an Beda College of Lato Lee ML ae: SCIURCES, 4. Rules 110-127 of ine Revined Rules of Court, 2, 1987 Constitution. particulerly those uncer Rights of en ezcused under Article Ill (Bill of 3. Various acts pat BP, Big. 127; 4. Prosidential Docraes; 5. Executive Orders; 8. Decisions of the Supreme Court, CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 1s the method priseribed by law for the apprahonsion end Prosecution of persons accused of any eririnal offansa, and for their prnihment, in case of conviction, id by the leglslatere the Tie loan not Iceni Hwee Santas he the procedural ‘cdmialstration of criminal Justice, that Is, taws and court rules governing arrest, ssarch and seizure, bail semagament seten end sees Se SUN eee Cua) acre ale : W declares what tate 8. punishablo, defines crimes, treats|it” provides for the: fo! tele nature ard] method by which a Provides for ir|person accused of a| punishmunt. forlme Is arrested, tried| Jor punish, ‘SYSTEMS OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 1. inquisitorial sy'stem = the desecton and rosocution of crimes are left to the intilalive of offciais ard agents of the law The procedure Is churacterlzed by eesecy and ‘extcutive Commairrer, ene nnn MEMORY AID IN RELEDIAL LAW] 287 Lure | PRC ees the Judge Js not timtted to the ovidence ‘brought before him but could grocoed with lis ‘own Inquiry which is not contrentive. 2 Accusctorial systom = tho accusation is exercised Ly every citzen, The procedure is confrontive ane the Gial is publicly hald and enas. with the magistrate rendering the verdlot 3. Mixed System, It is @ combination of the inguistcral'and tie accusatoriel aystom, it characterizes the “errihial procedure ‘observed in the Philippines, CRIMINAL JURISDICTION Is the authortty ‘to hear and try @ partkular offense and impose the punishment Yor be Paoplow Nene, Ge noes 40027, Juno 90,1978) RT ce Re Ses eh eat uc REM Ee (ome tn at set Pelt as ee [ENBERT CAL ABUGAN overal char and chale academics operclos, MAW"OLD ADEL SANTOS chaly hol Operations, GRACE SARAH TRA vice ‘halrfor operations 1UAN CARLES NUESTRO Ve chair for academies, MAE R IGEUE ETANG vice cha fr ten tral KISTNE ANNABELLE POS, wer eh lr ance IRENE TINA SEDTA vce chat fer e€p, A-EIELLO CON CON ven chal fore sles REMEDIAL LAW ADK MOWED SALONGAB subject cha aEAeW BueHSUCESE wahtentsubeet AAPHAEL LEANDRO ONOPOL chil roeadure, NARCISA MEDINA c idence ANNABELLE DONATO ee, COWARD GIALOGD and GDN JOSEP) TAMARES crn! pruodure, ADRTAN MAURO tpetal rocteding, IRISH TOB'ANO speci cl avons, PAULA MAE LAUREAWO wpe lows eons: i Pa Abano, Femare Amor, Paul Oartameda, Pod Belass tne Cho, denedita isin Lansang, Olver Uribe, Chat Mulla Castes Navara, Mary lane Prat, An Francs Saliba, Aaron Mac Salado, Marla Nina Sung, Banal yt, Antony Vile, fh Vilna, Jose Vite, eonaide Belt, Cee oval Bran Ducts Rana Bela Cmrgut, Nv Kamil Eset, yin Flore, ery. Gascon, lela oye, Morte Ks Wodrga, Op ‘eyes, Frets Yavers Reyrante, John Sagobsen, Mayan Saldamer, Jean Winneth Samira inde Tor ngco, Forence Toler, Fel Torres, Yen Ut, ian Relea UY, ion Mende, Pecnond ult iter, Ang! Calg, Sram Ceolee. Mala Kain Chavex 0h Malvog, Udoy Mint, Olver Mikséor, Waarnmad Na188 |2009 CENTRALIZED BAK OPERATIONS REQUISITES FOR A VALID EXERCISE OF CRIMINAL JURISDICTION 1. durisdicJon over the subject matter - The offense, by virtue of tha Imposabie penalty oF hts nature, Is o.1e whlch the court. ts by low authorized tc take cognizance of. 2, Jurisdiction over the terttory + The offense must have been commitea or finy of ito essential ingredients took place within the tertovial Jurisdiction of the court. cannot be walved and whore tha piece of the commission was not specifically charged, tho placo may bo shown by evidence, 3, Jurisdiction over the person of the aucused ~ The person charged with the offense must have ‘been brought to ite presonce for trin\, forcibly by warrant of arrest. or upon his ‘voluntary stibmission to the court Note: The general rule Is that the question of Iurisdiction may be raised at any siage of the proceedings. The exception Is where there has boen estoppat and laches on the oarty who ralses the question. (Paople vs. Munar, G:R, No. L- 97642, October 22, 1973) DETERMINATION oF SURISDICTION 4." Determined by the allegatiors in ° the omplatnt or information not by the resuits of roof or by the tral cour’s appreciation of tie evidence presented, Determined by the natura of the offense andlor pencity attached thareto ard rot whol ‘may bo mated out aftr tril. Determined by the law In force at the tine of the institution of the criminal ection and not 3 + the timo of s commission, ONCE VESTED, IT CANNO™ 8E WITHDRAWN BY: 8, subsequent valid amendment of thu +” information. (Paople. vs. Chupeco, G.? ‘Ne, 19568, Mor, 31, 1964) or b, subsequent statutory amendment of tho ules of jurisdiction UNLESS sho amendatory” low expressly provides clherwise ‘or is construad that hi {tended to operate to actions pondiny before its amendment, In which case, te court where the action Is. pending ie ousted of Jurediaton and tho pond'ng clon will have io be transferred to tho court having jurisdiction by virtua: ct the amendatory iow. (Binay vs CRIMINAL, Sondiganbayan, GR. No. 120041, Octotvro1, 1999) JURISDICTION BASED ON FENALTY IMPOSED The RTC has jurledietion over tfeusen unishablo by imprisonment exceeding 6 years The MTC has jutadltlon’ over _offens unstable’ by Imprlichmant for a perlod of 6 years and lass. JURISDICTION WHERE: FINE 18 THE ONLY PENALTY : Tho RTC has jurisdiction wheru the fing la more than 4,000 pesos excepl in cases of eminel nacligence involving damage to property which falls under the exclusive orginal jurisdiction of tha MTC. The MTC has Junsdlction where the fine is 4,00C pesos or less JURISDICTION OVER COMPLEX CRIMES Surlsciction over the whole complex crime ie lodard with the trial cout having jurtediction to impose the maxinium: and mdst serlous penal imposablu of an offénse forming, part of. the complex cr'me. It must be prosecuted integrally and must not be divided into component offenses which may be mace subjoct of mutlple infornetion brought In diferent courts. (Cuyos vs Garcia, €.R. No, L-46934, April 15, 1986) ° JULISDISTION OVER CONTINUOUS GRIMES Cortinuing offenses ere consummated in ont place, yal by the nature of the offense, the Violation of the low te deemed continuing (eu. estafa and ibal). As utch, the courts of thi terrterisy where the essontal ingredients of tho serimo took. place have concurrent jurisdiction, But the «court vihich frst acquis Jurisdletion exclude the other courts, , JURISDICTION OVER GRIMES PUNISHABLIE BY DESTIERRO Whirs the Imposnble pandity Is destlemo, the case fails within tha exclusive Jurisdiction of the Municipal Trial Court, considering that In the Nerarechy pvised rw ie “have Jurisdiction pspective cf the kind eco __ Pati Bedn Collége of awfin Beds Collet of Lay ‘and natura of the civ Habllty arlsing (rom he seid offense, (Lugados vi. da Guzman, G.? No. 35285, Fob. 20, 1908), Alco, tha _udditlonal Paniity for HABITUAL DELINQUENCY 5° not considered in deturmining juisdictior, becouse fsuch delinquency Is nat a ctimo, CRIMINAL, SALIDIGANBAYAN + Offenses or folontos whathor simpio or complexed with otter ertines commitied by the public officials. and their employees In relation 10 thelr office if the ast element, namely *in relation to his office" le absent or I not alleged in the liferation, the crime ‘commited dalls within the exclusi:e original lursdiction of ovdinary courte and not the Sandiganbayan, ‘+The offense ty commited “In relatien to the alice” Wf the offense intimately ccnnecisa with the offs of the offender end Petpolrutad whlle he was In tha performance Of his offcla! functions, or when the cme anno! exist without the oliice. or the otf-0 is 8 conalltuent elomant of the crime as defined Inthe etatute, YURISDICTION oF Y Jomctats usder the loxchunto Jurtsdiction' of + Live Sandiganbayan: INP. Those expressly Anumorated in PD 1608, 05 amenstod by RA $246; Violatlons of RA 3019 ANUGION and Compt Practices Act), RA 1379 une Chapter 2, Bec. 2, Tile 7, Book 2, RPG. ‘grade 27 and niyher. Provincial governors, vice governs, + membera of the aangguniong panialaw)jan sand” provinclal » treasurers, assessors, enginesra:and other provincial dpartmoni ae ora, vice-mayore, members of tie 19 pankuagtod, city treasurers, a engineers and other city », dopurtment heade, . 5," Officia’s of the dipiomatic service ocrupying ‘the position of consul and higher. 8. Philppine army anc alr force coloe's, real + captains, and all officers of higher rank, 7. Officers ‘of tha PN? while occupying the postion of provinelal director ‘aiid those holding the rank of sanicr superintendent or higher, 8, City ard. provinelal prosesutors and new sscirtants, and alfcia's und prorecutors in the Office of the Onbudaman and special prose suters, MEMORY AID IN REMEDIAL LAW] 189, 9, PresHtonta/decioretrustoes!managors of GOCCw, viata juniversities or educational Insttutions/oundations, 10. Momburs of Congress and offcius thereo! classified a4 Grade 27 and up. 14, Meibers of the Judiciary, without preludice te Constitutional provisions. 12, Chelrrion und members of Constitutional ‘Commissions, | without prejudice. to Gonsttuttonal piovsions. Exemptions; {, Elaction Oivenses ~ It's tho Regional Tra! Govt tat has lurisdiction as provided. for in the Omnibus Election Code aven if they. are commited by public officers classified os Grade 27 and higher and in relation to thelr offices. 2. Court Martial Casas ~ Cifenses committed by members af he Armed Forces and other porsora “subjest to miltary law - are cognizuble by court marta! if such offenses ‘re ‘vervica connected” 38 oxpreaaly ‘enuimierated In RA 7055, JUPISDICTION OF FAMILY COURTS i Fas No. 8360 establishing the. Family Court santing. hom exclu origina uted Ot Cchlid ond family caged! namaly: Criminal tases * ‘whiere one of mory of the accused Is below 18 €2°8 of age but not loss than 9 years of age or ‘where ane or moro cf fii victim la @ minor at the tine of the commiésion’of the oifonse, provided {nat If the minor Is found gulty, the court hall promulgate sentence end ascertain any olvi liobilty which tie accused mey have incurred. The sentence shiil be suspended without need of an application pursuant to tho “Child and Youtt Wosfare Code of FO 803. a5390 |2009 CENTRALIZED DAR OPERATIONS __ *:) barangay where the real proparty (or any * part thereof Ia eltuated, ~The Lupon hss 10 authortty over disputes: 1, Involving parties who actually’ reside In barangays of different c'eshrunlcipalilos, ‘except where such baranyays adjoin 2ach + other. 2. Involving teal property located In diflurunt Tunlelpatives, GRIMINAL ACTION ~ I on¢ by which the Siate protecutes © parson for an act or omission punishable by av", BECTION 4: INSTIUTION OF crIMmAL 41 ACTIONS | Fat ottenses whore a pretindnary Inontigation Is required: 1! By.filng the COMPLAINT with the proper officer for tha purpose of conducting the requisite pentminary Inveatlantion, fino. (Ruta 112, Seo. 1, Par, 2). “y Forall OTHER offenses: | By: filng ti COMPLAINT or INFORMATION Tha sireety wht the Munlelpal THal Govrts and *" Manlepal Chreult Tital Couns, or the compialst ‘withthe office of the prosoaiter, | Mania and othor chartered citoa, the compinint shat! ba Med with thn office of the | prouscutcr una olherws provided n thelr caattors. DOES NOT APPLY to étfenaea which fare subject to surkmary proceture. «Effect of Institution of the criminal acon: A’rInterrupts. the running of the perlod of A prencription ot. the offense, charged unless “". “etharwise prov.ded by special lave, 21 @ Act No, 3323 govamu the preseritive £1. parade’ of violations of spacial laws, 0 \ Offenses other than. these. panalizes under he Revised Penal Code. “= Note: With respact to offennes oonaize oii by special taws, the fling of tha corapinist 2°." of laformation “in coutt Ie the ono that Interrupts the prescriptive period and nol ‘the fling of the complaint in the proper ‘office for purposes. of conducting a San Beda Coflene of Keay praiiminary Investigation. (Zaldivia_ vs. Royes, G.R, No, L.102342, July 3, 1992) + The fling’ of a complaint fat purposen ol preliminary Investigation starts the prosecution process : ‘Tho Peopl. of the:Phtipphes is the ca offended party but since the crima Is aise fn ovtrago agelctithe ottended party, Né is onted to intewane Inte prosecutton in cases whore the clvll actlor: is impliedly insifuted therein, + 1 Srepanslon of Proverlptive Porlods of Casei: Fall.ng Under the Authority of thé upon Under gon. 442 of the Local Goverment Code of 491, no complaint, pettlon, actlon or procueainy, ‘wit ia the authority ofthe Lupon shail be institu'ed unless there has bgen & conelllation and accompanied by a certficate that no sott'ement has ven rezched of wiess the solt'ament hes ‘been repudiated. While under conciiaton, thn Prescriptive patiod shell be suspended irom thy ‘uy of the lng ot complaint with the punong barangay whlch suspension hall not exceed 60 cuys, The prescriptive feriod shall resume upon receipt of the certifesle of ropudin.ian to file pluswader ise iy his aN inienitiuss 4. File on action for mandamus, In caso of {gravo abuse of discretion; 2. Ledge a now complaint before the cout having Jurledletion evar, the otfe..a0 wher thera is no double Jeopardy; 7 Take up the matter with the Secretary of Justice in accordance with the Revised Adininistrative Cec’s cr with the President In 2 against the yD 8 puoder on, ‘being, public ‘be immediately OgeciMeRf for tha protection of Interest reqil Investigated aidan Beda College of Law tha society, (Domingo vs, Sanciyanbaysn, G.R. ‘No, 103276, April 14, 1996) Exceptions: 1. To afford adequate proisct'on to ihe constiutional rights of the acc sed. (Hemardez vs, Albano, GR. ido, L-19272, Jon. 25, 1967): 2 When ' necessary for the _ovderly administration of justice or to vol oppression or miuliplicity of actions. (Hamandoz vs, Albaivo, supra); 3, When there Is @ prejudicial question whi Is subludico; 4, When the avis of the officer ara without or in excess of authority. (Plavias vs. GP, G.R. No £46440, Jarwary 18, 1939), 8. When the prosecution ts under an inv jaw, vrdinage “or roguiations (Young vs. Rottarly, GR. No, L-10951, Fouruary v4, 1916): When double jeopary s clearty apparent, When the court had "o Juriticton ever the ‘offense. (Lopez vs. City Judge. G.R. Nu. L= 25795, Oct. 29, 1966); 8, When its w case of persecution rather ‘han prosecution; 8, Wher the charges ure manifestly false and motivated by the lust for vengeance; 10, When there Is clearly no prima facie case against the accused and a motion to quash ‘on that ground has been denied. (Salonga ¥S. Pano, G.R, No, L-59524, Feb. 18, 1985); and 11, Prevent the threatened unlawiul avest of petitoners.. (Brocka vs." Enrile, GR Nos. 69963-65, Docomber 10, 1990) SICTION 2: FORM OF THE COMPLAINT OR INFORNATION Form; 4. Inviting: 2. Inthe name of the Pevple of the Pnilippines; and 3. Against all persons who appear to ba responsible for the offense involved, SECTION 3: COMPLAINT DEFINED AComplaint io: 1, Asworn written statement; 2, Civarging a person with an offense; 3. Subscribed by the offended party any peace ‘officer, of other publla.otficer charged wih ‘the efiforcément of the law victated. +The complaint as defined under Section 3 19 different from the complaint ‘led -viin dhe Prosecutor's — Office, The cumaint MEMORY AID IN REMEDIAL LAW| 191. mentioned in thia section refers to one fled ‘n court for the commencement of @ criminal prosecution for violation of a crime, usually cognizable by municipal trial courts a¢ well a5 to a complaint fled by an offended part in private crimes. of those which cannot be prosecuted de officio. Roquisites of a Complain 4. itnvist be la willing and under gat; 2. It must bo in the of the People of the Phillppina: 3, Itmust charge a person with an offense; and 4. itt must be autserlbed vy the offended party, by any peace otficer or public officer charged with the enforcement of the iaw violated. Tho COMPLAINT FILED WITH THE PROSECUTOR's OFFICE, from which the lattor may tnitlato @ proliminary Investigation, rofers to: 4, Any written complaint 2. Filed by the otfended party or not 3. Not necessarly under oath, except in two instances: a, Complaint for commission of an offenso which cannot be prosecuted de officio or is private in nature &, Where the Inw requires that It Is to be starléd by a complaint swom to by the ofended' party, or whon it pertalns to those whlch need to be enforced by spociiad public officers, Porsons who can file a complaint i. Offended party; 2. Any peaed oftcer, 3. Other public! otficer charged wi'h. the enforcement ef the law violated (0.9, internal Reveni ion of the NIRC, custo} ft folation of tho 4 Mm 2 E\INFORMATI we private armel Tar492 | 2009 CENTRALIZED DAR OPERATIONS Under the Ruloon Summary Procedure: ‘A complaint mav be directly filed In the MIG, provided that In Metro Manila and in ‘chartered ‘ttlas, the criminal action. may only be commenced by the fling of Information, wich means, only by tre prosecutcr, excont when tho offense cannot be prosecuted de officio a8 In private crimes SECTION 4: INFORMATION DEFINED. ‘An Information ts: 4. Anaccusation In wring: 2, Charging a person with ar effenss; 3, Subseribed by the prosecuor and filed with the court : Rogiilsites of an Information: 4. Itmust be In writing: 2, Itmust charge a person with an offense; 3, Itmust be subscribed by the fiscal; 4. Itmust be fied in court. Persons Authorized to Fite Information 4. Clty oF provincial prosecuor end thelr assistant; and 2, Duly appointed spectal presacutors. Note: Prosecution In the “RTC Is always commenced by Iniorination, Except: 1. In certain crimes agalnst _chastiy (concubinege, adultery, _ seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousnees); und Defamations imputing any of tho aforosald offenses wherein a sworn waiton complaint Is required :n accordance with Section 5 of this Rue, + In case of varience between the complain filed by the offended. party the ‘Information In. crimes against cixastty, #0 complain controls. (Faople va. Osu, GR No. L-42671, October 10, 1935) ‘© An Informatian not property signad cannot be ‘cured by silence, acqulescence or even by express eorsent. (Villa vo. Ibanez GR No. L 4313, Match 20, 1951) SECTION 6: WHO. MUSY PROSEGUTE CRIMINAL ACTIONS: Full Discretion and Control of the Frosociitor All criminal actions commencad by a complalt or Information shall_be prosecuted under tha direction and control of the rrosucutor. San Peds Coltege af Lato Note; The Institution of a criminal action depends ‘upon ‘he sound discretion of the fiscal, But once Ute case is already fled In cour, the same ean no longer be withdrawn or dismissed) without th uult’s approval. Should the {al find it proer to conduct a reiavestigation of the case at such ago, tse permission of the Court must be Secured. (Cros30 vs. Mogul, GR No, 153979, June 30, 1987) Conditions for a ‘Prvate Prosecuior to Prosicuta a Criminal Action 4, fhe public prosecutor has a heavy work schedule, or thera 1s no. public prosecutor assigned In the province or city, 2. . The private prosecutor Is authorized IN WRITING by the Chief of the Prosecutor Otice or the Regional Slate Prosecutor (RSP) 3. The authority of the pr'vate prosec utor must be apj.cved by the court; 4, Tho private, prosecutor shall zontinue to prosecute the case lntil the end of the trial unless the authorlly Is withdrawn or oll.orwise revoked; 6, In-cage of the withdrawal at revecation of the authoriy of the private prosecutor, the same rust be approved by court. (Mamo Cire. No. 25, April 26, 2002, Regarding Armandment (0 Soe. &, Rulo 110) + In-appeats bofore the CA-and the SC, It fp cnly'the Sollctor General that is authorized to bring and dofend actions In benalf of tho People of the Philipplnes, (Poorve vs. Neno, GR No, £4698, January 19, 1992) + In ail cases olevated to the Sandigabayan and from the Sandiganbayan to the SC, ths $ ma, through NsSan Beda College of Favs Matters falling WITHIN. the Controt and Discrotion of the Prosacution What case (0 fla. (Poople vs. Pineda, Gut No. L-26222, July 21, 1967); 2, Whoin to prosacute. (People vs. O2varas, GAR. Nos, 100936-39, us. 15, 1999): 3% Manner "of prosecution (Peovie vs Nazareno, G.R. No. 103964, Aug. 01, 1993); 4, Right to “withdraw Informetion | Lefere arraignrient even without notice and nearing. (Galvez vs. CA, GR. Ne. 1140/6, Cetobor 24, 1904), Matters WITHIN the Control of the Court AFTER to caso le Flu Suspension of Arraignment. (Crespo. vs, Mogul, GP. No; 483373, June 30, 1387); 2 Relnvestigation. (Velasquez vs. Tuquoro, GAR, No. 88442, Feb. 15, 1990); 3, Prosecution by Fiscal, (Ste, Rose Mining Co. vs. Zabala, GR. No. L-44723, Aug. ot, 1997); 1. Dismissal of tye caso, (Oungon vs. GA, GA. Nos. 77860-61, Mar. 28, 1986); Downgrading ‘of offense or dropping of accused even before plea, (Rule 110, sov 14) Limitations on Control by Court Prosecution 13 enliled to notice of hearing. (Ropublic vs, Juxigo Sunga, G.R, No. 38634, June 20, 1986); 2 Court must await result for pettion for review. (Murcolo vs, Ci, G.R. No. 108696, 4 August 1994); 3, Prosesutlon’s stand to maintsin prosecution ‘shuld bo respected by the court. “opie vs, Montesa, GR, Wo. 114202, Sopt. 20 1998); 4. The court must make its own independent assessment of evidence in granting o: dismissing motion to dismiss. Otherwise. ludgaent in vold, (Mavtinez vs. CA, GR. Ne 112887, Oclebar 13, 1994) Privat Crimos are those which cannot be prosecuted except upan complaint fled ty the offended party. This logal ieculrement wes Impased aut of consideration for tha aggrieved party who might prefer to suffer the outrage in silence rather thar) p> through the scandal of a public trial, Prosecution of Private Crimes: Who May Proseéuto” +. 1, Concubinaga and Aquttory = only by the offended ‘spouse who shoud have the status, capacity, and legal representation. ut the time of fiting 07 the compleint, r2jardiess ofage: MEMORY AID IN REMEUIAL LAW] 193, When complainant had already been divorced. he can no longer file the complaint ‘Prapil vs. Sumera, GR NO. 801 46, Juna 30, 1968): b. Both guily poriies must te includes in the complaint; 2. The offondad party did not consent to the offense nor pardoned the offenders. Seruction, Abduction and Acts of LascWviousness ~ prosecuted exclusively and ‘successively by the folowing persons in this order: 8, By the offended woman; 6. By; the parents, grandparents of legptludicial guardians In > that successive order, If the offended party Ir Incompetent or incapable of doing s0: By the State purauant to the DOCTRINE OF PARENS PATRIAE, when tne offended arly dies oF becomes incapacitated before - she ‘could flo the complaint and she has no known. parents, grandparents or guardian. ae 3. A Cefamation Imputing to a person any of the foregohg crimer of coneubalna adultery, weduetlon, abduction or ‘acts of faseliotisness can be provecuted only by the party or paitles defamed (Article 360, last par, Revised Penal Codo) + If the offended part [s of legul ago and does not suffer from physical or mental disability, she alone can file the complaint to the oxcluslen of al, Prosocution of @ Private Crime Comploxed with a Pubile Olfensa In complex crimes, where one of the component offenses Ig ne other a public offense, seedings de gio. Th since one f ovrcke, neeine af tae the ‘offendad minor, in that order,194 12009 CENTRALIZED BAP OPERATIONS CANNOT extend a valid pardon Ii sale crimes WITHOUT the conformity of the offended party, even if the fatter Is a minor, I the vifended woman Is of age and not otherwise incapacitated, only’ she can extend a valid pardon. Note: The pardon refers to pardon BEFORE fing of the criminal complaint In court. Fardun affectoc! after the fing of the complaint In court dos NOT prohibit the continuance of the prosecution of the offense EXCEPT in casa of riatriage between the offerder and the offended party. + The pardon in cases of seduction, sb scion, and atts of lasclviowsness must be express. + Under RA 6363, a2 Is now classified under crimes against persons which may now be filed by the prosecutor. u nea Raters to Beat act8 Of eters to tatur ccs in order to absoive tho In order te absolve the faccused from liabilty accused from ltabily, i must be extended tolis sufficient even if both offenders. granted only to the avfending spouse. The SUBSEQUENT MARRIAGE betweun the offended party and the accused extinguishes ine criminal liabilly of the latter, together with that of tho co-princlpals, accomplices and accassories, Except Where tha mariega was tnvolit or contracted In bad faith In order to escape criminal fabilty, 2," In private libel” or the libelovs imputation te the complainant of the commisrion of the crimes of coneubiriage, adultery, seduction, abduction, rape or acts of losciviousners, ‘and in slander by deed; 3." In multiple repe, Insofar ae the other accusa” In the other ‘acts of rape respectively ‘commited by them ara cencemed, Noie: The ACQUITTAL of DEATH of ono of tna ‘accused In the crime of adulten’ coar not bar the prosecution of the other accuned, (Pocple Topltio, GR NO. 14895, Deceriber 20, 1916). HOWEVER, the death of thé oftenced spouse before the fing of the complaint for aduttery bars ‘futher prosecution, BUT If the offended upouse died after the fing of the corresponding Bate eee eee PERE complaint, his death: wil NOT prevent the procrecing from continuing to ite ultimate conclusion because «the. participation of the offeded part In privates times Is essential net for the mulntenance of the action but solely for the vat thereof, Note: Besistance of complainant does not ber criminal prosecution but k operates as walver of the right fo pursue clvi, Indemnity. + fn offended party hy a criminal cose hoe sulfclent porsonellty to fle a. special chil action for cortlorar, in proper case, ever without the imprimatur af the. Stata. In #3 doing, the complainant should not bring ths action in the name of the People of ihe Phirpines. The action may be prosecuted 11 tha name of the sald complainant, (Perez va. Hagonoy..Rural dank, Inc, GR No. 126210, ‘March 9, 2000) SECTION 6: SUFFICIENCY OF COMPLAINT ‘OR INSORMATION Contents of a Valld Compisint of Information 4, Name and surname of the accused, of aay appeliation or nickname by which he is known 2, The designation of the offense; 3° The acts of omissions complained of as constieting offonee; 4. The name of the offended party; 5. ine approximate date of the commission ¢t the offense: 6. The place whera the offense was commited, Purpose of the Rute: 1. To ‘inform the ascused of the nature antSean Beda College of Law SECTION 7: NAME OF The ACCUSEC Purposo: Tae maniiast intent of the provision 1s to make a specific identification of the person to wnam the commission of an offense Is being imputed so that the court may acquire jurisdiction over his person and to inform him of the facts, Rules in Stating the Namo of the Accused 4. it name is known, the nma and sunane of the accused or any uppollation or nicknarae by which he has baen or Is knows: must ba stated; 2. If nenia cannot bo ascustained, @ fictitious ame with @ statement that his true name is unknown; 3, If ttue nama thereafier ascertained, such ‘ame shall Fe Inserted In the complain, or information or record, 4, While one or more persons, along with specified and names accuser, may be sued aa *Joha Does", an Information ega'nst all accused described as ‘John Loos" is vuid, and an errest warrant against them Is also wold. Note: An error in the name of the accused Ic no. teversible as long as his identity is sufficiently estabilshed. This defect is curable at any siage oF tha prozaadings a8 insertion of the rear name of tha accused Is merely a matter of form, (People vs, Padica, GR No. 102645, Apri 7, 1933) SECTION 8: DESIGNATION OF THE OFFENSE The Information or complaint must state or designate the followiny whenover possible: 1. Tha designation of the offense given by the statute, if thera iS nay designation ‘of the ffense; reference shall o¢ made to the section of the statuts punishing It 2, The atatemont oF the acts or omissions constituting the offense, In ordinary, concise and perticular words: 3. The speciia qualifying and aggravating circumstances musi be stated ‘9 ordinary and concise language. Note: The qualifying and aggravating droumstances cannot he. appreciated even i! proved UNLESS alleged In tha Information, (People vs, Perreras, G.R. No. 139622, 31 July 2001) + In qe of allegation of nggravating clrcumstarice af HABITUAL DELINQUENCY, It shoule not be ganeraly avered. The Information must epacity the requisie data regarding: 4. The commission of the previous ciimes; MEMORY AID IN REMEDIAL LAW] 295, 2. The last ceriviction or release; 3. Tho other previous corviclion or release of the accired. + In rape babes, the concurrence of tie minority of the ‘victim and her relationship with tho offender is a special qualifying circumstance which should be both alleged ‘and jyrovad with certainty in order to warrant the Imposition of the (maximum) penalty. Allogations Provall Over Designation of tho Offense In the Information + Its not the designation of the oftensa in the complaint of information that. is controling (People vs. Sanilano, G.R. No. L-31976, / pri 22, 1974); he facts alloged therein and ‘not ite tlle determine the nature of the erie, (Peoplo vs. Magdowa, GI? No, L-48487, Docember 12, 1941) : +. The accused may be convicted of a crim moro serious tan that named in the title or preliminary part if such crime Is covered by the facts alleged in the body of the Information and Its commission fa established by evidence. (Buhat vs. Court of Appaais, GR No. 119601, December 17, 1996) te + An accused could not be convicted under fone ct wiven he 13 charged with a violation ‘of anoiher If the change from one statute to the ther involve 4. Achenge on the theory of the tia 2. Requires of the defendant a different dotensa; or 3, . Surprises the accused in any way, i SECTION 9: CAUSE OF THE ACCUSATION ‘of which the Ne. ly fonstitute Si herahing | 19812-126,12009 CEN] RALIZED OAR OPERATIONS boon vielated prohibits generelly acts therelr defined and Is Intended to ooply to all persone Indisedminately, but prescribes certain Hntetlon oF exceplions fons ito violation, the comp'nint 9¢ Information ft sufficient iit aloges facts which. the ctfener did es constituting a vllaticn of law, without explicitly negating the exceplign, as the exception Is 2 malter of defensa Which the accused has to prove. Exception: Whero the stalu'e alleged {0 have been violated applies only to speuifia classes of persons and special conditions and the exemptions from its violation aie SO INCORPORATED In the language dafiaina the crime that the Ingredients of the offonse carsnot bo clearly set forth If the exompllor Is emited, then tho indictment must show that the accused oes not fall within” the exemptions. (For examples, 300. Book of Agpnio in Criutinat Procodtir, 2004, od, p. 59-60) +” When an exception or negative allegation is rot an Ingredient 2f the offense and is, ‘matter of dafanse, it need net ke alleged, Complex Crimos Where what Is clleged in the Inforniadon is a cccmplex crime ond the evidence falls to suppcit the charge as tu one of the component offenses, the defendant can be convicted of the offense Preven. SECTION 10: PLACE OF COMMISEION OF ‘THE OFFENSE Purpose: To show territorial jurisdiction. A complaint or Information fe fs from the allegations that the offense was committed or tome of Its essential Ingredients occurred at some place, wilhin ths Jurtsaletion of the court, Exception: When the place of commission Is oA essential elemert of the offense, the place of commission must be alleged with particularity (Eg. Trespass to dwoling, dostructve amon, robbery in an Innabted nouse). SECTION 44: CATE OF COMMISSION OF THE OFFENSE Be General Rule: It is NOT tequired that the ‘complaint or inforration etate with particularity the DATE of the commission of the eiimu. it suffices that the allegation approximates or be cs ear 2s the actual date when the offence was committed, xéo atlont If the DATE OF the commission of the neo constitutes. an“eesential eleinent of the offense (2.9. Infanticide Abortion, Biyemy), + Tho remedy against an indictment that folls to allege the time of commission of the offense with suffclont dofiioness Is 8 motion for bi of pariculars unde" Rule 110 Sec. 10, the falure to move of spacifcation ar the quashat of the Information on any of the grounds proviced far In. tho Rules oprives tho accused of the right xo object to evidence which would be lawfully introduced ‘und admitted uicloe an) Information of more for leas genoral terms but which suflelanty ce rgus tho eccusod sth a defiite eine. Besides, the exact date of the commission of the time Ie not an sasentiol element of the time. (People vs. Epodos, GR No, 137106 07, 2601) SECTION 12: NAME OF THE OfFENDED PAY Gerercl Rule: The offended party iaust be designated by nama and sumame ot any other appeilation or nickname by which he has been of Is krown, Exenption: In crimes oyalnst propsity, If the name ci the offended party Is unknown, the froperty mist b9 described with euch particulary fas to properly Identity: the particular offense chaiged, ‘SECTION 43: DUPLICITY OF OFFENSE ‘There Io dupileity when tha complaint or two of more DISTINCT or 136 Sean Hedy Cotte xe of Tatofoam fen College of Lew, 2. Unity of penat provision infringed upon. o Molated; 3. Unlty of erlminal intent which means that twe ‘of more violations of the same penal provision are united on one and the same Intont leading to the pornutiation of the same criminal purpese or claim. (People vs. Lodesie, G.R. No, L-41822, September 79, 1976) Principio of Absorption ‘Acts committed In furtherance of rebetion though Cc imes In themsolvae are coamed abscrbed in the ‘one single crime of rebation, The test is whether of not the act was done in furtherance of a poilcal end. The poiltical motive of the act should Eo conclusively demonstrated, (Enric vs. Solazar, G.R. No, 92163, June 08, 1999) Walvor Should there be dupteily of offerse in the Information, the acoused must mova for the quashat ofthe sama BEFORE artaignment. Otherwise, he Is deomed to have waived the Objection and maybe found gulty of as many offense a8 thoto charged and proved during the trial Splitting of Case NOT Allowed On the other hand, a defendant should not be harassed with various prosecutions based upon the same ‘act by sptiting the same int» various charges, all emanutirg from the same iaw Violated when the. prosecution coud easily aid well embody them in @ alagle Information, SECTION 44; SUBSTITUTION AMENDMENT = OR Kinds of Amendment 4, - Be/ora the Flea ~ the goneral rule is that eny amendment, formal or substantial, before the accitand enters his plea may be one without leave o/ court. + Exzeplion: Anyamendment beore plea, \hich downgrades the nature of the cffenso charged In or exclude any nccused from the complaint or Information can by mad only: 3, Upon motion by tha prosecutor b, With notice to the offended party; 6, With LEAVE of COURT, 2 Alter the Plea - covers only fermal ‘athondment provided: a. Leave of cour is oblalnedi, b, Such pinedment Is not rejuuicial to tho nights of the accused. MEMORY AID IN REMEDIAL LAW] 197. Exception: When @ fact supervenes Which changes the natura of the crime charged in tha Information or upgrades It to a higher crime, in which casa, amendment ns fo substance may be made but thera Is a need for another arraignment of the accused tunder the amended information, ‘An Amondmunt is ONLY In FORM: a. Where it neither affects nor alters the nature of ine offense charged; OR b, ‘Where the charge does not deprive the accused. cf 2 fair opportunity to present his defense; OF ¢ Where it:does not involve a change In the basic theory of ine prosocutir, 9.99789 An Amendment Is ar. Amendmant in Substanco witere lt covers matters Involving the rectal of facts constituing tha offense charged and determinat've of the jurisdiction of the court. (Aimedts vs. Vilais2, GR No. .-81665, August 6, for) Substitution | Ht appenre at an}! tine bafore Judgment that @ mistake hes boen made in charging the proper offense, tha court shall cismiss the odginal Ccompiaint or tnfoimiation upon the fing of a new ‘one charging’ tha proper offense, providad the accused shailnotbe placed [double jeopardy. Limitation ta'the Rule on Substitution: 4, No judgment has yet becn renderad; 2. The accused cannot be convicted of the offense cherged or of any other offense necesoarlly ncluded theral 3, The wocused would not be placed in doubleson one cenealizeD nnn OPERATIONS 2 a It does not atfect of alter the noture of the offense originally charged; t dons not favolve a change In the haat, theory of the prasecutlon 80 as fo reculre the accused fo undergo any materia! charg or modification In his defense, It does not axpose tire accused fo a charg which would call for a higher pendity; It dos nut cause surprise or deprive the accused of an oppoitunty to méct the nw averinent, A defendant may file a counterclaim tor Interpeader against the plaintf.and w thi party also claiming the subject matter of the ‘ult. (Gablonza vs. Cor of Appeals, G I No, 140311, 2001) a Uo pal pold is OF EAN eee plea has been entered can be offectad without Toav9 ov ccurt. May Involve thor | Involves substantot formal or substantia! } change from the changes. corigical charge. ‘Amendment belore the | Substitution of information must be with fava of court 68 the. original Information has to be dlsmssed, ‘Amendment is only as to form, there Is NO “Another preliminary investigation is the: would ba withdrawn, Invoke double leopardy. accured could need ‘for arothor | ontallod and the preliminary accused has to pinad Investigation and: tha'| anew to the new retaking of tie plea of | Infonnation. the accused, An, ‘amended oF Information refers to the that the m8 offense charged information inthe original | Invotve's. a ditferont Tnformation or to’ an | offense which ces offense ‘which | not Include or ir not necessary Inéludes or | necessarily Included |s nacessaniy Included | In the otlginal charge; In the original charge, | hence the accured hence substantial | cannot claim doubie amendments to the | Jecpardy. Infermation after the plea hes cen taken cannot be made over 1 tha objection of the accused, tor if the ‘original’ Information cc Ve Gan Meds Coltene of Lay nen botwson Allegation and Proof (Lituations Contompiatod) ‘When’ tha offanse proved is oss seriout © than, and Is necessarily. inclusied In, the offoaea charged, in which case the Wofendant shall bo convictod of the offense proved Wiien the offense proved Is:more seriouti than: and Includes he ‘offense charged, ii which case the defendant sholl be convisted of the ofiansa charged When the offense proved Is neither Included in, aor does It Include, the offense charged and |r different therefrom, in which case the court should dismiss the action or d order tha fing of naw Information charging the proper offense. Note: The third situation set forth above Is st: yeliution of information under Soction 14, Rulo 119, SEOTION 18: PLACE WHERE ACYION 18 TO BE INSTITUTED Purpove: The purpose being not to compel the defendant to move to,] and app court from Fn diferent at of the; errtory whore the crime was commited, 9 it Would eBuse him great ‘neonvnnience in looking for his witnesses and sine evidane in net place, Verne 's Jurisdictions ‘as the court has no Juredietion to try an offense committed outsise ts territorial jurisdiction. It cannot bo waived, of hanged by agreement of the parties, or by the convent of the dofendent Gonerat Rul criminal Subject to existing laws. In all biting the pice Eton 15(b), Blo Where an offense is Committed on board aSau Meda College of ae vossol in tha course uf its voyage ~ The criminal action may be Instituie and scied In {he proper court of tha firt port of entry of of any munlelpalty of territory through ‘which the veesel passed during such voyage subject to the gonerally accected princins ‘of Intemational law; (Section 15(0), Rule 110) 4. Plracy ~The venve of piracy, unlike all other crimes, has no territorial limits. it Is triabie anywhere; (Poopie vs. Loh, G.R, No. 17958, February 27, 1922) 5. Libel ~ The action may be instituted at the lection of the offended er suing party in the province or city a” Where the libelous aiticle Is printed and fist published; b, Hone of the offendad partir is a private Individual, where sald. private Individual actually “esides at the time of the commission of the offense; © If the offended party 's a’ public official, ‘where the latter helds office at the time of the comirission of the offense, 8. In exceptional circumstances ~ To ensure a fait tral and Impartial inquiry. The SC shall «hava *he povier to order @ change of venue oF place of trial to avold miscarriage of Justice: (Section 6/4), Article Vill, 1287 Constiutian) 7. In casus filed under B,P, 22° The criminal action shall ba filed jn the place where the chack was dlshenorod of Issued. Iu case of crossed-check, place of depositay or collecting bank, SECTION 16: INTERVENTION OF THE OFFENDFD PARTY iN CRIMINAL ACTION © General Rule: The offended party has the right to ne by counsel in the prosecution uf the ation; where the elvil action for racovery of civil Habilty:la Inatituted in the criminal action Pursuant te Rule 417, Excoptions: . 1. Whera from the nature of the stime and the law defining and punishing it, NO civil iabitty arises in favor of the affended party; end 2, Where the offended party has waived hs ‘ight to civil ndumnity; OR 3. Where the offended party has expressly feservod his ght to institute © eeparate civ section; OR 4, Where the offended party vas already ‘natituted said action, 7 .—— MEMORY AD IN REMEDIAL LAW] 199 i SECTION 41 INSTITUTION OF CRIMINAL AND IVIL ACTIONS: Gonorat Rule: When 2 criminal action “Ie ‘nattuted, the civil gction for the recovery of efvll liauilty arising for the offense shall be deemed instituted with te cciminat action Exceptions: 1. When the pffended party WAIVES the elvil aetlon;.. 2 When the isffended party RESERVES his right to inetitute @ separate civi action: 3 When ofieniied party INSTITUTES A CIVIL ACTION PRIOR to the criminal action. Whon Reservation shall be made: 1. Before the prosecition starts to prasent jts evidence; and 2 Under elrcumstances affording the offended party a reasonable opportunity to make such reservation. wt Purpose: The same is intended to prevent deublo teccvery, (Yakut Philppinos vs. CA, G.R. No, 91056, Oct. 08, 1899). Invances: Where NO Reservation to file’ tho Civil Action Separately shall by Allowed .* 1. BP 22 ease (Rule 111, Sec. 1 par. b) 2. Cases cognizable by’ the Sandiganbayan, (Sec, 4 of PD 1608 as umended by RA 8249) 5, Tax caeus, (See.7 por. b no.1, RA 9262), . ‘Note: ONLY the civil Labiity arising frnm the crime charged (cg C200 |2009 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS, full the fling fees based on the face value of the check as the actual damages; 2 if damages, oiher than actual (ioral, ‘oxoniplary ‘and other damages), are EPECIFIED in the comelaint or Iafcrmation, th corresponding filng foes shoal bs pad; 3, Where moral, exemplary and olagr damage ate NOT SPECIFIED In the :emploint or Information (tha grant and antouni thoroot ‘79 fet 10 the sounc dicrotion of tho trial court), t18 correspording fling fees need not be paid and shall simply constitute n first hun Con tha Judgment awarding such damages, Note: Counterclaims, {Can objection was raises, the court, Instead ‘of dismissing thy complaint or information, fiscal to conduct it. (Doromat ..vs. Sandigonboyen, GR No, 85468, Sepomber 7, 1983) Romedios of the Accused I! Thoro Was No Preliminary Investigator Refise to enter a plea upon arraignment and cbject. to further proceedings upon such ground; Insist on @ preliminary investigation; File a cortiorar, refuse Ralse lack of prolminary investigation a rrr on apppal:(US vs. Banzvela, G.R. No. 10172, 1916); (Conde vs. CF, G.R. No, £21296, ala, 1829) Note: As Penta vestigation is NOT part of dismissal of the case by the Inventor sit nl eonsitue’ double Jecoardy ‘and will not bar tne fling of another coniplaint for the same offense, but If re-fied, the acctsed Is entiled to another preliminary Investigation, +A new preliminary Investigation is also teguired aftar amendment af the Information which change the natura of the odme charged. (Luclena vs. Mariano, GR No, L+ 32060, July 30, 1971) SECTION: 2: OFFICERS AUTHORIZED TO CONDUCT PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION. Porsons Authorlzed to Conduct a Preliininary Investigation 1. Provinclal or oly fiscal and thelr assistants}. 2. Natlona, and regionat alate prosecutors; end 3. Such other officers as may be authorized by’ law such 98; the COMELEC, Ombudsman ont NU EU peerkeue a Y ae y HEPudge cannot 203204 |2009 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS nior can the prosecutor fie an Intermation wit, tne Sandiganbayan without belng depullzes by, aad without prior wrltan authority of, tha Ombudsman or his doputy. Authority uf COMELEC The 1987 Constitution mandates the COMELEU not only fo Invastigate tut also fo prosecute cases ‘of violation of election iaws. This authoriy Is exclusive but fi may deputize other officials to conduct the Investigation amt the prosecuilon (Poople vs. Basille, G.R, Nos. 83938-40, viov. 03, 19897) Authority of tho Ombudsman The power of the ombudsman to make Investigation extends to any illeyal act of bmission ‘of any public official, whether or not the sama is committed in relation to his office, This however does not include administrative cases of court personnel because the 1987 Constiution exclusively vests in the Supreme Court administrative’ supervision over all courts and court personnel (Macada vs. Vasquez, .G.R. No. 102761, Apr. 22, 1993) The Ombudsman Dous following poworrs 1, To prosecuts before the Sendiganbayan ury Impeachable officers with any offense whish carries with it the penaily of removal from office, or any penalty service of which wouid amount to removal from office because by constitulonal mandate, they can only ve removee fram office cn impeachment for, and conviction of, culpahle violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and ‘corruption, ther high’ erimos, or betrayal of public rsh 2, To proseculs public officers or employees who hava committed eiection offenses. 3, To file an Information for an offence cognizable by the regular courts, NOT have tho Authority of the PCGG The POGG has the power to Investigate end prosecute such ll-gotten wealth cases of former Prasidant Marcos, his relatives and assorates, and graft and corrupt practices casas that may be assigned by tho President {9 the 2CGG to be fies! with the Sandiganbeyan... (Zaldvar vs, Sendiganbayen, G.R. Nos: 79690-79707, Apri 27, 1988) Effects of Investigation 4. it does nat warrant the queshal of ihe Information, 2, does not affect the coun’s Jurlsdictlon or the validity of the information an Incomplota’ Proilminary 704 San Meda Coilege of Law SECTION 3: PROCEDURE “Fiti.) of the compleint accompanied ty the aff'duvts end supporting documenta whieh must bo avacuted under oath, 1 [Wwinin 10” faye eter tho fling, the Investigating office sha eltherciemise or habe subpoDe, Sit eee I avbpena is Issued, vesyordent shal! submit ‘courteraitdavit and other auppecting dovuments within 10 oaye trom feceip thera. li Cianiieatery Hearing (optional. 1 ahall be held vathia 10. daye from uubmission of alflavila of from the explain of the period at theve sub ieston ‘Resoluton of investinating prosecuior (890. 48 5) + WC respondent cannot he subpoenaed, or It ‘subpcenaed but does rot submit his counters affidavit within 10 doys,.investigating officer shal resolve the complaint based on the avidonce presented by tre complainant, Note: The respondent shall not be ellowed to file ‘a motion to diemise In Hlou! of a countei-affidavit. Tne respondent atso has no right to cross- examine the witnestes which the vomplalnant- tigation SAN BROA -fran Beda College of Haw SECTION d: RESOLUTION OF INVESTIGATING. PROSECUTOR AND ITS REVIEW the investigating prosocutor finds cause to hold thy respondent for rial, he shall prepere the resolution and information, 1 ther is reasonable cause cause exists, to hold respondent dismiss the for thal, prepare nae. resolution, Within 6 days from resolution, forward the tocord of the case to (1) Provincial or city prosecutor; (2) Chief stnte prosecutor, or (8) Ombudsman or his doputy, in zases cognizable by the Sandiganbayan in the ‘exercise of It original juriadiction, ‘The abovementioned officers shall act on the resolutlon within 10 days. trom their tecalpt thereof and shall Immediately Inform the partie of auch action. Note: Ho shall. certity. under outh in the Information that: * 1. He or an authorized officer personally exim'ned the complainant and his witnesses; The'e Is reasonable ground to bellave that a crime has been committed and ihe accused Is. probably guity theroof; 2, The accused was Iniormed of the complaint and the evidence against him; and 3. He wes glen en opportunity to submit conicoverting evidence. + No complaint oF lifoimation may ba fled o° dismissed by ait Investigating ~ prosecutor ‘withart the prlor written authority 0, approval of the provinclal or ,ciy prosecutor or chiet ‘stole prosecutor or the Ombudsman or his deputy. Effects of Exclusion of Other Persons from tha information 1. , Hauring the bal, evidence is shown that such persons should have beun charged, the fact ‘nat they were vot Included in the information éo0s nol rellove them of criminal ‘billy, and they can be subsequantly prosecuted. 2. The accused who has been chargsd with ihe offense is not allowed to escape punshrvent merely because it develops in the course of the ‘rat that there wore otaer guily parieipants inthe erime, pain foy cpelary of stl, 3 by Tu RIGTNVBADS the adverae e an josecuion*OMnekg leevingg ti MEMORY AID IN REMEDIAL LAW| 205 3. Ik does not. vilate the valldty of the Jnformation, Nelther Is the same a ground for ‘motion to quash, Effect if the {nformation Is Filed by someone NOT Authorided by Low + The court, dogs not acquire jurisdicion,-The caused's {allure to assert lack of authorlly an "2 part of Ihe prosecutor in. filing tho ormation dees not coustiule a walver thoreof, + The prosacutor, is required to resolve the complaint bated on the evidence prevented by the ‘complainant in the event that the ‘espondent cannot bé subpoenaed of. the respondent, if subpoenaeri, doas not submit a ‘counter-aficayt within the 10-day period, Ostormination of Assistant Fiscal or. State Prosecutor ‘ : + The determination mado by the assistant fiscal cr slate grosecutor tn his resotutlon Is at best: RECOMMENDATORY. Their findings may he reversed or modified by the provincial ‘or cy fecal. + Where the Investigating prosecutor teconimends the dismissal of the case but his findings are reversed by tae provindal oF city prosecutor on she ground that-a probable cause exists, tho provincial or clty prosecutor may himself fle or direct another asslatant prosecutor: to fle the corresponding Information, WITHOUT need of another preliminary investigation, ‘Appnat to the Secretary of Justia. (C95 Ciroular Nu, 70 dated July 3, 2000)” ‘An aggrleved party may appeal by fling a verlied faled reso Dubs SRgE A.206 {2009 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS same, (Saction 11) +The Ombucsmuri has the authority to reverse ‘or modify the rngolulica of the afficers of the Uffice of the Ombudsman. ' + He may direct the officer concemed elther (1) To file whe cocresponding Information| without ‘conducting another preliminary investigation OF (2) To dlamies oF have for diemissal of the omlalnt of Informatio. with notlen to the partes + Note: Where the information was already filed tn court but ine accused filed a petition for review cf the findings of the Investigating prosecutors with the DOJ, the court is bound to suspend the ‘arraignment of the accused for @ period not exceeding 60 days. + This does not contradict tha doctrine a *Crospo vs, Mogul, because said case maroly acvisod the DOJ a8 far us practicable to terain from entertaining a pettion for review ft appeal from the acilon 01 the prosecuter ‘when the complaint or Information hos ‘already fled in court. The rent and ultimate test of the in“ependence and Integrty of the court Is nt th filna ofthe mation to suspend but the fling of a moon to diamise, tho Informetion on the basis of @ resolution of tho petition for review reversing the Joint Resolution ofthe investigation prosecutor. F Ra as Eau ba eeu sts Ena ge He (AM No, 05-8-26-SC) + All Flest Level Courts shall coritinue with tro preliminary Invesligation of cases pending ‘with them and terminate them not later than December 31, 2006. © Upon the date of “effectivity of ties amendments, First Level Courts hall no longer accept new casos for pratiminory favestigation, whlch tll ua: ‘exclualun Jutidellon of courts of other tavels, * ‘These amendments shall take .effect ur October 3.2008 following thelr publicat‘on Ir ‘8 newepapor of genural circulation not later than Septormber 15, 2005. Soction 6 of tho Rulos af Court was dototod by (AM 05-8-26-5C Note: The fotlowing is the new § zetlon &. (Soctivn Gis the samo as Sector. 5) =O Sean Meta College of Hato SECTION 6: WHUN WARRANT OF ARREST MAT ISSUE Probatio Gause presupposes a reasonable ground for bellet In the, existence: of facts ‘warranting the proceedings éomplained of, ‘+ fn apparent state of facts found to exist upon easonabia Inquiry which would, Inéuce & fnasorably Inteligedt nd prudeh man to believo thet the accused person had ommiied the erime cherged, + WF the judge finds probobie cause, he shal issue 4 warrant of arrest, or a commitment order if the accuted had already bean arresied and hold him for tal, If the judge Is satisfied that tivere 1s no necessity for placing the accused under custody, he may i983 sunimons inetond of wa rant of arrest, + Judges of Regional Teal Courts and inferior cours need NOT personelly examins the sompaainant and. wiinesses In the determination of probable case for the iseuance of the warfant of arrest. (Sollven vs. Mokastar, G.R. No, L+82585, Nov. 14 1980) Prozedura Disrriss ‘Within i¢days | [ Issue rase We] | frown flag, the | | Warrant record vudge must | | of Arrest clearly personaly " fais. to | | dolormine the | | probable establish | | oxistence of peobable | | probable caure t In case’ of doubt, Judge may | “order 4 prosecuiot to present additions! evidence within 5 days; within 30 Jays trom fling. of complaint or Information, Court must rosol's issue, Chepor and the ited by the fiscal ind!San Beda College of Law 2, Oni the basis thereat ne may: “a. Dlarriss; bo Issue warrant; ur @. Require further affidavits + The provincial nsca', if he believes that the ‘accused should. be’ Immediately laced in custody, “may °"flle “the corresponding Information 89 that the RTC may 'ssiie the necessary warrant ‘of arrest, (Samulde vs. Seven, Un GR No. 182506, Nov. 14 1988) + While the judye may roly on the fscal's zertiication’ thereof, tie same is NOT Sonelusive. on hin qs the iseuance of sald warrant calls, for the exercise of Judiclat discretion ané, for thet purpose, the jedge may require the subnilsalon of affidavits of witnesses to eld him In ardving at the proper sonelusion, OR he may require the “seal to conduct further preliminary Investigation or relnvestigation, + The determination of probable cause by the prosecutor. is for purpose different. fiom determination of probable cuss by the judg "The purpose of tie prosacutor Is lo aelermine whether there Is reasonable ground io believe that the accused is gully of the offense charged and should be held for trial, That of the Judge Is to determine whether a warrant of arrest should be Issued againct the accused. (Ho vs. People, GR. No. 108638, Oct, 09, 1997; Instances when Ww. Nosassary 4, Ifthe complaint or information was filed after sthe accused was lowtully arrested without warrant, 2. Ifthe offense is puiishabwe by fine oniy; 3. Ifthe complaint o¢ information Is fied with the MTC and Involves en offense which co2s Not rasuke rolminay Investigation, judge may Issue summons Instead of wairant of arrest, fhe Is satisfied that thie Is tio necessity for placing the accused under custody. (RULE 142, sae. 9) nt of ‘Arcost NOT Remedy of tho Accused viho bullevay thot thora Is NO Probable Case to hold tim for tral 4, To fle with the trial court a motion to dismics fon auch ground or for the cetermination of probable cause. 2. Ifthe warrant of arros: has beon Issued, the accused may fle a mation to quash’ the ‘warrani of arreat of to recall the seine on the ‘ground ef lack of probeble cause beso No W REMEDIAL Vy} 207 Roinvestigation + Ones the complaint or ifoimation is fed ix court, any mollon for reinvestigation ts addiossed ‘0 the sound discretion of the court, + Wile cho tal court Judge hus the power fo otder the relnvestigation of the case-by the prosecutor, he may not, before the prosecutor concluded’ tha relnvestigation, recall aeld order, set the case for arruignment and tal, witout gravely abusing his diacrelion, Muntcioal Judge May iseve Arrest Warrant Latore Conalualon of Prelit ary Invesugation i ue 1, He finds that probable cause exists ang °° 2 There is. proses of placing reapondent under immediate custody. Not Judge's powor to order ihe arrest of the accused Is limited to Instarces in which there Is 8 necessty tor placing him in custody in order not to frustrate the ‘ends of justiea, Thus, even if the Judgo finds probable couse, he cannot, on such ground dione, losue a Warrent of arrest. He must further find thore Is @ riecessity 2f plecing the accused undo rmedat cuyocy in onde Ret to fatale the ends of just + The Invastigatiig judge has no power: to reduce or chango the crime charged in order to justify tho grant of ball to the accused, The power belongs to the prosecutor. ‘+ After the cone!usion of his Pi, the Judge has to transmit to. the provincial prosecutor. his resolutlon and entire records of the case, regardless of whethor he finds a probable 367 ‘Tha nile Is now that tho InvestgaingSear prea ce i 208 |2009 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS, San Meda College of Lao jue st Proceadings suspec ed person te the prover judicial sutho-ity a i withir_a pened of three (3) deys: en the aon] mument th sald charged or auspected person Recolpt by the Inquest has been apprehended or arrested, detained, and lakan into custody by the aid police, or law enforcumont personnel, Officer of referral eee : Fraviiod, that the arrest of those suspebted of thy: crime. of ferris or ‘conspiracy fo commit terrorism rrust result from the surveliiance under ‘rest not properly Arrest “properly | Section 7 and examination of bank deposls under flected coffoctod Section 27 of this Ac. : 1 q + The zon or tw erent personnal 5 : ‘concerned shal, before detalning the person Reneeitea be 7 igati Ltn suspected of tha crime of terrorisfn, present fe investigation may be iin or her beforo any judge at the tatter's Et conducted Hf 80 residence or office nearest tha place where | requested, the artes ook placa at eny tive ofthe day or if evidence does | Ld night not warrant that * It shall be the duty of the judge, among other conduct of things, to ascertali th dently cof the police or preliminary ‘OTHERWISE law enforcement personnel end the parson or Investigation, the Inquest Proper persons they have arrested and presented detained person T before him or her, to Inquire of them the ¥. reasons why they neve arrasted the person ahall be roleasod [Betermination at ane! esiermine by questioning and personel otnerwise, a| ” a ‘observation whether or not the suspect {ras preliminary I Probable couse, been subjected to any physical, moral ot Investigation. shail eH psychological torture by whom and why, be conducted. —t———-) +The judge shall thon submit a written ceport of If there's p-obabie what he/she had observed when the vubject ‘cause, information ‘was tought before him to the proper eau shall be filed; that has jurisdiction cver tlw case of the oa 7 rerson thus arfosted ‘The Judge shal calendar days from the time tne suspect was er ree brougt.t tu his/her residence or offica, + lmmedtntely fer taking custody ofa person ERM amet Tans AGRA Ela Bia Note: To take effect on July 14, 2007 or two ‘months affer elections. SETION 48: PERIOD |OF _DRTEN‘ICN WITHOUT JUDICIAL WARRANT OF ARREST ‘The provisions of Article 12s of the Revised Penal Code to the contrary notwithttariding, any police cer law enforcement personnal, who, havirg beon duly authorized in writing by'the Ant-Terroriem Gouncil has taken custody of @ person chamod with or suspacied of the oxime of terrorism ar tho crimo of conspiracy to commit torrorizm shill, without incurring aniy erlminal fablity for dotay In the detvery of detained perions to the rraper Judicial “authorities, dellver sald chargeu or a=sin Beds Collene uf F.aty Investigation (soe." 1, Rule 142) and NO COMPIAINT OR INFORMATION HAS YET BEEN FILED, he may ask for a preliminary Investigation ‘by aigning a waiver of the provisions of Art, 128 of the RPC In the presence of his counsel, 2, WHEN” THE COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION WAS FILED without praiiminary Investigation, the accused may, ‘within 5 days from the time he leatns of the fling of the information, ask for a preliminary Investigation with the some right to adducs avidence In Nis. favor in the manner prescribed in tila Rute Note: The 8-day parlod is MANDATORY. Failure Gi '0 flo th motion within the sald period amounts, to walver of the right to ask for preliminary Inzestigation, (Pople vs. Figuoroa, GR. Wo, L- 241273, April 20, 1969) fi © Wheve the information was amended without ‘a new preliminary investigation having teen ‘conduclad, the 5-day perlod is coinputed for) the time the accused teams cf the filing of sald amended information, + Where the trial court bas granted a motion for relnvestigation, it must hold in abeyance the arraignment and tral of the accused unti the prosecutor stall have conducted end inade a ropor: on the result of such reinvestigation, Note: The rule in soo. 7 does not apnly If the person Is NOT lawfully arrested without a warrant. (Go vs, GA, 206 SORA 136) Aight to Ball Invostigation ‘A parson lawiully arrasted may post veil before the fllng nf the Information or even after ite fling without” waiving his right to — preliminary Inveatigetion, provided that he asks for a preimincry investigation by the proper ofticer withln the period fixed In the said rule, (Peopla vs. Court of Appeals, May 28, 1908) SECTION 7: RECORDS. Ponding — Protliairary + Av Inforraation of complaint filed in court shall bbe supported by the affidavit and coun: ‘affidavits of the parties and thelr witnecses, together with the other supporting evidence and the reeotutian on the ease, + _ Records of the preliminary Investigation shail NOT automatically form part of the records of the case, Courts are not compylled to take judiclal notice thereof, tt must he Introduced as evidence, MEMORY AID IN RENEDIAL LAW], 209 SECTION. 8:.\CASES NOT REQUIRING A PRELIMINARY: INVESTIGATION NOR COVERED BY THE RULE CN SUMMARY PROCEOURE | 11 Filed with tha Prosecutor: : ‘The procedure iulined in sac, Ga of this RULE shall be follower: | 4. Tha complaint shall state the known address of the respondent; : 2. It shall bo accompanied by affidavits of the complainant his witnesses as well a5 ‘olher supporting documents to estabish provable cause i 3, “The affdavtis shal bo execited under oath: 4) Within 10 days from fling, the prosecutor shall take® appropriate action without any ‘urther Investigation since this refers to cases ‘not ented fo preiminary Investigation. Note: For cases under the Revised Rules’ on Summury Procedure, no warrant shall be fasued EXCEPT whare the accused fails to appear after beng summoned, + Ifthe comploint Ie fled with the prosecutor Involving an offense punishable by Imprloonment cf less than 4 years, 2 months ‘and 1 day, the procedure In Rule 112, Section 3 (0) shall be observed. + Ifthe complaint Is fled with the MTC, the ‘same provadure under Rulo 112, Section 3 (3) shal be observed. : 1f the Complaint or Information Is Filed with tho wtTc: Fl a, Seo 3a of thie rule must be followed. b. If probable couse does not exist, dismiss complaint or invormas ct it gaat of arrest or LF probable cabaidae Vay Aerpor and reat Cpilihg affidavits of wih BipPariving at a conciusioitd SnYEnce of probable210 12009 CELITRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS 3. Must personally be satisfied that a probable ‘cause exists; (Solivon vs. Makasiar, G.R. No. 1-82585, Nov. 14, 1986) SECTION ¢: DEFINITION OF ARREST Arrest Is the taking of a person Into custody in ‘order that he may be bound to answer for the commission of an offense. (See. 4 Rule 113) Modes of Krrast 1. Arrest by virtue of a warrant; 2, Astost withow a warrant under exctptional roumstances as may be provided by statute. (See. 5, Rulo 119) Who Mey Issue Warrant of Arrest: Tho 1087 Constitutions speaks of Judges" which nyeans judges of al levels, This power may not be limited much less withdrawn by Congress. Tie ower to determine the existencs. of p:obable cause Is a function of the fudge and such power Hies In the Judge slone. (Pocplo vs. Inting, 3.2. No, 88919, July 25, 1999) Exception: The BIO Commissioner may Issue ‘warrant of arrest uf an undesirable allen sought to ba deported because it is not an act of State. (Harvey vs, Santiogo, GR No. 62544, Juve 2, 1988) Essential Requisites of @ Valld Warrant of ‘Arrest 1, Is3ued upon probable cause whicn must bo @xtermined personally by a judge afer examination under catty or affirmation of the: ‘coniplainant and the witnessen he may produce; 2, Botermined personally by the judge: 3. After evalvation of prosucutor’ repert and the evidence edeuced during the . preliminary Investigation, (Solon vs, Makasiar, GR No. 182585, Nov. 14, 1988) 4, The warrant must particularly. deveribe the person to be arrested: 5, Ineornection with a specific offense or eximc. Noto: A warrant of arrest hes NO oxplry date, it remains valid until arrest la effected or werrant is lined, (Monangan vs. CFi, GR No 82730, August 30, 1990) Remedy for Warrants Impreperty Issued Where a warrant of arrest was iniproparly lasued, the proper remedy is peition to quash t, NOT a petiton for habeas corpus, since the court in the Taller case may only order. his relsase but not Ho San Beds Coltege of Lato eajoln the further prosecutton or the preliminary examinat.an ef the accused, (Aiimpoos vs. Court of Appoals, GR No. L-27931, July 30, 1981) Note: Posting of ball dows aot bar one from ‘qunstioning legal artosl, (Section 26, Rule 114, Rulos of Sout) SECTION 2! ARREST; HOW MADE Modos of Affocting Arrost 1. By an actuat restfnint of the parson to be cirasted: 2. Ly his submission to the custody of the persor. enaking the arrost Reasonable Amount of Force May be ‘Isod to Effect Arrest Is principte very general officer, having the right fo arzgat an offender, may use such force ae Ie nocesanty 10 exfect his purpose, and to a great extait he is mado tho lxdge of the tegrae of force ‘hat may be properly exerted. accepted that an + A polies officer, in the performance of his duty, must stand his ground and cannot, ike 2 priv te individual, take rofupe In fight. His duly requltes him to overcome his opponent. (Walec:e v. poopie, GR No. 1-23129, Gctobor 31, 1969) ‘+ Upon arrast, the following may be confiscated trom We person arrsted ‘Objects subiect of the offense or used or Intended, to be used.in the comission of the crime; 2. Objocta which are the fruts of the crime: 3S. Thono whieh migh bo. used by. the pa violence of toBan Beda College of aly SECTION 3; DUTY OF ARRESTING OFFICER ‘A uly Istued warrant authorizes the proper offer, 4, To make an arvest thereurider out ciso malios W his duty to carry out without delay the commands thereof, 2, To deliver the person arrasted to the nearest pole talon or jal without uncesessary elay. SESTION 4: EXEGUTION OF WARRANT Thw Judge Issues a Warrant of Arcest In TWO Instances Upon the filing of the Information by the prosecutor, fn issulng this kind of warrant, the Judg> does ‘nok personally exanting the complainant and the wilnesses the may produce, but he merely evaluates personally the" repo and ‘supporting documents and other evidence ‘adducod submihed to him by the prosecuter, and if he finds probably cause on the besis, ‘thetaof ho Isoun the worrant for tho arrast of the accused. 2, Upon application of a powcu offizer in this kind of warrant, the judge must personally examine the epplicant and the witnesses ha may produce, to find out whether. thor exists probable —2ause, ‘otherwise the warraat Issued Is null and void. He must subject the complainant and the witnesees to suarching quastions. The recsun {or this ia there Is yot no evidence on 1eoord ‘upon which he may determine the existence of probable cause, + The head'of office to whom the warrant of rrect was delivered for exccuton stall cause tho warrant to be execuled within 10 days from its receipt + Within 10 days efter the eypiration of the period, the officer to 'vhom It was astigned for execution shall make a report to ‘he jucge vio Issued the warrant, In case of fallure to execuls the warrant, he shall stute the rasons therefore: Porlod of Warrant of Arrost © Unlika @ search warrant, the valicty 2f which Is limited to ten days, after which It bacon.es vold (Section 9, Rule 126), no time limit is ‘xeu for the validity of a warrant of arrest | ta 7 MEMORY. ALD IN REMEDIAL LAW) 222. + This must be $6, for the return mentioned In- this section refers not to the physical delivery of the very same copy of the process to the 'seuing court, ut the report of the officer charged with its execution on the action taken by him theron. In shor, the ‘en-day perlod Is ‘only @ derivative to the ovicer executing the warrant fo make 0 return to the court, (People v. Glvora, GR No. 132459, January 16, 2001) SECTION 5: ARREST WITHOUT WARRANT; WHEN LAWFUL General Rute: No peace officer or person has the power of authorly {> arrest anyone without a warrant. except In those cases expressly authorized by law, (Umil vs, Remos, GR No. €1867, October 3, 1991) Exceptions: Lawful Werrantioss Arrost’ 4, When, iN HIS PRESENCE, the person to be arrested has committed, ie actually ‘committing, oF Is attempting to commit an offense (In lagrante delleto arrests); 2. When gn offense has in fact Just been commitisd, and he has probable cause to bollave ‘based on PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE of fact and circumstance that th person to be arrested has coinmitted i; (Doctrine of Hot Pursult) Nols: There must be a large measure of lmmodidcy between the time the offense waa committed end the time of arrest. (Go vs.,CA, GR, No, 101897, Feb. 14, wt212 12009 CENTRALIZE BAROPERATIONS __ country without premistion of tha court (See. 23, Ruta 114). ‘+ fm cases falling under nos. 1 and 2, the person arrested sha’! be delivered lo the Reacost police station of jall snd shall be Proceaded agalnst in iccordance with Soctlon Cof Rulo 112, (Formorty Sec. 7) + Ifthe arrest was effected without warrant, th arresting officer must comaty with | the Provisions of Art, 125 of the RPC, ctherwiee, the may he held criminally lable for <:titrary detention uncer Article 124 of the RPC. In Flagrante Delito Azrosts ‘An offense is committed In the presence o: within ‘the View of the person making the a-rest when he sees the offense, although at a distance, or hea. thy disturbances created thereby and proceeds at once to the scene thersof; ot the offense Is Continuing, or has heen consiimmated, at the tinie the arrest is made. (Poopla vs. Evaristo, G.R No, 193828, Deo. 11, 1992) Nota: Personal knowledge must be based upcn “PROBABLE CAUSE" which means ‘an actual belle! of reasonuble grounds of suspicion.’ ‘+ The grounds of suspicion era reasonane when, In the absence of actual baief of the arresting officers, the suspicion that Ini perton to 29 arrested Is probably guily of commiting the offense Is based on actual facts. A reasonable suspicion therefore must bbe founded on protable cause coupled with {good faith on the pat of the paacs officers ‘making the arrest, (Posadas vs. Ombudsian, GR No, 131492, Soptembor 29, 2000) Buy-Bus! Operations Aform of entrapment which has been repeataly ‘acegpted to be valid means of arresting violators of the Da:igerous Drugs Law, ‘Tho violator is ‘caught In flagrarte delicto and the pulice offzers ccenducting the operation ara not only authorizec bbut duty-bound to apprehend the violator and to ‘search him for anything that may have been pur, of oF used In the ecmmission of the crime, (People vs. Justan, G.R, No. 1049976, Aug. 20. 1996) yg Elemonts of Hot Pursult Arrest: 4, Offense have been committed. Tho rule now I the Induoitable existence of @ crime is no! necessary te ually 3, watrentaes, aos. (People vs Ramos, GR. Nos, 85401-02, 7 Juna 1980) 2. Offense has JUST baen committed, The Tim= ae Sean Meda College of aby interval bet voen the actual commission of te cyime and the arrival ofthe arresting officer rust bo bret, (Go.va. CA, G.R.'No, 101897, Fob 11,1992), 3. Probablo cause ‘based on pt knovdeuge. fuses on iegatty of Wiest ‘An accused who uiters his plea of NOT gully and participates in the. tial. waives the iWegalty of the arrest, Objection to the legality must be raised before arralgnment, otnnwisa it Is deemed welved, a8 the rccuved, in this cago, has voluntary submitted himscif to the Jurisdiction of the court. Pople vs. Macam, G.R. Nos. Le 91011-2, Novembor 24, 1984) 2, Wegally of warcantioss arrest maybe cured by uiing of an informaton in cour and the subsequent Iesuance hy the jucge of a duly charged In he may no longer question nis detention by' petition for habeas corpus; his tmmedy Is 0 quash the Information andr tha ‘warrant of arrest, SECTION 6: TIME OF MAKING ARREST Unlike a search warvant which must be served only in daytime, on aresi may be mode ca any ‘day and ef any time of the day or nigh, even on & Sundoy. This Ia jusiied by the necessly 0! preserving the public peace, SECTION 7: METHOD OF. AKREST OF OFFICER BY VIRTUE OF WARRANT Unuer this rule, an arrest may be made even If the police warrant o} DMC abifia Flera Coltege of Law Hebe ere Res. Czy 7° | Inform the parcon, tobe arrested the cause of the arrest. and tho fact that tho warrant has been Issued for nie srrest, Note: The officer need not have the warrant in hie possession at wi tino of the arrest BUT must show the same afr the arrest, if tho person arrested Be requirus, aT RCH , Rk ae RO chan INFORMATION 4. When the porson to. be arrested flees; 2 When he forcibly rasists before, the offeor thus an orpertunity to laform hin; and 3. When the Giving of such tforation “wit laypert the arrest 8 | Inform the parson tc be arroated of bie authorily and the cause of the wiout a ‘Sie. | The officer shail When the person to bo arrested is engaged In tho ‘commieslon of an offense or a pursued immed’ately after Its commission, 2 Whon he hes gscaprd, fees, oF forcibly "resists hefore the officer tas an ‘opporturity to $0 inform him; and When tne ging such formation wi imperil the urrest. a 9 | person: "shall Inform the person to be arrested of the Intention to arrest him, and the cause of. the arrest, Note:’ Private Person. must doliver sw. the arrasted © person lo the | nearust police _statlon: or ‘Seo. | The private: 7 When the person to te arrested Is engoged ‘n the coninissicn >f an offense or is pursued immeviately after its commission; 2 When he hhas eauaped, fies, of forcibly: ‘rasiis before the person hasan oppc.tunity to 80. Inform turn; and i MEMORY AID IN REMEDIAL LAW] 213 Tai, otherwiee, he [3, _ Whon cthe may be held | giving of such criminally fable | information sal for legal | naporh the arrest. detention, . SECTION 10; OFFICER MAY SUMMON ASSISTANCE, we Only an officer making tho ara is governvd.by tho rule. It does not cover private. indiidual making an arrest ts SEGTION 11: RIGHT OF OFFICER TO BREAK INTO BUILDING OR ENCLOSURE Regulates bofore'an officer can bros in bulding or enclosura to make an arrost: 4. That the parton fo be arrested Is uf ls ‘éasonobly bolaved fo be in aald buldings 2, That ho. has announcod bie author, purpane for aniaring theral, 3. That ho nee requested and been denied semiance, | ; + General, a lawiul arost may be ma anywhere, dven on a private property of In hhotse, This rue is spplicahle both where the urreat i under a warrant, nd wore there is» “a valid warranties ast SECTION 12: RIGHT TO BREAK OUT OF THE BUILDING” OR FNCLOSURE TO EFFECT RELEASE ne A private person making an unrest CANNOT break in or out of a building or enclosure because only officers are allowed by law to do so. TT Tey214 |2009 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS SECTION 14: RIGHT OF ATTORKZY OR RELATIVE TO VISIT PERSON ARRESTED. RA No, 7439 dafined certain righta of po:sons arrested, cetalned, or under custodin| Investigation, with the penalties for violations thereof, SECTION 4: BAIL DEFINED. Bail is the security given for the release of a Person In custody of the (aw, furnished by him er 4 bondsman, conditioned upen bis epnonrance before any court a8 requlred undor the coudtons ‘specified by the rule (Sac, 1, Rule 114). Purposes of Ball: 4. To relieve an accused for the rigors uf imprisonment until his conviction snd yet secure his appenrance at the tral, (Almodi vs. Vilolve, CR No, 131665, August 6, 1974) 2, To honor the prestimilon of Innocence until his guit Is proven beyond reasonable doubt. 3, ‘To enable him to-arepare his defense without being subject to punishment prior to convietlon, Note: Ball Is avaiiable only to persons in custody ‘of the law. A pers.n Is in the curtody of law when he has been ei,hor arrested or otherwise daprivsa of nis freedom: or when he hao voluntarily ‘submitted himseit to the Jurisdiction of the court by ‘surrendering to tho: proper authorities, (Qinapo: vs, Boldacio, AM No, 92-898, August 6, 1999) «All persons, oxcept thote charged with offenses punishable by reclusion perpetue Yihen evidsnce of guil is strong, shall, Sefore conviction, be talable’ by autfclent euretios, or be released on recognizance as may be povided by iaw, The dght 6 bal ehal not be Impalrad even wher the pavilege of the wit of Habeas corpus Is suspended. (Section 12 ‘Attcle il, 1987 Consttution). See Nee: ‘An obligation of record, entared. Into before some" cout or agistrate duly authorized to take it with the conetion to de some particular ect, aCe ‘An obligation under ‘eal given by. the accused with one oF more sureties, and made payable to the Proper officer with-the nndlion te o0 void ‘upon performance by the ac San Meds Colteye of Raw acts as he may legally bo requited to oH poor, pL eee Fonns of Ball: 4, Coroorate surety, 2. Property bond; 1, Cast, deposit; 4, Recognizances, Presocution of Witnosses may alse te required to posi ball {0 ensure the appearance al the tat of tho case where: 1, Thero is a substitution af information; (Sao, 4, Put 140) end 2. \Whera the court belleves thet 2 materia! witnoss may not appeet at the tral, (S90. 14, Rulo 119) Roquring avralgnmens BEFORE Grant of Ba! NOT Valid: tis a mistaken theory for tha court te fis! roqute arraignment ufore the grant of ball where iis authovized, The roagons ave: 4. The tat court could ensure the presence of the accusad at the eralgnment precisely by granting ball end ordering his presence al any ‘tage of the proceedings such as arrelgnment (Soclion 2(), Rul 114): and 2, The accused would be placed in a pusiion whare he has to choose between ‘lag motion to quash and thus dolay hls releaer on ball, and foragoing the filag of a mation {0 quash 0 that he con be erralgned at onen and mnereatter be relsased on bal. (Lavidos v. Court of Appeals, @.R, No. 129670, Fab. 01, 2000) SECTION 2: CONDITIONS OF THE BAIL; REQUIREMENTS:San Meda College of Kaw MEMORY AD IN REMEDIAL LAW] 235 Tho tayo 1, Tal 2. Promulgetion 3. The execution of the sentence aty's Liability Covers ALL those 3 + Ifthe accused presunts his notice of uppeal, the trial court will order ‘he accured to o¢ taken into custody in the ‘absence of 2 new ‘ball bond on apposl duly spproved by the court, 17 the accused doas’ not appeal, the bondsman must produce the accused on the 18" day from promu'gation of sentence for service of his sentence, * NO ADDITIONAL .CONDITIONS: CAN BE IMPOSED, Note: The tal court may Impose other conditlone In ‘ranting ‘ball where tie likelihood of the accused jumping ball or commiting other harm to the sltzenry Is feared. (Almada vs, Vilaluz, G2 No, 431666, August 6, 1975) * ho court howaver may nut Impose additional obligations upon the bondsman than these provided fo: by law. The obligation imponed upon the bondsman cannot be greater nor of 4 different character than {hose Imposed upon the accused. (Bandoy’ vs, Judge of Court of Fes stance, GR No, £5200, Maich 11, 1909) + Addetention prisoner whe escaped waives his fight to cross-examination. » (Gimunez vs, Nazarene. GR No. Ln97933, Apri 15, 1983) + By filny @ fake ball bond, an appeliat an appellant is deumed to have escaped from ‘confinement ,during the pendency of his 4, 8ppeal and In tha normal course of things, hie * sppeal should be clisminsed, Note: Tho condition of the bail that *The ascusod ahall appear before the oper court whenever so fequired by the gourt of these rules” operates as a ‘alld restriction on his right 10 travel (Manotoe Sr. ¥s, CA, GR No, L-63409, May 30, 1988) SECTION 3: NO :RELEARE OR "TRANSFER EXC SPT ON COURT ORDER OR BAIL. + ho norson under detertion by iegel process ‘Svall be released or transferred except upon order ef the: court of when he Is admitted ta ball + The court could fot, hawaver, impose as condition for ball the arraignment of the accused. (Lavidgs vs. CA, GR No. 129470, Fobmuary 1, 2000, SECTION 4: BAIL, AS A MATTER OF RIGHT; EXCEPTION: | A Mattor of Right 1+ Before or aflersconvitcr, by the Inferor| courts; AND \ 2. Before conviction by the RVC, EXCEPT when | the “Imposndle perslty "is death, reclusion Pervetva ‘or fe Imprisonment’ and the evidence of guilt is strong, + In instances whore tall is a matter of right and, tra ball to be granted based on the recommendation of the prosecution as stated in the information or complaint, @ hesring I NOT nacessary, * But where, however, there Is a reduction of ball as recommended or after conviction by tie RTO of an offense not punishable by death, reciusion —perpetua, or ie Inprsonment wherein the grant of bail Is ‘tacretionery, there must bé a hearing before a ball Is granted in order ic afford: the Prosecution the chance to oppose * F. (Bongayen vs, Bitacan, AM. No. MTLOO 1920, Novembur 22, 2000) + Tue provecutlon cannot adduce evident the danial of bail where it Is @ matter of ght. However, where the gi discretionary, the prasecution to deny the ball. . Notlen of Hoaring Roqutred he ofder granting invalidated because213 |2009 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS the summery of tha evidence for the prosecution which contain the jugo's evaluation of the evicence may be consldeied a3 an expect of procedural due process jot th the pronecullon and the dof + it would bs promature, not to say Inconaruous, to file a petition for pull for Someone whose freedom has yet to be curtailed, ‘An Extraditeo lu NOT Entitled te Bail ‘+ The Constitutonut provision on ball as well as $00, 4 of Rule 114 applies only wher. 3 person has been arrested and detained lor iotatlon of Philippine Crimical Lava, it daes Huot apply to extrecttion proceedings because extradition courts do nol render Judqmert of conviction or acqultal, * The right fo wall, embodied In the Conatitxion, 's not available to miltery personnal ur officer ‘charged with a violation of the Articles of War (Aswat vs. Gallo, GR, Ho, -08901-82, November 21, 1994) SE: ION 6: BAIL, WHEN DISCRETIONARY Riles on Avallabiity of Ball 1. Regardless of stage of tho ermal Prosecution, iio bait shal! be aliowed if he accused Is charged wih a capital oferse or an offense punishable by reclusion perpoiua AND the evidence of guilt is: strong (Sec. 7); Before and after convieon by the MTC. Munvlpal lal Court oF MCTC, bats a mater of right (sac. 4); 1 3. Bofore consiclion by the RTC whether Ip the exercise of is orignal or appaliata jueciclan, of an offense not punishable by uerth: Roclislen parpotva, oF Ie Imprisonment bali Is @ matior of right (Sec, 4): 4. Upon conviction by the RTC of an offense not Punlshable Ey death, rctusion parvotuo or ite Imprlsonmend, “adimieaion to” bal is alscretionary (Sec. 8) 8. Aer conviction by the RTC wherein a penalty of imprlzonment exceeding 8 but ck mare than 20 years Is imposed, and not ana af fre circumstances below Is prexent and ‘proved, all Is a matter of discretion (Sec, 8: @ Recidivism, quasi-recidiviem or habitual delinquency of commission of: crime aggravated by the ercumstances of rloraton, : . Previous éseapa from legal continent evasion of nontence ot violation of the eondilons ct ball witout vara 2, Bn a San Bieta College of Kaw Juntineation; © Commnission of an offense while. on orobation, parole or under condltlonall pardon: d. Circumstance of fie accused or his case indicates the robabilty of fight if released on ball: i 8 Undue isk of commission of another crime by the accused during pendency of appeal, After conviction by the RTC imposing a Pencil) of imprisonment exceading 6 years but nut more than 20 years and any of the “ircumstonee enumarated above and uther siallar circumstance ls present, and proved, "no bail shall be grentoa (Se0.5); 7. No bail shall be allowed aller Jucgment hi becomn final UNLESS accused applied for probticn before cemmencing to serve santerce of ponailty and offense within urviow of probation taw (See. 24). Whore to File Ball Upon Convletion by the RTC of an Otferiso NOT punishable by doath, reclusion parzetua, of tte Imprigonm ont: #. With the telat court despite the fling of a rotlee of appeal provided it hs’ not transmitted the vriginal record to the appetite court +. With the eppeliate cout if the decision of the ‘tal court convleting the dccused changed the alums of the olfende from non-vallable to ballad, 4H tho ponalty imrosod by the tral court fe {nipriscmmant oxcoading 6 years, he accused shall Le denied ball of hid ball be cancelled upon a showing by the prosecution of the follewing: 1. Resielst, tomission AND. admitted to- fan Bada College of Tate MEMORY AID IN REMEDIAL LAW| 227 + Ifthe faw at the dime of commission aves rot imposy the death ponalty, the subsecuent émendment of the law incteasiny the penalty cannot apply to the case, otharwise it would te ox post facto, end penalies are aterminad Ly the taw at the Ume of the commission of the offense. + Ifthe faw-at tha time of tho application fo" ball has amended the prlor law which imposed the death penalty by raducing such peneity, such favorable law generally hee @ revoactve offect. . SECTION 7s CAPITAL OFFENSE NOT BAI.ABLE Goneral Rule: ‘Capital offerise or those nunishable. “by fediusion —porpetua, Ife imprisonment or death are NOT BAILABLE when ‘ovience of guilt Is strong. Note: RA. No. 9248 (AN ACT PROHISIING ‘TE: IMPOSITION OF DEATH PENALTY IN THE PHILIPPINES, JUNE 24, 2006) abolished the death penalty. Hence, there Is no roie capital offense Exception: If the accused charged with & cepital effenre ;8 a minor. Ratlo: One who faces n probable death sentence has a particularly strong temptation to flee. This reason ooes not hod where the accuted has been established without objaction to be u minor who by aw cannot be sentenced to death, (Bravo ee Bore, GR. No, S486, February 25, 985) + For purposaé of recommonding the amount of bal illeged mitigating clrcumstance of minority shall bo considered (Sec. 24, PA ND. 9344 or the JUVENILE JUSTICE AND WELFARE AGT OF 2006) Note: The: Stato recognizes the vital rola, of cchidran and youth In nation bulidiag and shall premote and. protnct thelr physical, morat, Spirtual, intevoctual and social wol-belng. Inculeate In the youth patriotism and nationalism, and encourage thal, Involvement. In public and ive affair, (Seo, 2, RA No. 9344) + RA Ho, 9344, (uverile Justice and Weifare ‘Act of 3000) subpands tentence of parsons convicted of an offense while they were Selow: years of age. For: those committed by minors below -18 years old, there is NO Criminal tablity, only oil ablily. Minors aged 5 18-17 years 11 months 20 days must have acted with discem.nent. Otherwise, they have ro criminal liablity + Henze, youthful offenders are not putin fall by police authorilles upon thelr arrest for the feoson that if In conviction they are not SSremittod how much more when they are not | {tied much fess Investigates, ; + Even though the penaty provided by law Is Toclusion perpatua or life Imprtsonment, or death, if-sueh penalty is nat Ikely to be Imposed on account of the allendance of mitigating clteunstances, the crime doos not {ail under tha category of @ caplial offense for purposesvof ball. (Bravo, vr v. Borja, G.R. No. 1.34851, February 26, 1986) SECTION 8: BURDEN OF PROOF IN BAIL. ° APPLICATION 2 ‘The hearing should be summary or otherwise In Ine diseratlon of the court. The burden of proving that the evidence ¢f guit Is strong les witin the fence of the proseaution (Comia vs. Antone, A.M. No, RTJ-99-1818, {4 August 2000) =. i Dutlos of Judgje ItBall Appiteation Filed °°" 1. Notify the prosecutor of che Nearing of the” ‘epplication for Qall or require him to submit his, . recommendation, Ball may be granted only, ‘after motiot fof that purpose has been fled. I may not bq granted motu propio; (Larva 8. ludgo Roy9s, A.M. No. MT.+04-897, Doo, 25,1904); | : 2. Conduct a;hearing of the: appilcation for ball > regardlesa of whether or not the prosecutor refuses 10. spresent .-evidence. Ith vidence, It "er the evidence Ryoasonable doubt but748 12009 CENTRALIZED DAR OPERATIONS rather whether it shows evident gult or a-great presi mption of gut © The evidence presented durhig the bait hearings are considered —_attornallcally reproduced at the tial, but upon motion ct either party, the court may recall any witnoss for odditional oxa-ninatlon usless the witness Js dead, outside of the Philippines, or otherwise unable to testty, Note: If ball Is denied by trial court, the review [ptisdietion of t.e Suprema Court may’ be Invoked. ‘ut not without ft applying to the CA. (People vs, Magallanes, GR. Nos." 118019-14, Oct. 11, 1996) SECTION 9: AMOUNT OF BAIL; GUIDELINES Factors to be considered In fixing the” Reasonable amount of ball (NO Exclusive 4, .Financlal ability of the accused to glve bai 2. Nature and circumstances of the offence; 3. Penalty of tho offense charged: 4, Character and reputation of the accused; 5. Age and heaith of the accuse 8, Weight of eviderice against the accused; 7, Probability of the acctised appearing teal, 8. Forfeiture uf other batt; 8, The fact that the accused was a fugtve froin justice when arrested; and 10, Pondency of ther cases when the accuand is on ball t tho + But, at the bottom, In ball-fixingy the principal factor considered, to the delermination of which most ether factore ected, 18 the probabllty of the appearance of the accused, of of his fight to avold punishment It shouid be high enough 49 assure the presence of dofendant but not higher than Is rasunably calculated to full the purpose, (Villasenor ve. ‘Abano, G.R No, L-23599, Sopt. 25, 1987) © Ball must not be In @ prohibliory amount Excessive ball is not fo be required. SECTION 10: CORPORATE BURETY ‘Aay domeatic or foreign corporation, licensed as 0 furely in accordance with) law ud curenty ‘authorized to act as such, may provide ball by 0 ‘bond subscived Jointy by the accused and an officer of the corporation duly authored by is board of directors. 78 San Beda College of Rate JON 14: PRPOERTY, HOW POSTED. Property Bund Is an undertaking cor siuted a9 a lien on the reel property gven as security for the amountof the bail, + Within 10 days atfer the approval of the bon, the accused shat! enuse the annotation of the lion on the covtifient, pf tle with the Regist'y of Deeds, and on|the corrasnonding tx doslaraitor in the offre of the provincial, ety ‘and minicipal assessor concemed. Falluts to do so shall be}. suffclont: cause for the ccanreitaton of the rroderty bond and re-arrest and detention ofthe agcused, SECTION 12: QUALIFIOATIONS OF SURETIES IN PROPERTY BOND The quuiifcations of eureties In @ property bond sholl be as follows: 1, Each must be a resident owner of real entele within the Philippine 2, Whare there is only ove suroty, his reol estate must be worth af least the amount of tne undertaking; and 3. If theve ere two ot more suretios, each may Juatly in an amount Jess than that exorested in the undortaking but the aggregate of the justified sums muct bs equlvatent ‘othe whole emount of the ball damanded. + In all cases, every gurety mus: be worth the aicount specified in hls own undertaking over ard above all just debts, obligations and proparties exompt from execution, Note: Philppine residency Is requied of a property bondsman. The reason for thie 1s that bondsmen in criminal cases, residing outside of g reach of the vs. Abano,+ Some Beds College of Baw +The purpose of the rule requiring the affidavit (of qualiticetion by the suraiy before the ‘udoe, 1s to enable the lalter to dotermine whether oF not the siraty possesses the qualification to ft ag euch, especially his finencial warth, + Tho justification being under oath, any folstly Introduced thereto by tho suroty upon a matter of siqnitcance would render him liable, fer perlury. SECTION 14; DEPOSITE OF CASH AS BAIL + The accused of any parson acting in his behalf may deposit In cash with the nearest collector of internal revenue, or provincial, city ‘of mun'cipal treasurar the amount of bail fixed by the court or recommended by the fiscal ‘wo Investigated ar filed the cae, + Tho monoy depositud shat! bs cor sidered as ball und applied to the payment of fine ard costs, The excess, if nny, shall be returncd to the accused or to whorver niade the deposit. Note: The trlal court may not reject other ise aozeptable sureties and insists that the accuse’t blaine his provisional ibery only thru a cash bond, Excessive bal! shali not be required. (Almada vs. Vilolux, G.R. No, L+31685, August 6, 1978) SECTION 15: RECOGNIZANCE Racognizanco refers to an obligation of record, pntered Info before. some ‘court or olficer aithorized to take It with a condition to do soms pinleular act, the most usual conditio, in criminal uses helng the appearance of the accused fer itt ‘Note: The “eloas@ of the accused may be on his ‘can tec09 zanca, which moans that he has Vecome his own jailer. SECTION 16: BAIL, WHEN NOT REQUIRED; REDUCED BAIL, ON RECOGNIZANCE nstancec Wherein the Accused MAY by feleasod on rocagalzance, without pulting ball or on ieducod ball 7. Oilense charg.d is | Violation, ofan i $B] ordinance, igi felony or PEO) 2 chininal offense, the RN CMeN ag) impesabie penalty | Rg] wherefore docs not | "6__months,_of | Nig Arash ea ogi Raia MEMORY PID IN REMEDIAL LAW| 219 Traprisonm cnt andlor fie of P 2,000. under RA.6036; 2. Where ‘the accused | has applind for probation ‘and before tne same has beun resolved out no bal was filed of the accused Is incapable of filing ono, In which case Le may be released on recogn'zance; In case of 'a youthtut offender held for physical or mental examination, trial oF appeal, if unable to furnish. bail_and_ under the circumstances under PD 603, as amended; f4.. A person who has Leen in custory for 2 perlod equal to or more than the possible mexinum Impfisoninent prescribed for the offense charged, without prejudice to: the continuation of the trot or the proceedings on appeal; © A:person accused of an ‘offense with a maximum penalty of destierro shal: be relvased after 30 days of _ preventive . person in custody for a 2 on or more then 4 fi La Ree iit at ‘ ‘he peel bed for if aS 5) charged, ppiicpilon sory mA fara 4 Fady 2 We y oa220 |2009 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS RUE, CTs ohorged With] Sno ation 2 aks tose of ordinance I ‘commited: oF Hes no kriown —tesidency ‘SECTION 17; BAIL, WHERE FILED 4. May be fled with the cout where the case it ending, or in the absence or unavallablity of the judge tnereof, with any regione trai judge, ‘or any Inferior court Judgo inthe province, chy, ot munielpalty; h 3 2, Ifthe accused ls arrested in @ province, ety or ‘mutielpalty OTHER THAN whers the vase Is Pending, bail may also be fled with any Teglonal tial court of the eald plitco, or if no. urge thereof Is aveliabld, with anv infertr ‘Court judge therein; 3, Whenever the grant of bell Ia matter of discretion, or ths accused seeks to be Felessed ‘on recognizance, the application ‘may be fled only In the prftcular court where the case is pending, whether on tia! or ‘appeal; 4. Any poreon in custody whale not yet charyes tn court may apply for ball with any court in the province, elty of munielpalty where h3 is held, (As amsendod by AM No, 05-8-26-S0) 5. Ifthe decision of the thal court corvleting tho ‘accused clianged tho aatlire of the offense from non-baltable to hallable, the application for ball can only be fled with and resolved by the eppeliate court, +. Aludge previding it one brunch hes no power to grant bail io an accused who ls belug tried In another branch presided by another judge who Is not absent of unavullablé, and hi act of releasing him on Dall constituted ignorance af law which subjects him to dlaciptinary sanction. . SECTION 18: NOTICE CF APPLICATION YO PROSECUTOR t +The rule makos no dlstinatiqn whather ball ia “matter of rgnt or of discretion, In all Instances, reasonable notice of hearing is required to 59 Given to the prosecttor, of alleast he must be ‘asked for his recommendation, (Chin vs +ftdgo Gustto, A.M, No, RTW-04-1243, August 41,1996) : ‘+ Such notice is necesszry because the burden Of proving that the evidence of guit Is strong 230 San Meda College ot Lady is en the prosacullon and that the discratlen of 16 pov Jessi, (ope VE. Kado, BR NO be 10724, Nol21, 1086) Note: 4 warrent of arrent without recommendation {ur Fall is @ violation of the constitutional right of the accused to ba! uniass fe accused is chargou will offenses punishable by rasluston perpetua or higher and the evidence of gull Is strong, (Parade v. Venoracio, A.M, No, RTA96-1953) SECTION 19: RELEASE ON BAIL, + Oncd the accused has boon admitted fo bal, he entitled to Irmediate releare from vustouy, An officer who falls of refuses (0 lense, hin tem delenton nowitnsandny {the approval by the fropar court of his ball bond may be held Watle under Anicie. 126 of the Revised Penal Code for delaying releat + Where bail Is Mud in court other shan whern the case is pending, the Judge who accepted ‘he ball shall forward it ogether wit the order «Traloase and other supporting papers, to the ‘ecurt where the case Is punding, SECTICN 20: INCREASE OR REDUCTION OF BAIL + When the amount of ball Is. Increased, the eccused may be conimitted to custody iv hé does not give ball In the Increased amount within a reasonable period,irba College of HLatw SECTION 24; FORFEITURE OF BAIL + Within Thirty (30) days. from the fallure of the uccused te appear in person as requirea, the bondsmen must a, PRODUCE the body of thelr principal ot give the reason for his non-production; AND b, EXPLAIN why the accused did not appear before the court when first requied 19 0 50. + Falling in these requisites, a judgment shat be rendered against the bondsmen, joirtly and severally, for the amount of bail. Note: Tire 30-day period granted to the bondsmen {tc comply with the Iwo requisites for the ting of the order cf forfeiture cunnot be shortened by the Court but may be extended for good cauee shi wn, Cia ferns ‘ Ccnditienal ‘and ] Not indepenctent of the Infatlocutory. It Is not | order of forfeiture. It is appealablo, a judgment ultimately determining the liakilty Jor the surety thereunder and thorefore tinal Execution moy issue at one | SECTION 22; CANCELLATION OF BAL. Balt if Cancoliod: 7 1, Upon application of the bondsmen with due notice tn the proseculor, upon sunend>r of the arcused or proaf af his death; 2 Upon acquittal of the aocust d 3, Upot, dismigaal of the case; or 4, Execution of judgment of conviation. Note: Without prejudice to any liability on the Lil SECTION 23: ARREST OF ACCUSED OUT ON BAIL Mothods by which sureties MAY relieve themselves from responsibilities a, Arvest the principal and deliver him to the proper authorities,» b, Trey may cause his artost {9 be made by any police officar or other person of suitable ae ‘ordiseretion; cr © By endorsing the auihosty to arrest upon a cortiied copy of the undertaking and dalivering itto such offlees or person {MEMORY Alb IN REMED! AL LAV | 221 Nol! An accused released on bail may be te- arented without a warrunt ihe altom,as to depart from the Philippines without prior permission of the court where the case is pending, Hold-Departure Ordors + Supreme Court Cicavlar No, 29-97 datad June 19, 1997 limits the authority to issue hold departure orders to the RTCs In criminal cases within Ihgir wxciusive jurisdiction. Consequently, MTC Judges have no authority to issue hold-depurture orders, following the maxim, eapress-menticn "implies the exclusion. Nether does he have authority to car.cel one whych he issued. + Furtharmore, the proper court may Issue a hol¢-departute order or direc: the Department of Foreign Affairs 10 cancel th passport of the accused. This isn case of a valid restriaion on @ person's sight tc trever so that he maybe dealt with In aécordance wilh the law. (Siivario vs. CA, B.A, No. 84284, Apr! 08, 1994) + Permission ‘0 leave the country should be filed in the same court where the case is pending breause they are in the best position to Judge the propriety and Implication of the same. SECVION 24: HO BAIL AFTER JUDGMENT; EXCEPTION FINAL, + No ball shall be granted! after judgment, if the cese has became final even if continued coninement of the accused would ba delimental or dargerous to his health. The femedy would be to submit him 12 medics! weatnart or hospitslizetion, ten eg f5tdlve right 4 tw oe rok O 6 Gor er the joa is for exe ovation toto Gc, the pana purview a ation fot prebaticl period o pevtectng PPoperates a5 3 ‘weiver of the wat222 |2009 CENTRALIZED GAR OPERATIONS = =SZZ. [2009 CENTRALIZED OAR OPERAT Excoption to the Excoptlon: Tho acrused sha’ not be allowed to te reloared on bell after he has commenced to ¢arva his sentence, SECTION 26: COURT’ SUPERVISION oF DETAINEES : + Tho cour shall exercise supamvision over all Peraans In custody for ithe purporo cf eliminaling unnecessary ' detention, ‘The execuve judges of RTCs shall conduct monthly ‘personal inspections cf provircial, ety and miinieipal jails and the ‘prissnr re within thelr respective jrsdtions +, Th» employinent of physical, psychofogleal or degrading prrishment ansingt any prisoner or Gelainee or the use of isubstandard «¢ Inadequate penal facilites Under subhumnai Conditions shall ba dealt with’by law. (Section 19(2), Artin li, 1987 Constitution). « SECTION 26: FAIL NOT A BAR To OBJECTIONS ON ILLEGAL ARREST, LACK OF OR IRREGULAR PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION An Application for cr admission to Bail shal NOT BAR the acci'sa 4. From challenging she vatulty of his arrost: OR 2 Legality of the we rrant Issued therefore: OR, 3. From assaiiing the regularly er questoaing the absence of preliminary Invastigation of the haga agalnst nim. : * Provided that the accused ralses them before en‘ering his plea, * The vourt chail observe the matter es eanly at practicable, but not later than the atart ef tho fal of the case. 7 This rule enumerates the rights of @ person accused of an offense, which are’ both constitutional as wall as statutory, save Dre right {0 9ppeal, which Is purely statutory In characters Elomonts of Criminal Due Process 4. Accusod must have been heard ka @ court of ‘competent jurisdiction; 2 Accused is proceeded against under the orderly processes of fam; 3, Ho has been given notica and opportunity to be tieard: 4. Tho Judgment was awarded within tha authority ‘of a constitutional law, (Mojla vs, Bn Han Beda College of Lars Pemaran, G.R, No, L-57409, Apri +8, 1989) SECTION 1: RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED AT THE TRIAL ‘4. To bo Prosumod INNOCENT. + Int criminal prosecutions, th’ accused is Presumed mocent untl the: eantrary Proved buyond reascnable doubt : Reasonable Doubt "Is that — doubi i i engendered by an investigation of the whale proof and ian inability, aft such 4 fe investigation, to: let the mind rest eany. g ul pein the certainly of gut, demanled by the law 16° cbnvlet of any stimisal charge but moral certainty Is requir une this certainty Iy-required as to eve » Brapostion of proof requsite to vonatve the otense, ‘Paoole vs, Ora 23414, October 29, 4974} Note: Absolute certainty of, guilt. Is. not f Rat.o: The slightest possibility of an Innocent ‘man beiny convicted for an offense he fas not committed would be far mare dreadtu: tha te'ting @ guilty parson go unpunished for & came hy may have perpetrated, (Peophy ve Lagniay, GR: No. 125316, April 24, 1999) Note: Equipoiso Rule grovides that where the evidence of the parties in a criminal case are evenly ba’anced, the conet'utional Presumpton of fanocence should tit In favor Of the avzused who must ie acquitted,+ “| In this cate @ REVERSE TRIAL will by hold, 8. To bu INFORMED of tho NATURE and thy CAUSE of the accusation ugalnst him ‘Means of Informing te Accused of the ry "4 Proliminary investigation; £2) Requirement cf sufficient “allegations in vl Nor complalt; ~ + 3. Aralgnment, 4. Bill of particulars; 6, Rules agalnst duplisity of offense, +. This right requires thot the ‘infarmatior, ‘should state the facts ard the 1 clreumatances constituling the crime. Fido kc charged In such a way that @ norson uf 4 \y,commMun understanding » niay easly ), ‘omprehend and be informed of wnat Is about. 7 An ascused) cannot be convicted of un offense unless i fs cloavly charaed in Lin complalat of Information, Fe coniviet hin of an offense other than that charged in ine oomplulot” or Informauon would be. a “ei violation of this conadtutlonal right. (People va. Otega GR. No. 116736, July Bd Soa 1007) Bi\ipes sie” When a poreon Is chstged tn @ cormtah ¢ Ji), with @ orime and the evidence doos not Jesnthow that he Is gullly thereot, but doos (7 MROW that he te gully oF aome ether ite ora lesser offense, ihe cour may sertonce_ bin for the ldsser offense, PROVIDED the lessor offenss k a cognate offensa and Ip Included in the complaint with tirs court. + The juaiitying or aggravati ic cleunistaneog must bs ALLEGED. anc PROVED In ordar te be consitered by the cout To bo PRESENT and DEFEND in porson nd by counsel at overy otago of tho . Procesding The kroience of tho Accused Is REQUIRED ONLY: 1, During arralgnmant (Soe. 1b, Rulo 140), 2, Prointigation of eontence EXCEPT when the conviction "Is for. ight offense, in which case, Nt may be prouourced In tw Provence “of N's counsel oro epres mntative; 3. When ordered by thy court for purnose » cf Identification, 4 IMEMORY Alp [14 REMEDIAL LAW| 223 Not appileublo in SC-end CA The saw securing (¢ an accused parson the right to be prerent at avery stage of the proceedings has- no application to the Foceedings byfore the Court of Appeals and the Supreme .Covt nor to the entry and promulgation of tnair Judgments. The defendant noed nol be present ii court during the hoaring of the appaal. (Suc. 9 Rule 124) + Accuses, MAY WAIVE hic right to be resent during the trial HOWEVER, his Presance may te cempelied when his {s to Be Identifies (Aquino, Je vs. Miltary Commission, GR’ No, L-37364, Moy. 9, 1975) Effects 2f Walver of the Riguit t6 Appear by the Accused: : 1, , Walver of thd ‘ignt {o present evidence, ‘1 and cross-examite witnesses: 2 Prosecution con present evidence accused falls tc appea 3.- The court Lan decide evidence. lhout accused" Requirements of Walver 4, Extstence of the right; 2. Knowledge of the existence thereof, 3. Intention to. relingulah which nut be shows clnary and convincingly: 4, Where the Goaatltution or law provides, it must be with the assistance of counsel to bo valid, | Trial ie Abseniia - It's important to state that luc provision of the Constitution authorizing the tial in absuntia gt the accused in case of his nox-appearance AFTER ARRAIGNMENT dap moans that he |, thoraby witnesses Fe v0 t egy (Ohiy vied in aves MZMIoMI to precent PEROT behat! and 10 “examine witnesses‘3242009 cenvrAuzeD BAR OPERATIONS 1, iho ieallfed agalnst hla, (Gimonaz vs. Nazareno, G.R, No, L-37874, April 18 jor 1988) ae DURIghtte COUNSEL + Tha right ‘9 counsel is absclute and may be invoked at al mes even on app sal {Tolan vs. CA, G.R, No, 95026, Oct. D4, 1991).Without the ald of counsel, a person may be convicted nat bécause he + i8 gully but because he does no: know how to establish his Innocenco, 4, The right covers the period beginning from custodial Investigation, wl into the tendltlon of the Judgment and even on appeal, /Poopla vs. Sor70, Jr,AG.R. No. «118495, Juno 20, 1997) Note: While tie right to counsel 13 absolute, the fight to ecunsol de parte Is nal. (Poop le ¥s, Sorz0, G.P. No, 118435, June 29, 19971 Custodial ‘nvestigation Is the questioning by law enforcement officers of a suspect tol 01 Into custody or otherwise ueprived of his freedom of aciion In a significant ay. Includes the >1actice of issuing an “inviation® fo a person who Is Investgated In, connector, with “an offense he Is suspected to have committed. (RA 7 138) Difference botyeon the Right to Counsel During Custodial investigation and During the Trial: , 4. Ouring trict = the right 19 counsel msana ~ +, EFFECTIVE counsel, Counso! Is here “ot to prevent the accused’ trom contassing but to defend the accused, 2, Custodial Invostigation. = stletar equicercent, It requires the presence cf competent anc! independent counsel wie. | preferably the cholce of the accused, Since a custodial Investigation It not dana In public thera Is a danger shat "confessions 2an be exacted against the | will of the accused, © if curing tha “Investigetion the assisting lawyar tof, of come and goss, tne statement’signed: by the accused !s stil Inadmlssibio because the lowyer should’ assist his lient from the time the confessant answers: the first. quastion asked | Ly the Investigating officer unt tho siguing of the extraludielal confession (Poopte vs, Mor al, GR. No, 128177 ‘August 15, 2091) Fr Right agai ! ATION ty for this rl feul* d0cSlicns wh Ny fn Beda College ot ny Note: The right ty counsel and the right te femaln silent do not cease avon a crimitial_compiainvinformation ‘has ead boen filod aqeinst the accused, AS LONG Ait ‘he is s'il In custody. (Pooole vs, Maquods, S.R. No. 112983, March 22, 1994) + Tho duty of the court to appoint a counsel ¢> oficia wher the accused, has nd legal counsel of chicice and desifes to employ {Hie servicas cf one Is MANDATORY. ony at the me of artelgnment, (Seo, 6 Rulo 110) Corsoquonco of Denial of, Right tu Counsel in Tolan vs. CA, the- Court -held thot an accused was deprived of his right to counsel when he relalned the services of persan whu risiepresented himsu as a lawyer, Retrial was ordeied on the ground cf denial of cr nsitutione| right to counsel, To TESTIFY as witnoas kv hie on baholt © Adonial of the dofyndant’s rig to in his behalf, would conettute ai ‘unjustifiable violation of hls constitutional right + Ifthe accused tectiies, he may be cross: examined but ONLY on matters covered be hls direct examination,” unllke an ordinary witness who. can be .cio83: examinad as to ary matter steted in the dlioct evamination of connented therewith {Sontion 6, Ruto ¢22). His falluro to tostty Ie not taken sgainat him but failure 0 produce evidence in his behall bx cor.siderad against him, im, (Safkthd hBOMny audjec ECA OF LAW. 1 ination 0’ his body iay be msteriat:Han Broa Soltege of Lary 44: Physical examination; 2, Examination of a iapist and the viet for gonorrhea is valid; 3 Evamination of a woman for Pregnancy charged with adulter, Is Valid, (Vilallor vs. Summors, GR No. 18976, Sojtombor 7, 1920): 4, Undergo ullraviolet for examination of Presence of fulorescent powder ‘dusted on marked money used is buy-bust. (Peopla vs. Tranea, G2 Ho. 110357, Augus! 17, 1994) Note: The right does Include cases covered ‘by Immunity statutes such as: 1. RA 1379 ~ Forlalture of Iilegally Obtained Wealth; 2. RA749~ Bribary and Graft Cases, Note: Furnishing of apacimen of signature ina falsification of documant cuse is zoverod by the tight because writing Is not furely 2 ‘mechanical act for it invoives the applica.ion ‘of inieligenca and attention. (Bottran vs. Samsor, GR. No, 32026, Septointer 23, 4929) Where Avaliable: Not eniy in’ criminat but also = in government. proceedings, oil, administrative proceedings where there 's 3 penal ranction Involved. Rationale for Protecting the Right agcinst Solf- inerimination 1, Humanitarian reasons > to prevent the state fram using ks coercive powers; 2, Practical reasons ~ the occured Is more ely (0 comnit perjury +The accuses Io protavted under thi rut from questions thal lund to ineriminste him, which mear s those that may subject hin to penal tabalty, +The right may ba waived by the falhire of the accusad to Indoky ine priviege at the proper ime, that Is AFTER the Inctiminating “cuestion is asked and BEFORE his answer + Tho prlulege of the accused to be exernat thorn tosllying a8 a witness, Invaives a; roblblion against testimoni i compulsion only aid the production by the accused of Incriminating documents and articles deranded of him, Right of the Accused vs Right of an Ord'nary Witnoss The ordinary witness may ba comtled to take the withess stand and claie the prnile et _MEMORY AD IN REMEDIAL LAW] 225 as each question requiring én incriminating answer is shot al him, while an accused may altegether rufuse to take the witness: stand ‘and refure to answer any and all questions. Note: Howaver, if the accuse” testifies in his ‘own behalf, then ha may be cross-examined as any other witness. He ray NOT on cross examination refuse to answer any question on the ground that the answer that ha wil give, of the evidence ha will prodiice would have the tendency to incriminate bm for the cme with which he is charged. Bu: he MAY’ refuse to anewer any quastion Inc.iminating him for n offense distinet from that for which he is ‘charged. Rights ‘of the Accused In the Matter of Testifying or Preducing Evidence A” Batorn the case: 4. Right to be informed. 2, Right to vemain alent ert to counsel Right not fo be subjectad to force or violence or any oiler means: which vita freu wil 4. Right to have tne eviderce obta!ned in Violation of these righis rejected, B. Altor the case is ted in court: 4. Right {0 efvsu to be a witness 2, Right to not have any prejudice whatsoever result to him by auch refusal 3._ The right to taaify on his own behalf subjact (0 sross-exarnination by the prosecuton 4, While vestiying the right to retusa o sneclic question. which tends to Inctiminate him fer some other erie. 7a226 |2009 CENTRALIZED DAR OPERATIONS 1. The prosecution hos a prima facie case, the present proof to overtum the 2, The ‘efense of the accusod ‘s an ali and ho does not tostity, the Interference is that the allo! fs not bellevable. established G,, Right to CONFRONT and CROSS-EXAMINE the witnesses against hita at teal Confrontation Is the act of selting a winoss face-o-tace with the. accused so that ine latter nay make any objection he has to the witness, and the. witness may Identiy the accused, and thie must take place In the Dresence of the court having jérlsdiction to permit the privilege of cross-examination Purpose: “he primary purpose |s to securé the opportunity of cross-examination ard the secondary purpose Is to onable the jt Ige le observe the demeanor of witnesses, + By way of an exception to this rule, Il. provided that either party may vtl!ze as part of its evidenco the tesiimony of & witness who Is deceased, oui of “hie country of cannot with duv dillyerce found in the Philippines, unavailable or otherwise unable to. tastify, givan in another case of proceeding, judicial cr administrative, involving the same pavtles and subject matter, tho adveree parly having had the opportunity to same time that sets up a matter vhich, if duly poved, would preclude futher proceadings. + Rdditicnal facts not alleen In the information bol admitted or not denied by the prosecution may be invoked in support of the‘niotion to quash, Ans B ‘ before tiled aller V defendant enters hie | prosecution hus ested ne. _| its case fies yo fethed be UWB ple in the question ef gulll or | suzpok = orth Innocence ofthe | accusetion accused ‘Govained by of the Rules of Criminal | of the Rules of Crisnhat Procedure Proceduie | General Rule: The accusea may move to quasin the compiaint or information at any time BEFORE entering his plea. Exceptlor.: nslances where ‘a motion to quasi may be fled ATER plea: 4. Fallure to charge ar offense; 2., Lack of jwisdietion over the off 3," Extinction of the offense or 4, The defendant would be Jeopardy. 6 charged; ed In double «Right to file motion to quash. belongs only to tne accused, Ture te riothing in the rulee which authorizes the court or judge to motu proprio initiace a motion to quash, ‘Quashat vs. Molle Prosuqui «The quastal of the complaint or Information ‘s different fom 2 nolle prosequl, atough ‘oth hhave one rusull, which is the dismissal of the case. + A nnolle prosequt Is nated by the prorecutor ‘while. 0 quaahal of Informatica is uon motion fo quash hied by the accused. ila 117 | Governed by Reto | | Matondo, G.R. No, L-12873, February 24, 1961) Foun Weds College of Tat + A note prosequi Is a dismissal of the criminal case by me govorniart before the accused |s placed’ on tial and before he la called to fled, with the approvel of the cour in the fexercisa of lis ludiclal clscretion. It parlakes of the naturu of a non-sul oF discontuance in a civil suit and loaves the matter In the oarve condition in whict It wea’ before tre ‘commencement of the prosecution itis not an acctulttal, it Is not a final disposition of the ase; and Wt does wot ber a subsequn! prosceutlon for (x6 aarne offense. SECTION 2: FORM AND CONTENTS: Form and contents 3f a motion to quash Jn weting ' Signed by the accuses oF hie couneel; hal: specify distinctly the factual and loyal grounds therefore, + the court shall consider no grounds other hue Henan alnteskin tha mation, FYCEDT Nal Note: A motion to suspend the Issuance of a warrant’ of arrest should be considered as a matic: to quash if tr0 sllsgations the ain ara to the effect that tle facts charged In the Information ro net constiute an offense. (People: vs. Resolution of a Motton to Quaah + A motion to quash must be resolved SEFCRE telat and cannot defer «the hearlig and determination of sald motion untl tral on the marits as It would impair the tight of the eP Since thu. Mveaugat pAVANE, Bie cores the gcyar aa asco tale FH nce pf profane prescrlbactle 8, That more théwhen a singio punishment for various offenses is prescrinod by law, 7. That the criminal action or liability nas ben extinguished, 8. That It contains averments which, if true would constitute a legal uxcuise or Justicotion; and 9 That the accused has been piaviousiy cconvlctes of acquilted of the offense sharged, ‘or the case against hin was dismissed or otherwise terminated without his express consent. Noto: hese grounds under Section 3, Rule 117 are exclusive in character, Accordingly, it was hold that lack of prolininary invealgation Is not a {ground for a motion to quash, not only becuuse it |s not stated by the rule ua one of the grounds, but also because lack of preliminary Investigation does not impair the validity of the hulormat'on, does not otherwise render it dotectivy ind does ‘ot affoct the jurisdiction of the court over the. case. (People v. Yulila, 102 SCRA 264) A. Tho Facts Charged Oo NOT cons‘itute ind offense +The complaint must show on it face that if the facts alleged are true, un offense has been committed. It must siate explicily and dioclly avery tact ad cirsumstance necessary to constitute in offunse. + The test to determine ifthe facts charges conslitute an cffense is to dotermine ‘whether or net all the essential elemunts of the crime have been alleged. +The fact ‘hat the allegations in the complaint or infarmnation ae vague or broad, is not generaiy a ground fer a motion te quash, the roinedy being to file ‘8 metion for bil of pai cular. + I the statute except certain persons or classes of persons from lisilty, then to complaint should show that the person choryed does not belong to that css (U.S. vs, Pompoya, GR. No. L-10255, ‘August 6, 1915) + This principle vices not epply if the language of the lav defining the offense 15 $0 enirely SEPARABLE from the excoption that ike Ingredier censiituting the olfense may be accurately and clearly defined without reference ta the exception, Note: Where the Information is void or charges an offense that does nat really exist, the prasentatlon of evidancn cannot valivate Said Information. (Peupla vs, Asuncion, 3. Nos, $3837-42, Apiif 22, 1992) ae “feat Beda Coltege of Law __— MEMORY AID 1 REMEDIA'. LAW| 233 B, Luck of Jurisdiction over the offense ‘charged 3, Lack of Jurisalction over tho parson of the recused D, Want of authority of officer filing tho information Unauthorized filieg of Information are: 1 Officer fing is irregularly appointes. it uvas nol necessar'y invalidate we Information if he may be considered a de facto officer; Officer iw disqualified trom appointment, to such position.” Tre Information Is Invalid and the court does not acquire Jurisdiction te try the accused thereon: (Vina “ys, Bonz, GR No, U-4313, March 20, 1951) 3. Officer fled Ine information witnout the approval by the headiCnief prosecutor, (Sec, 4, Rule 112) 4, Information flea _tnfermation alune involving privat crimes, Complaint or Information does not comforts to the proscribed form + it is) sufficient if the complaint or Information states the essentivl etements which constitute the offense a3 required in the slatule and it fs not necessary to follow the exact language amination Who should maky the oxaralnation? The examination ahnil be taken before any juga or Il rot practicable any member of the Oar In ‘gnod standing donignated by the trial cour, or by 2 lower court dasiynated by a court of supulor jutistiction which ‘sue the order. The examination shall proceed even in ths absence of ths prosecutor arovided he was duly notified. Coposition I's the testimony of a witne taken upon oral ‘in open court5. Expedite tigation; 8. Pravant d 7. Simplify and-narow the issues; & Epedtta and facta both py I, SECTION 44: BAIL TO SECURE APPEARANCE OF MATERIAL WITNESS Ifthe cov't is setisied, upon proof or oath, that a frateria! witness wi not testify when sc required may on motion of elther party, order “he wines {0 ost ball in such sum s'may be deemed proper. Should ihe vitness refuse to pos! suey pal as required, the cout may commit him vs prison untl he complies 0 Is fege'y discha ged ‘aRer his testimony has been taker Note: Even it the withess has been vited to appear hefore a cout siting outside of the Province in which he resides and the distr co ig ‘mora than fity (80) «llometera {now one hunrad {700) kiomotors) trom his placa of vesicence b the usual course of travel, hols til hour! bs the subpoena. Rule 23 appios only in civil cases {feple vs. Montonjo, G.R. No. L-24510 and 24526, Decombor 16,:1987) SECTION 45: EXAMINATION OF WITNESS FOR THE PROSECUTION Examination of Witnos: for Hie Prosecution: 1. Tho witness for tho prosecution may ‘be condluunally exeniined by the court niere tne ‘case Is pending if said witnass is: 8. Too sick to appear atthe tak or b, Has to leave the Philippines wit no Aafrils date of coum 2. Such examination should hw Ir the presence of the accused or Innis absorge ahs Feasonable nelica {9 attend the exan inten has boen served on hin . 3. Exam ination of child witnesses is tickled under the Rule on Examination of a Sha Wines which took effoct on Weconiber ti, 2000. AU ees aaa HN Conducted. befere any Judg2, mamler of tho bar in good standing or Conducted only the Judge or the coun A whera “the case } before” any Infertir | pending 7 court No gh ° it _ nore made Fash Maybe - Lean Meds College vf Yaw MEN.ORY AID IN REMCOIAL LAW) 243 Ee MEDIA 1. 13 100 Ka Wort the [noe place of tah, 1nay 100 am Fam the Face of tat. SECTION 16: TRIAL OF SEVERAL, ACCUSED General Rule: When two or more persons ave yolnily churged With an olfense, they shall bu Lied Jolnty, Tals rule Is $0 designed as to preclude a wasteful expenditure of Jucicial resources and to Promote an orderly and expeditious disnosition o- criminal prosecutions Exception: The court, upon mci‘on of the fiscal or of any of the defendants, may order a separate {al for one or more accused. The granting of Soparata trial wher: two or mers defer dante are Jofntly charged wth an offense is. purely wiserettonary wi the ial cou. In the interest ct {ustlce, @ separate trial may be grinled even ator {ne Prosecution has finisheu” presening ie evidence in chief (Joseph vs. Viluluz, G.R. No, Le 45911, April, 1979) + Ws separate tials grented the testimony of one accused imputiiq the crime to his co accused Is not admlssibie egainst the later, In Joint tal, It would be acmissible if the lalter ‘ad the oprortuniy for cross-examination, SECTION 17: DISCHARGE 07 ACCUSED To GE STATE WITNESS Motion to diecharga should be mnde by the prusccutlon BEFORE resting its case, Note: The rule exprossly allows the dischargo of ory than Gn@ dotendait. (Poopla 1s, Buesa, I. No Lo11408) duly 11, 1968) Roquision feu iguprsey, eau IE pc ie ean bony idhais haut alants sot Dee 05 notably be the most sui 0, Arcusedfifs ieiBtheer convicted of an