains a clear and distinct statement of facts proved or
admitted by the accused and the law upon which the judgment is based.
3. If it is of conviction, state:
3.1. the legal qualification of the offense constituted by the acts committed by the
accused and the aggravating or mitigating circumstances attending the commission
thereof, if there are any;
3.2. the participation of the accused in the commission of the offense, whether as
principal, accomplice, or accessory after the fact;
3.3. the penalty imposed upon the accused;
Page 84
3.4. the civil liability or damages caused by the wrongful act to be recovered from
the accused by the offended party, if there is any, unless the enforcement of the
civil liability by a separate action has been reserved or waived.
4. In case the judgment is of acquittal, state whether the evidence of the prosecution
absolutely failed to prove the guilt of the accused or merely failed to prove his/her
guilt beyond reasonable doubt. In either case, the judgment shall determine if the
act or omission from which the civil liability might arise did not exist.
5. When two or more offenses are charged in a single Complaint or Information, and
the accused fails to object to it before trial, convict the accused of as many offenses
as are charged and proved, and impose on him the penalty for each and every one of
them setting out separately the findings of fact and law in each offense.
6. When there is a variance between the offense charged in the Complaint or
Information, and that proved or established by the evidence, and the offense as
charged is included in or necessarily includes the offense proved, the accused shall
be convicted of the offense proved which is included in the offense charged, or of
the offense charged which is included in the offense proved.
An offense charged necessarily includes that which is proved when some of the
essential elements or ingredients of the former, as this is alleged in the Complaint or
Information, constitute the latter. And an offense charged is necessarily included in
the offense proved, when the essential ingredients of the former constitute or form
part of those constituting the latter.
B. Damages that may be awarded
Civil liability arising from crime includes moral damages, exemplary damages and
loss of earning capacity. Attorney’s fees may be awarded but only when a separate
civil action to recover civil liability has been filed or when exemplary damages are
awarded. Life expectancy must be included in award of damages.
The court should, however, specify how much is the indemnity for death and how
much is for moral damages and not lump the whole amount. Civil indemnity is
separate from moral damages.
In rape cases, a civil indemnity of P50,000.00 is mandatory. In addition, moral

damages in rape is automatic without the need of pleading or any proof.
For civil indemnity or actual and compensatory damages if committed or

effectively qualified by any of the circumstances under which the death penalty is
authorized by law, the indemnity for the victim shall be increased to the amount of
P75,000.00.
Actual damages should be supported by receipts.
Page 85
To justify a grant of actual or compensatory damages, it is necessary to prove with

a reasonable degree of certainty, premised upon competent proof and on the best
evidence obtainable by the injured party, the actual amount of loss.
Where there are no aggravating circumstances, exemplary damages should not be

awarded. Actual damages, if not supported by evidence, may not be awarded.
Acquittal does not necessarily preclude civil liability, as in the following cases
where:
a) the acquittal is based on reasonable doubt, as only preponderance of evidence is
required in civil cases;
b) there is a finding that the accused’s liability is not criminal but only civil in
nature; and
c) there is a finding that the civil liability does not arise from or is not based upon
the criminal act of malversation which the accused was acquitted of, but was held
liable for the funds which were spent for unauthorized purposes.
C. Promulgation of Judgment
1. What to do
1.1. Direct the clerk of court/branch clerk of court to give notice to the accused
personally or through his/her bondsman if bonded, or through the warden if
detained, or through the custodian if out on recognizance.
1.2. Direct the clerk of court/branch clerk of court to read the judgment to the
accused and counsel de parte or de oficio.
1.3. If the conviction is for a light offense, allow the judgment to be read in the
presence of the accused’s counsel or representative.
1.4. When the judge is absent or outside of the province or city, direct the clerk of
court/branch clerk of court to promulgate the judgment.
1.5. If the accused is confined or detained in another province or city, request the
executive judge of the Regional Trial Court having jurisdiction over the place of
confinement or detention to promulgate the judgment. The court promulgating the
judgment shall have the authority to accept the notice of appeal and to approve the
bail bond pending appeal, provided that, if the decision of the trial court convicting
Death and reclusion perpetua 20 years

Other afflictive penalties 15 years
Correctional penalties except Arresto Mayor 10 years
Arresto Mayor 5 years
Light penalties 1 year
Page 86
the accused changed the nature of the offense from non-bailable to bailable, the
application for bail can only be filed and resolved by the appellate court.
1.6. If the accused was tried in absentia because he jumped bail or escaped from
prison, the notice to him shall be served at his/her last known address.
1.7. In case the accused fails to appear at the scheduled date of promulgation of
judgment despite notice, the promulgation shall be made by recording the
judgment in the criminal docket and serving him a copy thereof at his/her last
known address or thru his/her counsel.
1.8. If the judgment is for conviction and the failure of the accused to appear was
without justifiable cause, he shall lose the remedies available in these rules against
the judgment and the court shall order his/her arrest. Within fifteen (15) days from
promulgation of judgment, however, the accused may surrender and file a motion
for leave of court to avail of these remedies. He/She shall state the reasons for his/
her absence at the scheduled promulgation and if he proves that his/her absence
was for a justifiable cause, he shall be allowed to avail of said remedies within
fifteen (15) days from notice.
D. Modification of Judgment
1. Modify or set aside a judgment of conviction only

1.1. Upon motion of the accused, and
1.2. Before the judgment has become final or appeal has been perfected. Except
when the death penalty is imposed, a judgment for conviction becomes final (a)
after the lapse of the period for perfecting an appeal, or (b) when the sentence has
been partially or totally satisfied, or (c) the accused has expressly waived in
writing his/her right to appeal, or (d) the accused has applied for probation.
E. Entry of Judgment
1. After the judgment has become final, have it entered in the book of entries of
judgments.
2. If no appeal or motion for new trial is filed within the time provided in the rules,
direct the clerk of court/branch clerk of court to enter the judgment and prepare a
certificate that such judgment has become final and executory.
Page 87
IX. PRESCRIPTION, PENALTIES AND ARCHIVING
A. Prescription
1. Prescription of Civil Action
 “In the early case of US v. Serapio, this Court held that under the Civil Code, the
prescription of an action refers to the time within which an action must be brought
after the right of action has accrued. The prescriptive statutes serve to protect those
who are diligent and vigilant, not those who sleep on their rights.
 “The rationale behind the prescription of actions is to prevent fraudulent and stale
claims from springing up at great distances of time, thus surprising the parties or
their representatives when the facts have become obscure from the lapse of time or
the defective memory or death or removal of the witnesses. Prescription applies
even to the most meritorious claims.
 “Prescription as understood and used in this jurisdiction does not simply mean a
mere lapse of time. Rather, there must be a categorical showing that due to
plaintiff’s negligence, inaction, lack of interest, or intent to abandon a lawful claim
or cause of action, no action whatsoever was taken, thus allowing the statute of
limitations to bar any subsequent suit.” (Pablo R. Antonio Jr., v. Engr. Emilio M.
Morales, G.R. 165552, January 23, 2007)
 By prescription, one acquires ownership and other real rights through the lapse of
time (acquisitive) in accordance with law. In the same manner, rights and
conditions are also lost with the lapse of time (extinctive). Civil Code Art. 1106
 Actions prescribe by the mere lapse of time (Civil Code Art. 1139)
 The prescription of actions is interrupted when they are filed before the Court,
when there is a written extrajudicial demand by the creditor, when there is written
acknowledgement of the debt by the debtor (Civil Code Art.1155)
2. Prescription of Criminal Offense
 As prescription of the crime is the loss or waiver of the State’s right to prosecute
an act prohibited and punished by law.
 From the moment the state has lost or waived such right, the defendant may, at any
stage of the proceeding, demand and ask that the same be finally acquitted (People
v. Moran, 44 Phil. 387 as cited in People v. Pascual Castro. G.R. L-6407, July 29,
1954 and Rafael Yapdiangco v. Hon. Concepcion B. Buencamino and Hon.
Justiniano Cortez, G.R.L-28841, June 24, 1983.)
 Statute of limitations is given by the State. It is surrendering by act of grace its
rights to prosecute, and declaring the offense to be no longer the subject of
prosecution. The statute is not a statute of process, but an amnesty, declaring that
after a certain time oblivion shall be cast over the offense; that the offender shall
be at liberty to return to his country, and resume his immunities as a citizen; and
Page 88
that from henceforth he may cease to preserve the proofs of his innocence, for the
proofs of his guilt are blotted out. (People v. Moran 44 Phil. 405-406; emphasis
supplied as cited in Rafael Yapdiangco v. Hon. Concepcion B. Buencamino and
Reclusion The penalty of reclusion perpetua 20 years 1 day – 40
perpetua shall be from twenty years and one years
day to forty years.
Reclusion The penalty of reclusion temporal 12 years 1 day – 20
temporal shall be from twelve years and one years
day to twenty years.
Prision mayor and The duration of the penalties of 6 years 1 day – 12
temporary disquali- prision mayor and temporary dis- years
fication qualification shall be from six years
and one day to twelve years, except
when the penalty of disqualification
is imposed as an accessory penalty,
in which case, it shall be that of the
principal penalty.
Prision correc- The duration of the penalties of 6 months 1 day – 6
cional, suspen- prision correccional, suspension, years
sion, and and destierro shall be from six
destierro months and one day to six years,
except when the suspension is im-
posed as an accessory penalty, in
which case, its duration shall be
that of the principal penalty.
Arresto mayor The duration of the penalty of ar- 1 month 1 day – 6
resto mayor shall be from one months
month and one day to six months.
Arresto menor The duration of the penalty of 1 day – 30 days
arresto menor shall be from one
day to thirty days.
Bond to keep the The bond to keep the peace shall
peace be required to cover such period
of time as the court may deter-
mine.
Hon. Justiniano Cortez, G.R.L-28841, June 24, 1983).

 Statutes of limitations are construed as acts of grace, and surrender by the
sovereign of its right to prosecute or of its right to prosecute at its discretion. Such
statutes are considered as equivalent to acts of amnesty founded on the liberal
theory that prosecutions should not be allowed to ferment endlessly in the files of
the government to explode only after witnesses and proofs necessary for the
Page 89
protection of the accused have by sheer lapse of time passed beyond availability.
The periods fixed under such statutes are jurisdictional and are essential elements
of the offenses covered. (People v. Panfilo Lacson, G.R. 149453, April 1, 2003)
PENALTIES TIME TIME TIME TIME 3.

INCLUDED INCLUDED INCLUDED INCLUDED
IN THE IN ITS IN ITS IN ITS
PENALTY MINIMUM MEDIUM MAXIMUM
IN ITS PERIOD PERIOD PERIOD
ENTIRETY
14 yrs 8 mos 1 17 yrs 4
Reclusion 12 years 1 day 12 years 1 day
day to 17 yrs mos 1 day
Temporal to to
4 mos To 20 years
20 years 14 years 8 mos
Prision
mayor, Abso-
lute Disquali- 6 years 1 day to 6 years 1 day to 8 years 1 day to 10 years 1 day
fication, Spe- 12 years 8 years 10 years to
cial Tempo- 12 years
rary Disquali-
fication
Prision 6 months 1 6 months 1 day 2 yrs 4 mos 1 4 years 2 mos 1
correcional, day to to day to day
Suspension, 6 years 2 years 4 4 years 2 mos To 6 years
Destierro months
1 month 1 day 2 months 1 day 4 months 1 day
Arresto 1 – 2 months
to to 4 months to 6 months
mayor
6 months
Arresto mnor 1 day to 30 1 to 10 days 11 to 20 21 to 30 days.

days days
Effect of Prescription of Action/ Prescription of Offense Civil cases
 Before the filing of the Answer to the Complaint or Pleading, a motion to dismiss
may be made on the ground that the cause of action is barred by the statute of
limitations (Rules of Court, Rule 16, Sec 1 (f)).
 Statutes barring civil remedy by suit abate the right which such remedy would
enforce and perfects the title which such remedy would invade.
 In civil suits the statute is interposed by the legislature as an impartial arbiter
between two contending parties. In the construction of the statute, therefore, there
is no intendment to be made in favor of either party. Neither grants the right to the
other; there is therefore no grantor against whom the ordinary presumptions of
construction are to be made.
Page 90
4. Criminal Cases
 "This, in effect, enacts that when the specified period shall have arrived, the right
of the state to prosecute shall be gone, and the liability of the offender to be
punished. To be deprived of his liberty...shall cease. Its terms not only strike down
the right of action which the state had acquired by the offense, but also remove the
flaw which the crime had created in the offender’s title to liberty. In this respect,
its language goes deeper than statutes barring civil remedies usually do. They
expressly take away only the remedy by suit, and that inferentially is held to abate
the right which such remedy would enforce, and perfect the title which such
remedy would invade; but this statute is aimed directly at the very right which the
state has against the offender. The right to punish, as the only liability which the
offender has incurred, and declares that this right and this liability are at an end.
(People v. Penile Lacson, G.R. 149453, April 1, 2003 quoting the US State
Supreme Court of Illinois)
 The accused may move to quash the complaint or information on the ground that
the criminal action or liability has been extinguished. If the accused fails to move
to quash based on the ground of prescription of offense, it shall not be deemed a
waiver of objections. (Rules of Court, Rule 117, Sec. 1(g) and Sec. (9)).
5. Where Found
Complaint
Information
6. Prescription of Civil Actions
Page 91
Relating to Ownership of Property and Other Real Rights
ACTION LEGAL BASIS PERIOD OF PRESCRIPTION

Action to Art. 1140, New Civil eight years from the time the
recover Code possession of the movable is
Movables lost, unless the possessor has
acquired the ownership by
prescription for a less period
in accordance with the Civil
Code
Real actions Art. 1141, New Civil thirty years
over im- Code
movables
mortgage action Art. 1142, New Civil ten years
Code
In Relation to Contracts and Other Right of Action
Page 92
Quasi-delict Art. 1146 (2), New Four years

Civil Code
Forcible entry and Art. 1147 (1), New One year
unlawful detainer Civil Code
Defamation Art. 1147 (2), New One year
Civil Code
All other actions whose Art. 1149, New Civil Code Five years from the
period is not fixed time the right of ac-
tion accrues
7. Prescription of Crimes
Penalty/Crime Prescription
Death, Article 90, 20 years
Reclusion Revised Penal
Perpetua, Code
Reclusion
Temporal
Afflictive Penalties 15 years
Perpetual or Temporary Absolute
Disqualification, Perpetual or
Temporary Special Disqualifica-
tion, Prision Mayor
Correctional Penalties 10 years
Prision Correctional, Sus-
pension, Destierro
Arresto Mayor 5 years
Arresto Menor, Public Censure 1 year
Libel & other similar offenses 1 year
Oral Defamation/ Slander by Deed 6 months
Light Offenses 2 months
8. Computation of Prescription of Offenses
 Shall commence to run from the day on which the crime is discovered by the
offended party, the authorities, or their agents,
 Shall be interrupted by the filing of the complaint or information
Page 93
 Shall commence to run again when such proceedings terminate without the
accused being convicted or acquitted, or are unjustifiably stopped for any reason
not imputable to him
 The term of prescription shall not run when the offender is absent from the
Philippine archipelago.
 “We should at first observe that a mistake is sometimes made in applying to

statutes of limitation in criminal suits the construction that has been given to
statutes of limitation in civil suits. The two classes of statutes, however, are
essentially different. In civil suits the statute is interposed by the legislature as an
impartial arbiter between two contending parties. In the construction of the statute,
therefore, there is no intendment to be made in favor of either party. Neither grants
the right to the other; there is therefore no grantor against whom the ordinary
presumptions of construction are to be made. But it is otherwise when a statute of
limitation is granted by the State. Here the State is the grantor, surrendering by act
of grace its rights to prosecute, and declaring the offense to be no longer the
subject of prosecution. The statute is not a statute of process, to be scantily and
grudgingly applied, but an amnesty, declaring that after a certain time oblivion
shall be cast over the offense; that the offender shall be at liberty to return to his
country, and resume his immunities as a citizen; and that from henceforth he may
cease to preserve the proofs of his innocence, for the proofs of his guilt are blotted
out. Hence it is that statutes of limitation are to be liberally construed in favor of
the defendant not one because such liberality of construction belongs to all acts of
amnesty and grace, but because the very existence of the statute is a recognition
and notification by the legislature of the fact that time, while it gradually wears out
proofs and innocence has assigned to it fixed and positive periods in which it
destroys proofs of guilt. Independently of these views, it must be remembered that
delay in instituting prosecutions is not only productive of expense to the State, but
of peril to public justice in the attenuation and distortion, even by mere natural
lapse of memory, of testimony. It is the policy of the law that prosecutions should
be prompt and that statutes enforcing such promptitude should be vigorously
maintained. They are not merely acts of grace, but checks imposed by the State
upon itself, to exact vigilant activity from its subalterns and to secure for criminal
trials the best evidence that can be obtained. (People v. Moran 44 Phil. 405-406;
emphasis supplied as cited in Rafael Yapdiangco v. Hon. Concepcion B.
Buencamino and Hon. Justiniano Cortez, G.R.L-28841, June 24, 1983).
 Revised Penal Code. Art. 91. Computation of prescription of offenses. — The

period of prescription shall commence to run from the day on which the crime is
discovered by the offended party, the authorities, or their agents, and shall be
interrupted by the filing of the complaint or information, and shall commence to
run again when such proceedings terminate without the accused being convicted or
acquitted, or are unjustifiably stopped for any reason not imputable to him. The
Page 94
term of prescription shall not run when the offender is absent from the Philippine
Archipelago.
SECTION 1. Defenses and objections not pleaded.—Defenses and objections

not pleaded either in a motion to dismiss or in the answer are deemed waived.
However, when it appears from the pleadings or the evidence on record that
the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter, that there is another action
pending between the same parties for the same cause, or that the action is
barred by a prior judgment or by statute of limitations, the court shall dismiss
the claim. (2a) (Rules of Court, Rule 9).
8. Prescription of Penalties
The penalties imposed by final sentence prescribe as follows:
9. Computation
 The period of prescription of penalties shall commence to run from the
date when the culprit should evade the service of his sentence
 It shall be interrupted if the defendant should give himself up, be captured,
and should go to some foreign country with which this Government has no
extradition treaty, or should commit another crime before the expiration of
the period of prescription.
B. PENALTIES
1. Penalties
1. Death
2. Reclusion perpetua
3. Reclusion temporal
4. Prision mayor
5. Prision correccional
6. Arresto mayor
7. Arresto menor
8. Destierro
Perpetual absolute disqualification
10. Temporal absolute disqualifications
11. Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be voted for, the
right to follow a profession or calling, and
12. Public censure.
 Notwithstanding the provisions of the rule next preceding, the maximum

duration of the convict’s sentence shall not be more than three-fold the
length of time corresponding to the most severe of the penalties imposed
upon him. No other penalty to which he may be liable shall be inflicted
Page 95
after the sum total of those imposed equals the same maximum period.
 Such maximum period shall in no case exceed forty years. In applying the
provisions of this rule the duration of perpetual penalties (pena perpetua)
shall be computed at thirty years.
Republic Act No. 7659

Sec. 21. Article 27 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, is hereby amended
to read as follows: Art. 27.
2. Divisible Penalties and Periods

Act No. 3815. TABLE SHOWING THE DURATION OF DIVISIBLE
PENALTIES AND THE TIME INCLUDED IN EACH OF THEIR PERIODS
3. Repeal of Death Penalty, Effect on Penalties

Republic Act 8177
The imposition of the penalty of death is hereby prohibited. Accordingly,
Republic Act No. Eight Thousand One Hundred Seventy-Seven (R.A. No.
8177), otherwise known as the Act Designating Death by Lethal Injection is
hereby repealed. Republic Act No. Seven Thousand Six Hundred Fifty-Nine
(R.A. No. 7659), otherwise known as the Death Penalty Law, and all other
laws, executive orders and decrees, insofar as they impose the death penalty
are hereby repealed or amended accordingly.
In lieu of the death penalty, the following shall be imposed.
(a) the penalty of reclusion perpetua, when the law violated makes
use of the nomenclature of the penalties of the Revised Penal
Code; or
(b) the penalty of life imprisonment, when the law violated does not make
use of the nomenclature of the penalties of the Revised Penal Code.
Not eligible for Parole. Per son convicted of offenses punished
with reclusion perpetua, or whose sentences will be reduced to
reclusion perpetua, by reason of this Act, shall not be eligible for
parole under Act No. 4180, otherwise known as the Indeterminate
Sentence Law, as amended.
C. ARCHIVING
1. Civil cases
 In civil cases, the court may motu proprio or upon motion, order that a civil case
be archived only in the following instances:
Page 96
 When the parties are in the process of settlement in which case, the proceedings
may be suspended and the case archived for a period not exceeding 90 days. The
case shall be included in the trial calendar on the day immediately following the
lapse of the suspension period.
 When an interlocutory order or incident in the civil case is elevated to, and is
pending resolution/decision for an indefinite period before a higher court which
has issued a temporary restraining order or writ of preliminary injunction.
 When defendant, without fault or neglect of plaintiff, cannot be served with
summons within six months from issuance of original summons.
2. Criminal Cases
 A criminal case may be archived only if, after the issuance of the warrant of arrest,
the accused remains at large for six months from the delivery of the warrant to the
proper peace officer. An order archiving the case shall require the peace officer to
explain why the accused was not apprehended. The court shall issue an alias if the
original warrant of arrest is returned by the peace officer together with the report.
 The court, motu proprio, or upon motion of any party, may likewise archive a
criminal case when proceedings therein are ordered suspended for an indefinite
period because:
 the accused appears to be suffering from an unsound mental condition
which effectively renders him unable to fully understand the charge against
him and to plead intelligently or to undergo trial, and he has to be
committed to a mental hospital;
 a valid prejudicial question in a civil action is invoked during the pendency
of the criminal case unless the civil and the criminal cases are consolidated;
an interlocutory order or incident in the criminal case is elevated to,
and is pending resolution/decision for an indefinite period before a
higher court which has issued a temporary restraining order or writ of
preliminary injunction; and
 when the accused has jumped bail before arraignment and cannot be
arrested by his bondsmen
3. General Provisions
 Copies of the Order archiving the case shall be furnished the parties.
 A special docket shall be maintained to record the cases, both criminal and civil,
that have been archived.
 A periodic review of the archived cases shall be made by the Presiding Judge.
 The Presiding Judge shall, motu proprio or upon motion by any party, order the
reinstatement/revival of an archived case and its withdrawal from the archives
whenever the same is ready for trial or further proceedings
 The Branch Clerk of Court shall submit to the Office of the Court Administrator, a
consolidated list of archived cases not later than the first week of January of every
year.
Page 97
4. Where Found
 Special Docket of Archived cases Order directing archiving of case
5. Relevant Provisions of the Rules of Court / Supreme Court Decisions /

Supreme Court Circulars
 SC Administrative Circular No. 7•A•92 issued on June 21, 1993
IX. MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL OR RECONSIDERATION
A. Grounds for New Trial

1. Errors of law or irregularities have been committed during the trial prejudicial to the
substantial rights of the accused;
Page 98
XII. ISSUANCE OF SEARCH WARRANTS
An application for search warrant shall be filed with the following:
a) Any court within whose territorial jurisdiction a crime was committed.

b) For compelling reasons stated in the application, any court within the judicial
region where the crime was committed if the place of the commission of the crime is
known, or any court within the judicial region where the warrant shall be enforced.
However, if the criminal action has already been filed, the application shall
only be made in the court where the criminal action is pending.
A. Rule on Forum Shopping

A search warrant was quashed because the applicant had been guilty of forum
shopping as the applicant sought the search warrant from a Manila Regional Trial
Court after denial by the courts of Pampanga.
The Rules of Court, however, requires only the initiatory pleading to be

accompanied with a certificate of non-forum shopping, omitting any mention of
―applicationsǁ as in Supreme Court Circular No. 04-94. Hence, the absence of such
certification will not result in the dismissal of the application for search warrant.
1. Seizure of Personal Property

A search warrant may be issued for the search and seizure of personal
property:
(a) Subject of the offense;
(b) Stolen or embezzled and other proceeds, or fruits of the offense; or
(c) Used or intended to be used as the means of committing an offense.
2. Requisites for issuance

A search warrant shall not issue except upon probable cause in connection with
one specific offense to be determined personally by the judge after examination under
oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and
particularly describing the place to be searched and the things to be seized which may
be anywhere in the Philippines.
3. Examination of Complaint
The judge must, before issuing the warrant, personally examine in the form of
searching questions and answers, in writing and under oath, the complainant and the
witnesses he may produce on facts personally known to them and attach to the record
their sworn statements, together with the affidavits submitted.
Page 99
B. Meaning of Probable Cause
The issuance of a search warrant is justified only upon a finding of probable

cause. Probable cause for a search warrant is defined as such facts and circumstances
which would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that an offense has
been committed, and that the objects sought in connection with the offense are in the
place sought to be searched.
C. Basis of Probable Cause; Personal Knowledge

This probable cause must be shown to be within the personal knowledge of the
complainant or the witnesses he may produce, and not based on mere hearsay, in order
to convince the judge, not the individual making the affidavit and seeking the issuance
of the warrant, of the existence of probable cause.
1. Meaning of knowledge; test is liability for perjury

The true test of sufficiency of a deposition or affidavit to warrant issuance of a
search warrant is whether it has been drawn in a manner that perjury could be charged
thereon and the affiant be held liable for damage caused. The oath required must refer
to the truth of the facts within the personal knowledge of the applicant for search
warrant, and/or his/her witnesses, not of the facts merely reported by a person whom
one considers to be reliable.
2. Insufficiency of Affidavits
Mere affidavits of the complainant and his/her witnesses are not sufficient. The
examining Judge has to take depositions in writing of the complainant and the
witnesses he may produce, and to attach them to the record. Such written deposition is
necessary in order that the Judge may be able to properly determine the existence or
non-existence of the probable cause, to hold liable for perjury the person giving it, if it
will be found later that his/her declarations are false.
Search warrants are not issued on loose, vague or doubtful basis or fact, nor on
mere suspicion or belief. The facts recited in an affidavit supporting the application for
a search warrant must be stated with sufficient definiteness, so that if they are false,
perjury may be charged against assigned on the affiant. Hence, affidavits which go no
further than to allege conclusions of law, or of fact, are insufficient.
Equally insufficient as a basis for the determination of probable cause is a

statement contained in a joint affidavit “that the evidence gathered and collated by our
unit clearly shows that the premises above- mentioned and the articles and things
above-described were used and are continuously being used for subversive activities
in conspiracy with and to promote the objective of, illegal organizations such as the
Light-A-Fire Movement, Movement for Free Philippines, and April 6 Movement.”
Page 100
3. Illustrative case
In his application for search warrant, P/Major Alladin Dimagmaliw stated that
“he has been informed” that Nemesio Prudente “has in his control and possession” the
firearms and explosives described therein, and that he “has verified the report and
found it to be a fact.” On the other hand, in his supporting deposition, P/Lt. Florencio
C. Angeles declared that, as a result of their continuous surveillance for several days,
they gathered information from verified sources that the holders of the said firearms
and explosives are not licensed to possess them. In other words, the applicant and his
witness had no personal knowledge of the facts and circumstances which became the
basis for issuing the questioned search warrant, but acquired knowledge thereof only
through information from other sources or persons.
While it is true that in his application for search warrant, applicant P/Major
Dimagmaliw stated that he verified the information he had earlier received that
petitioner had, in his possession and custody, the firearms and explosives described in
the application, and that he found it to be a fact, yet there is nothing in the record to
show or indicate how and when said applicant verified the earlier information acquired
by him as to justify his conclusion that he found such information to be a fact. He
might have clarified this point if there had been searching questions and answers, but
there were none. In fact, the records yield no questions and answers, whether
searching or not, vis-à-vis the said applicant.
What the records show is the deposition of witness, P/Lt. Angeles, as the only
support to P/Major Dimagmaliw’s application, and the said deposition is based on
hearsay. For it avers that they (presumably, the police authorities) had conducted
continuous surveillance for several days of the suspected premises and, as a result
thereof, they “gathered information from verified sources” that the holders of the
subject firearms and explosives are not licensed to possess them.
Evidently, the allegations contained in the application of P/Major Alladin

Dimagmaliw and the declaration of P/Lt Florencio C. Angeles in his deposition were
insufficient basis for the issuance of a valid search warrant. As held in the Prudente
case:
The oath required must refer to the truth of the facts within the personal
knowledge of the petitioner or his witnesses, because the purpose thereof is to
convince the committing magistrate, not the individual making the affidavit
and seeking the issuance of the warrant, of the existence of probable cause.
Page 101
4. Factors that may be considered in the determination of probable cause: time of

application in relation to alleged offense considered in determination of probable
cause.
The Supreme Court observed:
It has likewise been observed that the offenses allegedly took place from 1961
to 1964, and the application for search warrant was made on October 27, 1965. The
time of the application is so far remote in time as to make the probable cause of
doubtful veracity and the warrant vitally defective. Thus, Mr. Joseph Varon, an
eminent authority on Searches, Seizures and Immunities, has this to say on this point:
(1) x x x
(2) Such statement as to the time of the alleged offense must be clear and definite
and must not be too remote from the time of the making of the affidavit and
issuance of the search warrant.
(3) There is no rigid rule for determining whether the stated time of observation of
the offense is too remote from the time when the affidavit is made or the search
warrant issued but, generally speaking, a lapse of time of less than three weeks
will be held not to invalidate the search warrant, while a lapse of four weeks will
be held to be so.
A good and practical rule of thumb to measure the nearness of time given in
the affidavit as to the date of the alleged offense, and the time of making the affidavit
is thus expressed: The nearer the time at which the observation of the offense is
alleged to have been made, the more reasonable the conclusion of establishment of
probable cause. (Italics ours.)
The Supreme Court observed that had the respondent judge been more
cautious in issuing the questioned search warrants he would have wondered and,
therefore, asked the affiant why the said incident was reported only on May 31, 1972
when he allegedly witnessed it on May 29, 1972.
5. Specific offense must be charged and not violations of codes

Indeed, the same were issued upon applications stating that the natural and
juridical persons therein named had committed a "violation of Central Bank Laws,
Tariff and Customs Laws, Internal Revenue (Code) and Revised Penal Code." In other
words, no specific offense had been alleged in said applications. The averments
thereof with respect to the offense committed were abstract. As a consequence, it was
impossible for the judges who issued the warrants to have found the existence of
probable cause, for the same presupposes the introduction of competent proof that the
party against whom it is sought has performed particular acts, or committed specific
omissions, violating a given provision of our criminal laws. As a matter of fact, the
applications involved in this case do not allege any specific acts performed by herein
petitioners. It would be a legal heresy, of the highest order, to convict anybody of a
"violation of Central Bank Laws, Tariff and Customs Laws, Internal Revenue (Code)
and Revised Penal Code," — as alleged in the aforementioned applications — without
reference to any determinate provision of said laws or codes.
Page 102
6. The need for searching questions and answers by the judge

Asking of leading questions to the deponent in an application for search
warrant, and conducting of examination in a general manner, would not satisfy the
requirements for issuance of a valid search warrant.
7. Requisite of particular description of things to be seized

The description “is required to be specific only in so far as the circumstances
will ordinarily allow” and “where by the nature of the goods to be seized, their
descriptions must rather be general, as this would mean that no warrant would issue.”
Thus, the description “fraudulent books, invoices and records” was found
sufficient.
So also was the description “books, documents, receipts, lists, chits and other
papers used by him in connection with his/her activities as moneylender, charging a
usurious rate of interest, in violation of the law.” Justifying the sufficiency of the later
description, the Court said:
Taking into consideration the nature of the articles so described, it is

clear that no other more adequate and detailed description could have been
given, particularly because it is difficult to give a particular description of the
contents thereof. The description so made substantially complies with the legal
provisions because the officer of the law who executed the warrant was
thereby placed in a position enabling him to identify the articles, which he did.
In one case, the Supreme Court observed:
The grave violation of the Constitution made in the application for the
contested search warrants was compounded by the description therein made of
the effects to be searched for and seized, to wit:
Books of accounts, financial records, vouchers, journals,
correspondence, receipts, ledgers, portfolios, credit journals,
typewriters, and other documents and/or papers showing all business
transactions, including disbursement receipts, balance sheets and
related profit and loss statements.
Thus, the warrants authorized the search for and seizure of records pertaining
to all business transactions of petitioners herein, regardless of whether the transactions
were legal or illegal. The warrants sanctioned the seizure of all records of the
petitioners and the aforementioned corporations, whatever their nature, thus, openly
contravening the explicit command of our Bill of Rights — that the things to be seized
be particularly described — as well as tending to defeat its major objective: the
elimination of general warrants.
Page 103
8. Tests to Determine Particularity

A search warrant may be said to particularly describe the things to be seized:
1. When the description therein is as specific as the circumstances will
ordinarily allow; or
2. When the description expresses a conclusion of fact – not of law by which
the warrant officer may be guided in making the search and seizure; or
3. When the things described are limited to those which bear direct relation to
the offense for which the warrant is being issued.
Thus, if the articles desired to be seized have any direct relation to an offense
committed, the applicant must necessarily have some evidence, other than those
articles, to prove the said offense; and the articles subject of search and seizure should
come in handy merely to strengthen such evidence. In this event, the description
contained in the disputed warrant should have mentioned, at least, the dates, amounts,
persons, and other pertinent data regarding the receipts of payments, certificates of
stocks and securities, contracts, promissory notes, deeds of sale, messages and
communication, checks, bank deposits and withdrawals, records of foreign
remittances, among others, enumerated in the warrant.
In a case the search warrant which authorized the seizure of “all printing
equipment, paraphernalia, etc. used or connected with the printing of the WE FORUM
newspaper, and any and all documents, letters related thereto,” was voided as an
illegal general warrant as shown by the use of “any and all.”
9. Description of place to be seized

It does not suffice, for a search warrant to be deemed valid, that it be based on
probable cause, personally determined by the judge. It is essential, too, that it
particularly describes the place to be searched, the manifest intention being that the
search be confined strictly to the place also described.
10. Determination of Whether Search Warrant Describes Premises with

Particularity
The principle does not apply where there is no ambiguity on the face of the
search warrant as to the description of the place to be searched. The place to be
searched as set out in the warrant cannot be amplified or modified by the officer’s own
personal knowledge of the premises, or the evidence they adduced in support of their
application for the warrant. x x x The particularization of the description of the place
to be searched may properly be done only by the judge, and only in the warrant itself;
it cannot be left to the discretion of the police officers conducting the search.
Page 104
XIII. PROVISIONAL REMEDIES
A. Availability of Provisional Remedies

The provisional remedies in civil actions, insofar as they are applicable, may
be availed of in connection with the civil action deemed instituted with the criminal
action.
B. Attachment
When the civil action is properly instituted in the criminal action as provided
in Rule 111, the offended party may have the property of the accused attached as
security for the satisfaction of any judgment that may be recovered from the accused
in the following cases:
(a) When the accused is about to abscond from the Philippines;
(b) When the criminal action is based on a claim for money or property embezzled
or fraudulently misapplied or converted to the use of the accused who is a public
officer, officer of a corporation, attorney, factor, broker, agent or clerk, in the
course of his employment as such, or by any other person in a fiduciary capacity,
or for a willful violation of duty;
(c) When the accused has concealed, removed, or disposed of his property, or is
about to do so; and
(d) When the accused resides outside the Philippines.
Page 105

Manual For Continuous Trial PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Manual For Continuous Trial PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CONTINUOUS TRIAL

AND SKILLS DEVELOPMENT

Maraming salamat po at mabuhay tayong lahat!

MARIA LOURDES P. A. SERENO

The Lower courts account for a majority of the justice sys-

HON. DIOSDADO M. PERALTA

HON. LUCAS P. BERSAMIN, A ssociate Justice of the Supreme Court

HON. MAGDANGAL M. DE LEON, A ssociate Justice of the Court of A ppeals

HON. JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ, Court A dministrator

ATTY. JASON J. ZAPANTA, Secretariat

Judge Selma Palacio Alaras RTC Br. 62, Makati City

Requisites for Valid Exercise

Expanded Exclusive Original Jurisdiction of Municipal Trial Courts

Jurisdiction of Regional Trial Courts

Jurisdiction of Family Courts

III. PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES

Distinction Between Control of Prosecution by Public Prosecutor and Control by

Testing Sufficiency of Complaint or Information

Strict Scrutiny of Averments in Complaint or Information, Particularly in

Duplicity of the Offense and Continuing Crimes

Continuing Crimes: The Principle of Delito Continuado

Rule on Complex Crimes

Civil Liability Not Arising from Crime, Not Extinguished by Acquittal

Extinction of Penal Action Does Not Extinguish Civil Action

Exception – Prejudicial Civil Action

VI. PROCEDURAL CHECKLISTS ON CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

For Cases Cognizable by the Regional Trial Courts

Common Procedures in First and Second Level Courts

VII. CONDUCTING THE TRIAL

Compliance with the Constitutional Limitations on Periods

If a Motion to Determine Competency to Stand Trial is Filed

Damages that may be Awarded

IX. MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL OR RECONSIDERATION

XII. ISSUANCE OF SEARCH WARRANTS

Meaning of Probable Cause

Basis of Probable Cause; Personal Knowledge

XIII. PROVISIONAL REMEDIES

The arraignment, pre-trial dates, trial dates, and promulgation of judgment

 Marking for identification of evidence of the parties

SUPREME COURT RESOLUTION

SPECIAL RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9165 OR THE

MOTIONS THAT DELAY THE PROCEEDINGS

1. Motions filed before Arraignment:

This particular motion is intended to convince the court that it must

“Upon examination and perusal of the Information and

1.2. Motion for Reconsideration or Motion for Reinvestigation

If the crime charged in the Information is one where preliminary

If, however, preliminary investigation was conducted, the grant of a

“Acting on the Motion for Reconsideration (or Motion for

The Public Prosecutor is hereby ordered to submit to the court its

2. Motion for Preliminary Investigation

When the conduct of a preliminary investigation is required by Sec. 1, Rule

“Acting on the Motion for Preliminary Investigation filed by the

Accordingly, today’s arraignment is hereby cancelled and reset

The parties are already notified of this Order in open court.

“When the accused was arraigned, by reading the Information in a language

The reception of evidence for the prosecution to establish if the evidence of

4. Petition for Review

“Acting on the manifestation of the accused that a Petition for

* Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 116, Section 11(c).

5. Motion for Bill of Particulars

A Motion for Bill of Particulars should only be granted if the accused