CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION

By: RGA

1.

Information for homicide was filed against Juan before the Regional Trial Court of Roxas City.
Before arraignment, Juan through counsel filed a motion for a bill of particulars alleging that there are
defects in the information. The court denied the motion by reason that he already posted his bail hence
he is no longer allowed to file a motion for a bill of particulars. Is the ruling of the court denying the
motion proper? Why? (5 pts.)

2.

Information for slight physical injuries was filed against Juan in the Municipal Trial Court in Cities
of Roxas City. After the trial of the case, the court convicted the accused. Immediately after his
conviction, Juan through counsel filed a motion for reconsideration and the motion was set by the court
for hearing. The prosecution objected on the basis that the motion is bereft of merit. The court granted
the motion filed by the Juan through counsel and reconsidered its decision. Is the ruling of the court
granting the motion for reconsideration filed by the accused proper? Why? (5 pts.)

3.

An information for Homicide was filed against Juan Dela Cruz before the Regional Trial Court of
Roxas City after the complaint subject of an inquest was resolved by the prosecutor of Roxas City. Ten
days after learning of the filing of the information and before arraignment, Juan Dela Cruz filed a motion
for asking the court for a preliminary investigation by reason that he was denied of his right to
preliminary investigation. If you are the judge, will you grant the motion? Why? (5 pts.)

4.

A complaint for bribery was filed in the Office of the Ombudsman against Juan, the Municipal
Mayor of Panitan, Capiz and Pedro who is his farmworker. Before the resolution of the Office of the
Ombudsman
on the complaint filed, Juan died. After the complaint was resolved, an Information was filed before the
Sandiganbayan charging Juan and Pedro for bribery. Pedro through counsel filed a motion questioning
the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan over him by reason that he is not a government employee hence
the court has no jurisdiction over him and Juan who was the mayor of Panitan, Capiz during his lifetime
is already dead. The Sandiganbayan after receipt of the copy of the certificate of death of the accused
Juan dismissed the case against Pedro by reason that the court has no jurisdiction over him. Is the ruling
of the court proper? Why? (5 pts.)
 5.

How criminal actions are instituted. (5 pts.)

6.

An information for attempted homicide was filed before the Regional Trial Court of Roxas City
against Juan. During arraignment, Juan pleaded not guilty to the offense charge hence the pretrial
conference was set. Before the pretrial conference, Juan through counsel questioned the jurisdiction of
the court to try the case. The prosecutor objected on the ground that Juan had already entered his plea
hence he is no longer allowed to question the jurisdiction of the court. The court denied the motion of
Juan questioning the jurisdiction of the court. Is the ruling of the court proper? Why? (5 pts.)

7.

An information for serious physical injuries was filed in the Municipal Trial Court in Cities of
Roxas City. Before arraignment, the prosecution filed a motion with leave of court to amend the
information to less serious physical injuries. The prosecutor furnished the accused of the copy of the
motion before filing it in court. The court granted the motion since the amendment is a matter of right.
Is the ruling of the Court granting the motion with leave of court to amend the information proper? Why
(5 pts.)

8.

An information for reckless imprudence resulting to homicide was filed against Juan in the
Municipal Trial Court of Roxas City. Before filing of the complaint in the prosecutor’s office of Roxas City,
Gracia, the surviving spouse of Pedro filed a case for damages against Juan in the Municipal Trial Court
of Roxas City for the death of Pedro. During arraignment, Atty. Madyaas entered his appearance as
private prosecutor but his appearance was questioned by the counsel of the accused. The Court allows
that appearance of Atty. Madyaas as private prosecutor and actively participate in the hearing of the
case.
Is the act of the counsel of the accused in questioning the appearance of the Atty. Madyaas meritorious?
Why? (5 pts.)

9.

Information for frustrated homicide was filed against Juan before the Regional Trial Court of
Roxas City. During the trial of the case, the attending physician testified that the injury of the private
complainant is not fatal. Immediately after the testimony of the physician, the court dismissed the case
by reason that the Municipal Trial Court has the jurisdiction over the case since based on the testimony
of the Doctor, the case is only attempted homicide and not frustrated homicide hence the Regional Trial
Court has no jurisdiction over that case. Is the ruling of the Court proper? Why? (5 pts.)

10.

Information for slight physical injuries was filed against Juan in the Municipal Trial Court in Cities
of Roxas City. Upon knowledge of the filing, Juan secured a copy of the information to be given to his
counsel. The counsel of Juan filed a motion for a bill of particulars in the Municipal Trial Court because
according to him the allegations as to the acts constituting an offense is vague. If you are the judge, will
you grant the motion? Why? (5 pts.)

11.

A was immediately arrested after stabbing B. A complaint for attempted homicide was filed
before the Prosecutors Office of Roxas City for inquest. An information was filed before the MTCC of
Roxas City for attempted homicide. Day after the information was filed in the MTCC, A through counsel
filed a motion asking for a preliminary investigation of his case. The prosecutor opposed on the ground
that his case was a subject of an inquest proceedings hence he is no longer entitled to a preliminary
investigation. If you were a judge will you grant the motion of the accused? Why? (5 pts.)

12.

An information for slight physical injuries was filed by Pedro against Juan in the Municipal Trial
Court of Roxas City. Upon learning of the filing of the information and before arraignment, Juan through
counsel filed a motion to quash the information on the basis that the information did not comply with
the prescribed form. The prosecution opposed on the motion. The Court granted the motion of Juan. Is
the ruling of the court granting the motion proper? Why? (5 pts.)

13.

Juan was arrested in killing Pedro. A complaint for homicide was filed before the prosecutor’s
office for inquest. During inquest, Juan executed a waiver of Art. 125 of the Revised Penal Code and ask
for a preliminary investigation of the complaint filed against him. Before he filed his counter affidavit,
Juan applied for bail. If you are the judge, will you grant the application for bail even before the
complaint was resolved by the prosecutor’s office? Why? (5 pts.)
 14.

Information for slight physical injuries was filed before the Municipal Trial Court of Roxas City
against Juan. Upon learning of the filing of the information, Juan through counsel filed a motion to
quash the information since the complaint was not brought by the private complainant in the Barangay
before filing the complaint in the prosecutor’s office. The court denied the motion because it is a
prohibited motion under the Rules on Summary Procedure. Is the ruling of the Court proper? Why? (5
pts.)

15.

Juan was arrested for illegal possession of firearms during a check point conducted by the
members of the Roxas City PNP along Arnaldo Blvd., Roxas City. After an information was filed in Court,
Juan applied for bail and the same was granted. Before arraignment, the counsel of Juan questions the
legality of the arrest of Juan by the members of Roxas City PNP. The prosecutor objected on the ground
that Juan had already applied for bail and the same constitutes as a waiver on the part of Juan to
question the legality of his arrest. Is the objection of the prosecutor tenable? Why? (5 pts.)

16.

Distinguish formal and substantial amendments in the information (10 pts.)

17.

An Information for Bribery was filed against Juan, the Municipal Mayor of Panitan, Capiz and
Pedro who is his house helper who served as his bagman in the Sandiganbayan. Pedro through counsel
questioned the jurisdiction of the Court over his person by reason that he is not a government
employee. The court ruled in denying the motion of Pedro questioning the jurisdiction of the court over
his person. Is the ruling of the court proper? Why? (5 pts.)

18.

What is the rule on duplicity of the offense in the information? (10 pts.)
 Good luck!

When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane
takes off against the wind, not with it.
Henry Ford