G.R. No. 233174 – CABRAL vs.

BRACAMONTE
Before I entered law school, I used to believe that criminal cases can be filed anywhere outside the place
where the offense was committed. This case was a revelation to me. It clearly explains the requisites for
a valid exercise of criminal jurisdiction of the court. These are the jurisdiction over the person,
jurisdiction over the territory, and jurisdiction over the subject matter. For the court to know whether or
not it has jurisdiction over the offense, it must look on the averments of the complaint or information.
Moreover, if the court does not have jurisdiction over the person, it simply cannot hear the case.

G.R. No. 152662 – PANGILINAN vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

This case defines the prescription of crimes. Most of us are not aware that filing of cases has time limit.
It is important to know when do crimes prescribe because the offended party will lose their right to
prosecute the perpetrators if they do not take legal actions within the prescribed period. Prescription
begins to run from the day of the commission of the crime, or if it is not known, from the discovery
thereof and the institution of judicial proceeding. It shall be interrupted when proceedings are instituted
and shall resume if proceedings are dismissed.

G.R. No. 201572 – PEOPLE OF THE PHILS. vs. DELFIN

The institution of a criminal action starts from the filing of information or complaint. This must be given
importance because insufficiency of the information may be a ground for quashal of information. It must
be complete by indicating the name of the accused and the offended party, the designation and acts or
omission of the offense, the approximate date and the place where the offense was committed. It is also
essential to know that it is not the designation of offense that is controlling but the recital of facts
alleged in the information.

G.R. No. 279477 – PEOPLE OF THE PHILS. vs. TABIO

I can still remember this sentimental case. It is about the rape case of a mentally retarded victim. The
accused was charged of three counts of qualified rape. However, conviction was only a simple rape
because the offended party failed to specify the qualifying circumstances in the information. Even if the
guilt of the accused was proven, an accused cannot be convicted if the aggravating circumstances are
not alleged in the information.

G.R. No. 161075 – JOSE-CONSING vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILS.

This case explains the concept of a prejudicial question, which is probably one of the difficult topics in
Criminal Procedure. It is where the civil action and the criminal action are both pending but the former
case must be resolved before the latter may proceed because the resolution of the civil action is
determinative of the guilt or innocence of the accused. It took me time to understand this topic because
you need to determine the intimate relation between the civil case and criminal case. This case also
discusses the prosecution of an independent civil action where the civil liability is deemed instituted
with the criminal action.

G.R. No. 134744 – GIAN VILLAFLOR vs. GOZON

What I learned in this case is the relevance of preliminary investigation and the determination of
probable cause by the prosecutor. This is required for an offense where the penalty is at least 4 years, 2
months and 1 day. The purpose of this procedure is to free the respondent from the inconvenience and
expense of a public trial. If all informations are directly filed to the court without undergoing preliminary
investigation, there is a tendency that the dockets of our court will be clogged. However, this right can
be waived if the accused fails to invoke before arraignment.

G.R. No. 131492 – POSADAS vs. THE OMBUDSMAN

This is my favorite topic. Every time we hear about the word ‘arrest’, what comes in our mind is how it is
conducted. As a general rule, no arrest can be made without a valid warrant. However, if the arrest is in
flagrante delicto, hot pursuit, and the person to be arrested is an escapee, a valid warrantless arrest can
be made. There is a fine line between the first two valid warrantless arrest because the in flagrante
delicto, the person to be arrested was seen to have committed, is actually committing or is attempting
to commit an offense while in hot pursuit, an offense has just been committed but the peace officer has
probable cause to believe based on personal knowledge of facts that the person to be arrested has
committed it.

G.R. No. 148825 – CANTON vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILS.

This is my most unforgettable case because I was the one who was called to recite on this case. Aside
from warrantless arrests, there are also valid warrantless searches. Unlike arrests which is concerned
with the seizure of a person, a search is concerned with the seizure of personal properties subject to the
offense. Common instances of valid warrantless searches are warrantless search incidental to lawful
arrest, search of a moving vehicle, stop and frisk, plain view and consented search. These must be
conducted properly because evidences illegally obtained are inadmissible.

G.R No. 153979 – CATIIS vs. COURT OF APPEALS

It is a fundamental rule that all persons, except those charged with offenses punishable by reclusion
perpetua when evidence of guilt is strong, shall, before conviction be bailable. To be granted of bail, the
applicant must be in custody of the law and it must be granted before arraignment. If criminal cases are
within the jurisdiction of the MTC, bail is a matter of right, before and after conviction. Likewise, bail is a
matter of right prior to conviction by the RTC for any offense not punishable by reclusion perpetua.
However, it becomes discretionary after the accused has been convicted in the RTC. Before, I thought
bail was a payment in return for the offender’s release. It is a security given to guarantee the
appearance of the accused at the trial.

G.R No. 140863 – SOLAR TEAM ENTERTAINMENT vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILS.
One misconception of people who are not aware of the Rules of Court perceive that pleadings in an
arraignment are final judgments. It may sound funny but even me, before I studied law, whenever I hear
the phrase ‘plead guilty or not guilty’, I assumed it is already a conviction. Little did I know that it is only
a preliminary proceeding which informs the accused the nature and cause of the accusation against him.
The stage where the presentation of evidence starts and the rendering of judgment is based is during
the trial. Arraignment is imperative because the absence of it results in the nullity of the proceedings
before the trial court.

While all of the cases given by Atty. C are very useful, I choose these cases because each of it tackles
several issues with comprehensive discussion of court rulings. It helped me to better understand the
complexities of Criminal Procedure. Most especially, with the huge help of our teacher, I learned to
appreciate and love the subject even more.

Prepared by:
Joseph Ace Lagurin
Future Atty.