CRIMPRO NOTES the defense of lack of jurisdiction over the person of the
accused.
PRELIMINARIES
REQUISITES FOR THE EXERCISE OF CRIMINAL
JURSIDICTION:
(1) Jurisdiction over the subject matter/offense
(2) Jurisdiction over the person of the accused
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE JURISDICTION OVER
THE SUBJECT MATTER IN CRIMINAL CASES &
JURISDICTION OVER THE PERSON OF THE
ACCUSED:
Subject matter Person of the accused
Power of a court to try a Power of a court to try a case
particular class of criminal with binding effect as against
offenses as defined by the an accused
legislature
Conferred by law Obtained by arrest of the
accused or by the voluntary
surrender of the accused
HOW DOES A COURT ACQUIRE JURISDICTION OVER
THE PERSON OF THE ACCUSED?
(1) Arrest of the accused
(2) Voluntary appearance of the accused
The (2) may be made by the filing of a pleading or motion court
Exception on (2): However, if the motion to quash was precisely
and exclusively to challenge the jurisdiction of the court over
the person of the accused under Rule 117, S3(b), the accused is
not deemed to have made a voluntary appearance.
MIRANDA V. TULIAO (2006) SAYS:
Resolution of a motion to quash a warrant of arrest does not
require the court to have jurisdiction over the person of the
accused
Resolution of a motion for reinvestigation does not require that
the accused be in the custody of the law.
An affirmative relief may be obtained from the court despite the
accused being still at-large.
DAVID V. AGBAY (2015) SAYS:
One who seeks affirmative relief from a court, whether in a
criminal or civil case, is deemed to have submitted his person to
the jurisdiction of the court.
While custody of the law is required before a court can act upon
a bail application, it is not required for the adjudication of other
reliefs where the mere application constitutes a submission of
one’s person to the court’s jurisdiction.
PEOPLE V. VALDEZ (2015) SAYS:
Except in petition for bail, custody of the law is not required for
the adjudication of reliefs sought by the defendant (e.g. motion
to set aside “no bail” recommendation and to fix the amount of
bail), where the mere application thereof constitutes a waiver of
1 | B2023 LOPEZ – CRIMINAL PROCEDURE – PROF. VICTOR ELEAZAR
OUTLINE OF CRIMINAL JURISDICTION OF COURTS:
MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS (MTC)
Exclusive original jurisdiction (ROBoT-N64)
1. Violations of the Rental law.
2. Violations of city or municipal Ordinances committed within
their respective territorial jurisdictions.
3. Violations of B.P. Blg. 22 or the (Bouncing Checks Law)
4. Violations of Traffic laws, rules, and regulations.
5. Offenses involving damage to property through criminal
Negligence, where they shall have exclusive original
jurisdiction, even if they are punishable with imprisonment
exceeding 6 years.
6. Offenses punishable with imprisonment not exceeding 6
years, irrespective of the amount.
7. Offenses where the only penalty provided by law is a fine,
where such fine does not exceed P4,0001.
REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS (RTC)
Exclusive original jurisdiction (MCWEED)
1. Money laundering cases—those committed by public officers
and private persons who are in conspiracy with such public
officers shall be under the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan.
2. Violations of the Cybercrime Prevention Act2.
3. Cases of Written defamation
4. Criminal actions or proceedings for violation of the Omnibus
Election Code.
5. Criminal cases not falling within the Exclusive jurisdiction of
any court, tribunal, or body.
6. Criminal actions involving violations of the Comprehensive
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.
Family Courts (MC-DVD)
1. Criminal cases where one or more of the accused is below 18
years of age but not less than 9 years of age, or where one or
more of the victims is a Minor at the time of the commission of
the offense.
2. Violations of R.A. No. 7610, or the Child Abuse Act.
3. Cases against minors, cognizable under the Dangerous Drugs
Act as amended.
1
If the fine exceeds P4,000, then it’s the RTC which has
jurisdiction.
2
Section 21, R.A. No. 10175
4. Cases of Violence against women and their children under
R.A. No. 9262 (VAWC Law).
3. Cases of Domestic violence against women, and children. 3
Special Commercial Courts
Actions or proceedings involving violations of intellectual
property rights. (Samson v. Daway)
Appellate jurisdiction
Over all cases decided by the MTC within its territorial
jurisdiction.
SANDIGANBAYAN
Original exclusive jurisdiction4
a. Violations of the Anti-Graft Law and Chapter 2, Section 2,
Title VII, Book II of the RPC, where one or more of the accused
are officials5 occupying the ff. positions in the government,
whether in a permanent, acting or interim capacity, at the time of
the commission of the offense:
(1) Officials of the executive branch occupying the positions of
regional director and higher, (Grade “27” and higher of the
Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989 (R.A. No.
6758), specifically including:
(a) Provincial governors, vice-governors, members of the
sangguniang panlalawigan, and provincial treasurers, assessors,
engineers, and other provincial department heads;
(b) City mayors, vice-mayors, members of the sangguniang
panlungsod, city treasurer, assessors, engineers, and other city
department heads;
(c) Officials of the diplomatic sergice occupying the position of
consul and higher;
(d) Philippine army and air force colonels, naval captains, and
all officers of higher rank;
(e) Officers of the PNP while occupying the position of
provincial director and those holding the rank of senior
superintendent or higher;
(f) City and provincial prosecutors and their assistants, and
officials and prosecutors in the office of the Ombudsman and
special prosecutor;
(g) Presidents, directors, or trustees, or managers of GOCCs,
state universities or educational institutions or foundations.
(2) Members of Congress and officials thereof classified as
Grade “27” and up under the Compensation and Position
Classification Act of 1989;
3
Section 5, R.A. No. 8369
4
No mnemonic device in Riguera. Sad.
5
27 is the magic number
2 | B2023 LOPEZ – CRIMINAL PROCEDURE – PROF. VICTOR ELEAZAR
(3) Members of the judiciary without prejudice to the provisions
of the Constitution6
(4) Chairmen and members of Constitutional Commissions,
without prejudice to the provisions of the Constitution; and
(5) All other national and local officials classified as Grade “27”
and higher under the Compensation and Position Classification
Act of 1989.
b. Other offenses or felonies, whether simple or complexed with
other crimes committed by the public officials and employees
mentioned in “a.” of this section, in relation to their office.
c. Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection
with EO Nos. 1, 2, 14, and 14-A, issued in 1986.
 Provided that the RTC shall have exclusive original
jurisdiction where the information:
o (a) Does not allege any damage to the
government or any bribery; or
o (b) Alleges damage to the government or
bribery arising from the same or closely
related transactions or actions in an amount
not exceeding P1, 000,000.
 In cases where none of the accused are occupying
positions corresponding to Salary Grade 27 or higher,
or military and PNP officers mentioned above,
exclusive original jurisdiction thereof shall be vested
in the proper RTC or MTC as the case may be,
pursuant to B.P. Blg. 1297.
Appellate jurisdiction
Over final judgments, resolutions or orders of the RTC whether
in the exercise of their own original jurisdiction or of their
appellate jurisdiction, as provided in P.D. No. 16068:
 In case private individuals are charged as co-
principals, accomplices or accessories with the public
officers or employees, including those employed in
GOCCs, they shall be tried jointly with said public
officers in the proper courts which shall exercise
exclusive jurisdiction over them.
DUNCANO V. SANDIGANBAYAN (2015) SAYS:
The Sandiganbayan has no jurisdiction over charge against BIR
Regional Director, whose salary grade does not exceed 26.
COURT OF APPEALS (CA)
6
Potentially in reference to the Supreme Court’s disciplinary
power
7
Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980
8
REVISING PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 1486
CREATING A SPECIAL COURT TO BE KNOWN AS
“SANDIGANBAYAN” AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
 Appellate jurisdiction 2. When necessary for the orderly administration of justice or to
avoid oppression or multiplicity of suits.
Over final judgments, decisions, resolutions, orders, or awards
of the RTC and the Family Court. 3. When there is a prejudicial question which is sub judice10.

COURT OF TAX APPEALS (CTA)
Original jurisdiction
Over all criminal offenses arising from violations of the National
Internal Revenue Code, Tariff and Customs Code, and other
laws administered by the BIR or the BOC.
4. When the acts of the officer are without or in excess of
authority.
5. When the prosecution is under an invalid law or regulation.
6. When there is double jeopardy.

 Provided, however, that offenses or felonies where the
principal amount of taxes and fees, exclusive of
charges and penalties, claimed is less than P1,000,000
or where there is no specified amount claimed shall be
tried by the regular courts and the jurisdiction of the
CTA shall be appellate.
SUPREME COURT
Appellate jurisdiction
7. When the court has no jurisdiction over the offense/subject
matter.
8. When it is a case of persecution rather than prosecution.
9. When 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 a motion to quash on that ground has been denied.11

Criminal cases decided by the CA, Sandiganbayan, and the

CTA.
WHAT CASES BEFORE THE MTC ARE GOVERNED BY
THE RULE ON SUMMARY PROCEDURE?
The same where they exercise exclusive original jurisdiction
(ROBoT-N6), except (4), which is replaced by:

 All other criminal cases where the penalty is

imprisonment not exceeding 6 months, or a fine not
exceeding P1,000, or both.

 Moreover, for offenses involving damage to property

through criminal Negligence, the imposable fine
should not exceed P10,000.

ARAMBULO V. LAQUI (2000) SAYS:

The jurisdiction of the RTC over libel cases, as provided under
Article 360 of the RPC, has not been affected by RA 76919.

Under Article 360 of the PRC, in case of libel against a private

complainant, the criminal action may also be filed with the RTC
where any of the offended parties actually resides at the time of
the commission of the offense.

MAY INJUNCTION LIE TO RESTRAIN CRIMINAL

PROSECUTION?
The general rule is that writs of prohibition or injunction are not
available to restrain criminal prosecution.

The following are the exceptions:

1. When necessary to protect the constitutional rights of the

accused.

9
AN ACT EXPANDING THE JURISDICTION OF THE
METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL TRIAL
10
COURTS, AND MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS, Latin for “under a judge”; means that a particular case or
AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE BATAS PAMBANSA, matter is under trial or being considered by a judge or court;
BLG. 129, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE "JUDICIARY may be used interchangeably with “the present case” or “the
REORGANIZATION ACT OF 1980" case at bar”.
11
Brocka v. Enrile (1990)

3 | B2023 LOPEZ – CRIMINAL PROCEDURE – PROF. VICTOR ELEAZAR