Rule 110 and Rule 111 Where the civil action has been filed separately and trial
thereof has not yet commenced, it may be consolidated
PROSECUTION OF CIVIL ACTIONS AND
PROVISIONAL REMEDIES
Rule 110 PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES – of this Rule governing consolidation of the civil and
INTERVENTION OF THE OFFENDED PARTY
SECTION 16. Intervention of the Offended Party in
Criminal Action.-
Where the civil action for the recovery of civil liability is
instituted in the criminal action pursuant to Rule 111, the
offended party may intervene by counsel in the
prosecution of the offense.
Rule 111 PROSECUTION OF CIVIL ACTION
• Section 1. Institution of criminal and civil actions.
– (a) When a criminal action is instituted, the civil
action for the recovery of civil liability arising from the
offense charged shall be deemed instituted with the
criminal action unless the offended party waives the
civil action, reserves the right to institute it
separately or institutes the civil action prior to the
criminal action.
• The reservation of the right to institute separately the
civil action shall be made before the prosecution
starts presenting its evidence and under
circumstances affording the offended party a
reasonable opportunity to make such reservation.
When the offended party seeks to enforce civil
liability against the accused by way of moral,
nominal, temperate, or exemplary damages without
specifying the amount thereof in the complaint or
information, the filing fees therefore shall constitute a
first lien on the judgment awarding such damages.
• Where the amount of damages, other than actual, is
specified in the complaint or information, the
corresponding filing fees shall be paid by the
offended party upon the filing thereof in court.
Except as otherwise provided in these Rules, no filing
fees shall be required for actual damages.
No counterclaim, cross-claim or third-party complaint
may be filed by the accused in the criminal case, but
any cause of action which could have been the
subject thereof may be litigated in a separate civil
action.
(b) The criminal action for violation of Batas Pambansa
Blg. 22 shall be deemed to include the corresponding civil
action. No reservation to file such civil action separately
shall be allowed.
Upon filing of the aforesaid joint criminal and civil actions,
the offended party shall pay in full the filing fees based on
the amount of the check involved, which shall be
considered as the actual damages claimed. Where the
complaint or information also seeks to recover liquidated,
moral, nominal, temperate or exemplary damages, the
offended party shall pay additional filing fees based on the
amounts alleged therein. If the amounts are not so alleged
but any of these damages are subsequently awarded by
the court, the filing fees based on the amount awarded
shall constitute a first lien on the judgment.
with the criminal action upon application with the court
trying the latter case. If the application is granted, the trial
of both actions shall proceed in accordance with section 2
criminal actions.
Sec. 2. When separate civil action is suspended. –
After the criminal action has been commenced, the
separate civil action arising therefrom cannot be instituted
until final judgment has been entered in the criminal
action.
If the criminal action is filed after the said civil action has
already been instituted, the latter shall be suspended in
whatever state it may be found before judgment on the
merits. The suspension shall last until final judgment is
rendered in the criminal action. Nevertheless, before
judgment on the merits is rendered in the civil action, the
same may, upon motion of the offended party, be
consolidated with the criminal action in the court trying the
criminal action. In case of consolidation, the evidence
already adduced in the civil action shall be deemed
automatically reproduced in the criminal action without
prejudice to the right of the prosecution to cross-examine
the witness presented by the offended party in the criminal
case and of the parties to present additional evidence. The
consolidated criminal and civil actions shall be tried and
decided jointly.
During the pendency of the criminal action, the running
period of prescription of the civil action which cannot be
instituted separately or whose proceeding has been
suspended shall be tolled.
The extinction of the penal action does not carry with it
extinction of the civil action. However, the civil action
based on delict shall be deemed extinguished if there is a
finding in a final judgment in the criminal action that the act
or omission from which the civil liability may arise did not
exist.
Sec. 3. When civil action may proceed independently.
– In the cases provided in Articles 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of
the Civil Code of the Philippines, the independent civil
action may be brought by the offended party. It shall
proceed independently of the criminal action and shall
require only a preponderance of evidence. In no case,
however, may the offended party recover damages twice
for the same act or omission charged in the criminal
action.
Sec. 4. Effect of death on civil actions. – The death of
the accused after arraignment and during the pendency of
the criminal action shall extinguish the civil liability arising
from the delict. However, the independent civil action
instituted under section 3 of this Rule or which thereafter is
instituted to enforce liability arising from other sources of
obligation may be continued against the estate or legal
representative of the accused after proper substitution or
against said estate, as the case may be. The heirs of the
accused may be substituted for the deceased without
requiring the appointment of an executor or administrator
and the court may appoint a guardian ad litem for the
minor heirs.
The court shall forthwith order said legal representative or
representatives to appear and be substituted within a
period of thirty (30) days from notice.
A final judgment entered in favor of the offended party
shall be enforced in the manner especially provided in
these rules for prosecuting claims against the estate of the
deceased.
If the accused dies before arraignment, the case shall be
dismissed without prejudice to any civil action the offended
party may file against the estate of the deceased.
Sec. 5. Judgment in civil action not a bar. – A final
judgment rendered in a civil action absolving the
defendant from civil liability is not a bar to a criminal action
against the defendant for the same act or omission subject
of the civil action.
Sec. 6. Suspension by reason of prejudicial question.
– A petition for suspension of the criminal action based
upon the pendency of a prejudicial question in a civil
action may be filed in the office of the prosecutor or the
court conducting the preliminary investigation. When the
criminal action has been filed in court for trial, the petition
to suspend shall be filed in the same criminal action at any
time before the prosecution rests.
Sec. 7. Elements of prejudicial question. – The
elements of a prejudicial questions are: (a) the previously
instituted civil action involves an issue similar or intimately
related to the issue raised in the subsequent criminal
action, and (b) the resolution of such issue determines
whether or not the criminal action may proceed.
NOTES
• Article 100 of the RPC states that “a person criminally
liable is also civilly liable.” This involves the civil
aspect of every criminal case. Civil aspect means
civil liability ex delicto or civil liability flowing from the
crime and subject of criminal action.
• Examples of civil liability: value of property destroyed
in malicious mischief; face amount of the check in BP
22 cases; medical expenses incurred in crimes of
physical injuries; funeral expenses in
homicide/murder cases; value of the thing stolen in
theft and robbery cases if the thing stolen can no
longer be recovered
• By reason of Article 100, every civil action ex delicto
is deemed instituted or deemed included in the
criminal charge. This means that the civil action is
already considered as “merged” with the criminal
action.
• BUT, there is no implied institution if the offended
party waives or foregoes the right to pursue civil
action or makes a reservation on the civil action or
the civil action was filed first before the criminal
action.
• The main purpose of the civil action is to recover
damages or pecuniary liabilities due to the offended
party as a result of the damage or injury. The
judgment of civil liability is included in the main
judgment of conviction or acquittal
Can the court award civil damages if the accused is
acquitted?
• It depends.
- If the accused is acquitted by reason of reasonable
doubt, civil liability may still be awarded by the court
to the offended party.
- If the accused was acquitted because the crime was
absolutely not proven, no civil award may be given
because the crime from which the civil liability may
arise did not exist.
Effect of death of the accused on the civil liability
• In Article 89 of the RPC, death is enumerated as one
of the grounds for extinguishing criminal liability.
What then is the effect on civil liability if criminal
liability is already extinguished?
- If the accused died AFTER FINAL JUDGMENT, the
civil liability ex delicto survives.
- But if the accused died BEFORE FINAL
JUDGMENT, both the criminal and the civil
liability ex delicto will no longer survive. However,
the offended party can still pursue independent and
separate civil action arising from other sources of
obligations such as quasi delict, quasi-contract, or
law, against the estate of the deceased accused.
- The prescriptive period to file the separate civil
action is interrupted during the hearing of the
criminal case.
- PREJUDICIAL QUESTION comes into play
generally in a situation where civil and criminal
actions are pending and the issues involved in
both cases are similar or closely related that an
issue must be pre-emptively resolved in the civil
case before the criminal action can proceed.
The rationale behind the principle of prejudicial
question is to avoid two conflicting decisions.
Illustration:
• Anton married Benita on April 5, 2021
Later, Anton, by force, married Celia, or on May 5, 2022.
Celia files a civil case of annulment of marriage against
Anton.
Benita files a criminal complaint for bigamy against Anton.
The charge of bigamy may be suspended
pending the resolution of the Annulment of Marriage. The
reason is, if the marriage is annulled, there is only one
marriage, and the bigamy charge will be dismissed. On
the other hand, if the case for annulment of marriage is
dismissed, there will be two existing marriages and the
charge of bigamy will proceed.
Rule 127
PROVISIONAL REMEDIES
Section 1. Availability of provisional remedies. – The
provisional remedies in civil actions, insofar as they are
applicable, may be availed of in connection with the civil
action deemed instituted with the criminal action.
Sec. 2. Attachment. – When the civil action is properly
instituted in the criminal action as provided in Rule 111, the
offended party may have the property of the accused
attached as security for the satisfaction of any judgment
that may be recovered from the accused in the following
cases:
(a) When the accused is about to abscond from the
Philippines;
(b) When the criminal action is based on a claim for
money or property embezzled or fraudulently misapplied
or converted to the use of the accused who is a public
officer, officer of a corporation, attorney, factor, broker,
agent or clerk, in the course of his employment as such, or
by any other person in a fiduciary capacity, or for a willful
violation of duty;
(c) When the accused has concealed, removed, or
disposed of his property, or is about to do so; and
(d) When the accused resides outside the Philippines.
NOTES
PROVISIONAL REMEDIES in civil actions, insofar as they
are applicable, may be availed of in connection with the
civil action deemed instituted with the criminal action, the
court with which the civil action is filed is not thereby
deprived of its authority to issue auxiliary writs that do not
go into the merits of the case.
PROVISIONAL REMEDIES ARE NOT AVAILABLE
WHEN THE FOLLOWING CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST:
1. Offended party has waived the civil claim
2. Offended party has reserved the civil claim
3. Offended party has already instituted a separate civil
action
4. Criminal action carries with it no civil liability
KINDS OF PROVISIONAL REMEDIES
[The accused may present evidence to prove his defense
and damages, if any, arising from the issuance of a
provisional remedy in the case.
1. Preliminary attachment
The offended party may have the property of the
accused attached as security for the satisfaction of any
judgment that may be recovered from the accused in the
following cases:
a. When the accused is about to abscond from the
Phils.;
b. When the criminal action is based on a claim for
money or property embezzled or fraudulently
misapplied or converted to the use of the accused
who is a public/corporate officer, attorney, factor,
broker, agent, or clerk, in the course of his
employment as such, or by any other person in a
fiduciary capacity, or for a willful violation of duty;
C. When the accused has concealed, removed, or
disposed of his/her property, or is about to do so; and
d. When the accused resides outside the Philippines.
The writ of preliminary attachment may be
issued ex-parte before the acquisition of jurisdiction over
the accused. However, it may be implemented only after
acquisition of jurisdiction over the person of the accused.
A public prosecutor has authority to apply for
preliminary attachment to protect the interest of the
offended party, considering that the civil liability of the
culprits is to be determined therein, no reservation having
been made of the right to enforce it in a separate civil
action.
2. Injunction
Criminal prosecution may not be stayed or restrained by
injunction, preliminary or final, except in the following
cases:
a. To afford adequate protection to the constitutional
right of the accused;
b. When necessary for the orderly administration of
justice or to avoid oppression or multiplicity of
actions;
c. When there is a prejudicial question which is sub
judice;
d. When the acts of the officer are without or in excess
of authority;
e. When the prosecution is under an invalid law,
ordinance or regulation;
f. When double jeopardy is clearly apparent;
g. Where the court has no jurisdiction over the offense;
h. Where it is a case of persecution rather than
prosecution;
i. When the charges are manifestly false and motivated
by the lust for vengeance;
j. When there is clearly no prima facie case against the
accused and a MTQ on that ground has been denied; and
k. Preliminary injunction has been issued by the SC to
prevent the threatened unlawful arrest of the petitioners.
3. Support pendente lite
Applies in criminal action where civil liability
includes support for the child as a consequence of a crime
(i.e. instances where the victim got pregnant as a result of
rape)
POINTS TO PONDER
• A civil action arising from crime is also known as civil
liability ex delicto. Civil liability ex delicto is deemed
instituted with the criminal action unless the offended
party waives, reserves, or there is a separate filing of
the civil case ahead of the criminal case.
• Death of the accused will definitely extinguish his/her
criminal liability. Civil liability ex delicto will be
extinguished only if accused died before final
judgment.
• Criminal actions prevail over the civil actions.
Therefore, a civil action may be suspended if there is
an ongoing criminal action that is heard. The
EXCEPTION is in case of prejudicial question.
• There is PQ if the civil and criminal actions are so
intimately connected that the outcome of the criminal
action will be dependent on the result of the civil
action.
• It is possible that an accused may still be civilly liable
even if he/she is acquitted of the crime charged.
• Provisional remedies are temporary remedies
provided by the court so as not to render the court
proceeding fruitless.
ARREST
Rule 113
Section 1. Definition of arrest. – Arrest is the taking of
a person into custody in order that he may be bound
to answer for the commission of an offense.
• Offense includes felony or penal infractions.
• The term “taking” may involve actual restraint of
a person’s freedom of movement. However,
actual restraint is not always required.
• Elements of arrest:
1. There is deprivation of liberty; and
2. Submission of the respondent to the authority
so that he may be bound to answer the accusations
against him.
Sec. 2. Arrest; how made. – An arrest is made by an
actual restraint of a 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 subject to a greater restraint than is necessary
for his detention.
- Actual restraint is not always required.
• An arrester is not required to bodily touch or
have physical contact with the arrestee.
• Arrest need not be violent and forceful. A formal
and categorical declaration to arrest a person is
also not required. Mere intention to arrest is
enough. [Ongcama Hadji Hamar v. People, G.R.
No. 182534, Sept. 2, 2015]
• Reasonable amount of force may be used to
effect arrest.
Sec. 3. Duty of arresting officer. – It shall be the duty
of the officer executing the warrant to arrest the
accused and deliver him to the nearest police station
or jail without unnecessary delay.
• Article 125
• Any person can perform an arrest-whether a law
enforcement officer or non-officer; However, with
respect to warrantless arrest in hot pursuit, only
an officer of the law can perform such arrest.
Ideally though, it would be best to delegate the
arrest to a law enforcement officer not only for
safety reasons but also considering that they
received specialized training in performing
arrest. An arrester must always anticipate that
the arrestee is possibly “armed and dangerous”.
Sec. 4. Execution of warrant. – The head of the office
to whom the warrant of arrest was delivered for
execution shall cause the warrant to be executed
within ten (10) days from its receipt. Within ten (10)
days after the expiration of the period, the officer to
whom it was assigned for execution shall make a
report to the judge who issued the warrant. In case of
his failure to execute the warrant, he shall state the
reason therefore.
• warrants are valid only for 10 days
• Within 10 days from after the expiration of the
period, the officer shall file before the issuing
court, a Return of Warrant
• Sec. 5. Arrest without warrant; when
lawful. – A peace officer or a private person
may, without a warrant, arrest a person:
(a) When, in his presence, the person to be
arrested has committed, is actually committing,
or is attempting to commit an offense;
• (b) When an offense has just been committed
and he has probable cause to believe based on
personal knowledge of facts or circumstances
that the person to be arrested has committed it;
and
• (c) 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 is
temporarily confined while his case is pending,
or has escaped while being transferred from one
confinement to another.
In cases falling under paragraphs (a) and (b)
above, the person arrested without a warrant shall be
forthwith delivered to the nearest police station or jail and
shall be proceeded against in accordance with Section 7
of Rule 112.
A private person is not prevented from effecting
a valid arrest [Sec. 9, Rule 113] esp. for
practical purposes or under exigent
circumstances such as in flagrante delicto
arrests. Arrest by private persons may be the
last optionwhere law enforcement officers are
limited or if their station is significantly distant to
the place where the arrestee is found. Every
person is expected to be vigilant and alert to
crimes within their community. A brgy. Public
safety officer or brgy. Tanod falls within the
purview of a law enforcement officer who has
adequate training in processing arrests. Security
guards, watchmen and private detectives are
deemed private persons equipped with
adequate training in effecting arrests.
Exceptions
• Paragraphs (a), (b), ( c )
• (b) – there must be a large measure of
immediacy between the time the offense was
committed and the time of arrest [Go v. CA,
G.R. No. 101837, Feb. 11, 1992.
• (c ) – The same is founded on the principle that
at the time of the arrest, the escapee is in the
continuous act of committing a crime (Evasion
of service of sentence)
• 4[d], where a person who has been lawfully
arrested escapes or is recued (Rule 113, Sec
13) – If a person who has been lawfully arrested
escapes or is recued, ANY PERSON may
immediately pursue
• ……or retake him without warrant at any time
and in any place within the Phils.
• By the bondsman for the purpose of
surrendering the accused (Rule 114, Sec. 23)
• Where the accused attempts to leave the
country without permission of the court (Rule
114, Sec 23) ‘ an accused released on bail may
be re-arrested without the necessity of a warrant
if he attempts to depart from the Philippines
without permission of the court where the case
is pending.
In flagrante delicto arrests…
• An offense is committed in the presence or
within the view of the person making the arrest,
when he/she 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
been consummated, at the time the arrest is
made. [People v. Ernesto Cabrera, G.R. No.
93828, Dec. 11, 1992]
• The grounds of suspicion is reasonable when
the arresting officers know that the person to be
arrested is probably guilty of committing the
offense is based on facts. A reasonable
suspicion therefore must be founded on
probable cause coupled with good faith on the
part of the peace officers making the arrest.
[Posadas vs. OMB, G.R. 131492, Sept. 29,
2000]
On buy bust operations arrest…
• In a buy bust operation, the idea to commit a
crime originates from the offender, without
anybody inducing or prodding him to commit the
offense. If carried out WITH due regard to
constitutional and legal standards, a buy bust
operation deserves judicial sanction. (Pp v.
Agulay, G.R. No. 181747, Sept. 28, 2008)
• Entrapment had been accepted to be a valid
means of arresting violators of the Dangerous
Drugs Law. The violator is caught in flagrante
delicto and the police officers conducting the
operation are not only authorized but duty
bound to apprehend the violator and to search
him for anything that may have been part of or
used in the commission of the crime.
Elements of hot pursuit…
• 1. The offense has just been committed. The
time interval between the actual commission of
the crime and the arrival of the arresting officer
must be brief. (Go v. CA, G.R. No. 101837).
• 2. Probable cause must be based on personal
knowledge. Mere intelligence information that
the suspect committed the crime will not suffice.
(People v. Doria, G.R. No. 125299)
• -probable cause must be based upon “personal
knowledge” which means an actual belief or
reasonable grounds of suspicion.
Other valid warrantless search…
• SEARCH OF MOVING VEHICLES [ justified by
practicability, a ship, motorboat, wagon, or
automobile for contraband goods can be quickly
moved out of the locality or jurisdiction in which
the warrant must be sought
• CUSTOMS SEARCHES – Under the Tariff and
Customs Code, searches, seizures and arrests
may be made even without warrant, for
purposes of enforcing customs and tariff laws
• SEARCH WITH CONSENT or CONSENTED
SEARCH – Waiver of any objection to the
unreasonableness or invalidity of a search is a
recognized exception to the rule against a
warrantless search. The consent however, must
be expressly given and voluntary.
• STOP AND FRISK – This is of American origin.
The idea is that a police officer may, after
properly introducing himself and making initial
inquiries, approach and restrain a person
manifesting unusual and suspicious conduct, in
order to check, the latter’s outer clothing for
possibly concealed weapons.
RULES ON ILLEGALITY OF ARREST
• Objection to the illegality of arrest must be
raised before arraignment, otherwise it is
deemed waived, as the accused will be deemed
to have voluntarily submitted himself to the
jurisdiction of the court.
• Illegality of arrest may be cured by filing of an
information in court and the subsequent
issuance by the judge of a warrant of arrest.
• Once a person has been duly charged in court,
he may no longer question his detention by
petition for habeas corpus; his remedy is to
quash the information and/or the warrant of
arrest.
Section 6. TIME OF MAKING ARREST An arrest may
be made on any day and at any time of the day or
night.
• Unlike a search warrant, which may be served
only in daytime, an arrest may be made on any
day and at any time of the day, even on a
Sunday. This is justified by the necessity of
preserving the public peace.
• In the case of Miguel E. Colorado vs. Judge
Ricardo M. Agapito, A.M. No. MTJ-06-1658, July
3, 2007, it was held that it is of no moment that
the WA was issued on a Friday because of the
above provision. Issuance of WA on a Friday is
not prohibited.
If arrested on a Friday?
• Accused could post bail for his temporary liberty
[SC circular providing for a skeletal force on a
Saturday from 8-1 to act on petitions to bail and
other urgent matters. And on Saturday
afternoon, Sundays and non-working holidays,
any judge may act on bailable offenses.
Section 7. METHOD OF ARREST of officer by
virtue of warrant.
• – When making an arrest by virtue of a warrant,
the officer shall inform the person to be arrested
of the cause of the arrest and the fact that a
warrant has been issued for his arrest, except
when he flees or forcibly resists before the
officer has opportunity to so inform him, or when
the giving of such information will imperil the
arrest. The officer need not have the warrant in
his possession at the time of the arrest but after
the arrest, if the person arrested so requires, the
warrant shall be shown to him as soon as
practicable.
General rule: The officer shall inform the person
to be arrested of the cause of the arrest and of
the fact that a warrant has been issued for his
arrest.
• Exception: When the person to be arrested
flees or forcibly resists before the officer has
opportunity to so inform him, or when the giving
of such information will imperil the arrest.
[Diosdado Mallari vs. People and CA, G.R.
110569, Dec. 9. 1996]
Sec. 8. Method of arrest by officer without
warrant.
• – When making an arrest without a warrant,
the officer shall inform the person to be arrested
of his authority and the cause of the arrest,
unless the latter is either engaged in the
commission of an offense, is pursued
immediately after its commission, has escaped,
flees, or forcibly resists before the officer has
opportunity to so inform him, or when the giving
of such information will imperil the arrest.
Illustration:
• Rodel Luz y Ong versus People, G.R. No.
197788, Feb. 29, 2012
Sec. 9. Method of arrest by private person. –
• When making an arrest, a private person shall
inform the person to be arrested of the intention
to arrest him and the case of the arrest, unless
the latter is either engaged in the commission of
an offense, is pursued immediately after its
commission, or has escaped, flees, or forcibly
resists before the person making the arrest has
opportunity to so inform him, or when the giving
of such information will imperil the arrest.
How?
• Citizen’s arrest
The private person making the arrest shall
inform the person to be arrested of the intention to
arrest him and cause of the arrest.
Reminders: Irregularities attending the arrest should
be timely raised in a motion to quash the Information
at any time before the arraignment, failing at which
they are deemed to have waived their rights to assail
the same.
An accused is estopped from assailing any
irregularity with regard to his arrest if he fails to raise
this issue or to move for the quashal of the
Information on this ground before arraignment.
..IN SUMMARY….
• Sec. 7 – The officer shall inform the person to
be arrested the cause of the arrest and the fact
that the warrant has been issued for his arrest.
EXCEPTIONS:
- When the person to be arrested flees;
- When he forcibly resists before the officer has
an opportunity to inform him; and
- When the giving of such information will imperil
the arrest
NOTE: THE OFFICER NEED NOT HAVE THE
WARRANT IN HIS POSSESSION AT THE TIME OF
THE ARREST BUT MUST SHOW THE SAME
AFTER THE ARREST, IF THE PERSON
ARRESTED SO REQUIRES.
• Sec 8. – The officer shall inform the person to
be arrested of his authority and the cause of the
arrest without the warrant. EXCEPTIONS:
- When the person to be arrested is engaged in the
commission of an offense or is pursued immediately
after its commission;
- When he has escaped, flees, or forcibly resists
before the officer has an opportunity to so
inform him; and
- When the giving of such information will imperil
the arrest.
 • The private person shall inform the person to be
arrested of the intention to arrest him and the
cause of the arrest. EXCEPTION:
- When the person to be arrested is engaged in the
commission of an offense or is pursued immediately
after its commission;
- When he has escaped, flees, or forcibly resists
before the officer has an opportunity to so
inform him; and
- When the giving of such information will imperil
the arrest.
NOTE: Private person must deliver the arrested
person to the nearest police station or jail, otherwise,
he may be held criminally liable for illegal detention.
Sec. 10. Officer may summon assistance. –
• An officer making a lawful arrest may orally
summon as many persons as he deems
necessary to assist him in effecting the arrest.
Every person so summoned by an officer shall
assist him in effecting the arrest when he can
render such assistance without detriment to
himself.
Note…
• An officer making a lawful arrest may orally
summon person/s to assist him in effecting the
arrest. The person summoned shall assist the
officer in effecting the arrest if he can render
such assistance without detriment to himself.
• If the person summoned by the officer failed to
render assistance, he may be liable under
Article 275 of the RPC (Abandonment of person
in danger and abandonment of one’s own
victim.
Sec. 11. Right of officer to break into building or
enclosure. –
• An officer, in order to make an arrest either by
virtue of a warrant, or without a warrant as
provided in section 5, may break into any
building or enclosure where the person to be
arrested is or is reasonably believed to be, if he
is refused admittance thereto, after announcing
his authority and purpose.
NOTE: ONLY officers are allowed to do so. A private
person making an arrest cannot break in or out of a
building or enclosure.
Note….
• If the person to be arrested attempts to evade
the arrest, Section 11 provides that a peace
officer is allowed, in order to make a lawful
warrantless arrest, to break into any building or
enclosure in which the person to be arrested is
or is reasonably believed to be, if he is refused
admittance thereto, after he has announced his
authority and purpose.
• Generally, a lawful arrest may be made
anywhere, even on private property or in a
house. This rule is applicable both where the
arrest is under a warrant, and where there is
valid warrantless arrest.
Sec. 12. Right to break out from building or
enclosure. –
• Whenever an officer has entered the building
or enclosure in accordance with the preceding
section, he may break out therefrom when
necessary to liberate himself.
Sec. 13. 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.
Note…
• An escapee (fugitive) can be arrested by any
person even without a warrant of arrest at any
time and in any place within the Philippines. But
if the escapee is seen outside of the Philippines,
he should not be arrested.
Sec. 14. Right of attorney or relative to visit person
arrested. –
• Any member of the Philippine Bar shall, at the
request of the person arrested or of another
acting in his behalf, have the right to visit and
confer privately with such person in the jail or
any other place of custody at any hour of the
day or night. Subject to reasonable regulations,
a relative of the person arrested can also
exercise the same right.
Notes…
• The right to counsel of an accused is
guaranteed by our Constitution, our laws and
our Rules of Court. During custodial
investigation, arraignment, trial and even on
appeal, the accused is given the option to be
represented by a counsel of his own choice. But
when he neglects or refuses to exercise this
option during arraignment and trial, the court
shall appoint one for him. While the right to be
represented by counsel is absolute, the
accused’s option to hire one of his own choice is
limited. Such option cannot be used to sanction
reprehensible dilatory tactics, to trifle with the
rules or to prejudice the equally important rights
of the state and the offended party to speedy
and adequate justice.
REMINDER:
• Submitting to the jurisdiction of the court will
cure any defect in the arrest. [Vicencio Roallos y
Trillanes G.R. No. 198389, Dec. 11, 2013]
• R.A. 7438 defined certain rights of persons
arrested, detained, or under custodial
investigations, with the penalties for violations
thereof.

SEARCHES AND SEIZURES
RULE 126
When a policeman knocks on your door and wants to
search your house,
will you let him in?
If you are standing in a street, can a policeman just search
through
your belongings?
The answer is no, unless he is armed with a search
warrant.
No less than Art. III, Section 2 of the Constitution holds
inviolable our rights to be secure in our persons, houses,
papers and effects against unreasonable searches and
seizures. Thus, subject to certain exceptions, we cannot
be subjected to search by police authorities in the absence
of a search warrant.
Search warrants are governed by Art. III, Sec. 2 of the
Constitution which provides:
Section 2. The right of the people to be secure in their
persons, houses, papers, and effects against
unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature
and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and no search
warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue except upon
probable cause 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 be searched and the
persons or things to be seized.
Section 2. Court where application for search warrant
shall be filed.—
Section 1. 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
described therein and bring it before the court. (1)
ACCORDINGLY, a search warrant is:
• a written order – verbal orders are not allowed.
It must be in the proper form written in paper
• Issued under the name of the People of the
Philippines – because the State is an
interested party in the prosecution of crimes.
Thus, every s/w is applied for and issued by and
under the authority of the State, regardless of
who initiates its application or causes its
issuance. (Te v. Breva, G.R. No. 164974, Aug.
5, 2015)
• Signed by the judge – it includes justices of
higher courts, such as SB or CTA if warranted
under the circumstances. A s/w must also be
under the seal of the court. An unsigned or
unauthorized signature invalidates the s/w.
• Directed to a peace officer – a peace officer
pertains to any applicant law enforcement officer
or agency. This differentiates from an arrest
warrant where it is addressed to “Any Officer of
the Law”. This means a non-officer cannot
implement a s/w or a w/a. But a non-officer can
be summoned to assist in implementing an a/w
or be a witness in enforcing a s/w.
• Commanding [the peace officer] to search
for personal property described in the s/w
and bring it before the court – only personal,
tangible, and movable properties are subject of
a s/w. It does not include any rela properties like
lands and buildings or anything that cannot be
physically brought or moved to the court.
• An application for s/w is a judicial process, NOT
a criminal action. It is a special criminal process
designed to respond to an incident in a main
case, if one has been instituted, or in
anticipation thereof [Malaloan v. CA, G.R. No.
104879] and in the exercise of its auxiliary
jurisdiction.[People v. Castillo, G.R. No.
204419] A s/w is likened to a writ of discovery
employed by no less than the State to procure
relevant evidence of a crime. It is therefore, and
instrument or tool, issued under the State’s
police power. This is why it must be issued in
the name of the People of the Philippines.
[United Laboratories, Inc. v. Isip, G.R. No.
163858]
• -ex-parte and non-adversarial. Hence, the
Judge is not bound to strictly apply the rules of
evidence. Therefore, a s/w is not thereby
quashable merely because the Judge
propounded leading questions.
• If a searching officer searched a house, domicile
or dwelling without first securing a s/w, the
officer may be held criminally liable for Violation
of Domicile (Art. 126 of the RPC)
• An application for search warrant shall be filed
with the following:
- (a) Any court within whose territorial jurisdiction
a crime was committed.
- (b) 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 be 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. (n)
Section 3. 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. (2a)
Section 4. 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 be searched and the things to be
seized which may be anywhere in the
Philippines. (3a)
• Probable cause refers to such facts and
circumstances which would lead a reasonably
discreet and prudent man to believe that an
offense has been committed and that the
objects sought in connection with the offense
are in the place sought to be searched.
• “probable cause” is concerned with probability,
not absolute of even moral certainty. The
applicant need not present at this stage prook
beyond reasonable doubt. The standards of
judgment are those of a reasonably prudent
man, not the exacting calibrations of a judge
after a full blown trial.
• No law or rule states that probable cause
requires a specific kind of evidence. No formula
or fixed rule is fixed for its determination. It is
determined on a purely case-to-case basis.
• A core requisite before a warrant shall validly
issue is the existence of a probable cause
Section 5. Examination of complainant; record. —
• The judge must, before issuing the warrant,
personally examine in the form of searching
questions and answers, in writing and under
oath, the complainant and the witnesses he may
produce on facts personally known to them and
attach to the record their sworn statements,
together with the affidavits submitted. (4a)
How to examine the applicant for a s/w?
• 1. Personally examine the complainant/applicant
and the witnesses under oath;
• 2. Personal examination must be done in the
form of searching questions and answers;
• 3. Personal examination must be in writing;
• 4. Complainant/applicant and the witnesses
must show to the judge that they have the
personal knowledge of the offense;
• 5. Complainant/applicant and witnesses must
present to the judge their sworn statement and
other supporting affidavits. (Century Chinese
Medicine Co. v. People, G.R. No. 188526, Nov.
11, 2013)
Personal knowledge of the applicant and the
witnesses are very important to the validity of a s/w.
• And when the law speaks of facts, it means
facts, data, or information personally known to
the applicant and the witnesses he may present.
Absent the element of personal knowledge by
the applicant or his witnesses of the facts upon
which the issuance of a s/w may eb justified, the
warrant is deemed not based on probable cause
and is a nullity, its issuance being, in legal
contemplation, arbitrary. (Columbia Pictures,
Inc. vs. CA, 329 Phil. 875, 918 [1996])
• There is no hard and fast rule as to how a judge
may conduct his examination. The searching
questions propounded to the applicant and his
witnesses must depend on a large extent upon
the discretion of a judge. However, it is a must
that the said examination must be probing and
exhaustive and not merely routinary, general,
peripheral or perfunctory. (Roan vs. Gonzales,
145 SCRA 687 [1986]). He must make his own
inquiry on the intent and factual and legal
justifications for a s/w. (Nolasco vs. Pao, 139
SCRA 152 [1985]).
Section 6. Issuance and form of search warrant. —
• If the judge is satisfied of the existence of facts
upon which the application is based or that there
is probable cause to believe that they exist, he
shall issue the warrant, which must be
substantially in the form prescribed by these
Rules. (5a)
Section 7. Right to break door or window to effect
search.—
• The officer, if refused admittance to the place of
directed search after giving notice of his
purpose and authority, may break open any
outer or inner door or window of a house or any
part of a house or anything therein to execute
the warrant or liberate himself or any person
lawfully aiding him when unlawfully detained
therein. (6)
 • In executing a s/w, the police officers were
obliged to give notice, show their authority and
demand that they be allowed entry. They may
only break open any outer or inner door or
window of a house to execute the s/w if, after
such notice and demand, they are refused entry.
This is known as the “knock and announce
principle”. The method of entry of an officer into
a dwelling and the presence or absence of such
notice are important considerations in assessing
whether subsequent entry to search and/or
arrest is constitutionally reasonable. In the case
of Gouled v. The United States, it was held that
a lawful entry is the indispensable predicate of
reasonable search. A search would violate the
Constitution if entry was illegal-accomplished by
force, illegal threat or mere show of force.
Section 8. Search of house, room, or premises to
be made in presence of two witnesses.—
• No search of a house, room, or any other
premises shall be made except in the presence
of the lawful occupant thereof or any member of
his family or in the absence of the latter, two
witnesses of sufficient age and discretion
residing in the same locality. (7a)
• The search of the house must be done in the
presence of the lawful occupants and it is only in
their absence that the two witnesses of sufficient
age and discretion residing in the same locality
may be called upon to witness the search.
• Two-witness rule must be observed. Otherwise,
the objects seized during the search are
inadmissible in evidence. (Republic of the Philis
vs. SB, 454 Phil. 504, 550[2003])
Section 9. Time of making search.—
• The warrant must direct that it be served in the
day time, unless the affidavit asserts that the
property is on the person or in the place ordered
to be searched, in which case a direction may
be inserted that it be served at any time of the
day or night. (8)
👉 nighttime searches are prohibited unless there is court
authorization to search at night if the property or things to
be seized are found only during the night. This is to protect
the public from the abrasiveness of official intrusions. A
nighttime search is a serious violation of privacy. (People
v. CA, G.R. No. 117412, Dec. 8, 2000)
• General rule: S/Ws must be served during
daytime.
• Exception: a search at any reasonable hour of
the day or night, when the application asserts
that the property is on the person or place
ordered to be searched. The rule allows for the
exercise of judicial discretion in fixing the time
within which the warrant must be served subject
to the statutory requirement fixing the maximum
time for the execution of the warrant.
• In the case of People of the Philippines vs. CA,
G.R. No. 117412, Dec. 8, 2000, it was held that
the exact time of the execution of a warrant
should be left to the discretion of the law
enforcement officers. In holding that 7:30 pm is
considered reasonable, the High Court said that
in addition to the realities of the law enforcers,
the prevailing conditions in the place to be
searched must also be considered. 7:30 PM in a
suburban subdivision in Metro Manila is an hour
at which the residents are still up-and-about. To
hold said hour as an unreasonable time to serve
a warrant would not only hamper law
enforcement, but could also lead to absurd
results, enabling criminals to conceal their illegal
activities by pursuing such activities at night.
Section 10. Validity of search warrant.—
• A search warrant shall be valid for ten (10) days
from its date. Thereafter, it shall be void. (9a)
Section 11. Receipt for the property seized.—
• The officer seizing property under the warrant
must give a detailed receipt for the same to the
lawful occupant of the premises in whose
presence the search and seizure were made, or
in the absence of such occupant, must, in the
presence of at least two witnesses of sufficient
age and discretion residing in the same locality,
leave a receipt in the place in which he found
the seized property. (10a)
• The searching officer cannot just confiscate the
items subject of s/ws and walk away. They need
to list down the items confiscated even if
specifically described in the s/w. It mat be
possible that the s/w orders the seizing officers
to seize 10 live ammunitions, but they only
found 5. Before leaving, the seizing officer must
make an inventory of the recovered pieces of
evidence/ confiscated items, and issue receipt
of the same to the owner of the house or
occupant thereof. This is true even in
warrantless searches.
• If no return was made, the judge should
summon the officer and require him to explain. If
there was return, the judge must ascertain if
there was a complete and accurate inventory of
the items seized as well as detailed receipt left
to the occupants in whose presence the search
was made.
Section 12. Delivery of property and inventory thereof
to court; return and proceedings thereon. —
• (a) The officer must forthwith deliver the
property seized to the judge who issued the
warrant, together with a true inventory thereof
duly verified under oath. (b) Ten (10) days after
issuance .of the search warrant, the issuing
judge shall ascertain if the return has been
made, and if none, shall summon the person to
whom the warrant was issued and require him
to explain why no return was made. If the return
has been made, the judge shall ascertain
whether section 11 of this Rule has been
complied with and shall require that the property
seized be delivered to him. The judge shall see
to it that subsection (a) hereof has been
 complied with. (c) The return on the search
warrant shall be filed and kept by the custodian
of the log book on search warrants who shall
enter therein the date of the return, the result,
and other actions of the judge. A violation of this
section shall constitute contempt of court. (11a)
• Non delivery of the seized items to the court
violates the mandatory requirements of the law
and defeats the very purpose for which they
were enacted.
Section 13. Search incident to lawful arrest.—
• A person lawfully arrested may be searched for
dangerous weapons or anything which may
have been used or constitute proof in the
commission of an offense without a search
warrant. (12a)
Section 14. Motion to quash a search warrant or to
suppress evidence; where to file.—
• A motion to quash a search warrant and/or to
suppress evidence obtained thereby may be
filed in and acted upon only by the court where
the action has been instituted. If no criminal
action has been instituted, the motion may be
filed in and resolved by the court that issued the
search warrant. However, if such court failed to
resolve the motion and a criminal case is
subsequently filed in another court, the motion
shall be resolved by the latter court. (n)
• To “quash” means to invalidate, annul, set aside,
or to terminate a court order. Therefore,
quashing a search warrant means to invalidate
and to nullify a valid search warrant.
• Grounds for quashing a s/w:
• - (a) the place searched or the
property seized are not those
specified or described in the s/w, and
• - (b) there is no probable cause for
the issuance of the s/w
• (Abuan v. People, 536 Phil.
672, 692)
Is it required that the property to be searched should
be owned by the person against whom the search
warrant is directed?
• No. In Burgos, Sr. v. Chief of Staff, AFP [133
SCRA 800], the Supreme Court enunciated that
it is sufficient that the property is under the
control or possession of the person sought to be
searched.
Should the address in the search warrant match the
actual place to be searched?
• Yes, the address in the search warrant must
match the actual place to be searched. In
People vs. Court of Appeals [ 291 SCRA 400],
the Supreme Court ruled that the place to be
searched, as set out in the warrant, cannot be
amplified or modified by the officers’ own
personal knowledge of the premises, or the
evidence they adduced in support of their
application for the warrant. The particularization
of the description of the place to be searched
may properly be done only by the Judge, and
only in the warrant itself; it cannot be left to the
discretion of the police officers conducting the
search.
What are the instances when a search may be made
without a warrant?
• 1. search incident to a lawful arrest
• 2. stop and frisk
• 3. consented warrantless search
• 4. search of moving vehicles
• 5. plain view search or the plain view principle
• 6. checkpoints including airport and seaport
checkpoints
• 7. enforcement of customs laws
• 8. cybercrime warrants
1. Search incidental to a lawful arrest
• When a person is legally arrested for an
offense, whatever found upon his/her person or
in his/her control which is unlawful and which
may be used to prove the offense may be
seized and held as evidence. [“The police officer
empowered to arrest must be empowered to
disarm.”] To validate a search incidental to a
lawful arrest, the lawful arrest must come first
before search, never the other way around.
• Arrest must therefore be valid and lawful.
Stop and frisk [instances when allowed]
• An officer who reasonably believes that a
person is armed and dangerous may stop that
person and subject the person to frisk. It is
based on reasonable suspicions [not probable
cause]. Justified to protect the public and also to
protect the police officers from any potential
harm.
Consented search
• The constitutional protection against
unreasonable searches and seizures is a
personal right which may be waived. However,
to be valid, consent must be voluntary – clear,
unmistakable, specific and intelligently given,
uncontaminated by any duress or coercion. It
can only be proven by clear and convincing
evidence.
• In case of waiver, it must be shown that:
 1. the right exists;
2. that the person involved had knowledge,
either actual or
constructive of the existence of such right, and
3. the said person had an actual intention to
relinquish right. (Caballes v. CA, G.R. No.
136292, Jan. 15, 2002)
Search of moving vehicles
• may either be a mere routine inspection or an
extensive search
• Instances of search as routine inspection:
(1) where the officer merely draws aside the
curtain of a vacant vehicle parked on the public
fair grounds;
(2) officer simply looks into a vehicle;
(3) officer flashes a light therein without opening
the car’s doors;
(4)occupants therein are not subjected to a
physical or body search;
(5) inspection of the vehicle is limited to visual
search/inspection;
(6) the routine check is conducted in a fixed
area.
• extensive search of a moving vehicle is only
permissible when there is probable cause.
• In the following cases, SC held that there is
probable cause to conduct w/o a judicial warrant
an extensive search of moving vehicles:
(1) there had emanated from a package the
distinctive smell of marijuana;
(2) PNP officers had received a confidential
report from informers that a sizeable volume of marijuana
would be transported along the route where the search
was conducted;
(3) police officers received information that a
Caucasian coming from Sagada, Mountain Province, had
in his possession prohibited drugs and when the
NARCOM agents confronted the accused Caucasian,
because of a conspicuous budge in his waistline, he failed
to present his passport and other identification documents;
(4) police officers had received confidential
information that a woman having the same physical
appearance as that of the accused would be transporting
marijuana;
(5) the accused who were riding a
jeepney were stopped and search by policemen who had
earlier received confidential reports that said accused
would transport a large quantity of marijuana; and
(6) where the moving vehicle was stopped and
search on the basis of intelligence information and
clandestine reports by a deep penetration agent or spy-
one who has participated in the drug smuggling activities
of the syndicate to which the accused belong- that said
accused were bringing prohibited drugs into the country.
(Macad v. People, G.R. No. 227366, Aug. 1, 2018)
Plain view Search or the Plain View Principle
• “To be in plain view, an item must be plainly
visible to a law enforcement officer standing in a
position where he has a lawful right to be.”
• Plain view simply means – something that can
be seen by the naked eye. It is not plain view
when the evidence can only be seen with the
use of sense-enhancing devices like thermal
imaging scanners.
Requirements for warrantless search based on plain
view (De Villa v. People, G.R. No. 224039, Sept. 11,
2019)
• 1. The law enforcement officer in search of the
evidence has a prior justification for an intrusion
or is in a position from which he/she can view a
particular area.
• 2. The discovery of evidence in plain view is
inadvertent.
• 3. It is immediately apparent to the officer that
the item he observes may be evidence of a
crime, a contraband, or otherwise subject to
seizure. The law enforcement officer must
lawfully make an initial intrusion or properly be
in a position from which he can particularly view
the area.
• 4. In the course of such lawful intrusion, the
searching police officer inadvertently came
across an incriminating piece of evidence. The
object must be open to eye and hand and its
discovery inadvertent.
• *The police is allowed to seize without
warrant illegally possessed firearm or any
contraband inadvertently found in plain view.
However, “the seizure of evidence in plain view
applies only where the police officer is not
searching for evidence against the accused, but
inadvertently came across an incriminating
object.
Checkpoints including airport and seaport
checkpoints.
• Warrantless searches in airports and seaports
are a form of a border security search. This is to
prevent hijacking or skyjacking or airports and
piracy to vessels.
• --history - hijacking, skyjacking, piracy of
vessels [ airplanes and vessels involve the
national security of a State]
• Airport searches are in the nature of
administrative searches as distinguished from
criminal searches. Hence, they are part of the
general regulatory scheme toward an
administrative purpose and that is – to prevent
 the carrying of weapons or explosives aboard
aircraft, and prevent hijackings.
So, when are checkpoints allowed?
• In the case of Valmonte vs. De Villa, the
Supreme Court had the occasion to rule that
checkpoints are not illegal per se. Thus, under
exceptional circumstances, as where the
survival of organized government is on the
balance, or where the lives and safety of the
people are in grave peril, checkpoints may be
allowed and installed by the government.
Routine inspection and a few questions do not
constitute unreasonable searches. If the
inspection becomes more thorough to the extent
of becoming a search, this can be done when
there is deemed to be probable cause. In the
latter situation, it is justifiable as a warrantless
search of a moving vehicle.
• For as long as the vehicle is neither searched
nor its occupants subjected to a body search,
and the inspection of the vehicle is limited to a
visual search, said routine checks cannot be
regarded as violative of an individual’s right
against unreasonable search. [Valmonte v.
General de Villa, G.R. No. 83988, 24 May 1990]
If the security guard in a mall wants to open my bag
and check the inside thereof, isn’t there a violation of
my right against unreasonable search?
• No, there is no violation of your right. Private
search is not covered by the constitutional
guarantee. In the case of People vs. Marti [193
SCRA 57], the Supreme Court ratiocinated that
in the absence of governmental interference, the
constitutional right against unreasonable search
and seizure cannot invoked against the State.
The protection against unreasonable search and
seizure cannot be extended to acts committed
by private individuals so as to bring it within the
ambit of alleged unlawful intrusion by the
government.
Enforcement of customs laws
• Warrantless searches and seizures in the
enforcement of customs and immigration laws
are based on a country’s sovereign interest in
protecting its territorial integrity. Because of this,
a customs official may have the authority to
conduct routine searches and seizures at its
border without probable cause (or based on
reasonable suspicions) and without warrant.
• Purpose – to regulate the collection of customs
duties (or to ensure that customs taxes are paid)
and to prevent the introduction of contraband
into the country. For immigration purposes,
immigration officials have the right to determine
whether a person should be legally admitted to
the country to ensure proper legal process and
immigration status.
Cybercrime warrants
• Cybersecurity is a must for all individuals,
organizations, businesses and governmental
agencies in today’s connected worlds.
• Issued to prevent or stop cybercrimes that cost
trillion dollar damages.
• There are 4 types of cybercrime warrants one of
which is the Warrant to search, Seize, and
Examine Computer Data. This authorizes law
enforcers to initially make a forensic image of
the computer on-site, as well as limit their
search to the place specified in the warrant.
OTHERWISE, on off-site search, where the law
enforcer searches the computer outside the
place to be searched, may be conducted.
RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED
Rule 115
Section 1. 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
arraignment to 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. The absence of the accused
without justifiable cause at the trial of which he
had notice shall be considered a waiver of his
right to be present thereat. When an accused
under custody escapes, he shall be deemed to
have waived his right to be present on all
subsequent trial dates until custody over him is
regained. 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.
d. To testify as 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. Either party may utilize
as part of its evidence the testimony of a
witness who is deceased, out of or cannot with
due diligence be found in the Philippines,
unavailable, or otherwise unable to testify, given
in another case or proceeding, judicial or
administrative, involving the same parties and
subject matter, the adverse party having the
opportunity to cross-examine him.
g. To have compulsory process issued to secure
the attendance of witnesses and production of
other evidence in his behalf.
 h. To have speedy, impartial and public trial.
i. To appeal in all cases allowed and in the
manner prescribed by law.
DUE PROCESS
WHAT IS DUE PROCESS?
> The idea that laws and legal proceedings must
be fair
> Principle that the government must respect all
of a person's legal rights instead of just some or
most of those legal rights when the government
deprives a person of life, liberty, or property
WHAT ARE THE TWO BRANCHES OF DUE PROCESS?
> Due process covers two aspects—substantive
and procedural due process
> Substantive due process refers to the intrinsic
validity of the law
>Procedural due process, which is based
on the principle that a renders judgment
only after trial and based on the evidence
presented therein
> The important thing is that there was an
opportunity to be heard
>Notice and hearing are the two minimum
requirements of due process
• IN GENERAL, WHAT ARE THE
REQUIREMENTS OF PROCEDURAL DUE
PROCESS?
The requirements of procedural due process are
as follows:
1. There must be an IMPARTIAL AND
COMPETENT COURT with judicial power
to hear and determine the matter before it
2. Jurisdiction MUST HAVE BEEN LAWFULLY
ACQUIRED over the person of the defendant
or over the property subject of the
proceeding
3. The defendant must be given an
OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD
4. Judgment must be RENDERED UPON
LAWFUL HEARING
WHAT IS THE MEANING OF THE RIGHT OF
PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE?
>The right means that the presumption
must be overcome by evidence of guilt
beyond reasonable doubt
This is a non-waivable right.
1. Guilt beyond reasonable doubt means
that there is moral certainty as to the guilt of
the accused
2. Accusation is not synonymous to guilt—
conviction should then be based on the strength
of the evidence of the prosecution and not the
weakness of the defense
REASONABLE DOUBT
• That doubt engendered by an investigation of
the whole proof and an inability, after such
investigation to let the mind rest easy upon the
certainty of guilt.
• Absolute certainty of guilt is not demanded by
the law to convict of any criminal charge but
moral certainty is required and this certainty is
required as to every proposition of proof
requisite to constitute the offense. [People v.
Dramayo…]
WHAT IS THE RATIONALE FOR THE PRESUMPTION
OF INNOCENCE?
> There ought to be a balance between the
machineries of the State and the accused.
• It is based on the principle of justice. The
conviction must be based on moral certainty for
it is better to acquit a guilty person than to
convict an innocent man. [People v. Dramayo,
G.R. No. L-23444, October 29, 1971]
WHAT ARE THE EXCEPTIONS TO THE
CONSTITUTIONAL PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE?
1. If there is a
REASONABLE CONNECTION between the
fact presumed and the fact ultimately
proven from such fact. For example, an
accountable public officer who fails to
account for
funds or property that should be in his custody is
presumed to be guilty of malversation of
public funds; or that persons in possession
of recently stolen goods are presumed
guilty of the
offense in connection with the goods
2. In cases of SELF-DEFENSE, the person
who invokes the self-defense is presumed
guilty. The burden of proving the elements of
self-defense is incumbent upon the accused.
WHAT IS A REVERSE TRIAL?
> Usually in most cases, the prosecution first
presents its evidence to establish the guilt of
the accused, and the defense follows
thereafter
> But this is reversed when the accused admits
the killing but claims self-defense
> A reverse trial happens
>The accused must first establish
the elements of self-defense in order to
overturn the presumption that he was guilt of the
offense
WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF HAVING TO BE
INFORMED OF THE NATURE AND CAUSE OF THE
ACCUSATION?
> To know if he is truly the guilty party
> To know the charge against him
This right to be informed of the nature and cause of the
accusation requires that the information should state the
facts and the circumstances constituting the crime
charged in such a way that a person of common
understanding may easily comprehend and be informed of
what it is about.
• An accused cannot be convicted of an offense
unless said offense is clearly charged in the
complaint or information. To convict him of an
offense other than that charged in the complaint
or information would be a violation of this
constitutional right [to be informed of the nature
and cause of the accusation against him].
[People v. Ortega, G.R. No. 116736, July 24,
1997]
• An accused cannot be convicted of an offense
unless said offense is clearly charged in the
complaint or information. To convict him of
an offense other than that charged in the
complaint or information would be a violation of
this constitutional right [to be informed of the
nature and cause of the accusation against
him]. [People v. Ortega, G.R. No. 116736, July
24, 1997]
• The qualifying or aggravating circumstances
must be alleged in the information and proved in
order to be considered by the court.
• The description, not the designation of the
offense is controlling. In case of error in the
designation, accused may be validly convicted
of the offense described.
• The qualifying or aggravating circumstances
must be alleged in the information and proved in
order to be considered by the court.
• The description, not the designation of the
offense is controlling. In case of error in the
designation, accused may be validly convicted
of the offense described.
IS THERE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE RIGHT
TO
COUNSEL DURING THE CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION
AND THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL DURING TRIAL?
>Yes. During the trial, the right to counsel
means the right to effective counsel and the
purpose of the counsel is not so much to protect
the accused from being forced to confess,
but rather, to defend the accused.
>On the other hand, a custodial
investigation has stricter requirements. A
custodial investigation requires the presence of
a competent and independent counsel, who
is preferably the accused’s own choice.
Furthermore, the right to counsel could only
be waived in writing and in the presence of
counsel.
> A custodial investigation take note is not done
in public, hence the danger that confessions
will be extracted against the will of the
defendant during the custodial investigation.
This danger doesn't
really exist during trial since the latter is done in
public.
• The right to counsel is absolute and may be
invoked at all times even on appeal. Without the
aid of counsel, an accused may be convicted
not because he is guilty but because he does
not know how to establish his innocence.
• The said right covers the period beginning from
custodial investigation, well into the rendition of
the judgment and even on appeal.
• While the right to counsel is absolute, the right
to counsel de parte is not. [People v. Serzo Jr.,
G.R. No. 118435, June 20, 1997.]
CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION
• It is the questioning by law enforcement officers
of a suspect taken into custody or otherwise
deprived of his freedom of action in a significant
way. It includes the practice of issuing an
“invitation” to a person who is investigated in
connection with an offense he is suspected to
have committed. [R.A. 7348]
• Confessions during custodial investigation,
made without the assistance of counsel are not
admissible as evidence to incriminate the
accused but they may be used to impeach the
credibility of the accused, or they may be
treated as verbal admission of the accused
through the testimony of the person who heard it
or who conducted the investigation of the
accused. [People v. Molas, G.R. Nos. 97437-39,
February 5, 1993]
WHY IS THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL AFFORDED
DURING TRIAL?
• >The right to counsel afforded during trial
because this right is embraced in one’s right to
be heard.
• >While, the right to counsel can be
invoked at any stage of the proceedings
even on appeal, it can also be waived.
• The waiver must be voluntary, knowing, and
intelligent and must be made in the presence of
the accused’s lawyer.
• > The accused is deemed to have waived his
right to counsel when he voluntarily submits
himself to the jurisdiction of the Court and and
proceeds with his defense
• > But in two cases, the Court held that the
defendant cannot raise for the first time on
appeal his right to have an attorney. If the
question is not raised in the trial court, the
prosecution may go to
trial. The question will not be considered in the
appellate court for the first time when the
accused fails to raise it in the lower court.
IS IT THE DUTY OF THE COURT TO APPOINT
COUNSEL DE OFFICIO MANDATORY AT ALL TIMES?
> No, the duty to appoint counsel de officio is
mandatory only up to the time of arraignment
DOES THE MISTAKE OF COUNSEL BIND THE
CLIENT?
> As a rule, the mistake of counsel binds the
client
>Therefore, the client cannot question a
decision on the ground that his counsel was
an idiot.
> However, an exception to this if counsel
misrepresents himself as a lawyer, and he turns
out to be a fake lawyer. In this case, the
accused is entitled to new trial because his right
to be represented by a member of the bar was
violated. He was thus denied of his right to
counsel and due process.
IS THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL ABSOLUTE?
>No. The right of choice of counsel must be
exercised in reasonable manner within
reasonable time.
>The accused cannot insist on counsel that
he cannot afford; one who is not a member of
the bar; or one who declines for a valid reason.
> Also the right of the accused to choose
counsel is subject to the right of the state to
due process and adequate justice.
WHEN CAN THE ACCUSED DEFEND HIMSELF IN
PERSON?
>The accused can defend himself in person
only if the court is convinced that he can
properly protect his rights even without the
assistance of counsel.
WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF THE RIGHT AGAINST SELF-
INCRIMINATION? [par. d]
• Incriminating question means question which
may subject an accused to penal liability.
> The right against self-incrimination covers
testimonial compulsion only and the
compulsion to produce real or physical
evidence using the body of the accused
> Physical or moral compulsion to extort
communication
WITH WHAT KIND OF TESTIMONY OR INSTANCES
CAN THE RIGHT BE INVOKED?
> It applies to commutative testimony and not
mechanical testimony
>Commutative testimony involves the use of
intelligence on the part of the accused or
witness. Corollary, in cases on self-
incrimination, the following are permissible—
substance from the body, morphine from
mouth, put on pants, physical exam, wallet,
picture taking, etc. The following on the
other hand are not permissible—handwriting,
signature, and similar incidents which involve
the use of intelligence.
• In other words, this right does not cover
examination of the accused’s body as evidence,
when it may be material such as: physical
examination; examination of a rapist and the
victim for gonorrhea; examination for pregnancy
of a woman charged with adultery; examination
using ultraviolet light to determine presence of
fluorescent powder dusted on marked money
used in buy-bust, etc.
• This right against self-incrimination does not
include cases covered by immunity statutes
such as R.A. 1379 [Forfeiture of Illegally
Obtained Wealth], and R.A. 749 [Bribery and
Graft Cases].
• The time to invoke this right is after asking the
question and before answering it.
• The ordinary witness may be compelled to take
the witness stand and claim the privilege as
each question requiring an incriminating answer
is asked at him, BUT, an accused may
altogether refuse to even take the witness stand
and refuse to answer any and all questions that
will incriminate him.
• If the accused testified in his own behalf, then
he may be cross-examined as any other
witness. This is considered a waiver of his right
against self-incrimination. He may not, on cross-
examination, refuse to answer any question on
the ground that the answer that he will give, or
the evidence he will produce would have the
tendency to incriminate him for the crime with
which he is charged. BUT, he may refuse to
answer any question incriminating for an offense
distinct from that for which he is charged.
SUPPOSE THAT THERE IS A HOLE IN A DOOR
TO WHICH IF IT IS FOUND OUT THAT THE HAND OF
THE ACCUSED FITS THE HOLE, HE IS MOST
PROBABLE GUILTY OF THE ACCUSATION. CAN HE
INVOKE THE RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION?
>No, what is being asked of him is
mechanical in nature. The inserting of his
hand into the hole will not involve intelligence on
his part to fulfill the task.
IS THERE AN EXCEPTION TO THE RIGHT AGAINST
SELF-INCRIMINATION?
>The right cannot be invoked when the
State has the rights to inspect documents
under its police power, such as documents of
corporations.
ON WHAT KIND OF PROCEEDINGS CAN THE RIGHT
AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION BE INVOKED?
> The right against self-incrimination can be
invoked in all proceedings instituted by the
government
WHAT IS THE RATIONALE FOR PROTECTING THE
RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION?
1. FOR HUMANITARIAN REASONS—to
prevent the State with all its coercive
powers from extracting testimony that may
convict the accused
2. FOR PRACTICAL REASONS—the
accused is likely to commit perjury if he were
compelled to testify against himself.
SUPPOSE THAT X WAS A WITNESS IN A
JUDICIAL PROCEEDING. THE COUNSEL ASKED
HIM ABOUT HIS WHEREABOUTS DURING A
CERTAIN DATE. X WAS ACTUALLY TOGETHER WITH
A WOMAN IN A MOTEL DURING THAT DATE.
REVEALING HIS WHEREABOUTS WOULD RESULT
TO A DOMESTIC TURBULENCE. CAN X RIGHTFULLY
INVOKE HIS RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION?
> X cannot invoke the right. He can only invoke
the right if there is only a possibility of
criminal prosecution but not in cases of
possible embarrassment.
WHO MAY INVOKE THE RIGHT AGAINST SELF-
INCRIMINATION AND WHEN CAN SUCH PERSON
INVOKE THE RIGHT?
> An ordinary witness may invoke the right but
he may only do so as each incriminating
question is asked
>But once the accused waives his right
and chooses to testify on his own behalf, he
may be cross-examined on matters covered in
his direct examination. He cannot refuse to
answer questions during cross-examination by
claiming that the answer that he will give could
incriminate him for the crime he is being
charged.
• >However, if the question during cross-
examination relates to a crime different from
that which he was charged, he can still invoke
the right and refuse to answer.
CAN AN ACCUSED OR WITNESS INVOKE THE RIGHT
AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION IF HE IS ASKED
ABOUT PAST CRIMINALITY?
> It depends
> If he can still be prosecuted for it, questions
about the past criminal liability are still covered
by the protection against self-incrimination
> But if he cannot anymore be prosecuted for it
anymore, he cannot invoke the right
SUPPOSE X WAS A WITNESS ASKED ABOUT BEING
CHARGED WITH PERJURY TWO YEARS AGO. HE
INVOKES HIS RIGHT AGAINST SELF-
INCRIMINATION. CAN THIS BE TAKEN AGAINST
HIM?
• > It depends. If in the prior charge of perjury
against him, the case has already been
terminated through his acquittal, conviction, or
dismissal of the complaint, he couldn't invoke
the right anymore.
But if it is the case that he could still be
charged with this past criminality, then he
could invoke said right.
SUPPOSE X WAS A WITNESS ASKED ABOUT
BEING A PAIDWITNESS IN THE PAST. X
REFUSED TO ANSWER INVOKING THE RIGHT
AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION. CAN THIS BE
TAKEN AGAINST X?
> Again, it depends. If he could still be charged
for rendering false testimony, then he could
invoke the right. If he cannot anymore be
charged for past criminality, then it could not
invoke the right.
X ACCUSED WAS ASKED TO BE A HOSTILE
WITNESS. HE REFUSED TO DO SO. CAN THIS BE
TAKEN AGAINST X?
> No, X cannot be prejudiced whatsoever as a
result of his refusal to be a hostile witness.
To prejudice X as a result of his refusal
would render his right against self-
incrimination useless and nugatory.
RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED IN THE MATTER OF
TESTIFYING OR PRODUCING EVIDENCE?
• > Before the case is filed in court but after he
has been taken into custody or otherwise
deprived of his liberty, the accused has the
following rights—
1. The right to be informed of the nature
and cause of the accusation against him
2. The right to remain silent and to counsel
3. The right not to be subjected to any
force,violence, threat, intimidation, or any other
means which vitiate free will
4. The right have evidence obtained in
violation of these rights rejected
> After the case is filed in court, the
accused has the
following rights—
1. The right to refuse to be a witness
2. The right not to have any prejudice
whatsoever result to him by such refusal
3. The right to testify in his own behalf
subject to cross-examination by the
prosecution
USE IMMUNITY AND TRANSACTIONAL IMMUNITY
• USE IMMUNITY
• Prohibits the use of the witness’ compelled
testimony and its fruits in any manner in
connection with the criminal prosecution of the
witness
The witness can still be prosecuted but his
compelled testimony may not be used against
him
TRANSACTIONAL IMMUNITY
• Immunity to the witness from prosecution
for an offense to which his compelled testimony
relates
• The witness cannot be prosecuted at all
WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF THE REFUSAL OF THE
ACCUSED TO TESTIFY ON HIS BEHALF?
 > GENERAL RULE—the silence of the
accused should not prejudice him
> EXCEPTIONS—the following cases
draw an unfavorable inference from the
failure of the accused to testify:
• If the prosecution has already
established a prima facie,case, the accused
must present proof to overturn the
evidence of the prosecution
• If the defense of the accused is an alibi
and he doesn't testify, the inference is that the
alibi is not believable
IS DNA TESTING COVERED BY THE RIGHT AGAINST
SELF- INCRIMINATION?
> No, obtaining DNA samples from an
accused in a criminal case or from the
respondent in a paternity case will not violate
the right against self-incrimination
WHAT IS THE MEANING OF THE RIGHT OF
CONFRONTATION?
> It means that the accused can only be tried
using those witnesses that meet him face to
face at the trial who give testimony in his
presence, and who may be subject to cross-
examination
WHAT ARE THE REASONS FOR THE RIGHT?
> The right to confrontation is afforded the accused
to allow the court to observe the demeanor of the witness
while testifying and to give the accused the opportunity to
cross-examine the witness in order to test their
recollection and credibility
CAN THE RIGHT OF CONFRONTATION BE WAIVED?
> Yes, it can be waived either expressly or
impliedly
> It is waived impliedly when an accused
waives his right to be present at trial
> It is waived also by conduct amounting to a
renunciation of the right to cross-examine
> When the party was given an opportunity
to confront and cross-examine an opposing
witness but failed to take advantage of it for
reasons attributable to the party alone, he
is deemed to have waived his right
WHAT HAPPENS TO THE TESTIMONY OF A WITNESS
WHO DIES OR BECOMES UNAVAILABLE?
> If the other party had the opportunity to
cross-examine the witness before he died or
became unavailable, the testimony may be used
as evidence
> However, if the other party did not have the
opportunity to cross examine before the
subsequent death or unavailability of
the witness, the testimony will have no probative
value.
• What suffices to be able to use the
testimony of a witness as evidence is the
opportunity to cross-examine and there need
not be an actual cross-examination
WHAT IS THE RIGHT TO COMPULSORY PROCESS?
>It is the right of the accused to have a
subpoena and/or a subpoena duces tecum
issued in his behalf in order to compel the
attendance of witnesses and the production of
evidence
WHAT HAPPENS IF A WITNESS REFUSES TO
TESTIFY WHEN REQUIRED?
> The court should order the witness to give bail
or even order his arrest, if necessary
> Failure to obey a subpoena amounts to
contempt of court
COMPULSORY PROCESSES WHICH MAY COMPEL
THE ATTENDANCE OF A PERSON IN COURT:
1. Subpoena (Rule 21);
2. Subpoena duces tecum (Rule 21);
3. Warrant of arrest;
4. Contempt;
5. Perpetuation of testimony; and
6. Modes of discovery
MAY A WITNESS BE EXCUSED FROM APPEARING AT
TRIAL FOR THE REASON THAT HIS RESIDENCE
EXCEEDS 50 KILOMETERS FROM THE PLACE OF
TRIAL?
> The provision in the Rules of Court providing
for this exemption or excusing a witness from
appearance before a Court, judge or officer if
the province in which he resides is more than
50kms away to the place of trial by the usual
course of travel applies only to CIVIL CASES
and not to criminal cases
RIGHT TO SPEEDY, PUBLIC AND IMPARTIAL TRIAL
• HOW SHOULD THE TRIAL BE
CONDUCTED?
> The trial should be speedy, public and
impartial
• WHAT IS THE MEANING OF THE RIGHT TO
SPEEDY TRIAL?
• >The right means that the trial should be
conducted according to the law of criminal
procedure and the rules and regulations and it
should be free from vexatious, capricious and
oppressive delays. This is waivable.
• WHEN SHOULD THE ARRAIGNMENT AND
PRE-TRIAL BE HELD?
> According to the Speedy Trial Act of 1988,
and Circular 38-98, if the accused pleads not
guilty, arraignment and pre-trial should be held
within 30 days from the time the court acquires
jurisdiction
over the accused
• WITHIN HOW MANY DAYS SHOULD THE
TRIAL BE COMPLETED?
 > In no case shall the entire period exceed 180
days from the first day of trial .
EXCEPTIONS:
1. Those governed by the Rule on Summary
Procedure; or
2. Where the penalty prescribed by law does not
exceed six (6) month imprisonment or a fine of
Php1000 or both;
3. Those authorized by the Supreme Court.
WHAT FACTORS MAY BE CONSIDERED IN
DETERMINING WHETHER THE ACCUSED HAS
BEEN DEPRIVED OF HIS RIGHT TO SPEEDY
TRIAL AND SPEEDY DISPOSITION OF HIS CASE?
(ACCORDING TO CORPUZ V. SANDIGANBAYAN)
1. Length of delay
2. Reason for the delay
3. The accused’s assertion of his right
4. Prejudice to the accused
WHAT ARE THE REMEDIES AVAILABLE TO THE
ACCUSED WHOSE RIGHT TO SPEEDY TRIAL HAS
BEEN VIOLATED?
1. Motion to dismiss on the ground of
violation of right to speedy trial—must be
filed before trial. This has the same effect
as an acquittal for purposes of double
jeopardy.
2. File for mandamus to compel a dismissal of
the information
3. If he is restrained of his liberty, file for
habeas corpus
4. Ask for the trial of the case and move to
dismiss
WHAT IS THE LIMITATION ON THE RIGHT OF
THE ACCUSED TO A SPEEDY TRIAL?
> The limitation is that the State shouldn't be
deprived of its day in court
> The right of the State and the prosecution to
due process should be respected
THE PROSECUTION AND THE COMPLAINANT
FAIL TO ATTEND THE,FIRST HEARING. THE
COURT POSTPONES THE HEARING TO ANOTHER
DATE. IS THERE A VIOLATION TO THE RIGHT TO
SPEEDY TRIAL?
> No, the right to speedy trial is violated when
there are unjustified postponements of the trial
and a long period of time is allowed to elapse
without the case being tried for no unjustifiable
reason
NOTA BENE: Corollary to the right to speedy
trial is the right to speedy disposition of cases.
WHAT IS THE MEANING OF THE RIGHT TO A PUBLIC
TRIAL?
>It means that anyone interested in
observing the manner that a judge conducts
the proceedings in his courtroom may do so
WHY SHOULD A TRIAL BE CONDUCTED IN PUBLIC?
> The trial should be public in order to prevent
abuses that may be committed by the court to
the prejudice of the defendant
>Moreover the accused is entitled to the
moral support of his friends and relatives
IS THERE AN EXCEPTION TO THE REQUIREMENT OF
PUBLICITY?
> Yes, the court may bar the public in certain
cases, such as when the evidence to be
presented may be offensive to
decency or public morals, or in rape cases,
where the purpose of some persons in
attending is merely to ogle at the parties
IS IT ALRIGHT TO HOLD THE TRIAL IN THE
CHAMBERS OF THE JUDGE?
>Yes, there is no violation of the right to a
public trial since the public isn’t excluded from
attending the trial
IN SOCALLED TRIALS BY PUBLICITY, WHEN CAN
THE PUBLICITY BE CONSIDERED PREJUDICIAL TO
THE ACCUSED?
>To warrant a finding of prejudicial publicity,
there must be,allegations and proof that
the judges have been unduly influenced,
not simply that they might be by the barrage
of
publicity
…impartial trial
• Due process of law requires a hearing before an
impartial and disinterested tribunal, and that
every litigant is entitled to nothing less than the
cold neutrality of an impartial judge (Mateo, Jr. v.
Villaluz, G.R. Nos. L-34756-59, March 31, 1973)
• To disqualify a judge on the ground of bias and
prejudice , the movant must prove such bias by
clear and convincing evidence.
Right to appeal…
• The right to appeal a judgment of conviction is
fundamentally of statutory origin. It is not a
natural right. It is personal to the accused and
may be waived either expressly or by
implication. However, where the death penalty is
imposed, such right cannot be waived as a
review of the judgment is mandatory.
POINTS TO PONDER
• The rights of the accused are inviolable rights.
• Most of the rights of the accused are based
under Section 14 of Article III of the 1987
Constitution.
• The rights of the accused are consistent with the
principle of due process.
• The right to be present means the accused has
the right to attend court proceedings. If the
accused was previously convicted and is
serving sentence in a penitentiary, the right to
be present may still be had by conducting
hearings in the penitentiary.
 • The right to appeal is statutory and not a
constitutional right.
• Congress can pass laws on speedy trial such as
RA No. 8493.
• The purpose of the Revised Guidelines on
Continuous Trial in Criminal Cases promulgated
by the Supreme Court is to promote speedy trial
in criminal cases.
RIGHT TO APPEAL, WHEN ALLOWED
• IS THE RIGHT TO APPEAL A FUNDAMENTAL
RIGHT?
> No, the right to appeal is a statutory right,
except in the case of the minimum appellate
jurisdiction of the SC granted by the
Constitution. Anyone who seeks
exercise the right to appeal must comply
with the requirements of the
rules. Otherwise the right to appeal is lost.
CAN THE RIGHT TO APPEAL BE WAIVED?
> Yes it can be waived expressly or impliedly
WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF THE FLIGHT OF
THE ACCUSED ON HIS RIGHT TO APPEAL?
> When the accused flees after the case has
been submitted to the court for decision, he will
be deemed to have waived his right to appeal
from the judgment rendered against him.
ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
RULE 116
Section 1. arraignment and plea; how made
(a) The accused must be arraigned before the court
where the court where the complaint or information
was filed or assigned for trial. The arraignment shall
be made in open court by the judge or clerk by
furnishing the accused with a copy of the complaint or
information, reading the same in a language or dialect
known to him, and asking him whether he pleads
guilty or not guilty. The prosecution may call at the
trial witnesses other than those named in the
complaint or information.
(b) The accused must be present at the arraignment
and must personally enter his plea. Both arraignment
and plea shall be made of record, but failure to do so
shall not affect the validity of the proceedings.
(c) When the accused refuses to plead or makes a
conditional plea, a plea of not guilty shall be entered
for him.
(d) 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.
(e) When the accused is under preventive suspension,
his case shall be raffled and its records transmitted to
the judge to whom the case was raffled within three
(3) days from the filing of the information or
complaint. The accused shall be arraigned within ten
(10) days from the date of the raffle. The pre-trial
conference of his case shall be held within ten (10)
days after arraignment.
(f) The private offended party shall be required to
appear at the arraignment for purposes of plea
bargaining, determination of civil liability, and other
matters requiring his presence. In case of failure of
the offended party to appear despite 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.
(g) Unless a shorter period is provided by special law
or Supreme Court circular, the arraignment shall be
held within thirty (30) days from the date the court
acquires jurisdiction over the person of the accused.
The time of the pendency of a motion to quash or for
to
a. bill of particulars or other causes justifying
suspension of the arraignment shall be excluded in
computing the period.
Nature and concept of arraignment
Arraignment is the formal mode of implementing the
constitutional right of the accused to be informed of the
nature and cause of the accusation against him in a
language known and understood by him.
Purposes of arraignment
To notify the accused of the reason for his indictment [ why
he is being prosecuted]; the specific charges he is ound to
face, and the corresponding penalty that could possibly be
meted against him – which could possibly result to his loss
of freedom even of his life.
Arraignment not only satisfies the due process clause of
the Constitution, but also affords the accused an
opportunity to know the exact charge against him.
Through arraignment, the accused is placed in a position
to enter his/her plea with full knowledge of the
consequences.
Where and How is arraignment conducted.
1. In open court where the complaint/information is
filed/raffled; however, in Rape/Child Abuse and similar
cases, there can be closed door trial.
2. By the judge or clerk of court.
3. By furnishing the accused with a copy of the complaint
or information.
4. Reading the information in a language/dialect knoan
and understood by the accused
5. Asking the accused whether he pleads guilty or not
guilty; and
6. Both arraignment and plea shall be made of record
[Certificate of Arraignment], but failure to enter the plea in
the records shall not affect the validity of the proceedings.
Setting of the date of arraignment
General rule: w/n 30 days if not detained from the
moment the case is filed/raffled in court.
Shorter period:
- w/n 10 days if accused is detained ([Speedy Trial Act-
R.A. 8493]
-R.A. 4908, when the complainant is about to depart from
the Phils with no definite date of return
-cases under R.A. 7610[Child Abuse Law] where trial is
mandated to be commenced 3 days from arraignment
- cases for violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act
- cases under SC A.O. 104-96, i.e. heinous crimes,
violations of Intellectual Property Law, these cases must
be tried continuously and terminated within 60 days from
commencement of the trial and decided within 30 days
from submission of the case
- violation of Environment Law, accused must be arraigned
before releasing on bail
RULES ON ARRAIGNMENT
1. Judgment is void if the accused had not been validly
arraigned.
2. If the accused went into trial without being arraigned,
subsequent arraignment will cure the error provided that
the accused was able to present evidence and cross
examine the witnesses of the prosecution during trial.
3. Accused is presumed to have been validly arraigned in
the absence of proof to the contrary.
4. Accused must personally appear during arraignment [or
through video conference hearing for public health
concerns] and enter his plea [not his counsel].
5. Trial in absentia may be conducted only after valid
arraignment.
If an information is amended in substance which changes
the nature of the offense, arraignment on the amended
information is mandatory. If amendment is as to from, no
need for another arraignment.
Arraignment made after the prosecution rested its case is
considered a non prejudicial error because the counsel for
the accused failed to object the lack of arraignment during
trial and had full opportunity to cross examine the
witnesses.
In other words, there is no need for arraignment as the act
of the accused in participating in the trial implies the he
understood the nature and cause of the accusation
against him.
PLEA
- is the answer of the accused during arraignment and that
is whether guilty or not guilty
- pertains to the matter which the accused, on his
arraignment, alleges in answer to the charge against him
When does the court enter a plea of not guilty for the
accused
1. The accused so pleaded.
2. when accused refuses to plead;
3. when accused admits the charge [pleads guilty], but
sets up matters of defense, or any justification;
4. when accused enters a conditional plea of guilty
[People v. Sabilul –murder-reclusion temporal-destierro
(Art. 247)]
5. when the plea is indefinite or ambiguous [P v. Strong,
guilty, other allegations/attendant circumstances - no]
An unconditional plea of guilty admits the crime and all the
attendant circumstances alleged in the information [like
conspiracy, etc, and the plea warrants judgment of
conviction without need of further evidence.
Plea of guilty is mitigating if made before the prosecution
starts to present evidence.
The presence of the offended party shall be required
during arraignment for the purpose of:
1. plea bargaining,
2. determination of civil liability; and
3. other matters requiring his presence.
If case of failure of the offended party/private complaint
fails to appear during arraignment despite 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.
The judge is not obliged to point out that an information is
defective during arraignment. The obligation to move to
quash a defective information rests upon the accused,
whose failure to do so constitutes a waiver of the right to
object.
Sec. 2. plea of guilty to a lesser offense
At arraignment, the accused, with the consent of the
offended party and the prosecutor, may be allowed by
the trial court to plead guilty to a lesser offense which
is necessarily included in the offense charged. After
arraignment but before trial, the accused may still be
allowed to plead guilty to a lesser offense after
withdrawing his plea of not guilty. No amendment of
the complaint of information is necessary.
Before arraignment, the court may ask the accused if he
wants to enter into plea bargaining.
PLEA BARGAINING is a process whereby the accused
and the prosecution work out a mutually satisfactory
disposition of the case subject to court approval. It usually
involves the accused’s pleading guilty to a lesser offense
or to only one or some of the counts of a multi-count
indictment in return for a lighter sentence than that for the
graver charge.
Plea bargaining involves a give and take negotiation. The
essence of the agreement is that both the prosecution and
the defense make concessions to avoid potential losses. It
is encouraged because the chief virtues of the system –
speed, economy, and finality – can benefit the accused,
the offended party, the prosecution and the court.
Example:
Illegal gambling [cockfighting] under PD 1602 –prision
correccional medium or fine from 1k to 6k, and in case of
rescidivism, prision mayor medium or fine from 5k to 10k.
Proposal- plea of guilt if penalty is fine of 1k. If prosecution
accepts, the court will approve and impose 1k fine.
In drug cases – subject to A.M. No. 18-03-16-SC
Plea bargaining is allowed not only during arraignment but
also during pre-trial, or even up to the point when the
prosecution already rested its case.
Requirements in a plea of guilty to a lesser offense:
1. consent of the offended party;
2. consent of the prosecutor to the plea of guilty; and
3. the lesser offense must necessarily be included in the
offense charged.
If the accused entered a plea to a lesser offense without
the consent of the offended party and the prosecutor and
later on convicted, his subsequent conviction of the crime
charged would not place him in double jeopardy.
If private complainant/offended party fails to appear during
arraignment/pre trial despite notice, he/she is deemed to
have waived his/her right to object to a possible plea of
guilt to a lesser offense.
SEC 3. PLEA OF GUILTY TO CAPITAL OFFENSE;
RECEPTION OF EVIDENCE
When the accused pleads guilty to a capital offense,
the court shall conduct a searching inquiry into the
voluntariness and full comprehension of the
consequences of his plea and shall require the
prosecution to prove his guilt and the precise degree
of culpability. The accused may present evidence in
his behalf.
While the court may ask the accused to present evidence
on his behalf after pleading guilty to a capital offense, he
may not present evidence as would exonerate him
completely from criminal liability such as proof of self
defense.
Searching inquiry by the court is a requirement.
[People v. Dayot, G.R. No. 88281, July 20, 1990] The
trial judge must satisfy himself that the accused, in
pleading guilty,
(1) is doing so voluntarily, and
(2) he, in doing so, is truly guilty, and
(3) there exists a rational basis for a finding of guilt, based
on his evidence on record.
Accused must be informed of the exact jail term/period of
imprisonment he/she will serve.
Sec. 4 plea of guilty to a non-capital offense; reception
of evidence discretionary.
Sec. 5. withdrawal of improvident plea of guilty.
[Sec. 4.] When the accused pleads guilty to a non
capital offense, the court may receive evidence from
the parties to determine the penalty to be imposed.
[Sec. 5.] At any time before the judgment of conviction
becomes final, the court may permit an improvident
plea of guilty to be withdrawn and be substituted by a
plea of not guilty.
GENERALLY, plea of guilty constitutes an unqualified
admission of the crime and of the attendant circumstances
alleged in the information and may thus be the basis of a
judgment without need of further evidence. However, the
court may, upon motion, allow the presentation of
evidence to prove mitigating circumstances.
Even if the accused pleads guilty, if the facts charged in
the information do not state an offense, no conviction can
be had.
For non capital offense, the reception of evidence is
merely discretionary on the part of the court-only if the
complaint or information is not sufficient to render
judgment.
For a capital offense, reception of evidence to prove the
degree of culpability of the accused including the
mitigating circumstances, is mandatory.
Plea of guilty is an unconditional admission of guilt, freely,
voluntary and made with full knowledge of the
consequences and meaning of his act and with a clear
understanding of the precise nature of the crime charged
in the complaint or information. [Pp v. De Luna, G.R.No.
77969, June 22, 1989]
It must be of such nature as to foreclose the defendant’s
right to defend himself from said charge, leaving the
penalty fixed by law. [Pp v. Ng, Pek, G.R. No. l-1985,
October 2, 1948]
An improvident plea of guilty is a plea without information
as to all the circumstances affecting it; based upon a
mistaken assumption or misleading information or advice.
At anytime before the judgment of conviction becomes
final, the court may permit an improvident plea of guilty to
be withdrawn and be substituted by a plea of not guilty.
Effect of withdrawal- setting aside of the judgment of
conviction and the re-opening of the case for new trial.
Sec. 6. duty of court to inform the accused of his right
to counsel.
Before arraignment, the court shall inform the
accused of his right to counsel and ask him if he
desires to have one. Unless the accused is allowed to
defend himself in person or has employed counsel of
his choice, the court must assign a counsel de oficio
to defend him.
Sec. 7. appointment of counsel de oficio.
— The court, considering the gravity of the offense
and the difficulty of the questions that may arise, shall
appoint as counsel de oficio only such members of
the bar in good standing who, by reason of their
experience and ability, can competently defend the
accused. But in localities where such members of the
bar are not available, the court may appoint any
person, resident of the province and of good repute
for probity and ability, to defend the accused.
Counsel de oficio – counsel appointed by the court
[usually from the Public Attorney’s Office] [who are
members of the bar in good standing and are qualified], to
represent and defend the accused in the event he cannot
afford the services of a private lawyer called counsel de
parte.
Purpose – to secure the accused, who can’t afford a
counsel of his choice, effective representation by making it
imperative on the part of the court to consider in the
offense and the difficulty of the questions likely to arise in
the case.
Sec. 8. time for counsel de oficio to prepare for
arraignment
sec. 9. bill of particulars.
[Section 8.] — Whenever a counsel de oficio is
appointed by the court to defend the accused at the
arraignment, he shall be given a reasonable time to
consult with the accused as to his plea before
proceeding with the arraignment. (8)
[Section 9.] — The accused may, before arraignment,
move for a bill of particulars to enable him properly to
plead and to prepare for trial. The motion shall specify
the alleged defects of the complaint or information
and the details desired. (10a)
-Time must be reasonable depending upon the
circumstances.
- If averments in the information are vague that will
prevent the accused from making an intelligent plea, the
accused may withhold the arraignment first and move for a
bill of particulars as part of the accused’s right to be
informed of the nature and cause of accusation against
him/her. The motion shall specify/point out the defects and
details desired.
The purpose of the bill of particulars is to enable an
accused:
a. to know the theory of the govt’s case;
b. to prepare for his/her defense and to avoid surprise at
the trial; to plead his/her acquittal or conviction in bar of
another prosecution for the same offense; and
c. to compel the prosecution to observe certain limitations
in offering evidence.
Ex. Charge for theft: one (1) cellular phone and cash
money amounting to 300 pesos…
Property stolen is ambiguous… to fully apprise the
accused of its value, the markings on the phone and its
specific brand, he may move for bill of particulars.
2nd Ex. – when there is failure to allege time of commission
of the offense with sufficient definiteness
This may be filed at or before arraignment.
Before, reading of the information in the presence of the
accused is mandatory. Under the Rule on Continuous trial,
reading of the information can be dispensed with. Under
the new guidelines, waiver of the reading of the criminal
information is allowed, PROVIDED that the accused has
full understanding of the crime charged and with the
express consent of the accused and his/her lawyer.
But the court must explain the waiver to the accused in a
language known to him/her and must make sure that the
accused fully understand the consequences of the waiver
before allowing the nonreading of the information.
These matters must be duly recorded both in the minutes
of the hearing and in the certificate of arraignment.
*waiver of arraignment
Sec. 10. production or inspection of material evidence
in possession of prosecution.
— Upon motion of the accused showing good cause
and with notice to the parties, the court, in order to
prevent surprise, suppression, or alteration, may
order the prosecution to produce and permit the
inspection and copying or photographing of any
written statement given by the complainant and other
witnesses in any investigation of the offense
conducted by the prosecution or other investigating
officers, as well as any designated documents,
papers, books, accounts, letters, photographs,
objects or tangible things not otherwise privileged,
which constitute or contain evidence material to any
matter involved in the case and which are in the
possession or under the control of the prosecution,
police, or other law investigating agencies. (11a)
The right to modes of discovery, a seldom used process in
the Philippines.
Right of the accused to move for the production of material
evidence in the possession of the prosecution. It
authorizes the defense to inspect, copy or photograph any
evidence of the prosecution in its possession after
obtaining permission from the court.
-only those favorable to the accused, that, if suppressed,
would deprive the accused of fair trial.
Sec. 11. suspension of arraignment
— Upon motion by the proper party, the arraignment
shall be suspended in the following cases:
(a) The accused appears to be suffering from an
unsound mental condition which effective renders him
unable to fully understand the charge against him and
to plead intelligently thereto. In such case, the court
shall order his mental examination and, if necessary,
his confinement for such purpose;
(b) There exists a prejudicial question; and
(c) A petition for review of the resolution of the
prosecutor is pending at either the Department of
Justice, or the Office of the President; provided, that
the period of suspension shall not exceed sixty (60)
days counted from the filing of the petition with the
reviewing office. (12a)
These grounds are exclusive:
1. accused is suffering from unsound mental condition –
as he/she cannot intelligently plea. The duration of
suspension depends upon the report of the mental expert.
2. there exists a prejudicial question. PQ exists if a prior
issue whose resolution rests with another tribunal, but at
the same time is necessary in the resolution of another
issue in the same case.
3. There is a pending petition for review of the resolution
of the prosecutor before the DOJ or the Oof od the Pres.
The suspension will only last for 60 days, after which
arraignment shall proceed without waiting for the petition
to be resolved.
*if resolution of the SOJ is to withdraw information, its final
dismissal will still remain within the discretion of the court
under the principle of separation of powers.
Other pending incidents that results in the deferment
of arraignment:
a. a motion to quash
b. a motion for inhibition; ang
c. a motion for bill of particulars.
MOTION TO QUASH
Rule 117
Section 1. Time to move To Quash - At any time before
entering his plea, the accused may move to quash the
complaint or information.
What is a MTQ?
 It is the mode by which an accused assails,
before entering his/her plea, the validity of the
criminal complaint or the criminal information
filed against him/her for insufficiency or for
defect apparent on the face of the information.
 While this is not a responsive pleading being
addressed to the court, the State should be
required to comment or an opportunity thereof.
 Other facts, like matters of defense, which are
not in the information should not be considered.
Ex. [he was abroad when the incident happened]
...exceptions!
1. extinction of criminal liability;
2. prescription; and
3. former jeopardy.
In these cases, additional facts are allowed.
 GENERALLY, the accused may move to quash
the complaint or information at any time
BEFORE ENTERING HIS PLEA.
HOWEVER, a MTQ may be filed after plea if based on
these grounds:
1. failure to charge an offense;
2. Lack of jurisdiction over the offense charged;
3. extinction of the offense or penalty;
4. the accused would be placed in double jeopardy
 The right to file MTQ belongs only to the
accused. There is nothing in the rules w/c
authorizes the court or judge to motu propio
initiate a MTQ.
 Quashal of a criminal complaint or information is
not an acquittal; it is not disposition of the case;
and it does not bar a subsequent prosecution for
the same offense.
Section 2. Form and contents.- The motion to quash
shall be in writing, signed by the accused or his counsel.
And shall distinctly specify its factual and legal grounds.
The court shall consider no grounds other than those
stated in the motion, except lack of jurisdiction over the
offense charged.
Section 3. Grounds. The accused may move to quash
the complaint or information on any of the following
grounds:
(a) That the facts charged do not constitute an offense;
(b) That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over
the offense charged;
(c) That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over
the person of the accused;
(d)That the officer who filed the information had no
authority to do so;
(e) That it does not conform substantially to the subscribed
form;
(f) That more than one offense is charged except when a
single punishment for various offenses is prescribed by
law;
(g) That the criminal action or liability has been
extinguished;
(h) That it contains averments which, if true, would
constitute legal excuse or justification; and
(i) That the accused had been previously convicted or
acquitted of the offense charged, or the case against him
was dismissed or otherwise terminated without his
express consent.
 First ground - facts charged do not constitute an
offense-
The test is to determine whether or not all the elements of
the crime have been alleged in the criminal complaint or
information.
1. crime of estafa, it appeared in the allegations that the
contractor failed to finish building the house because of
the declaration of shutdown due to covid. There was no
deceit, hence, there is no estafa. The information may be
quashed…
2. crime of theft, the accused was a spouse…
3. malicious mischief….
Examples…
 The ground that the court has no jurisdiction
over the offense charged or the person of the
accused.
 Jurisdiction, as we all know, is the power and
authority of a court of justice to hear and decide
a case. If the court has no power to act on a
criminal case, it means that is has no jurisdiction
over the subject matter.
1. a graft case involving an accused with a salary
grade of 27 was filed with the RTC can be quashed
on the ground that RTC has no jurisdiction over the
subject matter. This should be filed before the SB
after an investigation conducted by the OMB.
  The crime of libel filed with the MTC is prone to
quashal as it is the RTC in the region where the
article was published which has jurisdiction.
Instances when there is unauthorized filing of
information….
1. Officer filing is irregularly appointed. It does not
necessarily invalidate the information if he may be
considered a de facto officer.
2. officer is disqualified from appointment to such position.
The information is invalid and the court does not acquire
jurisdiction to try the accused thereon.
3. Officer filed the information without the approval of the
head/chief prosecutor. (Rule 112, Sec.4)
- Prov/City Prosecutors, Chief State Prosecutor
-Ombudsman/his deputy
4. Information is filed without the complaint of the offended
party in cases involving private crimes.
 An infirmity in the information caused by the lack
of authority of the officer signing it cannot be
cured by silence, acquiescence, or even by
express consent. An invalid information is not an
information at all. No criminal proceeding may
prosper therefrom, thus, it is subject to quashal.
(Romualdez V. SB G.R. No.s. 143618-41, July
30, 2002)
 It is sufficient if the complaint of or information
states the essential elements which constitutes
the offense as required in the statute and it is
not necessary to follow the exact language of
the statute.
 If the defects are properly and timely raised, an
amendment of the complaint or information may
be ordered by the court under Rule 117, Sec.4)
 Criminal action or liability had been extinguished
Grounds for extinction of criminal liability (Art. 89,
RPC)
1.death of the convict, as to the personal penalties; and as
to the pecuniary penalties, liability therefor is extinguished
only when the death of the offender occurs before final
judgment;
2. by service of sentence;
3. by amnesty;
4. by absolute pardon;
5. by prescription of crime;
6. by prescription of penalty;
7. by the marriage of the offended woman, as provided in
Art. 344, RPC; and
8. by pardon or express consent of the offended party to
the accused in some private crimes in Art. 344, RPC.
 Where the last day of the prescriptive period for
filing an information is a Sunday or legal holiday,
the information can no longer be filed on the
next working day. The remedy is for the fiscal or
prosecution to file the information on the last
working day before the criminal offense
prescribes. (Yapdingco v. Buencamino, G.R. No.
L-28841, June 24, 1983)
.. That it contains averments, which if true, would
constitute a legal excuse or justification
Examples are the averments of facts constituting:
1. justifying circumstances;
2. exempting circumstances;
3. absolutory causes;
4. other causes
Ex. There is instigation – takes place when the peace
officer induces a person to commit a crime
Ex. Accused is merely 13 yrs old at the time of the
commission of the crime
Elements of double jeopardy:
1. the complaint or information is sufficient in form and
substance to sustain a conviction;
2. the court had jurisdiction;
3. the accused had been arraigned and had pleaded; and
4. the accused was convicted or acquitted or the case was
dismissed without his express consent
If one of the 4 elements is absent, double jeopardy will
not apply.
 More than one offense is charged in the
information-this means that there is duplicity of
offenses in the criminal information.
 Ex. Sec 5/11 of Ra 9165
 Exception if CR,SCC, etc…
Sec. 4. Amendment of Complaint or Information. If the
MTQ is based on an alleged defect of the complaint or
information which can be cured by amendment, the court
shall order that an amendment be made.
…continued Sec. 4…
 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 correct the defect by amendment, or the
complaint or information still suffers from the
same defect despite the amendment.
Section 5. Effect of sustaining the MTQ. If the MTQ is
sustained, the court may order that another complaint or
information be filed except as provided in Sec. 6 of this
Rule. If the order is made, the accused, if in custody, shall
not be discharged unless admitted to bail. If no order is
made, or if having been made, no new information is filed
within the time specified in the order or within such further
time as the court may allow for good cause, the accused,
if in custody, shall be discharged unless he is also in
custody for another charge.
SEC. 6. Order sustaining the MTQ not a bar to another
prosecution; exception
 An order sustaining the MTQ is not a bar to
another prosecution for the same offense unless
the motion was based on grounds specified in
Section 3(g) and (i) of this Rule.
SEC. 7. Former conviction or acquittal; double
jeopardy.- When an accused has been convicted or
acquitted, or the case against him dismissed or otherwise
terminated without his express consent by a court of
competent jurisdiction,
… upon a valid complaint or information or other formal
charge sufficient in form and substance to sustain a
conviction and after the accused had pleaded to the
charge,
…. the conviction or acquittal of the accused or the
dismissal of the case shall be a bar to another prosecution
for the offense charged, or for any attempt to commit the
same or
…frustration thereof, or for any offense which necessarily
includes or is necessarily included in the offense charged
in the former complaint or information.
 However, the conviction of the accused shall not
be a bar to another prosecution for an offense
which necessarily includes the offense charged
in the former complaint or information under any
of
…the following instances:
(a) The graver offense developed due to supervening facts
arising from the same act or omission constituting the
former charge;
(b) the facts constituting the graver charge became known
or were discovered only after a plea was entered in the
former complaint or information; or
(c) the plea of guilty to a lesser offense was made without
the consent of the prosecutor and of the offended party
except as provided in Section 1(f) of Rule 116.
In any of the foregoing cases, where the accused satisfies
or serves in whole or in part the judgment, he shall be
credited with the same in the event of conviction for the
graver offense.
SEC. 8. Provisional Dismissal. - A case shall not be
provisionally dismissed except with the express consent of
the accused and with notice to the offended party.
… The provisional dismissal of offenses
punishable by imprisonment not exceeding six (6) years or
a fine of any amount, or both, shall become permanent
one (1) year after the issuance of the order without the
case having been revived. With respect to offenses
punishable by imprisonment of more than six (6) years,
their provisional dismissal shall become permanent two (2)
years after issuance of the order without the case having
been revived.
 Provisional dismissal is similar to temporary
dismissal. The setting of the one-and two-year
period is known as the time bar rule.
NOTE that the rules do not specify the grounds for the
provisional dismissal of a case.
Under the Revised Guidelines for Continuous Trial in
Criminal cases, the revival of provisionally dismissed
cases shall conform to the following requisites:
1. the prosecution with the express conformity of the
accused, or the accused, moves for a provisional
dismissal of his/her case; or both the prosecution and the
accused move for its provisional dismissal;
2. the offended party is notified of the motion for a
provisional dismissal of the case;
3. the court issues an order granting the motion and
dismissing the case provisionally; and
4. the public prosecutor is served with a copy of the order
of provisional dismissal of the case.
SEC. 9. Failure to move to quash or to allege any
ground therefor. The failure of the accused to assert any
ground of a MTQ before he pleads to the complaint or
information, either because he did not file a MTQ or failed
to allege the same in said motion, shall be deemed a
waiver of any objections except those based on the
grounds provided for in paragraphs (a), (b), (g), and (i) of
Section 3 of this Rule.
PRE TRIAL
Rule 118
SECTION 1. Pre-trial; mandatory in criminal cases. - In
all criminal cases, cognizable by the Sandiganbayan,
Regional Trial Court, Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal
Trial Court in Cities, Municipal Trial Court and Municipal
Circuit Trial Court, the court shall, after arraignment and
within thirty (30) days from the date the court acquires
jurisdiction over the person of the accused, unless a
shorter period is provided for by the special laws or
circulars of the Supreme Court, order … a pre-trial
conference to consider the following:
(a) plea bargaining;
(b) stipulation of facts;
(c) marking for identification of evidence of the parties;
(d) waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence;
(e) modification of the order of trial if the accused admits
the charge but interposes a lawful defense; and
(f) such matter as will promote a fair and expeditious trial
of the criminal and civil aspects of the case (Sections 2
and 3, Circular 38-98)
The purposes of pre trial:
1. to simplify the issues of the case;
2. To shape up the testimonies and documents to be
presented at trial;
3. To generally clear and organize the desk of the parties
for the trial
Main objective of pre trial
 To achieve an expeditious resolution of the case.
 For this reason, pre-trial was mandated to be
mandatory in criminal cases.
 PERIOD OF PRE-TRIAL
GENERAL RULE: The court shall order a pre trial
conference after arraignment and within 30 days from the
date the court acquires jurisdiction over the person of the
accused.
EXCEPTION: when special laws of SC circulars provides
for a shorter period[Rule on Continuous Trial]
Who must be present during pre-trial
 The counsel of accused and the prosecutor should
be present during pre-trial. The accused is not
required to attend unless ordered by the court, and is
merely required to sign the pre-trial order specifying
the written agreements arrived at during the pre-trial
conference, if he agrees to the contents of such.
 Complainant is also not required to appear but should
the accused plead guilty to a lesser offense,
complainant shall be deemed to have waived his/her
right to oppose the accused’s plea of guilt
Concept of stipulation of facts
 Stipulation of facts is allowed in criminal cases,
except circumstances that qualify a crime and
increases its penalty to death. The court should
actively participate when counsels make proposals
for stipulation.
 During pre-trial/preliminary conference, the court
shall require the parties to enter into stipulations on
the subject of both direct ang cross examinations of
witnesses who have no personal knowledge of the
material facts constituting the crimes, such as
forensic chemists, medico-legal officers,
investigators, auditors, accountants, engineers,
 Custodians, expert witnesses, who will testify on the
authenticity, due execution, and the contents of public
documents and reports; corroborative witnesses; and
those who will testify on the civil liability. The rule is,
without prejudice to allowing additional direct and
cross examination questions
Marking for identification of evidence
 The documentary evidence of the prosecution and
the accused shall be marked. No evidence may be
presented and offered during the trial other than
those identified and marked during the pre-trial,
except when allowed by the court for good cause
shown. But the court must strictly comply with the
guidelines under A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC
SEC. 2. Pre-trial agreement
 All agreements or admissions 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 the matters referred to in
Section 1 of this Rule shall be approved by the court.
SECTION 3. NON APPEARANCE AT PRE-TRIAL
CONFERENCE
 If the counsel for the accused or the prosecutor does
not appear at the pre-trial conference and does not
offer an acceptable excuse for his lack of
cooperation, the court may impose proper sanctions
or penalties.
SECTION 4. Pre-trial order
 After the pre-trial conference, the court shall issue an
order reciting the actions taken, the facts stipulated,
and 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.
 10 days after the termination of the pre-trial, the
judge must issue a pre-trial order containing the
actions taken; facts stipulated; evidence marked;
admissions made; number and name of witnesses to
be presented and schedule of trial
 The pre-trial order binds the parties, limits the trial to
those matters not disposed of, and controls the
course of the action during the trial, unless modified
by the court to prevent injustice.
 The pre-trial order shall be signed by the parties and
counsels and furnished the parties
Importance of the Judicial Affidavit Rule in Criminal
Actions
 This rule shall apply to all criminal actions:
1. Where the maximum of the imposable penalties does
not exceed 6 years;
2. Where the accused agrees to the use of judicial
affidavits, irrespective of the penalty involved; or
3. 3. With respect to the civil aspect of the actions,
whatever the penalties involved are.
B. The prosecution shall submit the JAs of its witnesses
not later than 5 days before the trial, serving copies to the
accused. The documentary or object evidence marked
shall be attached to the JAs. No further JAs, documentary
or object evidence shall be admitted at the trial.
 If the accused desires to be heard on his/her defense
after receipt of the JAs of the prosecution, he/she
shall have the option to submit his/her JA as well as
those of his/her witnesses to court w/n 10 days from
receipt of the Jas of the prosecution and serve a copy
thereof to the public and private prosecutors,
together with the marked documentary and object
evidence. These affidavits shall serve as direct
testimonies of the accused and the defense
witnesses when they testify.
POINTS TO REMEMBER
 Arraignment and pre-trial are conducted on the same
day.
 Pre-trial is mandatory. It cannot be skipped.
 After pre-trial, the court does not immediately
proceed to trial if the crime charged is subject to
mediation by the Philippine Mediation Center.
 Plea bargaining can also be had during pre-trial not
only during arraignment.
 Stipulation of facts are agreed facts that no longer
require to be proven in court.
 Marking of evidence is done in open court. But if the
evidence is voluminous or there are many pieces of
evidence to be marked, the order may order a
commissioner’s hearing for the marking of evidence
before the branch clerk of court on a separate
scheduled date.
 If the accused pleaded self-defense, it is during pre-
trial that parties may agree for a reverse trial.
 Reverse trial is an instance where the accused
presents evidence first and followed by the
prosecution
 Possible settlement of the case is another matter
discussed during pre-trial.
 Naming all witnesses during pre-trial is also
conducted.
 All matters discussed and agreed during pre-trial are
written in the pre-trial order.
 Both parties are required to disclose all their
witnesses and the pieces of evidence to avoid
surprises during trial.
 Pre-trial is an effective tool in expediting the
resolution of cases.
 PT agreement is different from PTO. Pre trial
agreement are facts agreed upon by the parties while
pre-trial order is an order issued by the court in
confirming among others, the pre-trial agreement.
TRIAL
RULE 119
Section 1. Time to prepare for trial. — After a plea of not
guilty is entered, the accused shall have at least fifteen
(15) days to prepare for trial. The trial shall commence
within thirty (30) days from receipt of the pre-trial order.
(sec. 6, cir. 38-98)
Prescribed periods
1. Between acquisition of jurisdiction over the person of
the accused to arraignment and pre-trial
a. Detained accused: w/n 10 days
b. Non-detained accused: w/n 30 days
2. Between receipt of pre-trial order to trial: w/n 30 days
3. Periods of delay excluded from the computation
Section 2. Continuous trial until
terminated; postponements. — Trial once commenced
shall continue from day to day as far as practicable until
terminated. It may be postponed for a reasonable period
of time for good cause. (2a)
The court shall, after consultation with the
prosecutor and defense counsel, set the case for
continuous trial on a weekly or other short-term trial
calendar at the earliest possible time so as to ensure
speedy trial. In no case shall the entire trial period exceed
one hundred eighty (180) days from the first day of trial,
except as otherwise authorized by the Supreme Court.
(sec. 8, cir. 38-98).
The time limitations provided under this section
and the preceding section shall not apply where special
laws or circulars of the Supreme Court provide for a
shorter period of trial. (n)
Limitation on the trial period:
 It shall in no case exceed 180 days from the first
day of the trial, except as otherwise provided by
the SC. But, said limitation shall not apply where
special laws or circular of the SC provide for a
shorter period of time.
Cases when arraignment is made w/n a shorter
period:
1. Rules on Summary Procedure – must be arraigned
and tried immediately.
2. R.A. 4908 – where the offended party is about to depart
from the Phils. w/o definite date of return- arraignment w/o
delay;
3. R.A. 7610 involving child abuse cases – must be
tried w/n 3 days from arraignment;
4. R.A. 9165 on Dangerous Drugs – must be tried w/ 60
days and decision w/n 15 days from submission.
 Intellectual Property Code cases – trial w/n 60
days and decision/n 30 days from submission of
the case.
 Heinous crime cases – trial w/n 60 days and
decision w/n 30 days from submission.
Effect of absence of witnesses…
 Any period of delay resulting from the absence
or unavailability of an essential witness shall be
excluded in computing the time w/n w/c trial
must commence.
 For the period to be excluded, the witness
should be absent or unavailable and the witness
must be essential.
 A Motion to Bail is a remedy to secure
appearance of a material witness w/c either
party may file with proof/under oath that a
material witness will testify when required.
 When the court is satisfied of such, it may order
the witness to post bail. If the material witness
refuses to post bail, the court shall commit
him/her to prison until he/she complies or is
legally discharged after his/her testimony has
been taken.
Denial of the right to speedy trial
 Dismissal on the ground of violation of the right
to speedy trial has an effect similar to that of
acquittal. For it to be effected, a motion to
dismiss on the ground of denial of his/her right
to speedy trial should be made. The dismissal
shall be subject to the rules on double jeopardy.
The accused has the burden of proving the
ground of denial of right to speedy trial for the
motion.
  The prosecution has the burden of proving the
exclusion of time from the computation.
Waiver of the right to speedy trial
 Failure of the accused to move for dismissal
prior to trial shall constitute a waiver of the right
to dismiss on the ground of denial of his/her
right to speedy trial.
 In People v. Jardin, there is no violation of the
right where the delay is imputable to the
accused. When the accused resorts to tactical
maneuvers, he/she waives his/her right to
speedy trial.
Section 3. Exclusions. — The following periods of delay
shall be excluded in computing the time within which trial
must commence:
(a) Any period of delay resulting from other proceedings
concerning the accused, including but not limited to the
following:
(1) Delay resulting from an examination of the
physical and mental condition of the accused;
(2) Delay resulting from proceedings with
respect to other criminal charges against the accused;
(3) Delay resulting from extraordinary remedies
against interlocutory orders;
(4) Delay resulting from pre-trial proceedings;
provided, that the delay does not exceed thirty (30) days;
(5) Delay resulting from orders of inhibition, or
proceedings relating to change of venue of cases or
transfer from other courts;
(6) Delay resulting from a finding of the
existence of a prejudicial question; and
(7) Delay reasonably attributable to any period,
not exceed thirty (30) days, during which any proceeding
which any proceeding concerning the accused is actually
under advisement.
(b) Any period of delay resulting from the absence or
unavailability of an essential witness.
For purposes of this subparagraph, an essential witness
shall be considered absent when his whereabouts are
unknown or his whereabouts cannot be determined by due
diligence. He shall be considered unavailable whenever
his whereabouts are known but his presence for trial
cannot be obtained by due diligence.
(c) Any period of delay resulting from the mental
incompetence or physical inability of the accused to stand
trial.
(d) If the information is dismissed upon motion of the
prosecution and thereafter a charge is filed against the
accused for the same offense, any period of delay from
the date the charge was dismissed to the date the time
limitation would commence to run as to the subsequent
charge had there been no previous charge.
(e) A reasonable period of delay when the accused is
joined for trial with a co-accused over whom the court has
not acquired jurisdiction, or, as to whom the time for trial
has not run and no motion for separate trial has been
granted.
(f) Any period of delay resulting from a continuance
granted by any court motu proprio, or on motion of either
the accused or his counsel, or the prosecution, if the court
granted the continuance on the basis of its findings set
forth in the order that the ends of justice served by taking
such action outweigh the best interest of the public and
the accused in a speedy trial. (sec. 9, cir. 38-98)
Section 4. Factors for granting continuance. — The
following factors, among others, shall be considered by a
court in determining whether to grant a continuance under
section 3(f) of this Rule.
(a) Whether or not the failure to grant a
continuance in the proceeding would likely make a
continuation of such proceeding impossible or result in a
miscarriage of justice; and
(b) Whether or not the case taken as a whole is
so novel, unusual and complex, due to the number of
accused or the nature of the prosecution, or that it is
unreasonable to expect adequate preparation within the
periods of time established therein.
In addition, no continuance under section 3(f) of this Rule
shall be granted because of congestion of the court's
calendar or lack of diligent preparation or failure to obtain
available witnesses on the part of the prosecutor. (sec. 10,
cir. 38-98)
 Granting of continuance is not a matter of right
but of court’s sound discretion.
 The grant of continuance must be on grounds
specified in in Section 4.
Section 5. Time limit following an order for new trial.
— If the accused is to be tried again pursuant to an order
for a new trial, the trial shall commence within thirty (30)
days from notice of the order, provided that if the period
becomes impractical due to unavailability of witnesses and
other factors, the court may extend it but not to exceed
one hundred eighty (180) days from notice of said order
for a new trial. (sec. 11, cir. 38-98)
Section 6. Extended time limit. — Notwithstanding the
provisions of section 1(g), Rule 116 and the preceding
section 1, for the first twelve-calendar-month period
following its effectivity on September 15, 1998, the time
limit with respect to the period from arraignment to trial
imposed by said provision shall be one hundred eighty
(180) days. For the second twelve-month period, the limit
shall be one hundred twenty (120) days, and for the third
twelve-month period, the time limit shall be eighty (80)
days. (sec. 7, cir. 38-98)
Section 7. Public attorney's duties where accused is
imprisoned. — If the public attorney assigned to defend a
person charged with a crime knows that the latter is
preventively detained, either because he is charged with a
bailable crime but has no means to post bail, or, is
charged with a non-bailable crime, or, is serving a term of
imprisonment in any penal institution, it shall be his duty to
do the following:
(a) Shall promptly undertake to obtain the presence of the
prisoner for trial or cause a notice to be served on the
person having custody of the prisoner requiring such
person to so advise the prisoner of his right to demand
trial.
(b) Upon receipt of that notice, the custodian of the
prisoner shall promptly advise the prisoner of the charge
and of his right to demand trial. If at anytime thereafter the
prisoner informs his custodian that he demands such trial,
the latter shall cause notice to that effect to sent promptly
to the public attorney.
(c) Upon receipt of such notice, the public attorney shall
promptly seek to obtain the presence of the prisoner for
trial.
(d) When the custodian of the prisoner receives from the
public attorney a properly supported request for the
availability of the prisoner for purposes of trial, the prisoner
shall be made available accordingly. (sec. 12, cir. 38-98)
Section 8. Sanctions. — In any case in which private
counsel for the accused, the public attorney, or the
prosecutor.
(a) Knowingly allows the case to be set for trial without
disclosing that a necessary witness would be unavailable
for trial;
(b) Files a motion solely for delay which he knows is totally
frivolous and without merit;
(c) Makes a statement for the purpose of obtaining
continuance which he knows to be false and which is
material to the granting of a continuance; or
(d) Willfully fails to proceed to trial without justification
consistent with the provisions hereof, the court may punish
such counsel, attorney, or prosecution, as follows:
(1) By imposing on a counsel privately retained
in connection with the defense of an accused, a fine not
exceeding twenty thousand pesos (P20,000.00);
(2) By imposing on any appointed counsel de
oficio, public attorney, or prosecutor a fine not exceeding
five thousand pesos (P5,000.00); and
(3) By denying any defense counsel or
prosecutor the right to practice before the court trying the
case for a period not exceeding thirty (30) days. The
punishment provided for by this section shall be without
prejudice to any appropriate criminal action or other
sanction authorized under these rules. (sec. 13, cir. 38-98)
Section 9. 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 Section 1(g), Rule
116 and Section 1, as extended by Section 6 of this rule,
the information may be dismissed on motion of the
accused on the ground of denial of his right of speedy trial.
The accused shall have the burden of proving the motion
but the prosecution shall have the burden of going forward
with the evidence to establish the exclusion of time under
section 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, cir. 38-98)
 Section 9 refers to the remedy of the accused
in case he is not brought to trial w/n the time
limits. – to file motion to dismiss on the ground
of denial of his right to speedy trial. Failure to
move for dismissal shall constitute as waiver of
of his right to dismiss under this Section.
Section 10. Law on speedy trial not a bar to provision
on speedy trial in the Constitution. — No provision of
law on speedy trial and no rule implementing the same
shall be interpreted as a bar to any charge of denial of the
right to speedy trial guaranteed by section 14(2), article III,
of the 1987 Constitution. (sec. 15, cir. 38-98)
Section 11. 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 a provisional remedy in the case.
(c) The prosecution and the defense may, in that
order, present rebuttal and sur-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
written 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. (3a)
GENERALLY, the order in the presentation of evidence
must be followed. The accused may not be required to
present his evidence first before the prosecution adduces
its own proof.
EXCEPTION: when a reverse trial is ordered w/o the
objection of the accused and such procedure did not
prejudice his substantial rights.
 When the order of the trial set forth under this
section was not followed by the court to the
extent of denying the prosecution an opportunity
to present its evidence, the judgment is null and
void.
 When the accused pleads guilty to the crime
charged but interposes a lawful defense, the
trial court may allow the accused to present his
defense first and thereafter give the prosecution
the opportunity to present its rebuttal evidence.
Section 12. Application for examination of witness for
accused before trial. — When the accused has been
held to answer for an offense, he may, upon motion with
notice to the other parties, have witnesses conditionally
examined in his behalf. The motion shall state: (a) the
name and residence of the witness; (b) the substance of
his testimony; and (c) that the witness is sick or infirm as
to afford reasonable ground for believing that he will not
be able to attend the trial, or resides more than one
hundred (100) kilometers from the place of trial and has no
means to attend the same, or that other similar
circumstances exist that would make him unavailable or
prevent him from attending the trial. The motion shall be
supported by an affidavit of the accused and such other
evidence as the court may require. (4a)
Section 13. Examination of defense witness; how
made. — If the court is satisfied that the examination of a
witness for the accused is necessary, an order will be
made directing that the witness be examined at a specified
date, time and place and that a copy of the order be
served on the prosecutor at least three (3) days before the
scheduled examination. The examination shall be taken
before a judge, or, if not practicable, a member of the Bar
in good standing so designated by the judge in the order,
or if the order be made by a court of superior jurisdiction,
before an inferior court to be designated therein. The
examination shall proceed notwithstanding the absence of
the prosecutor provided he was duly notified of the
hearing. A written record of the testimony shall be taken.
(5a)
Section 14. Bail to secure appearance of material
witness. — When the court is satisfied, upon proof or
oath, that a material witness will not testify when required,
it may, upon motion of either party, order the witness to
post bail in such sum as may be deemed proper. Upon
refusal to post bail, the court shall commit him to prison
until he complies or is legally discharged after his
testimony has been taken. (6a)
Section 15. Examination of witness for the
prosecution. — When it satisfactorily appears that a
witness for the prosecution is too sick or infirm to appear
at the trial as directed by the order of the court, or has to
leave the Philippines with no definite date of returning, he
may forthwith be conditionally examined before the court
where the case is pending. Such examination, in the
presence of the accused, or in his absence after
reasonable notice to attend the examination has been
served on him, shall be conducted in the same manner as
an examination at the trial. Failure or refusal of the
accused to attend the examination after notice shall be
considered a waiver. The statement taken may be
admitted in behalf of or against the accused. (7a)
Section 16. Trial of several accused. — When two or
more accused are jointly charged with any 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. (8a)
Section 17. Discharge of accused to be state witness.
— When two or more persons are jointly charged with the
commission of any offense, upon motion of the
prosecution before resting its case, the court may direct
one or more of the accused to be discharged with their
consent so that they may be witnesses for the state when,
after requiring the prosecution to present evidence and the
sworn statement of each proposed state witness at a
hearing in support of the discharge, the court is satisfied
that:
(a) There is absolute necessity for the testimony
of the accused whose discharge is requested;
(b) The is no other direct evidence available for
the proper prosecution of the offense committed, except
the testimony of said accused;
Section 18. Discharge of accused operates as
acquittal. — The order indicated in 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 the discharge. (10a)
(c) The testimony of said accused can be
substantially corroborated in its material points;
(d) Said accused does not appear to be the
most guilty; and
(e) Said accused has not at any time been
convicted of any offense involving moral turpitude.
Evidence adduced in support of the discharge shall
automatically form part of the trial. If the court denies the
motion for discharge of the accused as state witness, his
sworn statement shall be inadmissible in evidence. (9a)
 A state witness is one or two or more persons
jointly charged with the commission of a crime
but who is discharged with his/her consent as
such accused so that he/she may be a witness
for the State.
Requirements before an accused may be discharged
as State witness:
1. There is absolute necessity for the testimony of the
accused whose discharge is requested. Absolute
necessity means that he alone has personal knowledge of
the crime and not when his testimony would simply
corroborate or strengthen the evidence for the
prosecution.
2. No other direct evidence for the prosecution;
3. Testimony can be substantially corroborated in its
material points;
4. Among the accused, he does not appear to be the most
guilty; but need not be the least guilty
5. Accused has never been convicted of an offense
involving moral turpitude; and
6. The application for discharge is filed by the prosecution
before the defense has offered its evidence.
 If an accused is discharged as state witness,
he/she will be acquitted and this will result to
double jeopardy for the same offense, provided
that the evidence adduced in support of the
discharge shall automatically form part of the
trial. But if the court denies the motion to
discharge the accused as state witness, his/her
sworn statement shall be inadmissible as
evidence.
However, acquittal will not work:
-if accused fails or refuses to testify against his/her co-
accused as basis for the discharge;
- failure to testify refers exclusively to accused’s will or
fault; or
- If accused later retracts and fails to keep his promise to
testify
Section 19. 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 proper offense and the accused cannot be
convicted of the offense charged or any other offense
necessarily included therein, the accused shall not be
discharged if there appears 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. (11a)
 This is predicated on the fact that an accused
has the right to be informed of the nature and
cause of the accusation against him; otherwise,
there is denial of that right.
Section 20. Appointment of acting prosecutor. —
When a prosecutor, his assistant or deputy is disqualified
to act due to any of the grounds stated in section 1 of Rule
137 or for any other reasons, the judge or the prosecutor
shall communicate with the Secretary of Justice in order
that the latter may appoint an acting prosecutor. (12a)
Section 21. 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. (13a)
Section 22. 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. (14a)
Generally, the accused has the right to a public trial and
under ordinary circumstances, the court may not close the
door of the courtroom to the general public.
EXCEPTION: where the evidence to be produced during
trial is of such character as to be offensive to decency or
public moral, the court may motu propio exclude the public
from the courtroom.
 The court may, on motion of the accused for
valid reasons, exclude the public from trial
except counsels and court personnel.
 The object of consolidation of trials of related
cases is to avoid multiplicity of suits, guard
against oppression or abuse, prevent delay,
clear congested dockets, simplify the work of
the trial court, and save unnecessary cost and
expenses.
Section 23. Demurrer to evidence. — After the
prosecution rests its case, the court may dismiss the
action on the ground of insufficiency of evidence (1) on its
own initiative after giving the prosecution the opportunity
to be heard or (2) upon demurrer to evidence filed by the
accused with or without leave of court.
 If the court denies the demurrer to evidence filed
with leave of court, the accused may adduce
evidence in his defense. When the demurrer to
evidence is filed without leave of court, the
accused waives the right to present evidence
and submits the case for judgment on the basis
of the evidence for the prosecution. (15a)
The motion for leave of court to file demurrer to evidence
shall specifically state its grounds and shall be filed within
a non-extendible period of five (5) days after the
prosecution rests its case. The prosecution may oppose
the motion within a non-extendible period of five (5) days
from its receipt.
If leave of court is granted, the accused shall file the
demurrer to evidence within a non-extendible period of ten
(10) days from notice. The prosecution may oppose the
demurrer to evidence within a similar period from its
receipt.
The order denying the motion for leave of court to file
demurrer to evidence or the demurrer itself shall not be
reviewable by appeal or by certiorari before judgment. (n)
 A demurrer to evidence is a motion to dismiss
due to the insufficiency of the evidence
presented by the prosecution to overturn the
presumption of innocence in favor of the
accused.
 A criminal action may be dismissed on the
grounds of insufficiency of evidence as initiated
by the court motu propio, after giving the
prosecution the opportunity to be heard or upon
demurrer to evidence filed by the accused.
HOW DEMURRER IS MADE
1. With leave of court – if the motion is denied, he can
still present evidence. The motion for leave of court must
be filed within a non-extendible period of 5 days after the
prosecution rests its case.
If leave is granted, the accused shall file the demurrer to
evidence w/n a non-extendible period of 10 days from
notice of the grant of leave of court.
The prosecution may oppose the demurrer to evidence
w/n a non-extendible period of 10 days from receipt of the
demurrer.
2. W/o leave of court – if the motion is denied, the
accused loses the right to present evidence and the case
will be deemed submitted for decision.
 In the event that the accused insists on filing the
demurrer to evidence despite denial of the
motion for leave, the previously scheduled dates
for the accused to present evidence shall be
cancelled.
 On the test of sufficiency of prosecution’s
evidence, it was stated that the prosecution
must prove beyond reasonable doubt the:
(a) Commission of the crime; and
(b) The precise degree of participation of the
accused.
Section 24. Reopening. — At any time before finality of
the judgment of conviction, the judge may, motu proprio or
upon motion, with hearing in either case, reopen the
proceedings to avoid a miscarriage of justice. The
proceedings shall be terminated within thirty (30) days
from the order grating it. (n)
POINTS TO PONDER
 After pre-trial or after unsuccessful mediation for
mediatable offenses, the court will give the
accused 15 days to prepare for trial. Trial shall
be held w/n 30 days from receipt of the pre-trial
order.
 The court must terminate the trial stage w/n 180
days from its commencement. Under the
Revised Guidelines, one witness must be
presented in one day. This means that the entire
testimony of the said witness will be terminated
in one day.
  When we say terminate in one day, the witness
must have undergone the entire examination
process (direct, cross, redirect, if any, re-cross,
if any).
 There are only 2 reasons for postponing a court
hearing. One is force majeure and another is
physical inability of the witness to appear and
testify. Postponement fees must be paid.
 Schedule of trial dates agreed upon during pre-
trial shall not be adjusted because of
postponement.
 Postponements are as much as possible, be
avoided.
 A material witness may be required to post bail
to ensure appearance.
 It is possible that a witness may be examined in
a remote place, especially if the witness is sick
or infirm or is physically far from the court. This
is so especially that video conferencing is
allowed.
 If there are several accused that are charged,
the court may conduct either a separate trial or
a joint trial.
 An accused can be discharged and be a state
witness.
 If an accused is discharged to be a state
witness and has complied with the
requirements, the accused turned witness is
acquitted.
 The court has the right to order the exclusion of
the public during hearings. This usually happens
in a criminal case involving minor victims.
Chamber hearings may also be conducted.
 Consolidation is different from duplicity of
offenses.
 The only ground for demurrer to evidence is
insufficiency of evidence. This means that the
prosecution failed to discharge its burden in
proving the crime against the accused. Allowing
demurrer to evidence is consistent with the
presumption of innocence.
 The court has the power to reopen the case in
the interest of substantial justice.
 Purpose of trial is to receive and identify all
types of evidence: testimonial evidence,
documentary evidence, and object evidence.
RULE 122
APPEALS
Section 1. New trial or reconsideration. – At any time
before a judgment of conviction becomes final, the court
may, on motion of the accused or at its own instance but
with the consent of the accused, grant a new trial or
reconsideration.
Sec. 2. Grounds for a new trial. – The court shall grant a
new trial on any of the following grounds:
(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.
Sec. 3. Ground for reconsideration. – The court shall
grant reconsideration on the ground of errors of law or fact
in the judgment, which requires no further proceedings.
Sec. 4. Form of motion and notice to the prosecutor. –
The motion for new trial or reconsideration shall be in
writing and shall state the grounds on which it is based. If
based on a newly-discovered evidence, the motion must
be supported by affidavits of witnesses by whom such
evidence is expected to be given or by duly authenticated
copies of documents which are proposed to be introduced
in evidence. Notice of the motion for new trial or
reconsideration shall be given to the prosecutor.
Sec. 5. Hearing on motion. – Where a motion for new
trial calls for resolution of any question of fact, the court
may hear evidence thereon by affidavits or otherwise.
Sec. 6. Effects of granting a new trial or
reconsideration. – The effects of granting a new trial or
reconsideration are the following:
(a) When a new trial is granted on the ground of errors of
law or irregularities committed during the trial, all the
proceedings and evidence affected thereby shall be set
aside and taken anew. The court may, in the interest of
justice, allow the introduction of additional evidence.
(b) When a new trial is granted on the ground of newly-
discovered evidence, the evidence already adduced shall
stand and the newly-discovered and such other evidence
as the court may, in the interest of justice, allow to be
introduced shall be taken and considered together with the
evidence already in the record.
(c) In all cases, when the court grants new trial or
reconsideration, the original judgment shall be set aside or
vacated and a new judgment rendered accordingly.
Grounds for new trial
a. Errors of law or irregularities prejudicial to the
substantial rights of the accused have been committed
during the trial. Irregularities must be with such
seriousness as to affect prejudicially the substantial rights
of the accused.
b. New and material evidence had 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.
REQUISITES BEFORE A NEW TRIAL MAY BE
GRANTED ON THE GROUND OF NEWLY
DISCOVERED EVIDENCE.
Tejada v. People,
a. The evidence was discovered after the trial;
b. The evidence could not have been discovered and
produced at the trial even with the exercise of
reasonable diligence;
c. The evidence is material, not merely
cumulative/corroborative/impeaching; and
d. The evidence is of such weight that it would probably
change the judgment if admitted
Grounds for reconsideration
The court shall grant on the ground of errors of law or fact
in the judgment, which require no further proceedings.
FORM OF MR/MNT
a. In writing;
b. Must state the grounds on which it is based
c. If based on newly discovered evidence, it must be
supported by (1) the affidavits of the witnesses by
whom such evidence is expected to be given, or (2)
duly authenticated copies of documents
[Notice of motion shall be given to the prosecutor.]
EFFECTS OF GRANTING A NEW TRIAL OR
RECONSIDERATION
a. The original judgment is set aside or vacated
b. A new judgment is rendered accordingly.
NOTA BENE: A motion for reconsideration is a prohibited
pleading in cases covered by the Rule on Summary
Procedure.
Criminal Cases covered by the Rule on Summary
Procedure [Section 1, (B) of the Revised RSP]
1. Violations of traffic laws, rules and regulations;
2. Violations of the rental law;
3. Violations of municipal or city ordinances;
4. All other criminal cases where the penalty prescribed
by law for the offense charged is imprisonment not
exceeding 6 months, or a fine not exceeding 1000
pesos, or both, irrespective of other imposable
penalties, accessory or otherwise, or of the civil
liability arising therefrom. In RIR to Damage to
Property through criminal negligence, this Rule shall
govern where the imposable fine does not exceed
10,000 pesos.
[penalty is arresto mayor]
NEYPES DOCTRINE
● This doctrine allows a fresh period of 15 days within
which to file the notice of appeal, counted from the
receipt of the order denying a MNT or MR.
● Neypes v. Court of Appeals, declared that:
“Henceforth, this ‘fresh period rule’ shall apply to:
- Rule 40 [appeal from MTC to RTC];
- Rule 42 [petitions for review from the RTC to
the Court of Appeals]
- Rule 43 [appeal from quasi-judicial agencies to
the Court of Appeals]
- Rule 45 [ appeal by certiorari to the Supreme
Court]
POINTS TO PONDER
There are 2 grounds for new trial:
1. Newly discovered evidence;
2. Errors of law or irregularities prejudicial to the
substantial rights of the accused.
Newly discovered evidence is not the same as forgotten
evidence.
Example of irregularities is if the accused without fault was
not given a chance to testify in court.
Grounds for reconsideration are broader as it includes
“any” error in the application of law or in the appreciation
of facts.
● Appeal only pertains to conviction because there is
already double jeopardy in acquittal. The exception is
in cases of a special civil action on certiorari under
Rule 65.
There are 2 modes of appeal:
1. Notice of appeal
2. Petition for review
Appeal must be made within fifteen (15) days from
promulgation of judgment or from notice of final order
appealed. If the accused filed a motion for reconsideration
and was denied, the accused has a fresh period of fifteen
(15) days to perfect an appeal.
Notice of appeal is filed in the court which rendered the
judgment of conviction or court that issued the final order
while a petition of review is filed in the higher court with
notice to the lower court which rendered the assailed
judgment.
Withdrawal of the appeal is allowed before the complete
records are forwarded to the appeal court. But in the case
of the Regional Trial Court, the withdrawal may still be
made at its discretion.
RULE 130
TESTIMONIALEVIDENCE
SECTION 20 Witnesses; their qualifications. - Except
as provided in the next succeeding section, all persons
who can perceive, and perceiving, can make their
perception known to others, may be witnesses.
Religious or political belief, interest in the outcome of the
case, or conviction of a crime unless otherwise provided
by law, shall not be ground for disqualification.
SECTION 21 Disqualification by reason of mental
incapacity or immaturity. – The following persons cannot
be witnesses:
 (a) Those whose mental condition, at the time of
their production for examination, is such that
they are incapable of intelligently making known
their perception to others;
(b) Children whose mental maturity is such as to
render them incapable of perceiving the facts
respecting which they are examined and of
relating them truthfully.
SECTION 22 Disqualification by reason of marriage. –
During their marriage, neither the husband nor the wife
may testify for or against the other without the consent of
the affected spouse, except in a civil case by one against
the other, or in a criminal case for a crime committed by
one against the other or the latter’s direct descendants or
ascendants.
SECTION 25 Parental and filial privilege. – No person
may be compelled to testify against his parents, other
direct ascendants, children or other direct descendants.
OPINION RULE
SECTION 48 General rule. – The opinion of witness is not
admissible, except as indicated in the following questions.
SECTION 49 Opinion of expert witness. – The opinion
of witness on a matter requiring special knowledge, skill,
experience, or training which he was shown to possess
may be received in evidence.
SECTION 50 Opinion of ordinary witness. – The opinion
of a witness for which proper bases is given, may be
received in evidence regarding –

SECTION 23 Disqualification by reason of death or (a) The identity of a person about whom he has
insanity of adverse party. – Parties or assignor of adequate knowledge;
parties to a case, or persons to a case, or persons in
(b) A handwriting with which he has sufficient familiarity;
whose behalf a case is prosecuted, against an executor or
and
administrator or other representative of a deceased
person, or against a person of unsound mind, upon a (c) The mental sanity of a person with whom he is
claim or demand against the estate of the deceased sufficiently acquainted
person or against such a person of unsound mind, cannot
testify as to any matter of fact occurring before death of The witness may also testify on his impressions of the
such deceased person or before such person became of emotion, behavior, condition or appearance of a person.
unsound mind.

SECTION 24 Disqualification by reason of privileged

communication. – The following persons cannot testify
as to matters learned in confidence in the following cases:
RULE 132
(a) The husband or wife, during or after the marriage,
cannot be examined without the consent of the other PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE
as to any communication received in confidence by
SECTION 1 Examination to be done in open court. –
one from the other during the marriage except in a
The examination of witnesses presented in a trial or
civil case by one against another, or in a criminal
hearing shall be done in open court, and under oath or
case for a crime committed by one against the other
affirmation. Unless the witness is incapacitated to speak,
or the latter’s direct descendants or ascendants;
or the questions calls for a different mode of answer, the
(b) An attorney cannot, without the consent of his client, answers of the witness shall be given orally.
be examined as to any communication made by the client
SECTION 2 Proceedings to be recorded. – The entire
to him, or his advice given thereon in the course of, or with
proceedings of a trial or hearing, including the questions
a view to, professional employment, nor can an attorney’s
propounded to a witness and his answers thereto, the
secretary, stenographer, or clerk be examined, without the
statements made by the judge or any of the parties,
consent of the client and his employer, concerning any fact
counsel, or witnesses with reference to the case, shall be
the knowledge of which has been acquired in such
recorded by any means of shorthand or stenotype or by
capacity.
other means of recording found suitable by the court.
(c) A person authorized to practice medicine, surgery, or
A transcript of the record of the proceedings made by the
obstetrics cannot in a civil case, without the consent of the
official stenographer, stenotypist or recorder and certified
patient, be examined as to any advice or treatment given
as correct by him shall be deemed prima facie a correct
by him or any information which he may have acquired in
statement of such proceedings.
attending such patient in a professional capacity and
which would blacken the reputation of the patient. SECTION 3 Rights and obligations of a witness. – A
witness must answer questions, although his answer may
(d) A minister or priest cannot, without the consent of the
tend to establish a claim against him. However, it is the
person making the confession, be examined as to any
right of a witness:
confession made to or any advice given by him in his
professional character in the course of discipline enjoined (1) To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or insulting
by the church to which the minister of priest belongs; questions and from harsh or insulting demeanor;
(e) A public officer cannot be examined during his term (2) Not to be detained longer than the interests of justice
of office or afterwards, as to communications made to him require;
in official confidence, when the court finds that the public
interest would suffer by the disclosure. (3) Not to be examined except only as to matters
pertinent to the issue;
TESTIMONIAL PRIVILEGE
(4) (4) Not to give an answer which will tend to subject
him to a penalty for an offense unless otherwise
provided by law: or)
(5) (5) Not to give an answer which will tend to
degrade his reputation, unless it to be the very fact at
issue or to a fact from which the fact in issue would
be presumed. But a witness must answer to the fact
of his previous final conviction for an offense.
SECTION 4 Order in examination of an individual
witness. – The order in which the individual witness may
be examined is as follows:
(1) Direct examination by the proponent;
(2) Cross-examination by the opponent;
(3) Re-direct examination by the proponent;
(4) Re-cross-examination by the opponent.
SECTION 5 Direct examination. – Direct examination is
the examination-in-chief- of a witness by the party
presenting him on the facts relevant to the issue.
SECTION 6 Cross-examination; its purpose and
extent. – Upon the termination of the direct examination,
the witness may be cross-examined by the adverse party
as to any matters stated in the direct examination, or
connected therewith, with sufficient fullness and freedom
to test his accuracy and truthfulness and freedom from
interest or bias, or the reverse, and to elicit all important
facts bearing upon the issue.
SECTION 7 Re-direct examination; its purpose and
extent. – After the cross-examination of the witness has
been concluded, he may be re-examined by the party
calling him, to explain or supplement his answers given
during the cross-examination. On re-direct-examination,
questions on matters not dealt with during the cross-
examination, may be allowed by the court in its discretion.
SECTION 8 Re-cross-examination. - Upon the
conclusion of the re-direct examination, the adverse party
may re-cross-examine the witness on matters stated in his
re-direct examination, and also on such other matters as
may be allowed by the court in its discretion.
SECTION 9 Recalling witness. - After the examination of
a witness by both sides has been concluded, the witness
cannot be recalled without leave of the court. The court
will grant or withhold leave in its discretion, as the interests
of justice may require.
SECTION 10 Leading and misleading questions. - A
question which suggests to the witness the answer which
the examining party desires is a leading question. It is not
allowed, except:
(a) On cross examination;
(b) On preliminary matters;
(c) When there is a difficulty in getting direct and
intelligible answers from a witness who is ignorant, or a
child of tender years, or is of feeble mind, or a deaf-mute;
(d) Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or
(e) Of a witness who is an adverse party or an officer,
director, or managing agent of a public or private
corporation or of a partnership or association which is an
adverse party.
A misleading question is one which assumes as true a fact
not yet testified to by the witness, or contrary to that which
he has previously stated. It is not allowed.
SECTION 11 Impeachment of adverse party's witness.
- A witness may be impeached by the party against whom
he was called, by contradictory evidence, by evidence that
his general reputation for truth, honesty, or integrity is bad,
or by evidence that he has made at other times
statements inconsistent with his present testimony, but not
by evidence of particular wrongful acts, except that it may
be shown by the examination of the witness, or the record
of the judgment, that he has been convicted of an offense
SECTION 12 Party may not impeach his own witness. -
Except with respect to witnesses referred to in paragraphs
(d) and (e) of Section 10, the party producing a witness is
not allowed to impeach his credibility.
A witness may be considered as unwilling or hostile only if
so declared by the court upon adequate showing of his
adverse interest, unjustified reluctance to testify, or his
having misled the party into calling him to the witness
stand.
The unwilling or hostile witness so declared, or the witness
who is an adverse party, may be impeached by the party
presenting him in all respects as if he had been called by
the adverse party, except by evidence of his bad
character. He may also be impeached and cross-
examined by the adverse party, but such cross-
examination must only be on the subject matter of his
examination-in-chief.
SECTION 13 How witness may be impeached by
evidence of inconsistent statements. - Before a witness
can be impeached by evidence that he has made at other
times statements inconsistent with his present testimony,
the statements must be related to him, with the
circumstances of the times and places and the persons
present, and he must be asked whether he made such
statements, and if so, allowed to explain them. If the
statements be in writing they must be shown to the
witness before any question is put to him concerning
them.
SECTION 14 Evidence of good character of witness. -
Evidence of the good character of a witness is not
admissible until such character has been impeached.
SECTION 15 Exclusion and separation of witnesses. -
On any trial or hearing, the judge may exclude from the
court any witness not at the time under examination, so
that he may not hear the testimony of other witnesses.
The judge may also cause witnesses to be kept separate
and to be prevented from conversing with one another
until all shall have been examined.
SECTION 16 When witness may refer to
memorandum. - A witness may be allowed to refresh his
memory respecting a fact, by anything written or recorded
by himself or under his direction at the time when the fact
occurred, or immediately thereafter, or at any other time
when the fact was fresh in his memory and knew that the
same was correctly written or recorded; but in such case
the writing or record must be produced and may be
inspected by the adverse party, who may, if he chooses,
cross examine the witness upon it, and may read it in
evidence. So, also, a witness may testify from such writing
or record, though he retain no recollection of the particular
facts, if he is able to swear that the writing or record
correctly stated the transaction when made; but such
evidence must be received with caution.
SECTION 17 When part of transaction, writing or
record given in evidence, the remainder admissible. -
When part of an act, declaration, conversation, writing, or
record is given in evidence by one party, the whole of the
same subject may be inquired into by the other, and when
a detached act, declaration, conversation, writing, or
record is given in evidence, any other act, declaration,
conversation, writing, or record necessary to its
understanding may also be given in evidence.
SECTION 18 Right to inspect writing shown to
witness. - Whenever a writing is shown to a witness, it
may be inspected by the adverse party.
CONCEPT OF A WITNESS
A witness is one who, being present, personally sees or
perceives a thing, a beholder, spectator, or eyewitness.
One who testifies to what he/she has seen or heard, or
otherwise observed.
All persons who can perceive, and perceiving, can make
known their perception to others, may be witnesses.
Religious/political belief, interest in the outcome of the
case, or conviction of a crime unless otherwise provided
by law, shall not be ground for disqualification.
QUALIFICATIONS OF WITNESSES
а. The witness can perceive
Corollary to perception is that the witness must have
personal knowledge of the facts surrounding the subject
matter of his testimony
b. The witness can make known his/her perception. This
means that the witness must have ability to remember and
communicate the remembered perception.
c. The witness must take an oath or affirmation
d. The witness must not possess any of the
disqualifications.
A deaf-mute is competent to be a witness so long as
he/she has the faculty to make observations and he/she
can make those observations known to others. There is no
substantive or procedural rule which requires a witness for
a party to present some form of authorization to testify as
a witness for the party presenting him/her.
Qualification of a witness is determined at the time the
said witness is produced for examination or at the taking
of their depositions. With respect to children of tender
years, competence at the time of the occurrence is also
taken into account
COMPETENCY OF A WITNESS PRESUMED
A person who takes the witness stand is presumed to
possess the qualifications of a witness. His/her
competence may be questioned by the other party by
interposing an objection.
CREDIBILITY OF A WITNESS
Credibility has nothing to do with the law or the rules. It
refers to the weight and trustworthiness or reliability of the
testimony. Questions concerning the credibility of a
witness are best addressed to the sound discretion of the
trial court as it is in the best position to observe his/her
demeanor and bodily movements.
DISQUALIFICATIONS OF WITNESSES
- As to the SUBJECT MATTER
A person is not disqualified by reason of his/her interest in
the subject matter. Interest only affects credibility, not
competency.
- As to the RELATIONSHIP
Mere relationship does not impair credibility. To warrant
rejection, bit must be clearly shown that the testimony was
inherently improbable or defective or improper/evil motives
had moved the witness to incriminate falsely.
Important: Disqualification by reason of mental incapacity
or immaturity (previously Sec. 21, Rule 130) and
disqualification by reason of death or insanity of adverse
party aka Dead Man's Statute (previously Sec. 23, Rule
130) have been deleted in the 2019 Revisions.
- Disqualification by Reason of Marriage
This is known as Marital Disqualification Rule or
Spousal Immunity.
For this disqualification to exist, the disqualification should
be claimed during their marriage, and such marriage must
be valid and existing at the time of the offer of the
testimony. Also, the husband or the wife cannot testify
against the other, and the "other" spouse must be a party
to the action, either as a plaintiff or defendant.
However, a spouse may testify against the other even
without the consent of the latter in a civil case by one
against the other or in a criminal case for a crime
committed by one against the other or the latter's direct
descendants/ascendants.
BASES
1. There is identity of interests between husband and wife.
2. If one were to testify against the other, there is a
consequent danger of perjury.
3. Policy of the law is to guard the security and confidence
of private life, and to prevent domestic disunion and
unhappiness.
4. Where there is want of domestic tranquility, there is
danger of punishing one spouse through the hostile
testimony of the other.
COVERAGE
The rule also includes utterance as to facts or mere
production of documents. It does not only prevent
disclosure of matters communicated in nuptial confidence
but is an absolute prohibition against the spouse’s
testifying to any facts affecting the other, however these
facts may have been acquired.
WAIVER OF DISQUALIFICATION
If one spouse imputes the commission of a crime against
the other, the latter may testify against the former.
Spouses as Co-Accused
The other cannot be called as an adverse party witness
under this rule.
- Disqualifications by Reason of Privileged
Communications; Rule on Third Parties
Privilege
A privilege is a rule of law that, to protect a particular
relationship or interest, either permits a witness to refrain
from giving testimony he/she otherwise could be
compelled to give, or permits someone usually one of the
parties, to prevent the witness from revealing certain
information.
Privilege may only be invoked by the persons protected
thereunder. It may also be waived by the same persons,
either impliedly or expressly.
IMPORTANT: This section was substantially amended in
the 2019 Revised Rules.
- Husband and Wife
Also known as marital privilege due to the confidential
nature of the privilege and to preserve marital and
domestic relations.
1. The husband or the wife;
2. During or after the marriage;
3. Cannot be examined;
4. Without the consent of the other;
5. As to any communication received in confidence by
one from the other during the marriage.
However, a spouse may testify for or against the other
even without the consent of the latter:
1. In a civil case by one against the other; or
2. In a criminal case for a crime committed by one
against the other or the latter’s direct descendants or
ascendants.
Not Applicable When:
1. Communication was not intended to be kept in
confidence
2. Communication was made prior to the marriage
3. Waiver privilege
WAIVER OF THE PRIVILEGE
1. Failure of the spouse to object, or
2. Calling spouse as witness on cross-examination
3. Any conduct constructed as implied consent.
The objection to the competency of the spouse must be
made when he/she is first offered as a witness. The
incompetency is waived by failure to make a timely
objection to the admission of spouse's testimony.
- Attorney and Client
In this privilege, an attorney cannot, without the consent of
his/her client, be examined as to any communication
made by the client to him/her, or his/her advice given
thereon in the course of, or with a view to, professional
employment, nor can an attorney's secretary,
stenographer, or clerk be examined, without the consent of
the client and his her employer, concerning any fact the
knowledge of which has been acquired in such capacity.
EXCEPTIONS:
1. When a strong probability exists that revealing the
name would implicate that person in the very same
activity for which he sought the lawyer's advice
2. When disclosure would open the client to liability
3. When the name would furnish the only link that would
form the chain of testimony necessary to convict.
4. Physician and Patient
In this privilege, a person authorized to practice medicine,
surgery, or obstetrics cannot in a civil case, without the
consent of the patient, be examined as to any advice or
treatment given by him/her or any information which
he/she may have acquired in attending such patient in a
professional capacity, which information was necessary to
enable him/her to act in capacity, and which would blacken
the reputation of the patient;
Important: This privilege also applies to persons, including
members of the patient's family, who have participated in
the diagnosis or treatment of the patient under the
direction of the physician or psychotherapist.
In the case of Lim v. Court of Appeals, it was stated that
this privileged communication for physician and patient is
not applicable to the following:
1. Communication was not given in confidence
2. Communication was irrelevant to the professional
employment
3. Communication was made for an unlawful purpose
4. Communication was intended for the
commission/concealment of a crime
5. Communication was intended to be made
public/divulged in court
6. When there was a waiver
7. When the doctor was presented as an expert witness
and only hypothetical problems were presented to
him/her
Waiver of the privilege can be by way of an express waiver
or thru an implied waiver by failing to object.
- Priest and Penitent
The witness should be a minister or priest or person
reasonably believed to be so.
There should be no consent of the affected person. The
priest cannot be examined as to any communication,
confession made to; or advice given by him/her, in his/her
professional character and in the course of discipline
enjoined by the church to which the minister or priest
belongs.
In this privilege, a public officer cannot be examined
during his/her term of office or afterward, as to
communications made to him/her in official confidence,
when the court finds that the public interest would suffer
by the disclosure.
The privilege is not intended for the protection of public
officers but for the protection of the public interest. When
no public interest would be prejudiced, this privilege
cannot be invoked.
RULE ON THIRD PARTIES
The communication shall remain privileged, even in the
hands of a third person who may have obtained the
information, provided that the original parties to the
communication took reasonable precaution to protect its
confidentiality.
Important: This amendment is a stark contrast from the
previous rule which removes the privilege from
communication that landed in the hands of third parties.
- Parental and Filial Privilege Rule
The rule is applicable to criminal actions.
In the case of Lee v. Court of Appeals, the privilege
cannot apply between stepmothers and stepchildren
because the rule applies only to direct ascendants and
descendants, a family tie connected by a common
ancestry.
In the case of People v. Invencion, a child can waive the
filial privilege and choose to testify against his father. The
rule refers to a privilege not to testify, which can be
invoked or waived like other privileges.
- Trade Secrets
A person cannot be compelled to testify about any trade
secret except if the non-disclosure will conceal fraud or
otherwise work injustice. When disclosure is directed, the
court shall take protective measures, as required by the
interests of the owner of the trade secret, the interests of
the parties; and the furtherance of justice.
EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES
Examination of a witness shall be done in open court and
under oath or affirmation.
Answers shall be given orally, unless the witness is
incapacitated to speak, or the question calls for a different
mode of answer.
Proceedings are to be recorded, including the questions
propounded to a witness and his/her answers thereto, the
statements made by the judge or any of the parties,
counsel, or witnesses with reference to the case by means
of shorthand or stenotype of by other means of recording
found suitable by the court.
Transcript of Stenographic Notes (TSN)
A transcript of the record of the proceedings made by the
official stenographer, stenotypist, or recorder and certified
as correct by him/her shall be deemed prima facie a
correct statement of such proceedings.
EXCLUSION AND SEPARATION OF WITNESSES
- Rights and Obligations of a Witness
Witnesses have the rights to be protected from irrelevant,
improper, or insulting questions, and from harsh or
insulting demeanor, not to be detained longer than the
interests of justice require, to only be examined as to
matters pertinent to the issue, not to give an answer which
will tend to subject him/her to a penalty for an offense, not
to give an answer which will tend to degrade his/her
reputation.
Exceptions to these are when the answer is the very fact
in issue and when the answer is a fact from which the fact
in issue would be presumed. An exception to this
exception would be that he/she must answer to the fact of
his/her previous final conviction for an offense.
OBLIGATIONS OF WITNESSES
A witness must answer questions, although his/her answer
may tend to establish a claim against him/her.
ONE-DAY EXAMINATION OF WITNESS RULE
A witness has to be fully examined in one (1) day only. It
shall be strictly adhered to subject to the courts' discretion
during trial on whether or not to extend the direct and/or
cross-examination for justifiable reasons.
Order in the Examination of an Individual Witness
1. Direct examination by the proponent
2. Cross-examination by the opponent
3. Redirect examination by the proponent
4. Recross-examination by the opponent
Direct examination - examination-in-chief of a witness by
the party presenting him/her on the facts relevant to the
issue .
Cross-examination - the witness may be cross examined
by the adverse party on any relevant matter with sufficient
fullness and freedom
Cross-examination is to test the witness' accuracy,
truthfulness, and freedom from interest or bias, or the
reverse; and to elicit all important facts bearing upon the
issue.
RIGHT TO CROSS-EXAMINATION
Cross-examination is the most reliable and effective way
known of testing the credibility and accuracy of testimony.
This is an essential element of due process. The right to
cross-examine under the constitution is superior to
technical rules on evidence.
EFFECT OF DENIAL OF RIGHT TO CROSS EXAMINE
Most courts require that the testimony given on direct
examination be stricken off-provided the unavailability of
the witness is through no fault of the party seeking to
cross-examine.
Cross-examination must be completed or finished. When
cross-examination is not and cannot be done or completed
due to causes attributable to the party offering the witness,
the uncompleted testimony is thereby rendered
incompetent.
Redirect examination--re-examination of the witness by
the party calling him/her.
The purpose of a redirect examination is to explain or
supplement his/her answers given during the cross-
examination. Questions on matters not dealt with during
the cross-examination may be allowed by the court in its
discretion.
Recross-examination - recross-examination of the
witness by the adverse party on matters stated in his/her
redirect and on other matters allowed by the court in its
discretion
RECALLING THE WITNESS
After examination by both sides has been concluded, the
witness cannot be recalled without leave of court.
In the case of People v. Rivera, the reasons why a redirect
examination should be conducted:
1. Particularly identified material points were not
covered in cross-examination
2. Particularly described vital documents were not
presented to the witness
3. Cross-examination was conducted in so inept a
manner as to result in a virtual absence thereof
Leading and Misleading Questions
This is allowed during
a. Cross examination;
b. Preliminary matters;
c. When there is difficulty in getting direct and intelligible
answers from a witness who is ignorant, or a child of
tender years, or is feeble mind, or a deaf-mute
d. Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or
e. Of a witness who is an adverse party or an officer,
director, or managing agent of a public or private
corporation or of a partnership or association which is
an adverse party.
A misleading question is one which assumes as true a fact
not yet testified to by the witness, or contrary to that which
he/she has previously stated. It is not allowed yet.
- Impeachment of Witness
An adverse party’s witness can be impeached by:
a. Contrary evidence;
b. Evidence that his/her general reputation for truth,
honesty, or integrity is bad; or
c. Evidence that he/she has made, at other times,
statements inconsistent with his/her present
testimony.
However, he/she may not be impeached by evidence of
particular wrongful acts, except that it may be shown by
the examination of the witness, or the record of the
judgment, that he/she has been convicted of an offense.
The unwilling or hostile witness so declared, or the witness
who is an adverse party, may be impeached by the party
presenting him/her in all respects as if he/she had been
called by the adverse party, except by evidence of his/her
bad character. He/She may also be impeached and cross-
examined by the adverse party, but such cross-
examination must only be on the subject matter of his
examination-in-chief.
IMPEACHMENT OF WITNESSES BY EVIDENCE OF
INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS
a. The statements must be related to him/her, with the
circumstances of the times and places and the
persons present.
b. He/She must be asked whether he/she made such
statements, and if so, allowed to explain them.
c. If the statements are in writing they must be shown to
the witness before any question is put to him/her
concerning them.
REFERRAL OF WITNESS TO MEMORANDUM
A witness may be allowed to refresh his her memory
respecting a fact by anything written or recorded, by
himself/herself or under his/her direction, at the time when
the fact occurred, or immediately thereafter, or at any
other time when the fact was fresh in his/her memory and
he/she knew that the same was correctly written or
recorded. The writing or record must be produced and
may be inspected by the adverse party, who may, if he/she
chooses, cross-examine the witness upon it, and may
read it in evidence.
A witness may also testify from such a writing or record,
though he/she retain no recollection of the particular facts,
if he/she is able to swear that the writing or record
correctly stated the transaction when made; but such
evidence must be received with caution.
RIGHT TO INSPECT WRITING SHOWN TO WITNESS
Whenever a writing is shown to a witness, it may be
inspected by the adverse party.
- Examination of a child witness
Unless otherwise provided, this rule shall govern the
examination of a child witness who are: (1) victims of a
crime; (2) accused of a crime; (3) witnesses to a crime.
The rule applies to all criminal and noncriminal
proceedings involving child witnesses
CONCEPT OF CHILD WITNESS
A child witness is any person who at the time of giving
testimony is:
1. Below the age of 18 years; or
2. In child abuse cases, may be over 18 but is found by
the court unable to fully take care of himself/herself or
protect himself/herself from abuse, neglect, cruelty,
exploitation, or discrimination because of a physical
or mental disability or condition.
The court has the duty of continuously assessing the
competence of the child throughout this testimony
PROOF OF NECESSITY
The party seeking a competency examination must
present proof of its necessity. The age of the child, by
itself, is not a sufficient basis. Burden of proof lies with the
party challenging the child's competence.
 CONDUCT OF EXAMINATION
Examination can be conducted only by the judge and
counsel for the parties may submit questions to the judge.
It is discretionary upon the judge if he/she will ask the child
the submitted questions.
DEVELOPMENTALLY APPROPRIATE QUESTIONS
The questions asked shall;
1. Be appropriate to the age and developmental level of
the child
2. Not be related to the issues at trial; and
3. Focus on the ability of the child to remember,
communicate, distinguish between truth and
falsehood, and appreciate the duty to testify truthfully.
REQUIREMENTS
The guardian ad litem shall consult the prosecutor or
counsel and defer to their judgment regarding the
necessity of applying for an order. If the guardian is
convinced that the decision of the prosecutor or counsel
not to apply will cause the child serious emotional trauma,
he himself may apply for the order. This should be applied
for at least 5 days before the trial date unless the court
finds on the record that the need for such an order was not
reasonably foreseeable.
The court shall issue an order granting or denying the use
of live-link television and stating the reasons therefor.
The application can be granted if there is a substantial
likelihood that the child would suffer trauma from testifying
in the presence of the accused, his counsel or the
prosecutor. The trauma must be of a kind which would
impair the completeness or truthfulness of the testimony of
the child.
The testimony of the child shall be preserved on
videotape, digital disc, or other similar devices which shall
be made part of the court record and shall be subject to a
protective order as provided in Sec. 31(b).
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF A CHILD WITNESS
The prosecutor, counsel, or guardian ad litem may apply
for an order that a deposition be taken of the testimony of
the child and that it be recorded and preserved on
videotape. The process of application for live-link TV
testimony in Sec. 25(a), as stated.
If the court finds that the child will not be able to testify in
open court at trial, the judge shall preside at the
videotaped deposition of the child. Objections to
deposition testimony or evidence, or parts thereof, and the
grounds of objection shall be stated and ruled upon at the
time of the taking of the deposition.
The following are allowed in the proceeding:
1. Prosecutor
2. Defense counsel
3. Guardian ad litem
4. Accused subject to subsection (e)
a. If there is evidence that the child is unable
to testify in the physical presence of the
accused, the court may direct the latter to
be excluded from the room where the
deposition is conducted
b. In case of exclusion of the accused, the
court shall order the testimony of the child
to be taken by live-link TV in accordance
with Sec 25.
c. It is not necessary for the child to be able
to view an image of the accused
5. Other persons whose presence is determined by the
court to be necessary for the welfare and well-being of the
child
6. One or both of his support persons, the facilitator and
interpreter, if any
7. Court stenographer
8. Persons necessary to operate the video tape equipment
Rights of the accused during trial, especially the right to
counsel and confront and cross-examine the child. shall
not be violated during the deposition. If, at the time of the
trial, the court finds that the child is unable to testify for a
reason stated in Sec. 25(f) of this Rule or is unavailable for
any reason described in Rule 23, Sec 4(c) of the 1997
Rules of Civil Procedure, the court may admit into
evidence the videotaped deposition of the child in lieu of
his/her testimony at the trial.
HEARSAY EXCEPTION IN CHILD ABUSE CASES
This applies to any criminal and non criminal proceeding.
However, a statement made by a child describing any act
or attempted act of child abuse, not otherwise admissible
under the hearsay rule, may be admitted in evidence
subject to the following rules:
1. Before the hearsay statement may be admitted, its
proponent shall make known to the adverse party the
intention to offer such statement and its particulars:
a. If the child is available - the court shall
upon motion of the adverse party, require
the child to be present at the presentation
of the hearsay statement for cross-
examination; or
b. if the child is unavailable - the fact of
unavailability must be proven by the
opponent.
2. The court shall consider the time, content, and
circumstances of the hearsay statement which provide
sufficient indicia of reliability that will consider the
following:
a. Motive to lie;
b. General character of declarant child;
c. Whether more than one person heard the
statement;
d. Whether the statement was spontaneous
e. Timing of the statement and the relationship
between the declarant child and witness;
f. Cross-examination could not show the lack of
knowledge of the declarant child;
 g. Possibility of faulty recollection of the declarant
child is remote; and
h. The circumstances surrounding the statement
are such that there is no reason to suppose the
declarant child misrepresented the involvement
of the accused.
UNAVAILABILITY OF A CHILD
a. He/She is deceased, suffers from mental infirmity,
lack of memory, mental illness, or will be exposed to
severe psychological injury or,
b. He/She is absent from the hearing and the proponent
of his/her statement has been unable to procure
his/her attendance by process or other reasonable
means.
If child is unavailable, his/her hearsay testimony must be
corroborated by other admissible evidence for the same to
be admissible.
SEXUAL ABUSE SHIELD RULE
The following evidence is inadmissible in any criminal
proceeding involving alleged child sexual abuse:
1. evidence offered to prove that the alleged victim
engaged in other sexual behavior; and
2. evidence to prove the sexual predisposition of the
alleged victim.
Exception: Evidence of specific instances of sexual
behavior by the alleged victim to prove that a person other
than the accused was the source of the semen, injury, or
other physical evidence shall be admissible.
REQUIREMENTS FOR PARTY OFFERING SUCH
EVIDENCE
1. Written motion filed at least 15 days before trial,
specifically describing the evidence and stating the
purpose for which it is offered.
Exception: If the court, for good cause, requires a
different time for filing or permits filing during trial.
1. Motion served on all parties and the guardian ad
litem at least 3 days before the hearing of the motion
HEARING NECESSARY
Before admitting such evidence, the court must conduct a
hearing in chambers and afford the child, his/her guardian
ad litem, the parties, and their counsel a right to attend
and be heard. The motion and the record of the hearing
must be sealed and remain under seal and protected by a
protective order. The child shall not be required to testify at
the hearing in chambers except if he/she consents.
PROTECTIVE ORDERS
Protective covers any videotape or audiotape of a child
that is part of the court record.
PROVISIONS OF THE PROTECTIVE ORDER
1. Tapes may be viewed only by the parties, their
counsel, their expert witnesses, and the guardian ad
litem.
2. No tape, or any portion thereof, shall be divulged by
any person mentioned in Sec 31(a) to any other
person, except as necessary for the trial.
a. Persons in Sec. 31(a): members of the
court staff for administrative use, the
prosecuting attorney, defense counsel,
guardian ad liter, agents d investigating law
enforcement agencies, and other persons
as determined by the court.
PROVISIONS OF THE PROTECTIVE ORDER
3. No person shall be granted access to the tape, its
transcript, or any part thereof unless:
a. he/she signs a written affirmation that he/she
has received and read a copy of the protective
order;
b. he/she submits to the jurisdiction of the court
with respect to the protective order; and
c. in case of violation, he/she will be subject to the
contempt power of the cold
4. Each of the cassette tapes and transcripts thereof made
available to the parties, their counsel, and their respective
agents shall bear the following cautionary notice:
a. "This object or document and the contents
thereof are subject to a protective order issued
by the court in (case title), (case number). They
shall not be examined, inspected, read, viewed,
or copied by any person, or disclosed to any
person, except as provided in the protective
order. No additional copies of the tape or any of
its portion shall be made, given, sold, or shown
to any person without prior court order. Any
person violating such protective order is subject
to the contempt power of the court and other
penalties prescribed by law."
5. No tape shall be given, loaned, sold, or shown to
any person except as ordered by the court.
6. Within 30 days from receipt, all copies of the tape
and any transcripts thereof shall be returned to the
clerk of court for safekeeping unless the period is
extended by the court on motion of a party.
7. This protective order shall remain in full force and
effect until further order of the court.
ADDITIONAL PROTECTIVE ORDER
b. The court may, motu proprio or on motion of any
party, the child, his/her parents, legal guardian,
or the guardian ad litem, issue additional orders
to protect the privacy of the child.
OPINION RULE
*Opinion is an inference or conclusion drawn from facts
observed.
- Opinion of Expert Witness;
The opinion of a witness on a matter requiring special
knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, which
he/she shown to possess, may be received in evidence.*
Expert witness is one who has made the subject upon
which he/she gives his/her opinion a matter of particular
study, practice, or observation and he/she must have
particular and special knowledge on the subject.
COURT DISCRETION TO EXCLUDE OR INCLUDE
EVIDENCE
The competence of an expert witness is a matter for the
trial court to decide upon in the exercise of its discretion.
The test of qualification is necessarily a relative one,
depending upon the subject matter of the investigation,
and the fitness of the expert witness. In our jurisdiction,
the criterion remains to be the expert witness' special
knowledge, experience and practical training that qualify
him/her to explain highly technical medical matters to the
court. It is the specialist's knowledge of the requisite
subject matter, rather than his/ her specialty that
determines his/her qualification to testify.
EXAMINING AN EXPERT WITNESS
He/she may base his/her opinion on the basis of
hypothetical questions where the facts are presented to
him/her hypothetically, and on the assumption that they
are true, formulates his/her opinion on this hypothesis.
The lack of personal examination and interview of the
respondent, or any other person diagnosed with
personality disorder, does not per se invalidate the
testimonies of the doctors. Neither do their findings
automatically constitute hearsay that would result in their
exclusion as evidence. Within their acknowledged field of
expertise, doctors can diagnose the psychological make
up of a person based on a number of factors culled from
various sources.
- Opinion of ordinary Witness
The Opinion of an ordinary witness is admissible:
1. If proper basis is given; and
2. Regarding:
a. Identity of a person about whom he/she
has adequate knowledge;
b. Handwriting with which he/she has
sufficient familiarity;
c. Mental sanity of a person with whom
he/she is sufficiently acquainted ; and
d. Impressions of the
i. Emotion;
ii. Behavior;
iii. Condition; or
iv. Appearance of a person.
JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT RULE [A.M. 12-8-8-SC]
APPLICABILITY
Applies to all actions and proceedings, and incidents
requiring the reception of evidence before:
1. Courts (but not to small claims cases);
2. Investigating officers and bodies authorized by the
SC to receive evidence, including the IBP; and
3. Quasi-judicial bodies, whose rules of procedure are
subject to disapproval of the Supreme Court, insofar
as their existing rules of procedure contravene the
provisions of this Rule.
SUBMISSION IN LIEU IN DIRECT TESTIMONY
1. The parties shall file with the court and serve on the
adverse party, personally or by licensed courier
service, not later than five days before pre-trial or
preliminary conference or the scheduled hearing with
respect to motions and incidents, the following:
a. the judicial affidavits of their witnesses,
which shall take the place of such
witnesses' direct testimonies; and
b. the parties' documentary or object
evidence, if any, shall be marked and
attached to the judicial affidavits.
2. Should a party or a witness desire to keep the original
document or object evidence in his/her possession, he/she
may, after the same has been identified, marked as
exhibit, and authenticated, warrant in his/her judicial
affidavit that the copy or reproduction attached to such
affidavit is a faithful copy or reproduction of that original. In
addition, the party or witness shall bring the original
document or object evidence for comparison during the
preliminary conference with the attached copy,
reproduction, or pictures, failing which the latter shall not
be admitted. This is without prejudice to the introduction of
secondary evidence in place of the original when allowed
by existing rules.
CONTENTS
Shall be prepared in the language known to the witness
and, if not in English or Filipino, accompanied by a
translation in English or Filipino.
1. The name, age, residence or business address, and
occupation of the witness
2. The name and address of the lawyer who conducts
or supervises the examination of the witness and the
place where the examination is being held
3. A statement that the witness is answering the
questions asked of him/her, fully conscious that
he/she does so under oath, and that he/she may face
criminal liability for false testimony or perjury
4. Questions asked of the witness and his/her
corresponding answers, consecutively numbered, that:
a. show the circumstances under which the
witness acquired the facts upon which he/she
testifies;
b. elicit from him/her those facts which are relevant
to the issues that the case presents; and
c. identify the attached documentary and object
evidence and establish
5. The signature of the witness over his/her printed name
6. A jurat with the signature of the notary public who
administers the oath or an officer who is authorized by law
to administer the same
7. A sworn attestation at the end, executed by the lawyer
who conducted or supervised the examination of the
witness, to the effect that:
a. he/she faithfully recorded or caused to be
recorded the questions he/she asked and the
corresponding answers that the witness gave;
and
b. neither he/she nor any other person then
present or assisting him/her coached the
witness regarding the latter's answers.
A false attestation shall subject the lawyer mentioned to
disciplinary action, including disbarment.
APPLICATION IN CRIMINAL CASES
This Judicial Affidavit Rule shall apply to all criminal
actions:
1. where the maximum of the imposable penalty does
not exceed six years;
2. where the accused agrees to the use of judicial
affidavits, irrespective of the penalty involved; or
3. with respect to the civil aspect of the actions,
whatever the penalties involved are
PROCEDURE
1. The prosecution shall submit the judicial affidavits of
its witnesses not later than five days before the pre-
trial, serving copies of the same upon the accused.
2. The complainant or public prosecutor shall attach to
the affidavits such documentary or object evidence
as he/she may have, marking them as Exhibits A, B,
C, and so on.
3. No further judicial affidavit, documentary, or object
evidence shall be admitted at the trial.
4. If the accused desires to be heard on his/her defense
after receipt of the judicial affidavits of the
prosecution, he/she shall have the option to submit
his/her judicial affidavit as well as those of his/her
witnesses to the court within ten (10) days from
receipt of such affidavits and serve a copy of each on
the public and private prosecutor, including his/her
documentary and object evidence previously marked
as Exhibits 1, 2, 3, and so on. These affidavits shall
serve as direct testimonies of the accused and
his/her witnesses when they appear before the court
to testify.
ISSUANCE OF THE SUBPOENA
If the government employee or official, or the requested
witness, who is neither the witness of the adverse party
nor a hostile witness, unjustifiably declines to execute a
judicial affidavit or refuses without just cause to make the
relevant books, documents. or other things under his/her
control available for copying, authentication, and eventual
production in court, the requesting party may avail
himself/herself of the issuance of a subpoena ad
testificandum or duces tecum under Rule 21 of the Rules
of Court.
The rules governing the issuance of a subpoena to the
witness in this case shall be the same as when taking
his/her deposition except that the taking of a judicial
affidavit shall be understood to be ex parte.
POINTS TO PONDER AND SUMMARY
➢ Persons who can perceive, and perceiving, can make
known their perception to others can be witnesses.
Qualifications, credibility, and competency of
witnesses are important factors that must be
considered.
➢ Disqualification of witnesses not only focuses on the
subject matter and on the relationship. Privileged
communication also falls within the disqualifications,
to wit: husband-wife, attorney-client, physician-
patient, priest-penitent, parental and filial privilege,
trade secrets, subject to the requirements of each.
➢ Persons who can perceive, and perceiving, can make
known their perception to others. Qualifications,
credibility and competency of witnesses are important
factors that must be considered.
➢ Disqualification of witnesses not only focuses on the
subject matter and on the relationship. Privileged
communication also falls within the disqualifications,
to wit: husband-wife, attorney-client, physician-
patient, priest-penitent, parental and filial privilege,
trade secrets, subject to the requirements of each
➢ In examination of witnesses, rights and obligations of
witnesses must be observed in every step of the
order of their examination. Leading and misleading
questions must be considered, apart from
underscoring that witnesses may be impeached.
Referral to memorandum may be allowed. In the
examination, a one-day-witness rule should be
implemented.
➢ In examination of child witnesses, the rules afford the
necessary protection for children who will be
subjected to examination, as to the conduct of
examination, questions that need to be development-
appropriate, live-link TV testimony, videotaped
deposition, hearsay exception, sexual abuse shield,
and protective orders. These aspects should be duly
remembered.
➢ The opinion rule covers opinions of expert witnesses
and opinions of ordinary witnesses, subject to
qualifications.
➢ The Judicial Affidavit Rule applies to criminal cases,
hence, the contents and its effects as elaborated
therein, as well as the procedure, should be
understood.
➢ In examination of witnesses, rights and obligations of
witnesses must be observed in every step of the
order of their examination. Leading and misleading
questions should be considered, apart from
underscoring that witnesses may be impeached.
Referral to memorandum can be allowed. In the
examination, a one-day-witness rule should be
implemented.
➢ In examination of child witnesses, the rules afford the
necessary protec tion for children who will be
subjected to examination, as to the conduct of
examination, questions that need to be development-
appropriate, live-link TV testimony, videotaped
deposition, hearsay exception, sexual abuse shield
rule, and protective orders. These aspects should be
duly remembered.
➢ The opinion rule covers opinions of expert witnesses
and opinions of ordinary witnesses, subject to
qualifications.
➢ The Judicial Affidavit Rule applies to criminal cases,
hence the contents and its effects as elaborated
therein, as well as the procedure, should be
understood.
Criminal Jurisdiction of Courts
Criminal Jurisdictions of the First Level Courts, the
Second Level Courts, the Sandiganbayan, the Court of
Tax Appeals the Court of Appeals, and Barangay.
FIRST LEVEL COURTS
1. Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) - Metro Manila
2. Municipal Trial Court (MTC) - municipalities
3. Municipal Circuit Trial Courts (MCTC) - are those
maintained to cover 2 or more municipalities with
small population if the maintenance of one MTC is
impractical
4. Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC) - provincial
cities
SECOND LEVEL COURTS - Regional Trial Courts (RTC)
APPELLATE COURT - Court of Appeals
SPECIAL COURTS
1. Sandiganbayan
2. Court of Tax Appeals
3. Shari’a Courts
4. Shari’a District Courts
JURISDICTION OF THE FIRST LEVEL COURTS:
R.A. NO. 7691, March 25, 1994
“(1) Exclusive original jurisdiction over all violations of city
or municipal ordinances committed within their respective
territorial jurisdiction; and
(2) Exclusive original jurisdiction over all offenses
punishable with imprisonment not exceeding six (6) years
irrespective of the amount of fine, and regardless of other
imposable accessory or other penalties, including the civil
liability arising from such offenses or predicated thereon,
irrespective of kind, nature, value or amount thereof;
Provided however, That in cases involving damage to
property through criminal negligence, they shall have
original jurisdiction thereof.”
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION OF THE RTC
RTCs shall exercise original jurisdiction in all criminal
cases not within the exclusive original jurisdiction of any
court, tribunal or body, except those now falling under
exclusive and concurrent jurisdiction of the
Sandiganbayan which shall hereafter be exclusively taken
cognizance of by the latter. (B.P. 129, Sec. 20)
APPELLATE JURISDICTION OF THE RTC
RTCs shall exercise appellate jurisdiction over all cases
decided by MeTCs, MTCs and MCTCs in their respective
territorial jurisdictions. Such cases shall be decided on the
basis of the entire record of the proceedings had in the
court of origin. (Sec. 22, Appellate jurisdiction)
APPELLATE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT OF
APPEALS
MTC to RTC to CA - by petition for review [may be given
due course only when the petition shows prima facie that
the lower court has committed an error of fact or law that
will warrant a reversal or modification of the decision
RTC to CA - ordinary appeal [by notice of appeal]
NOTES
Of Regional Trial Courts:
1. Over offenses punishable by imprisonment for a
period of more than six (6) years;
2. Over offenses where the fine is more than PhP4,000
3. Under P.D. 1606 as amended by R.A. 8249, the
criminal cases of
a. Government officials [below SG 27];
b. Offense punishable by imprisonment of
more than six (6) years or fine is more than
PhP4,000 [below SG 27];
4. Violations of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs
Act of 2002 (R.A 9165)
5. 5. Libel cases even though punishable by prison
correctional (RPC, Art. 360; People v. Eduarte, G.R.
No. 88232, February 26, 1990).
6. 6. Criminal violations of Intellectual Property Code
(Samson v. Daway, G.R. Nos. 160054- 55, July 21,
2004 R.A. 166, Sec. 27)
7. 7. Election offenses.
8. 8. Appellate jurisdiction over all cases decided by
MTC, MeTC, MCTC in their respective territorial
jurisdictions (B.P. 129, Sec. 27),
Jurisdiction over Complex Crimes:
Jurisdiction over the whole complex crime is lodged with
the trial court having jurisdiction to impose the maximum
and most serious penalty imposable of an offense forming
part of the complex crime. It must be prosecuted integrally
and must not be divided into component offenses which
may be made subject of multiple information brought in
different courts (Cuyos v. Garcia, G.R L-46934, April 15,
1988).
Jurisdiction over Continuing Crimes:
Continuing offenses are consummated in one place, yet
by the nature of the offense, the violation of the law is
deemed continuing (e.g., Estafa and libel). As such, the
courts of the territories where the essential ingredients of
the crime took place have concurrent jurisdiction. But the
court which first acquires jurisdiction excludes the other
courts.
Jurisdiction over Crimes Punishable by Destierro:
Where the imposable penalty is destierro, the case falls
within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Municipal Trial
Court, considering that in the hierarchy of penalties under
Article 71 of the Revised Penal Code, destierro follows
arresto mayor which involves imprisonment (People v.
Eduarte, G.R. No. 88323. February 26, 1990).
While the offense is within its exclusive competence by
reason of the penalty prescribed therefore, an inferior
court shall have jurisdiction to try and decide the case
irrespective of the kind and nature of the civil liability
arising from the said offense (Herrera, Vol. IV)
The additional penalty for habitual delinquency is not
considered in determining jurisdiction because such
delinquency is not a crime (Legados v. de Guzman, G.R.
No.35285, Feb. 20, 1989).
Of Sandiganbayan:
The Sandiganbayan shall exercise exclusive original
jurisdiction in all cases involving:
1. Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) and R.A. 1379 (An
Act Declaring Forfeiture in favor of the state any
property found to have been unlawfully acquired by
Public Officer or Employee);
2. Other offenses or felonies whether simple or
complexed with other crimes committed by public
officials and employees mentioned in Sec 4 a]
P.D.1606 as amended by R.A. 7975 in relation to
their office;
3. Crimes mentioned in Chapter 2 Section 2 Title VII
Book 2 of the Revised Penal Code i.e. Art 210: Direct
Bribery, Art 211: Indirect Bribery, Art 212: Corruption
of Public Officials;
4. Violations of Executive Orders 1, 2, 14, 14-A of 1986
(Marcos* Ill-gotten wealth cases);
5. Violation of R.A. 6713 - Code of Conduct and Ethical
Standards;
6. Violation of R.A. 7080 - The Plunder Law;
7. RA 9160 - Violation of The Anti-Money Laundering
Law when committed by a public officer;
8. P.D. 46 referred to as the gift-giving decree.
Officials under the Executive Jurisdiction of
Sandiganbayan:
9. Those expressly enumerated in P.D. 1606, as
amended by R.A. No.8249; Violations of R.A. 3019 (Anti-
Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) R.A. 1379 and Chapter 2,
Sec. 2, Title 7, Book 2, RPC;
10. Officials of the executive branch, occupying
salary grade 27 and higher, 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 treasurers,
assessors, engineers and other city department
heads.
c. Officials of the diplomatic service 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, 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
Prosecutors.
g. Presidents/directors/trustees/managers of
GOCCs, state universities or educational
institutions/foundations.
10. Members of Congress and officials thereof
classified as Salary Grade 27 and up;
11. Members of the Judiciary, without prejudice to
Constitutional provisions;
12. Chairmen and members of Constitutional
Commissions, without prejudice to Constitutional
provisions.
When offense deemed committed "in relation to public
office"
The offense must be a constituent element of the crime as
defined in the statute. The test is whether the offense
cannot exist without the office (Cunanan v. Arceo, G.R.
No. 116615, March 1, 1995).
An offense may be considered as committed in relation to
the office if:
1. It cannot exist without the office.
2. The office is a constituent element of the crime as
defined in the statute.
3. The offense be intimately connected with the office of
the offender; and
4. The fact that the offense was committed in relation to
the office must be alcose in, 1905, ormation (People
v. Magallanes, GiR. No. 118013-14, October 11,
1995).
the
What is controlling is the specific factual allegations in the
information that would indicate the close intimacy between
the discharge of the accused's official duties and the
commission of the offense charged, in order to qualify the
crime as having been committed in relation to public office
(Lacson v. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 128096, January
20, 1999).
In the absence of any allegation that the offense was
committed in relation to the office of the accused or was
necessarily connected with the discharge of their
functions, the Regional Trial Court, not the
Sandiganbayan, has jurisdiction to hear and decide the
case (People v. Cawaling, G.r. 117970, July 28, 1998).
Expectations are:
1. Election offenses - it is the Regional Trial Court that
has jurisdiction even if they are committed by public
officers classified as Grade 27 and higher and in
relation to their offices (OEC, Sec. 268).
2. Court martial cases - Offenses committed by
members of the Armed Forces and other persons
subject to military law are cognizable by court
martials if such offenses are "service connected" as
expressly enumerated in R.A. 7055
Criminal Jurisdiction of Family Courts:
R.A. 8369 establishing the Family Court Granting then
exclusive original jurisdiction over child and family cases,
namely:
1. Criminal cases where one or more of the accused is
below eighteen (18) years of age but not less than
nine (9) years of age or;
2. Where one or more of the victims is a minor at the
time of the commission of the offense.
Provided, that if the minor is found guilty, the court shall
promulgate the sentence and ascertain any civil liability
which the accused may have incurred. The sentence shall
be suspended without need of an application pursuant to
the "Child and Youth Welfare Code" or "P.D. 603".
Of the Court of Tax Appeals:
1. Exclusive original jurisdiction over all criminal
offenses arising from violations of the National
Internal Revenue Code (NIRC) or Tariff and Customs
Code and other laws administered by the BIR or the
Bureau of Customs.
2. Offenses where the principal amount of taxes and
fees, exclusive of charges and penalties claimed is
less than PhP1,000,000.00 or where there is no
specified amount claimed, shall be tried by the
regular courts and the jurisdiction of the Court of Tax
Appeals (CTA) shall be appellate.
3. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction in criminal offenses:
a. Over appeals from the judgments,
resolutions or orders of the RTC in tax
cases originally decided by them.
b. Over petitions for review of the judgments,
resolutions or orders of the RTC in the
exercise of their appellate jurisdiction over
tax cases originally decided by the MTC,
MeTC and MCTC. (R.A. 1125 as amended
by R.A. 9282).
Katarungang Pambarangay (Chapter 7, Title I, Book III of
the Local Government Code of 1991)
Of Barangay (and its proceedings)
A confrontation between the parties before the Lupon
Chairman or the Pangkat ng Tagapagkasundo is needed
before a complaint, petition, action or proceeding may be
filed or instituted directly in court or any other government
office for adjudication. The parties thereto may still go to
the court either (1) when the Lupon Secretary or Pangkat
Secretary as attested to by the Lupon or Pangkat
Chairman certifies that no conciliation or settlement has
been reached, or (2) when the parties repudiated the
settlement.
No need to secure Barangay Certification To File Action if:
1. The accused is under detention;
2. Where a person has been deprived of personal
liberty calling for habeas corpus proceedings;
3. Where actions are coupled with provisional remedies;
4. Where the action may be barred by the statute of
limitations..
Generally, the lupon shall have authority to bring parties
actually residing in the same city or municipality for
amicable settlement of all disputes.
Except in the following instances:
1. Where one party is the Government, or any
subdivision or instrumentality thereof;
2. Where one party is a Public officer or employee, and
the dispute relates to the performance of his official
functions;
3. Offenses punishable by imprisonment exceeding one
(1) year or a Fine exceeding Five thousand pesos
(P5,000.00);
4. Offenses where there is no private offended party;
5. Where the dispute involves real properties located in
different cities or municipalities unless the parties
thereof agree to submit their differences to amicable
settlement by an appropriate the parties thereof
agree to submit their differences to amicable by
appropriate Lupon;
6. Disputes involving parties who actually reside in
Barangay of different cities or municipalities, except
where such barangay units adjoin each other and the
parties thereof agree to submit their differences to
amicable settlement by an appropriate lupon;
7. Such other classes of disputes which the President
may determine in the interest of justice or upon the
recommendation of the Secretary of Justice.
- Filing of the complaint before the barangay
suspends the running of the prescriptive period.
Appellant - the term used to refer to the one who filed an
appeal
Appelle - the term used on appeal to refer to the person
against whom an appeal is filed
Appeal Brief - filed by the appellant on appeal
Appelle’s Brief - filed by the appellee
REVISED RULE ON SUMMARY PROCEDURE
Applicability
The Rule on Summary Procedure is to be applied by the
MeTCs, MTCCs, MTCs and MCTCs in the following cases
that falls w/in their jurisdiction:
1. Violations of traffic laws, rules and regulations;
2. Violations of the rental law;
3. Violations of municipal or city ordinances;
4. All other criminal cases where the penalty prescribed
by law for the offense charged is imprisonment not
exceeding six (6) months, or a fine not exceeding
(₱1,000.00), or both irrespective of other imposable
penalties, accessory or otherwise, or of the civil
liability arising therefrom; Provided, however, that in
cases involving damage to property through criminal
negligence, this Rule shall govern where the
imposable fine does not exceed ten thousand pesos
(₱10,000.00).
Only those who executed sworn statements or issued
certification attached to the complaint may be allowed as
witnesses in cases covered by the Rule on Summary
Procedure.
Definition of Terms
Criminal Procedure
It is a Supreme Court-issued set of Rules currently
embodied in the Revised Rules of Court (Rule 110) which
provides and regulates the steps by which, if one commits
a crime or an offense, is to be prosecuted and punished if
found guilty (Bustos vs Lucero, 81 Phil. 650; People vs
Lacson, G.R. No. 149453, April 1, 2003).
It is a method fixed by law Judiciary's rule-making power)
for the apprehension and prosecution of a person who is
accused of a crime or an offense and provides for his
punishment whenever convicted.
As defined in the Black’s Law Dictionary, it is the network
of laws or rules which governs the procedural
administration of justice, that is, laws and court rules
governing investigation of crimes, arrest, search and
seizures, bail, and other measures related thereto.
Criminal Law
It is a branch of law which declares what act/acts or
omission/ omissions are considered crimes, and prescribe
punishment for its commission.
The main source or book of the Philippine Criminal Law is
the Revised Penal Code, as amended. The other sources
are
a. the Special Laws with penal provisions and
b. the Philippine jurisprudence which are also part of the
laws of the land.
Crime
It is an act or omission that are punishable under the
Revised Penal Code, as amended.
Criminal Investigation
It is both an art and a science. An art in as much as it uses
skillful application of one's innate knowledge, experience,
psychology, practicality and intuition or insights, etc. in
solving crimes.
Also a science because there are instances where, in
conducting investigation, criminalistics (instrumentation) or
forensic science is necessary for purposes of identifying
the involved criminals especially in examining physical
evidence gathered at the crime scene like semen, urine,
blood, hairs, etc.
Tools of Criminal Investigation
Generally, it refers to the utilization of information,
interview/interrogation and instrumentation in conducting
criminal investigation for purposes of identifying the
criminal in order to be brought to the bar of justice/court.
Custodial Investigation
The skillful questioning of a suspect or a hostile witness
for the purpose of seeking information concerning the
crime under investigation.
Custodial Interrogation
A stage in criminal investigation wherein the probers start
to focus on the actual involvement of the suspect" and the
eventual arrest or taking him into custody. In that stage,
counsel for the suspect is already a requirement.
Criminal Action
One by which the State prosecutes a person for an act or
omission punishable by law (Rules of Court, Rule 1, Sec.
3 (b).
Arrest
The actual taking into custody (or deprivation of liberty) of
a person in order to answer for the commission of an
offense/crime.
Special Laws
Those are laws which were also passed by Philippine
Congress containing a provision that violation of or
disregard of the same are punishable by either
imprisonment and/or fine or both at the discretion of the
court.
Offense
It is an act or omission that are punishable under special
law (Callanta vs Carnation Philippines, 145 SCRA 275) or
those that are not covered by the Revised Penal Code.
Felony
As defined in Article 3 of the Revised Penal Code, it
means an act or omission punishable by the said Code; it
does not cover a crime punished by special law (Filipinas
Life vs Tolentino, SP-05858, Oct. 1, 1976)
Grave Felonies
As defined under Article 9 of the Revised Penal Code, are
felonies that violations thereof attaches capital punishment
or penalties which in any of their periods are afflictive in
accordance with Art. 125 of the same Code.
Less Grave Felonies
One which is in their maximum period are correctional in
accordance with the same article.
Light Felonies
Are those infractions of law for the commission of which
the penalty of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200
pesos or both, is provided.
Prima Facie
It means at first sight; on the face of it (Tiu Ca Siong case,
13 Phil.143).
Prima Facie Case or Evidence
It denotes evidence which, if unexplained or
uncontradicted by other evidence or unless rebutted, is
sufficient to sustain the proposition it supports or to
counter-balance the presumption of innocence to warrant
a conviction of the accused (Cometa vs CA, 321 SCRA
574)
Evidence
It is defined as the means sanctioned by the Rules of
Court, of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding the truth
respecting a matter of fact (Rules of Court, Rule 128, Sec.
I; Bustos vs Lucero, 81 Phil. 650). Evidence is admissible
when it is relevant to the issue and is not excluded by the
law or the rules (Rule 128. Sec. 3). It is elementary that
evidence to be believed must not only proceed from a
credible witness but must be credible in itself (People vs
Marti, 193 SCRA 57; People vs Malbago, 185 SCRA 311)
Forensic Evidence
Refers to anything real or physical evidence that has been
gathered, examined or analyzed and presented in court for
its consideration. I is the merging of law and science for
purposes of insuring the administration of justice.
Forensic Science
It is the scientific process of analyzing forensic evidence
involving many disciplines from other sciences like
forensic trace evidence (analysis of hairs, fibers, paint
chips gunshot residues, soils and similar objects),
anthropology, biology, toxicology, odontology, etc.
Locard’s Exchange Principle
Internationally accepted as the rallying point in discovering
physical evidence in crime investigation made famous by
a French Criminologist, Dr. Edward Locard, which states
that, "Every contact leaves a trace" which can be usually
found in the crime scene. The said principle is the
cornerstone of criminal investigation that is observed up to
the current time (www.enotes.com/forensic science/)
Fingerprint Analysis
One of the oldest disciplines of forensic science which
states that because fingerprints are permanent,
unchangeable and, most importantly, unique to each
person, they are given much weight by the courts. Sir
Francis Galton said, "The chances of two (2) fingerprints
being identical are as small as 64 billion to one. In over a
century of forensic fingerprinting, no two (2) prints have
ever been found to be the same, even those of identical
twins." While identical twins share the same DNA profile
markers, they can be differentiated by their fingerprints
(www.crimtrac.gov.au)
DNA Analysis
Now widely reputed as the most reliable tool of forensic
science (even better than Fingerprint analysis but is costly
and time-consuming), DNA stands for "deoxyribonucleic
acid” and under the microscope, it looks like a very, very
thin spring, and about a foot long. Being a component part
of every cell in the human body, it defines a person's
genetic makeup. it contains our inherited traits of eye
color, hair color, height, weight, bone density and many
others.
DNA is the same in every cell in the body. The DNA in
one's blood is the same with those in the other parts of the
body. The human body is composed of 100 trillion cells
and each cell, except RED BLOOD cells, contain DNA.
DNA fingerprinting experts are in unison in concluding on
this formula: 99.9%-similar; 0.1% - dissimilar.
Like fingerprints, the DNA of a person is unique to him. No
one else would have the same DNA profile. And a person's
DNA is a combination of the mother and father's DNA.
Unless he has an identical twin, his DNA is exclusively his
(www. howstuffworks.com). It can be found in blood,
semen, skin cells, tissue, organs, muscle, brain cells,
bone, teeth, hair, dandruff, saliva, mucus, perspiration,
fingernails, urine, feces, etc. and even at bite mark area,
fingernail scrapings, used condom, cigarette butt,
toothpick, bed linens, clothing, caps for sweats, etc.
(www.ncjrs.gov)
Rules of Evidence
Are commonly accepted principles which expresses the
manner upon which a party relies to establish a fact in
dispute (Domondon, 100 Years of the Bar and Beyond in
Remedial Law Vol. 4 (2015 First Edition)
Allegation
A party's assertion which is unsupported or not backed-up
by evidence, hence is considered self-serving. Mere
allegation is not evidence and is not equivalent to
proof(Martinez, vs NLRC, 272 SCRA 793)
Probable Cause
As determined by the prosecutor for purposes of filing a
case in court, constitute the facts and circumstances
which would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man
to believe that an offense has been committed by the
person sought to be charged and that he should be held
for trial. In determining It, the average man (not learned in
law) weights facts and circumstances without resorting to
the calibrations of the technical rules of evidence but of
the common sense of an ordinary man (People vs CA 301
SCRA 475). It is an executive action or function.
The other Probable Cause which is a indicial action is one
determined by the judge for purposes of issuing warrant of
arrest against the person charged and whether there is a
necessity of placing him under the immediate custody in
order not to frustrate the ends of justice. He must satisfy
himself that based on the evidence submitted, there is
sufficient proof that a crime has been committed and that
the person to be arrested is probably guilty thereof. Its
issuance should be based on his own personal and
independent determination. It is some sort of counter-
checking the validity of the prosecutor's findings (Webb vs
de Leon, 247SCRA 652)
Police Power
the authority of the State to enact legislation (laws) that
may actively interfere with personal liberty or property of
everyone in order to promote the general welfare which
may consist of restraint upon liberty or property in order to
foster the common good.(Phil. Assn. of Service Exporters
vs Drilon, 163 SCRA 386)
Pillars of Criminal Justice System
Refers to the five (5) governmental functions that has
something to do with the administration of justice such as
(a) the Law Enforcement (or "Police Pillar"); (b)
Prosecution (or "Fiscal Pillar"); (c) Court ("Judgment
Pillar*); (d) Corrections ("Reformation Pillar"); and (e)
Community ("Reintegration Pillar")
Criminal Jurisdiction
The authority of a court, agency, body, tribunal, to hear
and try a particular case or offense and impose the
punishment for it, if warranted (People vs Mariano, G.R.
No. L-40527, June 30, 1976)
The filing of the case for preliminary investigation at the
Prosecutor’s Office without the respondent/suspect having
been arrested or put into custody.
Law Enforcement Officers
filing of the case at the Prosecutor's Office by the law
enforcement officers and considering that the suspect is
under detention, the case would be forthwith filed in court
without undergoing preliminary investigation. It usually
happens when the suspect was validly arrested and
refused to sign a waiver of detention under Article 125 of
the Revised Penal Code, as amended. Ordinary Filing.
The filing of the case for preliminary investigation at the
Prosecutor's Office without the respondent/suspect having

First Level Courts Law Enforcement Agencies

These courts are the trial courts lower than the Second
Level Courts such as Municipal Trial Courts (MC),
Metropolitan Trial Courts (MeTC), Municipal Trial Courts in
Cities (MTCC) and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts (MCTC)
Second Level Courts
These courts refers to the Regional Trial Courts (RTC)
Appellate Courts
Are Courts whose primary task is to handle cases on
appeal like the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court.
Government offices tasked to enforce the provisions of the
Revised Penal Code, as amended, and other special laws
that has penal provisions.
Jurisprudence
Judicial interpretation of the laws and/or decisions of the
Supreme Court and sometimes of the Court of Appeals
which are considered case laws and thus also form part of
the Philippine laws.

Summary Procedure

A court procedure that was specifically designed and

issued by the Philippine Supreme Court to expedite the
trial or early resolution of cases. Instead of the usual trial
where the witnesses would be presented in the witness
stand to give their respective testimonies, in this kind of
procedure, the parties would just be required to submit
their respective position papers with attached Affidavits of
witnesses and documentary exhibits.

Preliminary Investigation

It is an inquiry or proceeding to determine whether there is

sufficient ground to endanger a well-founded belief that a
crime has been committed and the respondent is probably
guilty thereof, and should be held for trial (Villaflor vs Viva,
349 SCRA 194).

Its rationale is to protect the accused from the

inconvenience, expense and burden of defending himself
in a formal trial unless the reasonable probability of his
guilt shall have been first ascertained in a fairly summary
proceeding by a competent officer (Yusop vs
Sandiganbayan, 352 SCRA 587). It is not a judicial but an
executive function. And it is not a constitutional but merely
a statutory right which can be waived.

Inquest Proceedings

The filing of the case at the Prosecutor's Office by the law

enforcement officers and considering that the suspect is
under detention, the case would be forthwith filed in court
without undergoing preliminary investigation. It usually
happens when the suspect was validly arrested and
refused to sign a waiver of detention under Article 125 of
the Revised Penal Code, as amended.

Ordinary Filing