BASIC

CONCEPTS
JURISDICTION CRIMINAL

JURISDICTION
WHAT IS CRIMINAL PROCEDURE?

A generic term to describe the network

of laws and rules which governs the procedural
It is the right to act The authority to
administration of justice
or the power and hear and try a

authority to hear particular offense
TAKE NOTE: The rules shall be liberally
and determine a and impose a
construed in order to promote their objective of
cause- a question punishment for it.
securing a just, speedy and inexpensive
of law
disposition of every action and proceeding.



PROCEDURAL LAW AS APPLIED TO CRIMINAL
REQUISITES FOR THE EXERCISE OF THE
LAW
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION:
Provides or regulates the steps by which one

who committed a crime is to be punished.
(a) Jurisdiction over the subject matter

(b) Jurisdiction over the territory
CRIMINAL LAW CRIMINAL
(c) Jurisdiction over the person of the
PROCEDURE
accused
Declares what Lays down the

conduct is criminal, processes by which
JURIDICTION OVER THE SUBJECT MATTER
defines crimes and an offender is
• Refers to the authority of the court to
prescribes made to answer for
hear and determine a particular criminal
punishment for the crime he
case. (in short, jurisdiction over the
such crimes. committed.
offense charged)

• Law confers jurisdiction and not the
PH’S SYSTEM OF PROCEDURE:
rules
Accusatorial/Adversarial
• Conferment of jurisdiction CANNOT be
-It contemplates 2 contending parties before
presumed.
the court which hears them impartially and

renders judgment only after trial.
HOW TO DETERMINE JURISDICTION OVER THE
-A judge is not permitted to act as an inquisitor
SUBJECT MATTER?
who pursues his own investigation and arrives
-by the allegations in the complaint or
at his own conclusion ex-parte.
information

-penalty imposable by the law on offense
What is inquisitorial system?
determines jurisdiction NOT by the actual
The court plays an active role and is not limited
penalty imposed after trial
to the evidence presented before it. The court

may utilize evidence gathered outside the court
CAVEAT: Subject matter in criminal matters is
and the judge may actively participate in
measured by the law in effect at the time of the
receiving information or evidence from the
commencement of a criminal action
parties.

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | ATTY. GALEON|EH 410 SY 2019-2020

Principle of adherence of jurisdiction or JURISDICTION OVER THE TERRITORY
Continuing jurisdiction • The offense should be committed or any
of its essential ingredient should have
GENERAL RULE: Once a court has acquired taken place within the territorial
jurisdiction, it continues until the court has jurisdiction of the court.
done all that it can do in the exercise of that • REASON: Venue is jurisdictional in
jurisdiction criminal cases and the court is bereft of
jurisdiction to try an offense committed
EXPNS: outside its limited territory.
(a) express provision in the statute • Jurisdiction of a court over the criminal
(b) the statute is clearly intended to apply to case is determined by the allegations in
actions pending before its enactment the complaint or information and the
offense must have been committed or
Objection based on the Court’s lack of any one of the essential ingredients took
jurisdiction over the subject matter: place within the territorial jurisdiction of
- may be raised or considered motu proprio by the Court.
the Court at any age of the proceeding or on
appeal. VENUE IS JURISDICTIONAL IN CRIMINAL CASES
Foz vs. PP
Antiporda Jr. vs. Garchitorena Foz was charged with Libel filed before the
A party cannot invoke the jurisdiction of RTC of Ilo-ilo (LIBEL IS ALWAYS FILED BEFORE
the court to secure affirmative relief THE RTC)
against his opponent and after obtaining
or failing to obtain such relief repudiate or The information stated:
question the same jurisdiction. “Panay News, a daily publication with a
considerable circulation in the City of Iloilo
When estoppel lies against the parties and throughout the region”
Tijam vs. Sibonghanoy
Parties may be estopped from questioning “Dr. Portigo is a physician and medical
the jurisdiction of the courts for reasons of practioner in Ilo-ilo City”
public policy as when he initially invokes
the jurisction of the court and then later VENUE FOR LIBEL/WRITTEN DEFAMATION
on repudiates that same jurisdiction. Art 360 RPC as amended by RA No. 4363
(1) Province or city where the libelous
CAVEAT: this case an exception to the article is printed and first published;
general rule that jurisdiction is vested by or
law and cannot be conferred or waived by (2) If offended party is a public officer-
the parties. province or city RTC where he held
office at the commission of the
offense
(3) If offended party is a private
individual, RTC of the province or city
where he actually resides at the time
of the commission of the offense

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | ATTY. GALEON|EH 410 SY 2019-2020

 Jurisdiction of a court over the criminal case Bonifacio vs. RTC of Makati
is determined by the allegations in the
complaint or information and the offense Crime is internet libel against PEPCI
must have been committed or any one of the Petitioners used the venue where the
essential ingredients took place within the libelous articles were printed and first
territorial jurisdiction of the Court.. published. Information alleged that Makati
City was the place where the defamatory
article was first published and accessed.
HELD: the information did not establish that
Ilo-ilo is the first place where the article is SC: for libelous articles appearing online,
printed and first published. It also failed to there is no way to determine the place of its
clearly allege that Dr. Portigo was actually printing and first publication.
residing in Ilo-ilo at the time of the
commission of the offense as it is possible Atty G: REMEDY: city/province where private
that Portigo was actually residing in another offended party actually resided during the
place. commission of the crime.

One who transacts business in a place and Even though one of the private complainant
spends considerable time therein does not here resided at Makati City at the commission
render a person a resident therein. Pursuit of of the crime,it was however not alleged in the
business in a place is not conclusive of Information so RTC Makati still has no
residence for purposes of venue. jurisdiction.

HENCE, RTC of Ilo-ilo had no jurisdiction to
hear this case Macasaet vs. PP
The information for libel merely stated
Quezon City without indication whether the
Agbayani vs. Sayo jurisction was invoked where Abante was
first published and printed or the offended
Crime for written defamation was filed in the party’s actual residence at the time of the
wrong venue. (Nueva Vizcaya) commission of the crime.
It should have been before the CFI of Isabela
where Mahinan held public office as GSIS GR: Facts stated in the information or
branch manager at Cauyan, Isabela. complaint should be taken as they are.

EXPN: when the Rules of Court allow
investigation of facts alleged in the motion to
wuash such as presciprtions, double jeopardy
or instanity of thie accused. (Case does not
fall under these exceptions)

Barangay certifications have no probative
value as one can be a resident of QC but be a
voter of Marikina vice-versa.

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | ATTY. GALEON|EH 410 SY 2019-2020

JURISDICTION OVER THE PERSON OF THE recognizing the jurisdiction of the court by his
ACCUSED personal appearance therein.

ACQUIRED THROUGH: The issue on double jeopardy was also raised
1.Upon the accused’s arrest with or without a in this case but the SC said that double
warrant jeopardy does not lie when the accused has
2.Accused’s voluntary appearance or not been arraigned.
submission to the jurisdiction of the Court.
Cojuangco vs. Sandiganbayan
TAKE NOTE: not all acts seeking affirmative
relief tantamount to voluntary appearance or Well-settled that the giving or posting of bail
submission to the Court’s jurisdiction. SPECIAL by the accused is tantamount to submission
APPEARANCE IS ALLOWED! of his person to the jurisdiction of the Court.

Miranda vs. Tuliao In order to avoid the submission of his body
to the jurisdiction of the court, he must raise
INSTANCES WHICH DO NOT TANTAMOUNT the court’s jurisdiction over his person at the
TO VOLUNTARY APPEARANCES: (SPECIAL very earliest opportunity.
APPEARANCES)
If he gives bail, demurs to the complaint or
(1) In civil cases, motion to dismiss on the file any dilatory plea or pleads to the merits,
ground of lack of jurisdiction over the he thereby gives the court jurisdiction over
person of the defendant, whether or his person.
not other grounds are included
(2) In criminal cases, motions to quash a Cojuangco in this case, apart from posting
complaint on the ground of lack of bail, sough for various motions that sought
jurisdiction over the person of the other affirmative reliefs. He cannot claim
accused. exemption from the effect of being subject to
(3) Motion to quash warrant of arrest the jurisdiction of the court. For short he
actively participated in the trial. He could
CUSTODY OF LAW accomplished by: arrest have filed a petition for certiorari and
or voluntary appearance prohibition with a prayer for an issuance of a
TRO.
Custody of law is required before the Court
can act upon the application for bail but is not
required for the adjudication of other reliefs
sought by the defendant where the mere
application thereof constitutes waiver of the
defense of lack of jurisdiction over the person
of the accused.

Rationale behind the special rule on bail
(accused must be in custody of law)
Prevents the case wherein accused could just
send another in his stead to post bail without

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | ATTY. GALEON|EH 410 SY 2019-2020

 Custody of law Jurisdiction over the acting or interimcapacity, at the time of
person the commission of the offense:
• Literally Acquired by:
(1) Officials of the executive branch
custody of • the accused’s occupying the positions of regional
over the body arrest with or director and higher, otherwise classified
but not limited without a as Grade '27' and higher, of the
to detention warrant Compensation and Position
• Accused’s Classification Act of
• Required voluntary 1989 (Republic Act No. 6758),
before the appearance or specifically including:
Court can act submission to
upon the the jurisdiction (a) Provincial governors, vice-
application of the governors, members of
for bail. Court.(EXPN: the sangguniang panlalawigan, and
special provincial treasurers, assessors,
appearances) engineers, and other city department
heads;
(b) City mayor, vice-mayors, members
of the sangguniang panlungsod, city
Illustration of the difference: treasurers, assessors, engineers, and
In custody of law BUT not yet subject to court’s other city deprtment heads
jurisdiction over his person
-Person is arrested pursuant to a warrant. (c) Officials of the diplomatic service
occupying the position of consul and
Court acquires Jurisdiction of a person but not higher;
in custody of law (d) Philippine army and air force
-Accused escapes custody after trial has colonels, naval captains, and all
commenced. officers of higher rank;

(e) Officers of the Philippine National
SANDIGANBAYAN’S JURISDICTION’ Police while occupying the position of
Sec. 4. Jurisdiction. The Sandiganbayan shall provincial director and those holding
exercise exclusive original jurisdiction in all the rank of senior superintendent or
cases involving: (NOTE:SEC 4(a) not eclusive higher;
list for SB’s jurisdiction) (f) City and provincial prosecutors and
their assistants, and officials and
A. Violations of Republic Act No. 3019, prosecutors in the Office of the
as amended, other known as the Anti- Ombudsman and special prosecutor;
Graft and Corrupt
Practices Act, Republic Act No. 1379, (g) Presidents, directors or trustees, or
and Chapter II, Section 2, Title VII, Book managers of government-owned or -
II of the Revised Penal Code, where one controlled corporations, state
or more of the accused are officials universities or educational institutions
occupying the following positions in the or foundations.
government, whether in a permanent,
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | ATTY. GALEON|EH 410 SY 2019-2020

Persons mentioned in A-G does not SB’S EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL
have to obtain the salary grade of 27 JURISDICTION
(2) Members of Congress and officials "The Sandiganbayan shall have
thereof classified as Grade '27' and up exclusive original jurisdiction over
under the Compensation and Position petitions for the issuance of the writs
Classification Act of 1989; of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari,
habeas corpus, injunctions, and
(3) Members of the judiciary without other ancillary writs and processes
prejudice to the provisions of the in aid of its appellate jurisdiction and
Constitution; over petitions of similar nature,
(4) Chairmen and members of including quo warranto, arising or
Constitutional Commission, without that may arise in cases filed or which
prejudice to the provisions of the may be filed under Executive Order
Constitution; and Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A, issued in
1986: Provided, That the jurisdiction
(5) All other national and local officials over these petitions shall not be
classified as Grade '27' and higher exclusive of the Supreme Court.
under the Compensation and Position
Classification Act of 1989. WHEN SALARY GRADE 27 IS NEEDED:
Sec 4(A)1,2,5
b. Other offenses of felonies whether Sec 4(b) applied in Subido, Pactolin, Serana
simple or complexed with other crimes case
committed by the public officials and Subido vs Sandigabayan
employees mentioned in subsection a of Petitioners questioned SB’s jurisdiction because
this section in relation to their office. at the time of the filing of the information for
applicability: must be imperative that arbitrary detention, Subido was already a
the (1) public officer is holding the private individual.
position enumerated in Sec 4(A) and (2)
the crime is in relation to his office and it SC:Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over Subido
does not violate RA 3019 OR RA 1379 as and co-conspirator Parina
enumerated in the preceding item.
(TWIN REQUIREMENT) Sec 4 PD 1606 as further amended by RA 7975,
reckoning point is at the time of the
c. Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant commission of the crime.
to and in connection with Executive
Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A, issued in Even though Parina held a position with a salary
1986. (also applies to private persons) grade of less than 27 is no moment as he is
SB’S APPELLATE JURISDICTION prosecuted as a co-conspirator of Subido

"The Sandiganbayan shall exercise In cases where none of the principal accused are
exclusive appellate jurisdiction over occupying the positions corresponding to salary
final judgments, resolutions or order grade 27 of higher exclusive jurisdiction shall be
of regional trial courts whether in the vested in the regular courts.
exercise of their own original
jurisdiction or of their appellate
jurisdiction as herein provided.
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | ATTY. GALEON|EH 410 SY 2019-2020

 Pactolin vs Sandiganbayan Antiporda vs. Garchitorena
Sandiganbayan acquired jurisdiction here
Pactolin a member of Sangguniang Panlalawigan of through estoppel.
Misamis Occidental charged with Art 171 of RPC
Falsification by public officer, employee or notary or Antiporda here is the mayor of Cagayan. The
ecclesiastical minister. original information did not mention that
that offense was done in relation to the
SB has jurisdiction as per Sec 4(A)(1)(A) member of accused’s office but it was only after the
the Sangguniang Panlalawigan and information same was amended.
clearly established that Pactolin as a S.P. member
took advantage of his position when he committed Petitioners here questioned the assumption
the falsification of the document in the of jurisdiction by the SB but insisted that the
performance of his official duties. court acquired jurisdiction over their motion
to quash.
Here the information charged him with Art 171 RPC
but convicted for Art 172 RPC. (ALLOWED) Petitioners are estopped from assailing SB’s
jurisdiction when it was they who challenged
The description of the crime charged and the RTC’s jurisdiction over the case in their
particular facts are controlling not the title of the Motion for reconsideration contenting that
complaint or designation of the offense charged. the crime is work-connected.

SC: pary cannot invoke the jurisdiction of the
Serana vs. Sandiganbayan court to secure affirmative relief against his
-Serana charged with Estafa. (failed to remit 15M opponent and after obtaining or failing to
funds for VInzons Hall renovation) obtain such relief, repudiate or question the
-Serana here is the president of the student same jurisdiction.
regent of UP but questioned SB’s jurisdiction on
the following grounds:
1. She is not a public officer with Salary
grade of 27
2. She does not receive any salary as UP
regent
SC: Sec 4(A)(1)(G) of PD 1606 explicitly vested
the Sandiganbayan with jurisdiction over
Presidents, directors or trustees or managers of
GOCC, state universities or educational
institutions or foundations.
NOTE: persons listed from A-G does not have to
have a salary grade of 27.
BOR performs functions similar to those of a
board of trustees of a non-stock corporation




CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | ATTY. GALEON|EH 410 SY 2019-2020

 Esteban vs. Sandiganbayan Lacson vs. Sandiganbayan

Judge Esteban is charged with Sexual Amended information merely stated: “in
Harrassment and Acts of Lasciviousness by relation to office as officers and members of
Simbajon, a casual employee of the City Gov’t PNP”
of Cabanatuan. SC: said phrase is not what determines the
jurisdiction of SB, what is controlling is the
SC: intimate relation connected with his specific actual allegations in the information
office as the petitioner as a presiding judge is that would indicate the close intimacy.
vested with power to recommend the
appointment of Simbajon as bookbinder but
constrained due to the imposed condition by Sanchez vs. Demetriou
Esteban.
Crime was rape with homicide but there is no
Intimate relation between the offense direct relation between the crime and the
charged and the discharge of official duties discharge of Sanchez’s official function as
must be alleged in the information. municipal mayor.

Sec 4 (A) includes city mayor but the crime
ATTY G: How will we know if this other offense was not done in relation to his office. RTC
is committed in relation to his office? -à has jurisdiction
based on the allegation in the information
ATTY G: Can he appeal to the
GR: Establish intimacy of the offense and the Sandiganbayan? NO-should be CA and SC
discharge of official duties when public office is It is as if he committed the offense as a
not essential in the offense charged. (ie. private person.
Murder,rape)

EXPN: no need to establish intimacy when Omitting the word “principal” before the word
public office is essential to the crime charged accused.
(ie. Malversation of public funds, direct bribery) Lacson vs. Sandiganbayan
Sec 4 PD 1606 as amended omitted the word
PP vs. Montejo “principal” before the word accused/
Mayor Brown was charged with the crime of
murder. The crime here is murder and not under Sec
SC: Although public office is not an element 4(A) but Sec 4(B) other offenses/felonies
of the crime of murder in abstract, according committed by public officials and employees
to the amended information, the offense mentioned in Sec 4 (a). in relation to office.
charge therein is intimately connected with
their respective offices and was perpetrated Under Sec 4(b) what determines SB’s
while they were in the performance though jurisdiction is the official position or ranj of
improper or irregular, of their official the offender-that is whether he is one of
functions those public officers or employees
enumerated in Sec 4(a).
Intimacy was not established in Lacson
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | ATTY. GALEON|EH 410 SY 2019-2020

 The offenses mentioned in Sec 4 (a)(b)or(c) FLOW OF APPEAL AND REMEDIES
do not make any reference if the criminal
participation of the public officer is a CASES COGNIZIBLE BY SANDIGANBAYAN
principal, accomplice or accessory. SB-----------àSC
Notice of appeal
(Rule 122, RCC)
ATTY G: RA 8249- “principal” word is already EXPN:death
deleted. IF 4 are accused if only one of them
is holding a public position but he is RTC-----------------àSB---------------------àSC
impleaded as an accessory, it is enough for Notice of appeal Petition for review
sandiganbayan to acquire jurisdiction (Rule 122 RCC) (Rule 45)
EXPN: death EXPN:death


Illustrations by Atty G: MTC--------àRTC--------------àSB-----------àSC
OFFENDER CRIME PROPER Notice of appeal Petition for review Petition for review
COURT (Rule 122 RCC) ( Rule 42) (Rule 45)
Barangay Bribery (RA MTC/RTC
captain 3019) Appeal: SB-SC Rule 65 is for grave abuse of discretion
Malversation
of Public ORDINARY CRIMINAL CASES ( not cognizable
Funds by SB)
Municipal Malversation Regular courts
mayor of public Appeal: SB-SC MTC---------->RTC--------------->CA-------------->SC
Notice of appeal Petition for review Petition for review
funds (Rule 122 RCC) ( Rule 42) (Rule 45)
City Mayor RA 3019 SB
Appeal:SC
Not in sec RA 3019 SB RTC--------------àCA-------------------àSC
4(a) but in Appeal: SC Notice of appeal Petition for review
holding a (Rule 122 RCC) (Rule 45)
EXPN: death EXPN:death
Salary

grade of 27
EXPNS:

If death-no need notice
NOTE: If the offense carries the penalty of less
If reclusion perpetua or life- notice of appeal
than 6 yrs AND violates RA 3019 OR RA 1379
not petition for review
then MTC, then to RTC then accuse can file an

appeal to sandiganbayan then Supreme Court
IF Reclusion Perpetua
na.
RTC to CA (notice of appeal) CA to SC (notice of

appeal NOT petition for review under Rule 45)








CRIMINAL PROCEDURE | ATTY. GALEON|EH 410 SY 2019-2020