NOTES IN CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

Part 1
PUP COLLEGE OF LAW
2ND SEM SY 2019-2020
Prof: Pros. Ma. Julpha P. Maningas

Rule 113 – ARREST –

Sec. 1- DEFINITION – Arrest is the taking of a person into custody in order that he may be bound
to answer for the commission of an offense.

Note 1 – An arrest is made by an actual restraint of the person to be arrested, or by his

submission to the custody of the person making the arrest (Larranaga vs. CA, 287 SCRA 581).

Application of actual force, manual touching of the body, physical restraint or formal
declaration to arrest is not required. It is enough that there be an intent on the part of one of
the parties to arrest the other and an intent on the part of the other to submit, under the belief
and impression that submission is necessary (Sanchez vs. Demtriou, 227 SCRA 627).

Sec. 2 – How arrest is made – An arrest is made by an actual restraint of the person to be
arrested or by his submission to the custody of the person making the arrest.

No violence or unnecessary force shall be used in making an arrest. The person arrested
shall not be subjected to ay greater restraint than is necessary for his detention.

Note 2 – An arresting officer is never justified in using unnecessary force in making the arrest. If
the arresting officer employs violence which is unnecessary to effect the arrest or to prevent
the escape of the person arrested, he can show the justifying circumstance precluding any
person who acts in the fulfillment of a duty or in the lawful exercise of a right or office from
incurring criminal liability (Sec. 5, Art. 11, RPC). The requisites of such justifying circumstance
are: a) that the offender acted in the performance of a duty or in the lawful exercise of a right
and b) that the injury or offense committed be the necessary consequence of the due
performance of such duty or the lawful exercise of such right or office. In arrest with a warrant,
the first requisite is present but the second requisite may be absent where there is excessive
use of force in effecting the arrest.

The arresting officers may be held criminally liable if, by their impatience or over-anxiety
in the fulfillment of their duty, they killed the person to be arrested without resistance from the
latter and without any previous inquiry as to his identity (People vs. Oanis, 74 Phil. 257).

Note 3 – Persons immune from arrest:

1) Senator or Member of the House of Representatives shall, in all offenses punishable

by not more than 6 years imprisonment, be privileged from arrest while the
Congress is in session. No member shall be questioned nor be held liable for any
other place for any speech or debate in the Congress or in any committee thereof
(Sec. 11, Art. VI, 1987 Constitution).
2) Ambassadors and minister of foreign countries in the Philippines in accordance with
RA No. 75.

Sec. 4, R113 – Execution of warrant –

Note 4 – The warrant of arrest mentioned in Secs. 3 and 4 refers to a warrant issued by a judge
upon application of the arresting or peace officer, which is arrest carried out by virtue of a
warrant, as distinguished from a warrantless arrest provided in Sec. 5.

Note 5 – The constitutional provision on the right of the people against unlawful searches and
seizures deals with the requirements of probable cause. The judge issues a warrant of arrest in
2 instances – a) the first is upon the filing of the information by the prosecutor, the judge does
not personally examine the complainant and the witnesses he may produce, but here merely
evaluates personally report and supporting documents and other evidence adduced during the
preliminary investigation and submitted to him by the prosecutor, and if he finds probable
cause on the basis thereof he issues the warrant of arrest of the accused.
b) the second instance is when a judge may issue a warrant of arrest upon application by a
peace officer, in which kind of warrant, the judge must personally examine the applicant and
the witnesses he may produce, to find out whether there exists probable cause, otherwise the
warrant issued is null and void.

Note 6 – A warrant of arrest has no expiry date. It remains valid until the arrest is effected or
the warrant is lifted. However, Sec. 4, R113 requires the head of the office who applied for
warrant to execute the same within 10 days from receipt thereof and for the arresting officer
assigned to execute the same to submit, within 10 days from the expiration of the first 10-day
period, a report to the judge who issued the warrant.

Sec. 5, R 113 – Arrest without warrant- when lawful –

1) When in the presence of the peace officer, the person to eb arrested has committed, is
actually committing or is attempting to commit an offense;
2) When an offense has in fact just been committed and he has probable cause to believe
based on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances indicating that the person to be
arrested has committed it and
3) When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal
establishment or place where he is serving final judgment or temporarily confined while
his case is pending, or has escaped while being transferred from one confinement to
another.

Note 7 - In flagrante delicto – means “caught in the act of committing a crime”. In flagrante
arrests requires that the person arrested has just committed a crime, or is committing it, or is
about to commit an offense, in the presence or within the view of the arresting officer.

Note 8 –‘IN HIS PRESENCE” - does not only require that the arresting officer sees the offense,
but also when he hears the disturbance created thereby and proceeds at once to the scene.

In Padilla vs. CA (269 SCRA 402), the Supreme held that the exigent circumstances (hot
pursuit, a fleeing suspect, moving vehicle, nighttime) justify the arrest without warrant.

Note 9 – An offense is committed in the presence or within the view of an officer, within the
meaning of the rule authorizing an arrest without warrant, when the officer sees the offense,
although at a distance, or hears the disturbances created thereby and proceeds at once to the
scene thereof; or the offense is continuing, or has not been consummated, at the time the
arrest is made.

Note 10 - Officer must have personal knowledge of the offense just committed – Requisites – a)
an offense has in fact or actually just been committed and b) the arresting officer has probable
cause to believe based on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances indicating that the
person to be arrested committed the offense. The arrest must be based on the PERSONAL
KNOWLEDGE OF FACTS UPON PROBABLE CAUSE, which means an actual belief or reasonable
grounds of suspicion.

Note 11 – PROBABLE CAUSE must be based on “personal knowledge of facts;, which means an
actual belief or reasonable grounds of suspicion that the person to be arrested is probably
guilty of the offense, based on actual facts.

Note 12- Meaning of “offense has in fact just been committed” - the word “just” implies
immediacy in point of time. In People vs Monda (228 SCRA 115), the SC held that the
warrantless arrest after 3 days had elapsed from the date of the commission of the offense is
illegal, the element of immediacy between the time of the commission of the offense and that
of the arrest not having been complied with.

Note 13 – Entrapment vs. instigation. In entrapment, ways and means are resorted to for the
purpose of trapping and capturing the law breakers in the execution of their criminal plan. IN
INSTIGATION, in which the instigator practically induces the would-be defendant into the
commission of the offense, and himself becomes a co-principal. Entrapment is not a bar to
prosecution and conviction, but in instigation, the defendant would have to be acquitted
( People vs. Rivera, 216 SCRA 363).

Note 14 – BUY-BUST OPERATION – a form of entrapment employed by peace officers to catch a

malefactor in in flagrante delicto. It is a form of entrapment employed by peace officers to trap
and catch malefactor in flagrante delicto, wherein a police officer in civilian clothes would buy
the prohibited drug and, immediately after the sale, would arrest the seller or pusher for
violation of RA 9165.

Note 15 – Arrest of escaped prisoner – the rule is founded on the principle that at the time of
the arrest, the escapee is in the continuous act of committing a crime which is EVADING THE
SERVICE OF HIS SENTENCE.

Note 16 – Delay in the delivery of detained Persons to proper judicial authorities (Art. 125, RPC)
– IT MEANS THE FILING OF THE COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION with the MTC or with the
inquest fiscal of prosecutor who shall then decide either to order the release of the detained
person or to file the corresponding information in court.

Sec. 8 R113 – Method of arrest by officer without warrant –

Note 17 -– Arrested person must be informed why he is being arrested.

Note 18 – Custodial investigation – refers to questioning initiated by law enforcement officers

after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in
any significant way.
RA 7438 has extended the rights under custodial investigation to an individual who has
not been formally arrested by has merely been “invited” for questioning, such that anything
that he admits without the assistance of counsel is inadmissible in evidence.

POLICE LINE-UP is not part of a custodial investigation, and for this reason, the accused’
s identification by a witness as the suspect in the police lineup without eh assistance of c
counsel is admissible.

Note 19 – A CONFESSION OF AN ACCUSED UNDER CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION, given in the

presence of his counsel appointed by him or by a person in his behalf or by the court upon his
petition or petition by someone in his behalf, constitutes EVIDENCE OF HIGHER ORDER since it
is supported by the strong presumption that no person of normal mind would deliberately and
knowingly confess to a crime unless prompted by truth and his conscience.
HOWEVER, a confession given without the presence of his counsel or in the presence of
counsel engaged by the investigator is inadmissible in evidence, where the appointment of
counsel was without his conformity.

Note 20 – INADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE DOES NOT PRECLUDE CONVICTION ON OTHER

EVIDENCE –

Note 21 – There is illegal arrest where the arrest of a person is not justified by any of the
instances of a warrantless arrest, as provided in Sec. 5, R 113. The question of whether or not
the arrest is illegal does not depend on the fact that a crime has actually been committed by
the person arrested but on the nature of the deed from which the arresting officer may
reasonably infer that the person arrested has probably committed the offense.

HOWEVER, THE ILLEGALITY OF WARRANTLESS ARREST MAY BE CURED. The filing of an

information in court and the subsequent issuance by the trial judge of a warrant of arrest
enabled the court to acquire jurisdiction over the person of the accused and cured the defect of
the originally warrantless arrest.

Note 22- CONSEQUENCES OF ILLEGAL ARREST –

1. The documents, things or articles seized following the illegal arrest are jot admissible
in evidence. They are CONSIDERED FRUITS OF THE POISONOUS TREE. The
poisonous tree is the indirect result of the same illegal act, which renders all such
evidence inadmissible.
2. The arresting person may be held criminally liable for illegal arrest (Art. 269, RPC)
3. The arresting officer may be held civilly liable for damages under Art. 32 of the Civil
Code.

Note 23 – Waiver of illegality of arrest – The accused may waive the illegality of his arrest,
either expressly or impliedly.
An accused who enters his plea of not guilty and participates in the trial waives the
illegality of his arrest. Objection to the illegality of arrest must be raised before arraignment,
otherwise it is waived.

Note 24 – Once a person has been charged in court, he may no longer question his detention by
a petition for habeas corpus, his remedy being to quash the information and/or the warrant of
arrest.

In Sanchez vs Demetriou 227 SCRA 627, the SC held that if the accused objects to the
jurisdiction of the court over his person on the ground that the has been illegally arrested, he
may move to quash the information but only on that ground. If the accused raises other
grounds in the motion to quash, he is deemed to have waived that objection and to have
submitted his person to the jurisdiction of the court.

Sec. 13, R 113- ARREST AFTER ESCAPE OR RESCUE – If a person lawfully arrested escapes or is
rescued, any person may immediately pursue or retake him without a warrant at any time and
in any place within the Philippines.
NOTES IN CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Part 2
PUP COLLEGE OF LAW
2ND SEM SY 2019-2020
Prof: Pros. Ma. Julpha P. Maningas

Rule 114- BAIL

Sc.1, R114 – BAIL DEFINED – Bail is the security given for the release of a person in custody of
the law, furnished by him or a bondsman, to guarantee his appearance before any court as
required under the conditions hereinafter specified. Bail may be given in the form of corporate
surety, property bond, cash deposit or recognizance.

Note 1 – The purpose of bail is to relieve an accused from imprisonment until his conviction or
acquittal and to secure his appearance at the trial.

A person is in the custody of law when he has been either arrested or otherwise
deprived of his freedom or when he has voluntarily submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the
court by surrendering to the proper authorities.

Sec 2, R 114 – CONDITIONS OF BAIL; REQUIREMENTS –

Note 2 – A criminal proceeding in criminal action consists mainly of 3 stages: the trial, the
promulgation of judgment and the execution of his sentence. The surety’s liability covers all of
these 3 stages – appearance of the accused at the trial, appearance during the promulgation of
judgment and service by an accused of the sentence imposed. Unless the court directs
otherwise, the bail bond posted by an accused remains in force at all stages of the case until its
final determination (Cal. Vs. CA 251 SCRA 523).

Note 3 – No release or transfer except on court order or bail.

Sec. 4, R114 – BAIL AS A MATTER OF RIGHT –

All persons in custody shall be admitted to bail as a matter of right, with sufficient
sureties, or released on recognizance as prescribed by law or this Rule: a) before or after
conviction by the MeTC, MTC, MTCC and MCTC and b) before conviction by the RTC of an
offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment.

Note 4 – Bail is a matter of discretion before conviction in offenses punishable by death,

reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment that the prosecution is entitled to present evidence for
its denial.

Note 5 – In cases where it is authorized, bail should be granted before arraignment, otherwise
the accused may be precluded from filing a motion to quash.

Note 6 – The right to bail springs from the presumption of innocence accorded every accused
upon whom should not be inflicted incarceration at the outset since after trial he would be
entitled to acquittal, unless his guilt is established beyond reasonable doubt.

Note 7 – The right to bail is not available to military personnel or officer charged with a
violation of the Articles of War (Aswat vs. Galido, 204 SCRA 205).
Note 8 – A summary hearing for petition for bail means such brief and speedy method and
considering the evidence of guilt as is practicable and consistent with the purpose of hearing
which is merely to determine the weight of evidence for purposes of bail.
The court’s order granting or refusing bail must contain a summary of the evidence for
the prosecution, otherwise the order granting or denying bail may be invalidated because the
summary of evidence for the prosecution which contains the judge’s evaluation of the evidence
may be considered as an aspect of procedural due process for both the prosecution and
defense (Cortes vs. Catral, 279 SCRA1)

Sec. 5, R 114 – Bail shall be denied, or his bail shall be cancelled, in cases involving
penalty of imprisonment exceeding 6 years, but nor more than 20 years upon a showing by the
prosecution of the following circumstances:
a) That the accused is a recidivist, quasi-recidivist, or habitual delinquent or has
committed the crime aggravated by the circumstance of reiteration
b) That he has previously escaped from legal confinement, evaded sentence or has
violated the conditions of his bail without justification
c) That he committed the offense while on probation, parole or under conditional
pardon;
d) That the circumstances of his case indicate the probability of flight if released on bail
or
e) That there is undue risk that he may commit another crime during the pendency of
the appeal.

Sec. 6, R 114 – A capital offense is an offense which, under the law existing at the time
of its commission and at the time of the application for admission to bail may be punished with
death.

Note 9 – The constitutional mandate makes the grant or denial of bail in capital offenses hinges
on the issue of whether or not the evidence of guilt of the accused is strong. The burden of
proof lies with the prosecution to show strong evidence of guilt.

Sec. 7, R 114 - Burden of proof in bail application.

Note 10 - The hearing for bail in capital offenses is summary, i.e. that hearing which is brief and
speedy method of receiving and considering the evidence of guilt as is practicable and
consistent with the purpose of the hearing which is merely to determine the weight of the
evidence for purposes of bail.

Note 11 – Hearing is required even if the prosecution agrees to the grant of bail.

Sec. 9 – Amount of bail; guidelines:

a) Financial ability of the accused to give bail;
b) Nature and circumstances of the offense
c) Penalty of the offense charged-
d) Character and reputation of the accused;
e) Age and health of the accused
f) The weight of the evidence against the accused;
g) Probability of the accused appearing at the trial;
h) Forfeiture of other bail
i) The fact that accused was a fugitive from justice when arrested and
j) The pendency of other cases where the accused under bond.
Note 12 – Excessive bail shall not be required.

Sec. 15, R 114 – RECOGNIZANCE

Note 13 – Whenever allowed by law or these Rules, the Court may release a person in custody
on his own recognizance or that of a responsible person. RECOGNIZANCE is defined as an
obligation of record, entered into before some court or magistrate duly authorized to take it,
with the condition to so some particular act, the most usual condition in criminal cases being
the appearance of the accused for trial.

Sec. 24, R 114- NO BAIL AFTER JUDGMENT; EXCEPTION

No bail shall be allowed after the judgment of conviction has become final. If before
such finality, the accused applies for probation, he may be allowed temporary liberty under his
bail. When no bail was filed or the accused is incapable of filing one, the court may allow his
release on recognizance to the custody of a responsible member of the community. In no case
shall be allowed after the accused has commenced to serve sentence.

RULE 115 – RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED

Sec. 1, R 115 – Rights of Accused at the trial –

a) To be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved beyond reasonable doubt;
b) To be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him;
c) TO be present and defend in person and by counsel at every stage of the
proceedings, from the arraignment to the promulgation of the judgment. The
accused, may, however, waive his presence at the trial pursuant to the stipulations
set forth in his bail, unless his presence is specifically ordered by the court for
purposes of identification..
d) To testify as a witness in his own behalf but subject to cross-examination on matters
covered by direct examination. His silence shall not in any manner prejudice him
e) To be exempt from being compelled to be a witness against himself.
f) To confront and cross-examine the witnesses against him at the trial.
g) To have compulsory process issued to secure the attendance of witnesses and
production of other evidence in his behalf.
h) To have a speedy, impartial and public trial and
i) To appeal in all cases allowed and in the manner prescribed by law.

Note 14 – EQUIPOISE RULE – If the inculpatory facts and circumstances are capable of 2 or
more explanations, one of which is consistent with the innocence of the accused and the other
consistent with his guilt, then the evidence does not fulfill the test of moral certainty and is not
sufficient to support a conviction of the accused.

Note 15 – An accused has the right to be INFORMED OF THE NATURE AND CAUSE OF
ACCUSATION AGAINST HIM. He cannot be convicted of an offense, unless it is clearly charged
in the complaint or information. He cannot be convicted of an offense which has not been
charged in the information, even if the same has been duly proved.

Note 16- QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTACE, IN ORDER THAT THEY AY BE APPRECIATED TO UPGRADE

THE OFFENSE CHARGED, when proved, must be alleged in the information. THE ACCUSED
CANNOT BE HELD LIABLE FRO A HIGHER CRIME THAN THAT WHICH IS CHARGED IN THE
IFNROMATION, EVEN IF HOW CONCLUSIVE AND CONVINCING THE EVIDNECE OF GUILT FOR THE
HIGHER OFFENSE MAY BE.

Note 17v- The right to counsel means that the accused is simply accorded legal assistance
extended by a counsel who commits himself to the cause of the defense and acts accordingly.
The right to counsel does not mean the right to an intelligent counsel but to an effective and
vigilant counsel ( People vs. Liwanag 263 SCRA 62).
Note 18 – Consequences of denial of right to counsel:
1. Admission of guilt given by the accused in custodial investigation, including receipts he
signed for items which are inculpatory in nature, are not admissible in evidence, and if
properly objected to will not be received in evidence against him.
2. If the judgment of conviction has become final and executory, it may still be recalled,
and the accused afforded the opportunity to be heard by counsel, where he has been
denied the right to counsel during the hearing;
3. Where an accused was represented in the RTC by a person who claimed to be a lawyer
and was thereafter convicted, but it was later discovered that his counsel was not really
a lawyer, he was entitled to have his conviction set aside and a new trial undertaken.
4. If the incompetence, ignorance or inexperience of counsel is so great that as a result
thereof, the client was prejudiced, the litigation may be re-opened to given the accused
another chance to present his case.
5. In custodial investigation, the accused has the right to a competent and independent
counsel of his choice.

Note 19 – WAIVER OF THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL –

Sec. 1 © R 115 provides that upon motion , the accused may be allowed to defend
himself in person when it sufficiently appears to the court that he can properly protect his
rights without the assistance of counsel. This implies that an accused may waive his right to
counsel.

Note 20 – The right to remain silent means that he does not have to talk at all during custodial
investigation, nor take the witness stand during the trial of his case. It is a right that attaches
right at the moment he is investigated in connection with the crime for which he was
suspected.

Note 21 – IMMUNITY FROM SUIT FOR TESTIFITYING –

TWO TYPES – a) TRANSACTIONAL IMMUNITY – broader in scope of application. A witness can

no longer be prosecuted for any offense whatsoever arising out of the act or transaction and
b) USE AND DERIVATIVE USE IMMUNITY – a witness is only assured that his or her particular
testimony and evidence derived from it will not be used against him or her in a subsequent
prosecution.

Note 22 – RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION –

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused is exempt from being a witness against himself.
It is based on grounds of public policy because it would place the witness against the strongest
temptation to commit prejudice; and of humanity because it would be to extort a confession of
truth by force and the de free of which the law abhors.

The right against self-incrimination is accorded to every person who gives evidence,
whether voluntarily or under compulsion of subpoena, in any civil, criminal or administrative
proceeding. The right is not to be compelled to be a witness against himself. It secures to a
witness, whether he is a party or note, the right to refuse to answer any particular incriminating
question. It is the protection against testimonial compulsion; it prohibits the use of physical or
moral compulsion to extort communications from the accused, not an exclusion of his body as
evidence when it may be material. HOWEVER, the right does not apply to photographing,
fingerprinting and paraffin-testing, ultra-violet testing.
Note 23 – RIGHT TO CONFRONT AND CROSS-EXAMINE WITNESSES
Two purposes – to secure the opportunity to cross-examination and 2) to allow the judge to
observe the deportment and appearance of the witness while testifying.

It may be waived( Kim Liong vs. People, GR No. 200630, June 4, 2018).

Note 24- RIGHT TO APPEAL may be waived. Waiver is voluntary and intentional relinquishment
or abandonment of a known existing legal right,, advantage, benefit, claim or privilege, which
except for such waiver the party would have enjoyed.

ASSIGNMENT – READ ALL THE CASES CITED.

NOTES IN CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

Part 3
PUP COLLEGE OF LAW
2ND SEM SY 2019-2020
Prof: Pros. Ma. Julpha P. Maningas

RULE 116- ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA

Sec. 1, R 116 -Arraignment and Plea; how made.

1. The accused must be arraigned before the court where the complaint or information has
been filed or assigned for trial.
2. The accused must be present at the arraignment and must personally enter his plea. Both
arraignment and plea shall be made of record, but a failure to do so shall not affect the
validity of the proceedings.
3. When the accused refuses to plead, or makes a conditional plea of guilty, a plea of not
guilty shall be entered for him.
4. When the accused pleads guilty but presents exculpatory evidence, his plea shall be
deemed withdrawn and a plea of not guilty shall be entered for him
5. When the accused is under preventive detention, his case shall be raffled and its records
transmitted to the judge to whom the case was raffled within 3 days from the filing of the
information or complaint. The accused shall be arraigned within 10 days from the date of
the raffle. The pre-trial conference of his case shall be held within 10 days after
arraignment.
6. The private offended party shall be required to appear at the arraignment for purposes of
plead bargaining, determination of civil liability and other matters requiring his presence.
In case of failure of the offended to appear despite due notice, the court may allow the
accused to enter a plea of guilty to a lesser offense which is necessarily included in the
offense charged with the conformity of the trial prosecutor alone (Circular 1-89)
7. Unless a shorter period is provided by special law or Supreme Court Circular, the
arraignment shall be held within 30 days from date the court acquires jurisdiction over
the person of the accused. The time of the pendency of a motion to quash or for a bill of
particulars or other causes justifying suspension of the arraignment shall be excluded in
computing the period.

Note 1 – Issues which accused may raise before plea-

1. Has the accused been legally arrested with or without warrant? If he has been illegally
arrested or the arrest warrant has been illegally issued, he should move to quash or to
recall the warrant for entering a plea without questioning the legality of the arrest will
amount to a waiver thereof.
 2. Was the accused accorded the right to a preliminary investigation? If there has been no PI
or if there is an incomplete one, counsel for the accused should, if he so desires, ask the
court that the accused be accorded a preliminary investigation, or a re-investigation in
case he has not been accorded the opportunity to file a motion for reconsideration of the
resolution of the prosecutor finding probable cause or if there is new evidence to warrant
a re-investigation.
3. Is the complaint or information vaguely worded, such that there is need for a bill of
particulars to enable him to properly plead and to prepare for trial?
4. Is the complaint or information quashable on any or some of the grounds for motion to
quash pursuant to Rule117?

Sec. 2 R116 – PLEA OF GUILTY TO LESSER OFFENSE

Note 2 – Plea bargaining in criminal case is the process whereby the accused, the offended party
and prosecution work out a mutually satisfactory disposition of the case subject to court
approval.
The plea bargaining may also include amending the information by alleging more
mitigating circumstances in the information and allowing the accused to plead guilty thereto, as
this will lighten the penalty, depending on the number of mitigating circumstances.

Note 3 – Plea of guilty to lesser offense after prosecution has presented evidence - After the
prosecution has rested its case, a change of plea to a lesser offense may be granted but the judge,
with the approval of the prosecutor and the offended party and only when the prosecution does
not have sufficient evidence to establish the guilt of the crime charged. The judge cannot on its
own grant the change of plea (People vs. Villarama 210 SCRA 246).

Note 4 – The trial court, in the exercise of its discretion, may allow the accused to withdraw his
plea of guilty to not guilty. Similarly, before judgment of conviction upon a plea of guilty
becomes final, the trial court may still allow the accused to withdraw his plea of guilty and to
enter a non-guilty plea.

Sec. 3, R 116 – plea of guilty to capital offense; reception of evidence required.

Note 5 – When the accused pleads guilty to a capital offense, the above provision imposes on the
judge the following duties: a) to conduct a searching inquiry into the voluntariness and full
comprehension of the consequences of the accused’s plea; b) to require the prosecution. To
prove the guilt of the accused and the precise degree of his culpability; c) to inquire whether or
not the accused wishes to present evidence on his behalf and allow him to do so if he so desires.

Sec. 4, R 116- Plea of guilty to non-capital offense

When the accused pleads guilty to anon-capital offense, the court may receive evidence from the
parties to determine the penalty to be imposed.

Note 6 – The general rule is that a plea of guilty does not merely join the issues of the complaint
or information, but amounts to an admission of guilty and of the material facts alleged in the
complaint or information and in this sense takes the place of the trial itself.
Exception – Where the accused pleaded guilty to information which did not allege all the
elements of the crime charged, a plea of guilty to such information does not warrant the
conviction of the accused. Also, where the accused enters a plea of guilty to information which
charges a capital offense, in which case Sec. 3, R 116 requires that the court shall conduct
searching inquiry into the voluntariness and full comprehension of his plea and shall require the
prosecution to prove his guilty and the precise degree of culpability.

Note 7 – Effect of plea of guilty to information that charges no offense – it will not warrant
conviction of the accused.

Sec.5, R 116 – WITHDRAWAL OF GUILTY TO NOT GUILTY

 Sec. 5 allows the trial court to permit the accused to withdraw or change his plea of guilty
to not guilty at any time before the judgment of conviction becomes final. The effect of change
is the setting aside of the judgment of conviction and the re-opening of the case for new trial.

Sec. 9, R 116 – BILL OF PARTICULARS

Accused may, before arraignment, move for bill of particulars to enable him to properly
plead and prepare for trial. The motion shall specify the alleged defects of the complaint or
information and the details desired.

Note 8 – The purpose of bill of particulars is to enable the party to prepare his responsive
pleading; to amplify or limit a pleading, specify more and particularly a claim or defense set up
and pleaded in general terms, give information not contained in the pleading, to the opposite
party and the court as to the precise nature, character, scope and extent of the cause of action or
defense relied on by the pleader, and apprise the opposite party of the case which he has to meet,
to the end that the proof at the trial may be limited to matter specified, in order to avoid surprise
the trial.

Sec. 10, R 116 -Production or inspection of material evidence in possession of

prosecution –

Note 9, R 116 – The accused may thus move for production or inspection of material evidence in
the possession of the prosecution. It authorizes the defense to inspect, photograph any evidence
of the prosecution in its possession after obtaining the permission of the court.

Sec. 11, R 116 – Suspension of arraignment

Note 10 – Insanity as a ground to suspend arraignment; where the physical and outward
manifestations of the accused at the time of arraignment indicated substantial demonstration of a
mental disorder which the trial court had observed and counsel for accused had called the
attention of the court to such fact, the court should suspend the arraignment and require that the
accused be examined by a government physician to determine his fitness to stand trial.

Note 11 – PREJUDICIAL QUESTION as a ground to suspend arraignment.

Note 12 – The filing and pendency of PETITION FOR REVIEW filed with the DOJ from the
resolution of the investigating prosecutor, or from the resolution of the DOJ itself to the Office of
the President. The accused should file such motion to suspend and to secure a ruling on his
petition for review within 60 days from the filing of the petition.

RULE 117 – MOTION TO QUASH

Sec. 1, R 117- Time to move to quash – At any time before entering his plea, the accused
may move to quash the complaint or information.

Note 13 – QUASHAL OF INFORMATION VS. NOLLE PROSEQUI

A MOTION TO QUASH is initiated and filed by the accused while a nolle prosequi is
initiated by the prosecutor. Further, a nolle prosequi is a dismissal of the criminal case by the
government before the accused is placed on trial and before he is called to plead, with the
approval of the court in the exercise of its judicial discretion. Nolle Prosequi partakes of the
nature of a nonuser or discontinuance in a civil sit and leaves the matter in the same condition in
which it was before the commencement of the prosecution.

Sec.2, R117 – Form and contents of Motion to Quash

Sec. 3, R 117 – Grounds for a Motion to Quash

 1) That the facts charged do not constitute an offense;
2) That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the offense charged;
3) That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the person of the accused;
4) That the officer who filed the information had not authority to do so;
5) That it does not conform substantially to the prescribed form;
6) That more than one offense is charged except when a single punishment for various
offenses is prescribed by law;
7) That the criminal action or liability has been extinguished;
8) That it contains averments which, if true, would constitute a legal excuse or
justification; and
9) That the accused has been previously convicted or acquitted of the offense charged,
or the case against him was dismissed or otherwise terminated without his express
consent.

Note 14 – Prescription of continuing crime – An offense is a continuing one perpetrated over a

span of time. The period of its prescription is counted from the lasts tor last act constituting the
series of acts continuing the single crime.

Note 15 – The period of prescription does not run when the offender is absent from the
Philippines.

Note 16 – Pardon in private crimes before the filing of the complaint in court refers to the
offenses of seduction, abduction, rape or acts of lasciviousness. If it involves a minor, the
pardon t be effective as to prevent prosecution of the accused must be given by both parents and
the offended party, one or the other not being sufficient.

Note 16 – Amnesty as ground for motion to quash – when the criminal action or liability has
been extinguished, as amnesty completely extinguishes the penalty and all its effects.

Note 17 – Double jeopardy – Requisites: a) a first jeopardy must have attached prior to the
second; 2) the first jeopardy must have been validly terminated and 3) the second jeopardy must
be for the same offense charged in the first information, or is an attempt to commit the same or a
frustration thereof.

Note 18 – Requisites of first jeopardy – a) court of competent jurisdiction; b) valid complaint or

information; c) arraignment; d) valid plea and e) the defendant was acquitted or convicted or
the case was dismissed or otherwise terminated without the express consent of the accused.

Sec. 4, R 117 Amendment of complaint or information

If the motion to quash is based on an alleged defect in the complaint or information which can be
cured by amendment, the court shall order that an amendment be made.
If it is based on the ground that the facts charged do not constitute an offense, the
prosecution shall be given by the court an opportunity to correct the defect by amendment. The
motion shall be granted if the prosecution fails to make the amendment, or the complaint or
information still suffers from the same despite the amendment.

Sec. 5, R 117 – Effect of sustaining motion to quash

Note 19 – If the motion to quash is granted, the court may order that another information be
filed, except as provided in section 6 of this rule.
Sec. 6, R 117 – Order sustaining the motion to quash not a bar to another prosecution; exception
–

An order sustaining the motion to quash is not a bar to another prosecution for the same
offense unless the motion was based on the grounds specified in Sec. 3 (g) and (i) of this Rule.

Note 20 – Remedies or prosecution where motion to quash is granted –

a) The prosecution may amend the information correct the defects thereof if the trial
court makes an order to that effect, in accordance with Sec. 5 R118 and thereafter
prosecute the accused on the basis of the amended information.

b) If the prosecution does not agree with the order of quashal of the information, it may
appeal therefrom to the appellate court.

c) If the facts alleged in the information which has been quashed because it does not
allege all the elements of the offense, but the facts so alleged constitute another
offense under a specific statute, the prosecution can file a complaint for such specific
offense where dismissal is made prior to arraignment of the accused and on a motion
to quash.

Note 21 – Remedies of accused where motion to quash is denied –

a) Proceed with the trial, and if he is convicted, he may appeal with the appellate court
and thereby assign as error the denial of his motion to quash; the order denying the
said motion to quash is interlocutory

NOTES IN CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

Part 4
PUP COLLEGE OF LAW
2ND SEM SY 2019-2020
Prof: Pros. Ma. Julpha P. Maningas

Remedies of Accused where Motion to Quash is DENIED:

A. To proceed with the trial, and in case of conviction, to appear therefrom and assign as
error the denial of the motion to quash (Lalican vs. Vergara, 276 SCRA 518).
B. File a petition for certiorari (Rule 65) from the Order denying Motion to Quash under
any of these instances: 1) where there is necessity to afford protection to the
constitutional rights of the accused; 2) when necessary for the orderly administration of
justice or to avoid oppression or multiplicity of actions; 3) when there is a prejudicial
question which is sub judice; 4) when acts of the officer are without or in excess of
authority; 5) where the prosecution is under an invalid law, ordinance or regulation; 6)
when double jeopardy is clearly apparent 7) where the court has no jurisdiction over the
offense; 8) where it is a case of persecution rather than prosecution; 9) where the
charges are manifestly false and motivated by the lust for vengeance; 10) when there is
clearly no prima facie case against the accused and 11) to avoid multiplicity of actions
 Sec. 7, R 117 – Former Conviction or Acquittal; double jeopardy

Note: Double jeopardy consists of 2 categories:

The first speaks of the same offense and
The second refers to the same act.

The first part refers to punishment for the same offense. Where the offenses charged
are penalized either by different sections of the same statute or by different statutes, the
important inquiry relates to the identity of the offense charged, and the constitutional
protection against double jeopardy is available only where an identity is shown to exist
between the earlier and the subsequent offenses charged.

The second category of double jeopardy embodied the exception to the general
proposition, namely, that the constitutional protection against double jeopardy is available
although the prior offense charged under an ordinance be different from the offense
charged subsequently under a national statute, such as the Revised Penal Code, provided
that both offenses spring from the same act or set of acts. When the acts of the accused as
set out in the two information are so related to each other in time and space as to be
reasonably regarded as having taken place on the same occasion and where those acts have
been moved by one and the same, or a continuing, intent or voluntary design or negligence,
such acts may be appropriately characterized as an integral capable of giving rise to penal
liability under different legal enactments (municipal ordinance and national statute)

Note 2 – ELEMENTS OF DOUBLE JEOPARDY –

1) A first jeopardy has attached prior to the second;
2) The first jeopardy has been validly terminated and
3) A second jeopardy is for the same offense as that in the first.

The first jeopardy only attaches

a) after a valid indictment;
b) before a competent court;
c) after arraignment,
d) when a valid plea has been entered and
e) when the accused was acquitted or convicted, or the case was dismissed or otherwise
terminated without his express consent.

Note 3 – When there is no double jeopardy –

1) Conviction for a crime under special law which also constitutes an offense under the
RPC, will not be a bar to the prosecution under the RPC, as the special law crime is a
malum prohibitum and the RPC crime is malum in se
2) When two informations are filed charging the same accused with 2 different
elements (ex – issuance of bouncing check for estafa under the RPC and Violation of
BP Bilang 22)
3) The dismissal of the first case was null and void because the trial court lost its
jurisdiction to issue the order of dismissal and it violated the right of the prosecution
to due process, it does not bar a subsequent prosecution of the same offense, there
being no double jeopardy.

Note 4 – Identity of offenses need not be absolute identity; the first and second offenses may
be regarded as the same offense where the second offense necessarily includes the first offense
or is necessarily included in such first offense or where the second offense is an attempt to
commit the first or a frustration thereof.
Note 5 – The test to determine the identity of 2 offenses is whether or not the evidence that
proves one offense would also prove the other, or whether or not the second offense charged
necessarily includes or is necessarily included in the offense charged in the former information.

Note 6 – There is double jeopardy even if accused consented to the dismissal of the case
(People vs. Declaro, 170 SCRA 142). Similarly, where the dismissal, on motion of the accused, is
based on the accused’s constitutional right to speedy trial, the dismissal is an adjudication on
the merits and its revival will twice put him in double jeopardy (Salcedo vs. Mendoza, 88 SCRA
811).

Note 7 – Double Jeopardy in continued or continuing crimes –

Where 2 informations arose from the same transaction, the second information cannot
prosper because the accused would be placed in double jeopardy (Mallari vs. People, 168 SCRA
422).

Sec 8, R 117 – Provisional Dismissal

A case shall not be provisionally dismissed except with the express consent of the
accused and with notice to the offended party…

Note 8 – The trial court nay not order a provisional dismissal of the case without the express
consent of the accused and prior notice to the offended party, as the latter is entitled to be
heard on the matter. A provisional dismissal of the case becomes permanent after the
expiration of the periods: a) 1 year after the issuance of order of provisional dismissal without
the case having been revived for offenses punishable by imprisonment not exceeding 6 years or
a fine of any amount or both and b) 2 years after the issuance of order of provisional dismissal,
for offenses punishable by imprisonment of more than 6 years.

Sec. 9, R 117 – Failure to move to quash or to allege any ground therefor.

Note 9 – General Rule – A motion to quash must be filed before arraignment, otherwise all
objections then available which are grounds of a motion to quash are waived.
Exceptions – Failure to assert certain grounds in a motion to quash filed prior to the plea
does not operate as a waiver of the right to invoke them later, namely: 1) the information
charges no offense; 2) the trial court has no jurisdiction over the offense charged; 3) the penalty
or the offense has been extinguished 4) double jeopardy has attached.

RULE 118- PRE-TRIAL

Sec. 1, R 118 – Pre-trial mandatory in criminal cases.

Note 10 – After arraignment and within 30 days from the date the court acquires jurisdiction
over the person of the accused, unless a shorter period is provided for in special laws or
circulars of the SC, the trial court shall order a pre-trail conference to consider the following:
plea bargaining, stipulation of facts, marking for identification of evidence of the parties, waiver
of objections to admissibility of evidence, modification of the order of trial if the accused admits
the charge but interposes a lawful defense and such other matters as will promote a fair and
expeditious trial of the criminal and civil aspects of the case.

Plea bargaining in criminal cases is the process whereby the accused, the offended party
and the prosecution work out a mutually satisfactory disposition of the case subject to court
approval.
Sec. 2, R118 – Pre-trial agreements –
All agreement or admission made or entered during the pre-trial conference shall be
reduced in writing and signed by the accused and counsel, otherwise they cannot be used
against the accused,. The agreements covering matters referred to in Section1 of this Rule shall
be approved by the court (Sec. 4, Circ. 38-98).

Note 11 – Sec. 1, R118 requires that a stipulation of facts must be signed by the accused and by
his counsel, without which the stipulation is a nullity and cannot be used as evidence against
the accused.

Sec.3, R 118 – Non-appearance at pre-trial conference – If the counsel for the accused
or the prosecutor does not appear at the pre-trial and does not offer an acceptable excuse for
his lack of cooperation, the court may impose proper sanctions or penalties (Sec. 5, Cir. 38-98)

Sec. 4, R118 – Pre-trial order – After the pre-trial conference, the court shall issue an
order reciting the actions taken, the facts stipulated and the evidence marked. Such order shall
bind the parties, limit the trial to matters not disposed of, and control the course of action
during the trial, unless modified by the court to prevent manifest injustice.

Note 12 – A judge who renders judgment of acquittal based on the pre-trial, even when there
are disputed documents and issues of facts, commits grave error and deprives the prosecution
of due process, rendering the judgment void.

RULE 119 – TRIAL

Sec. 1, R119 – Time to prepare for trial – After a plea of not guilty is entered, the
accused shall have at least 15 days to prepare for trial. The trial shall commence within 30 days
from receipt of the pre-trial order (Sec. 6, Cir. 38-98).

Note 13 – The general rule is that trial, once commenced, shall continue from day to day as far
as practicable until terminated.

Note 14 – REQUISITES OF TRIAL IN ABSENTIA –

1. The accused has been arraigned;
2. he has been duly notified of the trial; and
3. his failure to appear is unjustified.

The Constitution authorizing trials in absentia allows the accused to be absent at the trial
but not at certain stages of the proceedings, to wit:
a) at arraignment and plea, whether of innocence or of guilt;
b) during trial whenever necessary for identification purposes and
c) at the promulgation of sentence, unless it is for a light offense, in which the accused may
appear by counsel or representative.
At such stages of proceedings, his presence is required and cannot be waived (Lavides vs.
CA, 324 SCRA 321).

Note 15 – Where after arraignment and during trial the accused escapes from confinement or
jumps bail, as a result of which trial in absentia would proceed. He waives the right to present
evidence and cross-examine the witnesses against him as by escaping he loses standing in
court. Trial in absentia will continue except when the presence of accused is necessary for his
identification by the witnesses and if he is convicted, he cannot, through counsel, appeal said
conviction, unless he voluntarily submits himself to the jurisdiction of the court or otherwise
arrested within 15 days from notice of the judgment against him ( People vs. Mapalao, 197
SCRA 79).
Note 16- Accused can be compelled to appear despite waiver of appearance – The accused’s
waiver of appearance or trial in absentia does not mean that the prosecution is thereby
deprived of its right to require the presence of the accused for purposes of identification by the
witnesses which is vital for conviction of the accused, except where he unqualifiedly admits in
open court after his arraignment that he is the person named as defendant in the case on trial.

Note 17 – A change of venue may occasion delay in the trial of the case, which should be
excepted in computing the trial period.

Sec. 9, R119 – Remedy where accused is not brought to trial within the time limit – If the
accused is not brought to trial within the time limit required by Sec. 1 (g), Rule 116 and Sec. 1 as
extended by Sec. 6 of this rule, the information may be dismissed on motion of the accused on
the ground of denial of his right to speedy trial. The accused shall have the burden of providing
the motion but the prosecution shall have the burden of going forward with the evidence to
establish the exclusion of time under this Sec. 3 of this Rule. The dismissal shall be subject to
the rules on double jeopardy.
Failure of the accused to move for dismissal prior to trial shall constitute a waiver of the
right to dismiss under this section (Sec. 14, 38-96)

Sec. 11, R 119 – Order of trial

The trial shall proceed in the following order:
a) The prosecution shall present evidence to prove the charge and, in the proper case,
the civil liability;
b) The accused may present evidence to prove his defense, and damages, if any, arising
from the issuance of any provisional remedy in the case;
c) The prosecution and defense may, in that order, present rebuttal and su r-rebuttal
evidence unless the court, in furtherance of justice, permits them to present
additional evidence bearing upon the main issue;
d) Upon admission of the evidence of the parties, the case shall be deemed submitted
for decision unless the court directs them to argue orally or to submit memoranda
e) When the accused admits the act or omission charged in the complaint or
information but interposes a lawful defense the order of trial may be modified.

Note 18 – When the accused admits the act or omission charged in the complaint or
information but interposes a lawful defense, the order of trial may be modified accordingly.
Pursuant to this rule, the accused, instead of the prosecution may adduce evidence first to
prove the lawful defense or exempting circumstance. However, if the accused objects to such
reverse procedure, the curt should follow the order of trial, as provided in Sec. 11, R119 (Sacay
vs. Sandiganbayan, 142 SCRA 593).

Sec. 12, R 119 – Application for examination of witness for the accused before trial
Note 19 – Deposition is the testimony of a witness taken upon oral question or written
interrogatories, in open court, but in pursuance of a commission to take testimony issued by a
court, or under a general law or court rule on the subject, and reduced to writing and duly
authenticated, and intended to be used in preparation and upon the trial of a civil or criminal
prosecution.
The purpose of taking depositions are : 1) greater assistance to the parties in
ascertaining the truth and in checking and preventing perjury; 2) provide an effective means of
detecting and exposing false, fraudulent claims and defenses; 3) make available in a simple,
convenient and inexpensive way, facts which otherwise could not be proved except with
greater difficulty; 4) educate the parties in advance of trial as to the real value of their claims
and defenses thereby encouraging settlements; 5) expedite litigation; 6) prevent delay; 7)
simplify and narrow the issues and 8) expedite and facilitate both preparation and trial.
Note 20 – Rule on Examination of Child Witness (A.M. No. 004-07-SC, effective Dec. 15, 2000)

The rule provides that every child is now presumed qualified to be a witness. To rebut
this presumption, the burden of proof lies on the party challenging the child’s competency
(People vs. Esugon, GR 195224, June 22, 2015).

Only when substantial doubt exists regarding the ability of the child to perceive,
remember, communicate distinguish truth from falsehood, or appreciate the duty to tell the
truth in court will the court, motu proprio or on motion of a patty, conduct a competency
examination of a child (People vs. Hermosa, GR No. 199442, April 7, 2014).

Note 21 – “Child witness” is any person who at the time of giving testimony is below the age of
18 years. In child abuse cases, a child includes one over 18 years but is found by the court as
unable to fully take care of himself or protect himself from abuse, neglect, cruelty, explanation,
or discrimination because of a physical or mental disability or condition (Rule on Examination of
Child Witness)

Note 22 – Sec. 20, A.M. No. 004-07-SC – Leading questions – The court may allow leading
questions in all stages of examination of a child, if the same will further the interests of justice.

Sec. 16, R 119 -Trial of several accused- When 2 or more accused are jointly charged
with an offense, they shall be tried jointly unless the court, in its discretion and upon motion of
the prosecutor or any accused orders separate trial for one or more accused.

Note 23 – Separate trial – The grant of separate trial rests in the sound discretion of the curt
and is not a matter of right to the accused, especially where it is sought after the presentation
of evidence of the prosecution.

Sec. 17, R 119 – Discharge of accused to be state witness –

Note 24 – The rule relative to the right of the government prosecutor to utilize a person who
has participated in the commission of a crime as a witness for the prosecution is: 1) when the
offense is committed by more than one person, it is the duty of the prosecutor to include all of
them in the complaint or information; 2) if the prosecutor desires to utilize one of those
charged with the offense as government witness, the prosecutor may ask the court to discharge
one of them after complying with the conditions prescribed by law; 3) there is nothing in the
rule from which it may be inferred that before a person can be presented as government
witness that he be first included as a co-accused in the information, for the prosecutor is free to
produce as witness anyone whom he believes can testify to the truth of the crime charged and
4) failure to follow the requirements of the rule relative to the use of a person, himself a
particeps criminis, as a government witness does not violate due process, nor render his
testimony ineffectual if otherwise competent and admissible (People vs. Binsol, 100 Phil. 713).

Note 25 – An accused may be discharged to be utilized as state witness if he does not appear to
be the most guilty. While all the accused may be give the same penalty by reason of
conspiracy, yet one may be considered least guilty if his degree of participation in the
commission of the offense is taken into account (People vs. Esparas, 292 SCRA 332).

Note 26- R.A. 6981 – An Act Providing for a Witness Protection, Security and Benefit Program
and for other Purposes –

Sec. 10 – State Witness – any person who has participated in the commission of a crime
and desires to be a witness for the State, can apply, and, if qualified as determined in this Act
and by the Department, shall be admitted into the Program whenever the following
circumstances are present –
1) The offense in which his testimony will be sued is a grave felony as defined under
the RPC or its equivalent under special laws;
2) There is absolute necessity for his testimony;
3) There is no other direct evidence available for the proper prosecution of the offense
committed;
4) His testimony can be substantially corroborated on its material points;
5) He does not appear to be the most guilty and
6) He has not at any tie been convicted of any crime involving moral turpitude.

Note 27 – 2 Types of immunity statutes granting immunity to a witness from suit –

a) Transactional immunity – broader in the scope of its application. By this grant, a
witness can no longer be prosecuted for any offense whatsoever arising out of the
act or transaction.
b) Use-and-derivative use immunity – a witness is only assured that his or her
particular testimony and evidence derived from it will not be sed against him or her
in a subsequent prosecution. The court in which the action against the witness
granted immunity is pending has the jurisdiction to review the immunity granted by
the prosecution.

Sec. 18, R 119 – Discharge of accused operates as acquittal – The order indicate din the
preceding section shall amount to an acquittal of the discharged accused and shall be a
bar to future prosecution for the same offense, unless the accused fails or refuses to
testify against his co-accused in accordance with his sworn statement constituting the
basis for his discharge.

Sec 19, R 119 – When mistake has been made in charging the proper offense – When it
becomes manifest at any time before judgment that a mistake has been made in charging the
roper offense and the accused cannot be convicted of the offense charged or of any other
offense necessarily included therein, the accused shall not be discharged if there appears t be
good cause to detain him. In such case, the court shall commit the accused to answer for the
proper offense and dismiss the original case upon the filing of the proper information.

Sec. 21, R 119- Exclusion of the public – The judge may, motu proprio, exclude the public
from the courtroom if the evidence to be produced during the trial is offensive to decency or
public morals. He may also, on motion of the accused, exclude the public from the trial except
court personnel and the counsel of the parties.

Sec. 22, R 119 - Consolidation of trials of related offenses- Charges for offenses founded
on the same facts or forming part of a series of offenses of similar character may be tried jointly
at the discretion of the court.

Sec. 23, R 119 – Demurrer to evidence –

Note 28 – Demurrer to evidence is an objection by one of the parties in an action, to the effect
that the evidence which his adversary produced is insufficient in point of law, whether true or
not, to make out a case or sustain the issue. The party demurring challenges the sufficiency of
the whole evidence to sustain a verdict. (Gutib vs. CA, 312 SCRA 365).
Sufficient evidence for purposes of frustrating a demurrer thereto is such evidence in
character, weight or amount as will legally justify the judicial or official action demanded to
accord to the circumstances.
Note 29 – After the prosecution shall have rested its case, the case may be dismissed in any of
the following manner: 1) the court on its own initiative can dismiss the case after giving prior
notice to the prosecution; 2) the accused can file a demurrer only if he is granted prior leave of
court; 3) if the motion for leave or the demurrer is denied, the accused can present his
evidence, and there is no waiver and 4) if the accused files a demurrer without leave , his right
to present evidence is waived.

Note 30 – Where there are two or more accused and only one of them presents a demurrer to
evidence, without leave of court, and the trial court may defer resolution thereof until the
decision is rendered on the other accused.

Note 31- The order denying demurrer is not appealable nor subject to challenge by certiorari as
it is interlocutory (Par. 5, Sec. 23, R119). HOWEVER, this has been abandoned in Gutib vs. CA,
where the SC ruled that the denial of the demurrer to evidence, filed with leave of court, may
be questioned by means of a petition for certiorari upon a showing that the trial court gravely
abused its discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction.

RULE 120 - JUDGMENT

Sec. 1, R 120 – Judgement, definition and form – JUDGMENT is adjudication by the court that
the accused is guilty or not guilty of the offense charged and the imposition of the proper
penalty and civil liability, if any.

Note 32 – Judge who penned the decision need not be the one who heard the case.

Note 33 – Meaning of acquittal – a finding of not guilty based on the merits, that is, the accused
is acquitted because the evidence does not show that his guilty is beyond reasonable doubt, or
a dismissal of the case after the prosecution has rested its case and upon motion of the accused
on the ground that the evidence fails to show beyond doubt that the accused is guilty.

Note 34 - An order of dismissal is immediately final and cannot be reconsidered. It is always

based on the merits BUT a dismissal does not decide the case on the merits or that the
defendant is not guilty. Dismissals terminate the proceedings, either because the court is not a
court of competent jurisdiction, or the evidence does not show that the offense was committed
within the territorial jurisdiction of the court, or the complaint or information is not valid or
sufficient in form and substance.

Note 35 – Acquittal on reasonable doubt does not bar civil action on quasi-delict , unless the
court declares in the judgment that the fact from which the civil liability might arise did not
exist.

Sec. 3, R 120 – Judgment for 2 or more offenses – When 2 or more offenses are charged
in a single complaint or information, but the accused fails to object to it before trial, the court
may convict the accused of as many offenses as are charged and proved, and impose on him
the penalty for each offense setting out separately the findings of fact and law in each case.

Sec. 6, R 120 – Promulgation of judgment –

Note 36 – Meaning of Promulgation – an official proclamation or announcement of the decision
of the court. In a criminal case, promulgation requires the following requisites: 1) filing of the
decision with and receipt thereof by, the clerk of court and entering or recording the same in
the criminal docket and 2) reading the judgment or sentence in the presence of the accused
and the judge of the court who rendered. The first requisite is indispensable and cannot be
dispensed with, for without the receipt by the clerk of court and his entering the judgment in
the criminal docket, there can be no valid promulgation.
Note 37 – The presence of the accuse din person at the promulgation is mandatory in all cases
except where the conviction is for light offense and except where the judgment is for acquittal,
either or which case the accused may appear through counsel or representative.

Note 38 – Promulgation of judgment in criminal cases is the reading of the judgment or

sentence in the presence of the accused and the judge of the court who rendered it. IT IS NOT
THE DATE OF THE WRITING OF THE DECISION OR JUDGMENT THAT CONSTITUTES RENDITION
THEREOF AND GIVES IT VALIDITY AND BINDING EFFECT BUT THE FILING OF SUCH DECISION OR
JDUGMENT WITH THE CLERK OF COURT.

Note 39 – When the judge is absent or outside of the province or city, the judgment may be
promulgated by the clerk of court.

Sec. 7, R 120 – Modification of judgment- Judgment may be modified before it becomes

final, upon motion or the accused.

Note 40 – judgment becomes final:

1) the period for perfecting the appeal has lapsed;
2) the sentence is partially or totally satisfied or served;
3) the accused expressly waives in writing his right to appeal or
4) the accused applies for probation.

The filing of application for probation operates as a waiver of the right to appeal and
renders the judgment of conviction final.

Sec. 8, R 120 – ENTRY OF JUDGMENT – after a judgment has become final, it shall be
entered in accordance with Rule 36 of the Rules of Court.

Note 41 – Probation is a mere privilege, rests solely on the discretion of the court. It is
revocable before final discharge of the probationer by the court. Thus, the expiration of the
probation period alone does not automatically terminate probation. Probation affects only the
criminal aspect of the case, it has no bearing on the civil liability (Budlong vs. Apalisok, 122
SCRA 937).

RULE 121- NEW TRIAL OR RECONSIDERATION

Sec. 1, R121- New trial or reconsideration – At any time before a judgment of conviction
becomes final, the court may, on motion of the accused, or on its own instance but with the
consent of the accused, grant a new trial or reconsideration.

Sec. 2, R121 – Grounds for new trial –

a) That errors of law or irregularities prejudicial to the substantial rights of the accused
have been committed during the trial;
b) That new and material evidence has been discovered which the accused could not
with reasonable diligence have discovered and produced at the trial, and which, if
introduced and admitted, would probably change the judgment.

Note 42 – Gross negligence of counsel as ground for new trial – If the mistake or negligence of
counsel is so gross as to deprive the client of his right to due process of law, the latter may eb
entitled to new trial (Tan vs. CA, 275 SCRA 505).
Note 43 – An affidavit of desistance is not a newly discovered evidence which will warrant a
new trial. However, where aside from the testimonies of the retracting witnesses there is no
evidence to support the judgment of conviction, a new trial may be granted.
Sec. 3, R 121 – GROUNDS FOR RECONSIDERATION –
The court shall grant reconsideration on the ground of errors of law or fact in the judgment,
which requires no further proceedings.

RULE 122 – APPEAL

Sec. 1, R 122 – who may appeal – Any party may appeal from a judgment or final order,
unless the accused will be placed in double jeopardy.

Note 44 – “Any party” includes the government, the accused and the offended party whose
claim for civil damages arising from the crime is impliedly instituted in the criminal action.

Note 45 – Offended party may file appeal or file certiorari – It is settled that in criminal cases
where the offended party is the State, the interest of the private complainant or the private
offended party is limited to civil liability. In the prosecution of the offense, the complainant’s
role is limited to that of a witness for the prosecution.

Rule 126- SEARCH AND SEIZURE

Sec.1, R126 – Search warrant defined – A search warrant is an order in writing issued in
the name of the People of the Philippines, signed by a judge and directed to a peace officer,
commanding him to search for personal property descried therein and bring it before the court.

Gen Rule – No search and seizure without warrant

Exceptions – 1) consented searches; 2) as an incident to a lawful arrest; 3) searches of
vessels and aircrafts for violation of immigration, customs and drug laws; 4) searches of moving
vehicles; 5) searches of automobiles at borders or constructive borders; 6) were the prohibited
articles are in plain view; 7) searches of buildings and premises to enforce fire, sanitary and
building regulations and 8) stop and frisk operations.

Sec. 2, R 126 – Where application for search warrant shall be filed: 1) any court within
whose territorial jurisdiction a crime was committed; 2) for compelling reasons stated in the
application, any court within the judicial region where the crime was committed if the place of
the commission of the crime is known, or any court within the judicial region where the warrant
shall eb enforced.
However, if the criminal action has already been filed, the application shall only be made
in the court where the criminal action is pending.

Read Malaloan vs. CA, 232 SCRA 249, Cudia vs. CA, 284 SCRA 173).
Sec. 3,R 126 – Personal property to be seized – A search warrant may be issued for the
search and seizure of personal property: a) subject of the offense b) stolen or embezzled and
other proceeds or fruits of the offense or c) used or intended to be used as the means of
committing an offense.

Sec. 4, R 126 – Requisites for issuing search warrant- A search warrant shall not issue
except upon probable cause in connection with one specific offense to be determined
personally by the judge after examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the
witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing the place to eb searched and the things
to be seized which may be anywhere in the Philippines.

Note 46 – Things need not be owned by person against whom the warrant was issued.
 There must be probable cause. Probable cause for a search has been defined as such
facts and circumstances which would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe
that an offense has been committed and that the object sought in connection with the offense
are in the place that: 1) the judge must examine the complainant or applicant and his witnesses
personally; 2) the examination must be under oath and 3) the examination must be reduced to
writing in the form of searching questions and answers.

Sec. 13, R 126 – Search incident to lawful arrest – A persona lawfully arrested may be
searched for dangerous weapons or anything which may have been used or constitute proof of
the commission of an offense without a search warrant.

Read People vs. Malmstedt

Manalili vs CA
People vs. Aminundin
People vs. Encinada

Note 47 – Plain View Doctrine – Objects falling in plain view of an officer who has a right to be
in the position to have that view are subject to seizure even without search warrant and may be
introduced in evidence.
Requisites: 1) the law enforcement officer in search of evidence has a prior justification for an
intrusion or in a position from which he can view a particular area:
2) the discovery of the evidence in plain view is inadvertent;
3) it is immediately apparent to the officer that the item he observes may evidence of a crime,
contraband or otherwise subject of seizure.

Note 48 – Search of moving vehicles and aircraft- Officers may lawfully conduct searches of
moving vehicles without need of a warrant as it is impracticable to secure a judicial warrant
before a searching vehicle since a vehicle can be quickly move doubt of the locality or
jurisdiction in which the warrant may be sought.

Note 49 -Stop and frisk rule – It is based on the observation of police officers on the conduct of
the person who acts suspiciously, and when searched, such search would yield unlawful items
in connection with an offense.

Note 50 – In flagrante delicto – Arrest of a person without warrant if he has just committed, is
actually committing, or is attempting to commit an offense.

Note 51- Hot pursuit arrest – one where a person is arrested without warrant when an offense
has in fact just been committed, and he has personal knowledge of facts indicating that the
person to be arrested has committed it.

Note 52 – Effects of illegal search - Illegally seized evidence is not admissible, and the things
seized thereby are not admissible in evidence.

RULE 127 – PROVISIONAL REMEDIES IN

CRIMINAL CASSES

Sec. 2, R 127 – Attachment (Rule 57 of the Rules of Court applies to the procedure to
secure an attachment under Rule 127, Rules on Crim Procedure.