CRIMINAL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS

PROF. JUDGE THERESA S. DIZON

PART I

INTRODUCTION:
I. Basic Concepts
 Definition – CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
 Ultimate Goal of Criminal Procedure
 The Adversarial or Accusational Vs. Inquisitorial System
 Liberal Interpretation of the Rules (Sec.6 Rule I, RRC)

Cases: Cueto vs. Catolico, 31SCRA 52,58;

Cariaga vs. People, 626 SCRA 231,236

II. Requisites for the exercise of Criminal Jurisdiction

a) Jurisdiction over the subject matter;
b) Jurisdiction over the territory; and
c) Jurisdiction over the person of the accused

Cases: Cruz vs. CA, 388 SCRA 72,83

Antiporda, Jr vs. Garchitorena, 321 SCRA 551,558
Treña vs. People, 664 SCRA 355,366

III. CRIMINAL JURISDICTION OVER THE SUBJECT MATTER

1) How jurisdiction over the subject matter is conferred

Cases: Gomez vs. Montalban, 548 SCRA 693, 702

Antiporda, Jr vs. Garchitorena, 321 SCRA 551,558
Padunan vs. DARAB, 396 SCRA 196, 204

2) The conferment of jurisdiction cannot be presumed

Cases: De Jesus vs. Garcia, 19 SCRA 554,559

Soller vs. Sandiganbayan, 357 SCRA 667,683

3) Jurisdiction over a criminal case is DETERMINED by the allegations in the complaint or

information.

Cases: Mobilia Products vs. Umezawa, 452 SCRA 736, 761-762

Rapsing vs. Ables, 684 SCRA 195, 200-201, Oct. 15, 2012
Lacson vs. Executive Secretary, 301 SCRA 298, 325

4) Jurisdiction is not determined by the penalty actually imposed after trial but by the penalty
imposable by the law on the offense

Cases: People vs. Buissan, 105 SCRA 547, 552-553

People vs. Purisima, 69 SCRA 341, 347

5) Principle of adherence of jurisdiction or continuing jurisdiction

Cases: People vs. Cawaling, 293 SCRA 267, 288

Palana vs. People, 534 SCRA 296, 303

6) Objectives based on jurisdictional grounds

1|Page
  After voluntarily submitting a cause and encountering an adverse decision on the merits,
it is too late for theloser question the jurisdiction of the court(People vs. Munar, 53
SCRA 278, 282)
 A party may be stopped from questioning the jurisdiction of the court for reasons of
public policy as when he initially invokes the jurisdiction of the court and then later
onrepudiates that same jurisdiction (Tijam vs. Sibonghanoy, 23 SCRA 29)

I. CRIMINAL JURISDICTION OVER THE PERSON OF THE ACCUSED

1. Jurisdiction over the person of the accused is acquired upon his arrest or apprehension , with or
without a warrant, or his voluntary appearance or submission to the jurisdiction of the court

Cases: Valdepeñas vs. People, 16 SCRA 871,875

2. Filing pleadings seeking affirmative relief constitutes voluntary appearance and the consequent
jurisdiction of one’s person to the jurisdiction of the court.

Cases: Jimenez vs. Sorongon, 687 SCRA 151, 161, Dec. 5, 2012)

3. The voluntary submission of the accused to the jurisdiction of the court is accomplished either
by his pleading to the merits such as filing a motion to quash or other pleadings requiring the
exercise of the court’s jurisdiction, appearing for arraignment or entering trial

Cases: Santiago vs. Vasquez, 217 SCRA 633,643; Antiporda, Jr vs. Garchitorena, 321 SCRA
551,559

4. When the accused appears for arraignment, voluntary submission to the jurisdiction of the
court is accomplished. If he subsequently fails to appear during the trial and escapes from the
custody of the law, such jurisdiction is not lost. Jurisdiction once acquired is not lost but
continues until the case is terminated

Cases: Gimenez vs. Nazareno, 160 SCRA 4, 5

II. CRIMINAL JURISDICTION OF TRIAL COURTS

Rules to Consider:
1. BP 129 as amended by RA 7691
2. The 1991 Rules on Summary Procedure (as amended by the Rules on Expedited
Procedure)
3. The Revised Penal Code
4. The 1987 Constitution
5. The Revised Rules on Continuous Trial of Criminal Cases
6. The Rules on Expedited Procedure (2022) A.M. No. 12-11-2-SC (Guidelines for
Decongesting Holding Jails by Enforcing the Rights of the Accused Persons to Bail
and to Speedy Trial)

PART II- INSTITUTION OF CRIMINAL ACTIONS

1. Rule 110 – Institution of Criminal Actions

A. How criminal actions are instituted
a.1. The institution of a criminal action depends upon whether or not the offense is one which
requires a preliminary investigation (Sec. 1, Rule 110 Rules of Court)
Where a preliminary investigation is required, a criminal action is instituted by filing the
complaint with the proper officer for the purpose of conducting the requisite preliminary
investigation.
2|Page
 a.2. Where a preliminary investigation is not required, a criminal action is instituted in either of
2 ways:
- by filing the complaint or information directly with Municipal Trial Court and Municipal
Circuit Trial Court
- by filing the complaint with the office of the Prosecutor (Sec. 1, Rule 110)

B. The institution of the criminal action interrupts the period of prescription of the offense
charged unless otherwise provided in special laws
- Sec. 1, Rule 110
- Act No. 3326 as amended Zaldivia vs. Reyes Jr. 211 SCRA 277, 283-284

C. A criminal action is prosecuted under the direction and control of the public prosecutor. This is
the general rules and this applies to a criminal action commenced either by a complaint or
information. (Sec. 5, Rule 110, RRC; ___ vs. People, 564 SCRA 542, 560-561)

D. The rationale for the rule that all criminal actions shall be prosecuted under the directions and
control of a public prosecutor is that since a criminal offense is an outrage against the
sovereignty of the state, it necessarily follows that a representative of the state shall direct and
control the prosecution thereof. (Chua vs. Padilla, 522 SCRA 60,66)

E. Where the offense is a violation of a special law, the same shall be prosecuted pursuant to the
provisions of the said law (Sec. 5, Rule 110)
F. A private prosecutor may prosecute the criminal action up to the end of the trial, even in the
absence of the public prosecutor, if he is authorized to do so in writing, This written
authorization shall be given either by the chief of the Prosecution Office or the Regional State
Prosecutor. The written authorization in order to be given effect must, however be approved by
the Court. (Sec. 5, Rule 110, RRC; AM No. 02-2-07-SC, effective May 1, 2002)
G. Intervention of the offended Party in the prosecution of the Criminal Action
- Every person criminally liable for a felony Is also civilly liable (Art 100, RPC)
See also Art 104, RPC
Sec. 16, Rule 110, RRC
Rule 111, RRC
- Prosecution of Private Crimes
(Sec. 5, Rule 110)
See People vs. Ilarde, 125 SCRA 1
H. THE COMPLAINT AND INFORMATION
- Definitions and Distinction
- Sufficiency of Complaint vs. Information
- How the nature of the offense is determined
The real nature of the criminal charge is determined not from the caption or the preamble of
the information, or from the specification of the provision of the alleged to have been violated,
which are mere conclusions of law, but by the ACTUAL RECITAL OF THE FACTS in the complaint
or information.
Cases: People vs. Valdez, 663 SCRA 272, 286-287, January 18, 2012
People vs. Valdez, 690 SCRA 563, 569 GR No. 175602, February 13, 2013
Espino vs. People, 706 SCRA 704, 719, October 2, 2013
Consigna vs. People, GR No. 175750-51, April 2, 2014

I. How to state the name of the accused

 Sec. 12, Rule 110
 People vs. Espera, 706 SCRA 704, 719, October 2, 2013
 People vs. Yau, GR No. 208170, August 20, 2014

J. How to state the name of the offended party who is a natural person
 Sec. 12, Rule 110
 Lee Pue Liong vs. Chua Pue Chin Lee, 703 SCRA 240, 252, August 7, 2013

3|Page
 K. Designation of the Offense
- The designation of the offense requires, as a rule that the name given to the offense by the
statute shall be stated in the complaint or information (Sec. 8, Rule 110)
- To be included in the complete designation of the offense is an assessment of the acts or
omissions constituting the offense (Sec. 8, Rule 110)
- The complaint or information shall specify the qualifying and aggravating circumstances of the
offense (Sec. 8, Rule 110)
- The prosecutor is not even required to be absolutely accuratein designating the offense by its
formal name in the law (Espino vs. People, 700 SCRA 579, 574, GR No. 188217, July 3, 2013)
People vs. Valdez, 690 SCRA 563, 570, February 13, 2013
People vs. Rebucan, 654 SCRA 726
- The accused will not be convicted of the offense provided during the trial if such
circumstances were not properly alleged in the information (Buebas vs. People, 550 SCRA
210,227)
- CAUSES OF ACCUSATION
1. The acts or omissions complained of must be alleged in such a form as is sufficient to enable
a person of common understanding to know what offense is intended to be charged and
enable the court to know the proper judgment. (Serapio vs. Sandiganbayan, 396 SCRA 443,
459-460)
2. In informing the accused of the cause of accusation against him, it is not necessary to
employ the words used in the statute alleged to have been violated (Sec.9, Rule 110)

L. Duplicity of the offense

- The general rules is that a complaint or information must charge only one offense (Sec. 13,
Rule 110)
- The rule against duplicity is transgressed when in theinformation the accused is charged with
multiple murder, multiple frustrated murder, and multiple attempted murder (People vs. Delos
Santos, 355 SCRA 415, 432)
- The rationale behind this rule is to give the accused the necessary knowledge of the charge
against him and enable him to sufficiently prepare for his defense (People vs. CA, GR No.
183652, February 25, 2015)
- Exception to the rule against duplicity- when the law prescribed a single punishment for
various offenses as in complex and compound crimes treated under Art 48 of the RPC

M. VENUE OF CRIMINAL ACTIONS

1) The criminal action shall be instituted and tried in the court of the municipality or territory (a)
where the offense was committed, or (b) where any of its essential ingredients occurred. (Sec.
5, Rule 110 RRC; Unionbank of the Philippines vs. People, 667 SCRA 113, 123 February 28, 2012)
2) One of the fundamental principal in criminal procedure is that a court cannot exercise
jurisdiction over a person charged with an offense committed outside its limited territory; this is
because venue is a jurisdictional matter in criminal cases (Sec. 6, Rule 110, RRC)
3) How to state the place of the commission of the offense (Sec. 10, Rule 110 RRC)

N. Amendment or Substitution of the Complaint or Information

Amendment is the correction of an error or an omission in a complaint or information.
 If the amendment is made BEFORE the accused enters his plea, the complaint or
information may be amended in form or substance, without the need for leave of court
(Sec. 14, Rule 110)

 Rule as to amended made after the plea, Sec. 14, Rule 110
Ricarge vs. CA, 515 SCRA 302, 315
Matalam vs. Sandiganbayan, 455 SCRA 736, 746
Fronda –Baggao vs. People, 539 SCRA 531, 535

4|Page
  Formal vs. Substantial Amendment
(Pacoy vs. Judge Afable Cajigal, 534 SCRA 338)
Teehankee vs. Madayag, 207 SCRA 134, 139-144
Examples of Formal Amendments
- Insertion of the real name of the accused (People vs. Padica, 221 SCRA 362, 381)
- Inclusion of an additional accused acted in conspiracy with the original accused (People
vs. CA, 121 SCRA 733, 737)
- Additional allegation of conspiracy (Buhat vs. CA, 265 SCRA 701, 707)
Examples of Substantial Amendment
- DIonaldo vs. Dacuycuy, 108 SCRA 736, 738
- People vs. Montenegro, 159 SCRA 236, 241
- People vs. Sandoval, 348 SCRA 476, 485
 Substitution of the complaint or information – Sec. 14, Rule 110
- Sec 19, Rule 119
- Ocampo vs. Abando, GR No. 176830, February 11, 2014
 Distinction between substitution and amendment

PART III. PROSECUTION OF CIVIL ACTION

1) When a criminal action is substituted, the civil action for the recovery of the civil liability arising from
the offense charged shall be deemed instituted with the criminal action.
Section 1 (a) Rule III, RRC
Article 100, RPC
Nissan Gallery-Ortigas vs. Felipe, 709 SCRA 214, 221-222, Nov 11, 2013

2) Because a person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable, generally , therefore , a criminal case
has two aspects, the civil and criminal. (Art. 100, RPC)
3) The civil action , in which the offended party is plaintiff and the accused is the defendant, is 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.
(Heirs of Sarah Marie Palma Burgos vs. CA,, 612 SCRA 1,7)
4) The rule of implied institution of the civil action does not apply before the filing of the criminal action
or information.
(ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corp. vs. Ombudsman, 569 SCRA 59, 74)
5) Judgment of conviction includes a judgment on the civil liability (Hyun Hyung Park vs. Eun Wong Choi,
515 SCRA 502, 513)
6) When a civil action may proceed independently, independent civil actions and quasi-delicts
See articles 31 and 33, Civil Code
Lim vs. Kou Co Ping, 679 SCRA 114, 127-128, August 23, 2012
Articles 32, 33, 34 and 2176 Civil Code- separate, distinct and independent civil action
Article No. 2177, liability arising from quasi-delict
The suspension shall last until final judgment is rendered in the criminal action, Section 2, Rule III

7) Effect of the death of the accused on his criminal liability and civil liability
a) Death of the accused prior to final judgment, as when he dies pending appeal of his conviction,
extinguishes his criminal liability
Cases: People vs. Paras, 739 SCRA 179, 183, October 22, 2014
People vs. Dionaldo, G.R. No. 207949, Sept. 9, 2015
People vs. Soria, G.R. No. 179031, Feb. 24, 2014
b) If the accused dies after arraignment and during the pendency of the criminal action, the civil liability
of the accused arising from the crime is extinguished.
Section 4, Rule III , RRC, People vs. Paras, 739 SCRA 179, 184, Oct. 22, 2014

8) The extinction of the penal action does not carry with it the extinction of the civil action (Section 2,
Rule III, RRC)

5|Page
 Domingo vs. Colina, 698 SCRA 574, 580, June 17, 2013
Hence , if the accused is found not criminally liable, it does not mean that he will not likewise be held
civilly liable. (Nissan-Gallery-Ortigas vs. Felipe, 709 SCRA 214, 222, Nov. 11, 2013)

9) Effect of payment of civil liability

Payment of civil liability does not extinguish criminal liability. Hence, a judge can not dismiss a criminal
case because the civil liability has been paid. (Cabico vs. Dimaculangan-Querijero, 522 SCRA 300, 310)

10) Concept of a prejudicial question

San Miguel Properties, Inc. vs. Perez, 705 SCRA 38, 55, G.R. No. 166836, Sept 4, 2013
People vs. Arambulo, G.R. No. 186597, June 17, 2015
JM Dominguez Agronomic Co, Inc. vs. Liclican, G.R No. 208587, July 29, 2015

The concept of prejudicial question comes into play, when a civil action and a criminal action are both
pending, and there exists in the former case, an issue which must be preemptively resolved before
the latter case may proceed.
Strategic Alliance Dev’t. Corp. vs. Star Infrastructure Devt. Corp., 647 SCRA 545, 553

PART IV. PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION (RULE 112)

1) Definition of Preliminary Investigation
Section 1, Rule 112
Galvez vs. CA, 671 SCRA 222, 235 April 25, 2012
Hasegawa vs. Giron, 703 SCRA 549, 560 August 14, 2013

2) Specific Purposes of Preliminary Investigation

3) Nature of Preliminary Investigation

A. That function belongs to the public prosecutor (Punzalan vs. Plata, 704 SCRA 426, 439, Sept. 2,
2013)
B. The determination of probable cause, is under our criminal justice system, an executive
function that the courts can not interfere with in the absence of grave abuse of discretion
(Saapudin vs. CA, 691 SCRA 578, 597, Feb. 25, 2013; Villanueva vs. Caparas, 689 SCRA 679, 685,
January 30, 2013)
C. The courts, as a rule, can not reverse the findings of probable cause of the Secretary of Justice,
except in clear cases of grave abuse of discretion (Unilever Phils, Inc. vs. Tan, G.R. No. 179367,
Jan. 9, 2014)
D. The purpose of a preliminary investigation is not to declare respondent guilty beyond
reasonable doubt but only to determine first, whether or not a crime has been committed, and
whether or not the respondent if “probably guilty” of the crime.
(Callo Trinidad vs. Esteban, 694 SCRA 185, 198, March 20, 2013; Estrada vs. OMB, G.R. No.
212140-41. January 21, 2015)
E. The prosecutor merely determines the existence of probable cause, and to file the information
if he finds it to be so (De Chavez vs. OMB, 514 SCRA 638, 651-652)

4) Right to a Preliminary Investigation is not a constitutional right

A. The holding of a preliminary investigation is not required by the constitution. But while the
right is statutory rather than constitutional ,since it has been established by statute, it becomes
a component of due process in criminal justice. (Duterte vs. Sandiganbayan, 289 SCRA 721,
737-738; Ong vs. Sandiganbayan, 470 SCRA 7, 20)
B. It is a substantive right . To deny the claim of the accused to a preliminary investigation would
be to deprive him the full measure of his right to due process (Duterte vs. Sandiganbayan, 289
SCRA 721, 738)

5) Right to a preliminary investigation is waivable.

6|Page
 (People vs. Gomez, 117 SCRA 73. 78), (Go vs. C.A., 206 SCRA 138, 153)

6) Probable Cause in Preliminary Investigation

a. Probable cause pertains to fact and circumstances sufficient to support a well-
founded belief that a crime has been committed and the accused is probably guilty
thereof. (Shu vs. Dee, G.R. No. 182573, April 23, 2014)
b. The evidence necessary to establish probable cause as based only on the likelihood,
or probability, of guilt.
(Estrada vs. OMB, G.R. No. 212140-41, January 21, 2015)
(People vs. Borje, G.R. No. 170046, December 10, 2014)

7) Preliminary Examination vs. Preliminary Investigation

8) Instances when probable cause needs to be established

a. Section 1 and 3 of Rule 112
b. Section 6 and 9 of Rule 112
c. Section 5 (b) of Rule 113
d. Section 4 of Rule 126

9) Officers authorized to conduct preliminary investigation and determine existence of probable

cause
(See also A. M. No. 05-8-26-SC, October 3, 2005)
(Sibulo vs. Toledo-Mupas, A. M. No. MTJ-07-1686)

10) Cases requiring a preliminary investigation

- For an offense where the law prescribes a penalty of at least four (4) years, two (2) months, and
one (1) day without regard to the fine
 Rule 112, Section 1, RRC; Tabujara III vs. People , 570 SCRA 229, 245)

11) Procedure for cases not requiring a preliminary investigation

a. First, by filing the complaint directly with the prosecutor; or Section 3 (a) Rule 112
b. Second, by filing the complaint or information with the Municipal Trial Court (Section 8,
Rule 112, RRC; Tabujara vs. People, 570 SCRA 229, 245)

12) What is an INQUEST PROCEEDING?

When is it proper? (Ladlad vs. Velasco, 523 SCRA 318) See Section 6, Rule 112, RRC (See pages 202-
205, Criminal Procedure by Riano)

13) May a person lawfully arrested without a warrant ask for a preliminary investigation? (Section 6,
Rule 112, see also R.A. 7438, Section2)

14) An accused who wants to question the regularity or absence of a preliminary investigation must do
so before he enters his plea. Failure to invoke the right before entering a plea will amount to a
waiver. (People vs. Gomez, 117 SCRA 73,78)
(People vs. Buluran, 325 SCRA 476, 486)

15) After filing a complaint, the investigating officer may either DISMISS the complaint or ISSUE a
subpoena to the respondent (Section3, Rule 112)

16) Resolution of the investigating officer/prosecutor and certification of preliminary investigation

(Section 4, Rule 112)

17) Motion for Reconsideration and appeals to the DOJ

7|Page
 18) Records needed to be filed in court to support the information or complaint (Section 7 B, Rule 112)

19) Action of the JUDGE upon filing of the complaint or information:

a. Within 10 days from the filing of the complaint or information, the judge may personally
evaluate the resolution of the prosecutor. In conducting the evaluation of the resolution,
the judge shall look into its supporting evidence (Section 5, Rule 112)
b. The judge will personally evaluate the resolution of the prosecutor. If the evidence on
record clearly fails to establish probable cause, the judge may immediately dismiss the case.

( The law Firm of Chavez Miranda and Aseoche vs. Fria, 703 SCRA 258, 264, 265, G.R. No. 183014,
August 7, 2013; Cajipe vs. People, G.R. No. 203605, April 23, 2014)

c. If the judge finds probable cause, he shall issue a warrant of arrest. Hence, the issuance of
a warrant of arrest implies the existence of a finding of probable cause by the court.

A COMMITMENT ORDER shall be issued instead of a warrant of arrest when the accused has
already been previously validly arrested. (Section 6, Rule 112, see also Section 5, Rule 112)

20) WHEN WARRANT OF ARREST IS NOT NECESSARY

A. When a complaint or information has already been filed pursuant to a lawful warrantless arrest,
i.e. if the accused is already under detention and was lawfully arrested without a warrant and a
complaint or information has been filed pursuant to Section 6, Rule 112

(See also Section 5 (B) and (c) of Rule 112 )

B. When the accused is charged for an offense punishable only by fine (Section 5c Rule 112)

C. When the case is subject to the Rules on Summary Procedure (Section 16, of the Rules on Summary
Procedure), unless he fails to appear whenever required.

21. An important doctrine enshrined in the case of CRESPO VS. MOGUL, 151 SCRA 462:

“Once a criminal complaint or information I s filed in court, any disposition of the case or dismissal or acquittal
or conviction of the accused rests within the exclusive jurisdiction , competence, and discretion of the trial
court.”

PART V. ARREST, SEARCH AND SEIZURE

1. What is an ARREST?

An arrest is the taking of a person into custody in order that he may be bound to answer
for the commission of an offense. (Section 1, Rule 113)

2. In making an arrest, a person need not be actually restrained by the person making the arrest. A
submission to the custody of the person making the arrest already constitutes an arrest. (Section 2,
Rule 113)

3. Requisites for the issuance of a Warrant of Arrest

a) Section 2, Article III (Bill of Rights) 1987 Constitution
b) An arrest without a probable cause is an unreasonable seizure of a person, and violates the privacy of
persons which ought not to be intruded by the State.

(Borlongan vs. Pena, 620 SCRA 106, 127)

8|Page
 4. PROBABLE CAUSE for the issuance of a warrant of arret is defined as “such 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 arrested. (Ocampo vs. Obando, G.R. No. 176830, Feb. 11, 2014)

5. Personal examination by a judge is not required.

(AAA vs. Carbonell, 524 SCRA 496, 508)

(Soliven vs. Makasiar, 167 SCRA 393)

(Ocampo vs. Obando, G.R. No. 176830, Feb. 11, 2014)

See also Section 8 (b) Rule 112 and Section 1 (b) Rule 110

6. When a warrantless arrest is lawful

A. Section 5, Rule 113

Cases: Hao vs. People, G.R. No. 183345, Sept. 17, 2014; People vs. Adriano, G.R. No. 208169, Oct. 8, 2014;

Omar vs. People, G.R. No. 182534, Sept. 2, 2015

B. Other Grounds for a lawful warrantless arrest

See Section 13, Rule 113 and Section 23, Rule 114

C. Arrest in flagrante delicto

Cases: People vs. Callado, 698 SCRA 628, 642-643, June 17, 2013; People vs. Edano, G.R. No. 188133, July
17, 2014; People vs. Endaya, G.R. No. 205741, July 23, 2014; People vs. Chi Chan Liu , G.R. No. 189272,
January 21, 2015; Comerciante vs. People, G.R. No. 205926, July 22, 2015

D. The HOT PURSUIT Exception

Section 5 (b) Rule 113
2 Stringent Requirement:
1. An offense has just been committed; and
2. The person making the arrest has personal knowledge of facts indicating that the
person to be arrested has committed it.
Cases: People vs. Villareal, 693 SCRA 549, 556, March 18, 2013
Pestilos vs. Generoso, 739 SCRA 337, 362, Nov. 10, 2014
Comerciante vs. People, G.R. No. 205926, July 22, 2015
“Under the flagrante delicto exception, the person making the arrest himself witnesses the
crime. In the hot pursuit exception, the person making the arrest knows for a fact that a crime
has been committed.” (People vs. Villareal, 693 SCRA 549, 557, March 18, 2013)

E. METHOD OF ARREST WITHOUT A WARRANT

1. Arrest by an officer (Section 8, Rule 113)

The officer shall inform the person to be arrested of his (a) authority and (b) the cause of his arrest.
2. Arrest by a private person (Section 9, Rule 113)
He shall inform the person to be arrested not of his authority to arrest, but of his a) intention to arrest
him and b) the cause of his arrest .
3. Where a warrantless arrest is made under the in flagrante and hot pursuit exceptions, the person
arrested without a warrant shall be forthwith delivered to the nearest police station or jail. (Section 5,
last par. Rule 113)

F. RIGHTS OF A PERSON ARRESTED- See R.A. 7438, page 246 and 247 of the textbook

G. What is CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION

9|Page
 1. Custodial investigation begins to operate as soon as the investigation ceases to be a general
inquiry into an unsolved crime and the interrogation is then aimed on a particular suspect who has
been taken into custody and to whom the police would then direct interrogatory questions that
tend to elicit incriminating statements. (Luspo vs. People, 739 SCRA 133, 144, Oct. 22, 2014)
2. RA 7438 expanded the meaning of custodial investigation. Under Section 2 (f) of said Act, a
custodial investigation shall include the practice of issuing an “invitation” to a person who is
investigated in connection with an offense he is suspected to have committed, without prejudice to
the liability of the “inviting” officer for any violation of law, this means that even those who
voluntarily surrendered before a police officer must be apprised of the Miranda rights.

(People vs. Chaves, G.R . No. 207950, Sept. 22, 2014)

Part V No. 7 SEARCHES AND SEIZURE (Rule 126)

A. 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. (Section 1, Rule 126)

B. The constitutional guaranty against unlawful searches and seizures is intended as a restraint
against the government and its agents tasked with law enforcement. (Sesbreno vs. Court of
Appeals, G.R. No. 160689, March 26, 2014)

C. See Section 2, Article III, 1987 Constitution

The Constitution mandates that a search and seizure must be carried out through or on the
strength of a judicial warrant predicated upon the existence of probable cause. In the absence
of such warrant, the search and seizure becomes unreasonable. (Comerciante vs. People, G.R.
No. 205926, July 22, 2015)

D. The EXCLUSIONARY RULE

“Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding section shall be inadmissible for
any purpose in any proceeding . (Section 3 (2) , Article III, 1987 Constitution)

E. Where to file application for search warrant:

e.1 As a rule, it shall be filed before any court within whose territorial jurisdiction a crime was
committed (Section 2, a, Rule 126)
Exceptions:
a. The application may be made before any court within the judicial region where the crime
was committed if the place of the commission of the crime is known (Section 2b, Rule 126);
b. The application may also be filed before any court within the judicial region where the
warrant shall be enforced (Section2 b, Rule 126)
c. The application shall be made only in the court where the criminal action has already been
filed (Section 2, last par. Of Rule 126)

F. By the principle of EJUSDEM GENERIS, the Court explained, where a statute describes things of a
particular class or kind accompanied by words of a generic character, the generic word will
usually be limited to things of a similar nature with those particularly enumerated, unless there
be something in the context of the statement which would repel such inference. (People vs.
Nunez, 591 SCRA 394, 405)

G. REQUISITES FOR THE ISSUANCE OF A SEARCH WARRANT:

1. It must be issued upon probable cause;
2. The probable cause must be determined by the judge himself and not by the
applicant or any other person;
3. In the determination of probable cause, the judge must examine, under oath or
affirmation , the complainant and such witnesses he may produce; and

10 | P a g e
 4. The warrant issued must particularly describe the place to be searched and the
persons or things to be searched.
Cases: People vs. Tuan, 628 SCRA 226. 245 Section 4, Rule 126
Century Chinese Medicine Co. vs. People, 709 SCRA 177, 192
Santos vs. Pryce Gases, Inc., 538 SCRA 474, 483
Ogayon vs. People, G.R. No. 188794, Sept. 2, 2015

H. PROCEDURE UNDER SECTION 5 OF RULE 126, AS TO THE CONDUCT OF EXAMINATION OF

COMPLAINANT AND WITNESS TO DETERMINE EXISTENCE OF A PROBABLE CAUSE:
1) The examination must be personally conducted by the judge;
2) The examination must be in the form of searching questions and answers;
3) The complainant and witnesses shall be examined on those facts personally known to them;
4) The statements must be in writing and under oath; and
5) The sworn statement of the complainant and the witnesses, together with the affidavits
submitted, shall be attached to the record.
(Section 5, Rule 126)

I. THE LANDMARK CASE OF STONEHILL VS. DIOKNO, 20 SCRA 383, 393

The description is too broad and general because it authorizes the search and seizure of records
pertaining to all business transactions of petitioner herein, regardless, of whether the transactions
were legal or illegal.

Other cases on search and seizure:

20th Century FoxFilm Corp vs. C.A., 164 SCRA 655, 664-666

Uy vs. BIR, 344 SCRA 36, 64

Kho vs. Makalintal, 306 SCRA 70, 78-79

People vs. Tee, 395 SCRA 419, 434-435

J. OTHER RULES
1) Issuance and form of the search warrant (Section 6, Rule 126)
2) Duration of the validity of a search warrant (Section 10, Rule 126)
3) Time of making the search (Section 9, Rule 126)
4) Manner of making the search ( Section 8, Rule 126) (Section 11, Rule 126) (Section7, Rule 126)
5) Duty of the judge, return and other proceedings (Section 11, Section 12 A, Rule 126)

K. EXCEPTIONS TO THE SEARCH WARRANT REQUIREMENT

1) Warrantless search incidental to a lawful arrest
2) Seizure of evidence in “plain view”
3) Search of a moving vehicle
4) Consented warrantless search
5) Customs search
6) Stop and frisk or Terry searches
7) Exigent and Emergency circumstances
8) Search of vessels and aircraft
9) Inspection of buildings and other premises for the enforcement of fire, sanitary and building
regulations

CASES: People vss. Almodiel, 680 SCRA 306, 322 Sept. 5, 2016

Abelita III vs. Doria, 596 SCRA 220, 228

Zalameda vs. People, 598 SCRA 537, 553-554

People vs. Tuazon, 532 SCRA 152, 167-168

11 | P a g e
 People vs. Libnao, 395 SCRA 407

People vs. Nuevas, 516 SCRA 463, 482

Comerciante vs. People, G.R. NO. 205926, July 22, 2015

Valmonte vs. De Villa, 185 SCRA 665, 668-669 (on checkpoints)

People vs. Vinecario, 420 SCRA 280, 291

L. THE FRUIT OF THE POISONOUS TREE DOCTRINE

-Effect of an illegal search and seizure

Villanueva vs. People, G.R. No. 199042, Nov. 17, 2014

Moncado vs. People’s Court, 80 Phil 1

Stonehill vs. Diokno, 20 SCRA 383

PART VI. BAIL (Rule 114)

1. What is bail? BAIL is the security given for the release of a person in custody of the law,
furnished by him or a bondsman, to guarantee his appearance before any court as required
under specified conditions. (Section 1, Rule 114)
2. The purpose of Bail is to guarantee the appearance of the accused at the trial. (Enrique vs.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 213847, August 18 , 2015) Section 1, Rule 114
3. The money deposited as bail, may however be applied to the payment of fines and costs while
the excess, if any, shall be returned to the accused or to whoever made the deposit. (Section
14, Rule 114)
4. Constitutional basis of the right to bail
a. The right to bail is a constitutional right. (Article III, 1987 Constitution)
b. The presumption of innocence is rooted in the guarantee of due process, and is safeguarded by
the constitutional right to be released on bail (Enrile vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 213847,
August 18, 2015)
c. The Constitution lays down the following fundamental principles in bail:
c.1 All persons charged, before their conviction for a criminal offense , shall be entitled to bail.
This is the general rule.
c.2 The suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus does not impair the right to
bail.
c.3 Excessive bail is not to be required.

5. Taking the constitution and the Rules of Court, the rule is that a person shall, before conviction
be accorded the right to bail, unless he is charged with a capital offense, or an offense
punishable by reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment , and the evidence of his guilt is strong.

Cases: Trillanes IV vs. Pimentel, 556 SCRA 471, 482; People vs. Cabral, 303 SCRA 361, 372;
Section 2, Rule 133; Dipatuan vs. Mangotara, 619 SCRA 48, 56-57; Enrile vs. Sandiganbayan,
G.R. No. 213847, August 18, 2015

6. Applicant for bail must be in custody (Paderanga vs. Court of Appeals, 247 SCRA 741,749)
(Docena-Caspe vs. Bagtas, 400 SCRA 37,44) (Maguddatu vs. Court of Appeals, 326 SCRA 362,
369), (Guillermo vs. Reyes, 240 SCRA 14, 159)

7. Bail to guarantee appearance of witnesses (Section 14, Rule 119 , RRC)

12 | P a g e
 8. Bail for those not yet charged:
a. What entitles a person to bail is his being under the custody of law. Hence, “any person in
custody who is not yet charged in court may apply for bail with any court in the province,
city or municipality where he is held. (Section 17 c, Rule 114 RRC)
b. A person deprived of his liberty by virtue of his arrest or voluntary surrender may apply for
bail as soon as he is deprived of his liberty, even before a complaint or information is filed
against him. He need not wait for his arraignment before filing a petition for bail (Serapio
vs. Sandiganbayan, 396 SCRA 443, 471) (Ruiz vs. Beldia, Jr., 451 SCRA 402, 408)
c. The application for bail shall be made with any court in the province, city or municipality
where the person arrested is held. (Ruiz vs. Beldia, Jr. 451 SCRA 402)

9. Effects of Failure to appear at the trial

a. The failure of the accused to appear at the trial without justification despite due notice
shall be deemed a waiver of his right to be present and the trial may proceed in absentia
(Section 2c, Rule 114, RRC
b. The bondsman may arrest the accused for the purpose of surrendering him. (Section 23,
Rule 114

10. Forms of Bail

a. Corporate surety;
b. Property bond;
c. Cash deposit;
d. Recognizance (Section 1, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16 of Rule 114, RRC) (See also A.M. No. 12-11-2-SC,
Guidelines for Decongesting Holding Jails by Enforcing the Rights of Accused Persons to Bail
and to Speedy Trial)
e. Factors to be considered by the judge in granting the application for bail
E1. Financial ability of the accused to give bail;
E2. Nature and circumstances of the offense;
E3. Penalty for the offense charged;
E4. Character and reputation of the accused;
E5. Age and health of the accused;
E6. Weight of the evidence against the accused;
E7. Probability of the accused appearing at the trial;
E8. Forfeiture of other bail
E9. The fact that the accused was a fugitive from justice when arrested;
E10. Pendency of other cases where the accused is on bail. (See Section 9, Rule 114 and
A.M. No. 12-11-2-SC)
11. When is bail not allowed?
a. When a person is charged with a capital offense, or offense punishable by reclusion
perpetua or life imprisonment, and the evidence of guilt is strong (Section 7, Rule 114)
b. After judgment of conviction is final (Section 24, Rule 114)
c. After the accused has commenced to serve sentence (Section 24, Rule 114)

12. When is bail a matter of right?

a. Before conviction by the Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court, Municipal Trial
Court in Cities, or Municipal Circuit Trial Court;
b. After conviction by the courts mentioned in letter a;
c. Before conviction by the Regional Trial Court of an offense not punishable by death,
reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment (Section 4, Rule 114)

13. When is bail a matter of discretion? (Section5, Rule 114) “But when the accused has been
convicted in the Regional Trial Court of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua
or life imprisonment, the admission to bail becomes discretionary”.

14. WHERE TO FILE AN APPLICATION OR PETITION FOR BAIL

A. GENERAL RULE: with the Court where the case is pending (Section 17 , Rule 114)
See also cases- Savella vs. Ines, 521 SCRA 417, 420-421
13 | P a g e
 B. Where the accused is arrested in a province, city or municipality other than where the case
is pending, the application for bail may also be filed with any Regional Trial Court of said
place. If no judge thereof is available, then with any Metropolitan Trial Court judge,
Municipal Trial Court judge or Municipal Circuit Trial Court judge in the said place. (Section
17 a, Rule 114)

C. Where the grant of bail is a matter of discretion, or the accused seeks to be released on
recognizance, the application may only be filed with the court where the case is pending; on
trial or appeal (Section 17 b , Rule 114)
D. When a person is in custody but not yet charged, he may apply for bail with any court in the
province, city or municipality where he is held. (Section 17 c, Rule 114)

15. Increase or reduction of bail (Section20, Rule 114)

16. Forfeiture of bail (See Section 2b, Rule 114; Magleo vs. De Juan-Quinagoran, A.M. No. RTJ-12-
2336, Nov. 12, 2014) also see Section 21, Rule 114

17. BENCH WARRANT- is a writ issued directly by a judge to a law enforcement officer, for the
arrest of a person ho has been held in contempt, has disobeyed a subpoena, or has to appear at
a hearing or trial. See Section 9, Rule 71.

18. Cancellation of the bail (Section 22, Rule 114)

PART VII. RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED (Rule 115)

1. See Bill of Rights, of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines
2. See Section 1, Rule 115- the rights of the accused at the trial and in criminal prosecutions
3. Presumption of Innocence- Section 14(2) Article III of the 1987 Philippine Constitution
4. Proof Beyond reasonable doubt
a. Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean such a degree of proof as, excluding the
possibility of error, produces absolute certainty. Moral certainty only is required, or that degree
of proof which produces conviction in an unprejudiced mind (Section2, Rule 133)
b. When there is reasonable doubt, acquittal must then follow. The premise is that an accused is
presumed innocent until the contrary is proved. (Valencerina vs. People, G.R. No. 206162, Dec.
10, 2014)
c. There is only one type of quantum of evidence which overcomes the presumption of
innocence-proof beyond reasonable doubt. Without such quantum of evidence, the accused is
entitled to an acquittal. (See Section 2, Rule 133) Proof beyond reasonable doubt is
indispensable to overcome the constitutional presumption of innocence. (People vs.
Montenegro, 436 SCRA 33, 44), (People vs. Clara, 702 SCRA 273, 284, July 24, 2013)
d. The prosecution must rest on its own merits to prove guilt of accused. (People vs. Guzon, 707
SCRA 384, Oct. 9, 2013)

5. The Equipoise Rule- where the Court is faced with conflicting versions of the prosecution and the
defense, and where the evidence, facts and circumstances are capable of two or more
explanations, one of which is consistent with the innocence of the accused and the other
consistent with his guilt, the court will have to resort to the equipoise rule. The said rule provides
that where the evidence in a criminal case is evenly balance, the constitutional presumption of
innocence tilts the scales in favor of the accused. (People vs. Erguiza, 571 SCRA 634, 660)

6. Right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him (Pielago vs. People, 693
SCRA 476, March 13, 2013), See also Section 7 to 12 of Rule 110

14 | P a g e
 7. Right to Counsel- Section 14 (2) Article III of the Constitution, People vs. Bermas, 306 SCRA 135,
147, Section 12(1) Article III of the Constitution, Section 2 (b) R.A. 7438

a. Right to choose a counsel may be waived, but must be in writing and in the presence of a
counsel (People vs. Del Castillo, 439 SCRA 601)
b. What do you mean by a competent and independent counsel / (People vs. Deniega, 251 SCRA
626); (People vs. Rapeza, 520 SCRA 596, 623-624)
c. What is custodial investigation? It is any questioning initiated by law enforcement authorities
after a person is taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any
significant manner. (Tanenggee vs. People, 699 SCRA 639, 655, June 26, 2013), (People vs.
Guillen, 710 SCRA 533, Nov. 25, 2013)

8. Right to Speedy Trial – It is a right of the accused and cannot be invoked by someone who is not an
accused. See Section 14 (2) Art. III of the Phil Constitution, People vs. Anonas, 513 SCRA 552.
The right to speedy trial is deemed violated only when the proceedings are attended by vexatious,
capricious and oppressive delays, etc. (Ombudsman vs. Jurado, 561 SCRA 135, 146)

Right to speedy disposition of cases- Section 16, Article III of the Phil Constitution
Effects of the violation of the right to speedy trial (Condrada vs. People, 398 SCRA 482, 486; see
also Villareal vs. People, 664 SCRA 591, 545)

9. Privilege against self-incrimination (Section 17, Article III of the Phil Constitution) , Section 1 e, Rule
115 Rules of Court, Chavez vs. Court of Appeals, 24 SCRA 663, 677-679)

10. Right to defend himself, right to be present at trial, right to be heard- See Section 1 © Rule 115,
See also Section 14 (2) Article III, 1987 Const.

11. Right to Testify as a Witness, Section 1(d), Rule 115

12. Right to compulsory process , Section 14 (2) , Article III of the Constitution

13. Right to Appeal – In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall have the right to appeal in the
manner prescribed by law. The right to appeal is statutory and its suppression would be a violation
of due process (Hilario vs. People, 551 SCRA 191, 209)

PART VIII. ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA (RULE 116)

1. ARRAIGNMENT is the formal mode and manner of implementing the constitutional right of an
accused to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him. Its purpose is to
apprise the accused why he is being prosecuted by the State. As such, it is an indispensable
requirement of due process and cannot be regarded lightly or brushed aside peremptorily. (Taglay
vs. Daray, 678 SCRA 640, August 22, 2012) (Kummer vs. People, 705 SCRA 490, Sept. 11, 2013)

2. Effect of absence of arraignment- results in the nullity of the proceedings before the trial court –
Taglay vs. Daray, 678 SCRA 640, August 22, 2012) He can not also be tried in absentia if he is not
arraigned. (Section 14 (2), Article III, !987 Const.

3. Duty of the Court before Arraignment-

a. Inform the accused of his right to counsel;
b. Ask him if he desires to have one;
c. Must assign a counsel de oficio to defend him, unless the accused (i.) is allowed to defend
himself in person or (ii.) has employed a counsel of his choice (See Section 6, Rule 116)

Cases: Gamas vs. Oco, 425 SCRA 588, 600-601; See also Section 7 and 8, Rule 116
15 | P a g e
 4. Before arraignment and plea, the accused may avail of any of the following:
a. Bill of particulars, Section 9, Rule 116. People vs. jalbuena, 526 SCRA 500
b. Suspension of arraignment- See Section 11 © Rule 116, of the Rules of Court
c. Motion to Quash – Section 3, Rule 117 in relation to Section 1 of the same rule
d. Challenge the validity of the arrest or legality of the warrant issued or assail the regularity or
question the absence of a preliminary investigation of the charge- Section 26, Rule 114
Cases: People vs. Lozada, 406 SCRA 494; Adasa vs. Abalos, 516 SCRA 261; Gandarosa vs. Flores,
527 SCRA 776

5. Amended information, substituted information. -See Cabangangan vs. Concepcion, 95 Phil. 87,90;
Teehankee, Jr. vs. Madayag, 207 SCRA 132, 143; Kummer vs. People , 705 SCRa 490, 509, Sept. 11,
2013

6. How arraignment and plea made

a. Where? Before the Court where the complaint or information was filed or assigned for trial –
See Section 1 (a) Rule 116
b. How? 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 the language or dialect known to him, and asking
him whether he pleads guilty or not guilty (Section 1 (a) , Rule 116 )
c. When? Within 30 days from the date the court acquires jurisdiction over the person of the
accused, unless a shorter period is provided by a special law or a Supreme Court circular
(Section 1 (g) Rule 116) Also within 10 days , if the accused is detained (See the Revised
Guidelines for the Continuous Trial of Criminal Cases)

7. Other Matters
a. Record of arraignment-Section1b, Rule 116
b. Presence of accused- Section 1b , Rule 116
c. Presence of offended party- Section 1f, Rule 116
d. When a plea of ‘not guilty” shall be entered for the accused if he –
d.1 refuses to plead;
d.2 makes a conditional plea;
d.3 pleads guilty but presents exculpatory evidence in which case the guilty plea shall be
deemed withdrawn and a plea of not guilty shall be entered (See Section 1 c and d of Rule 116

e. It is well-settled that when a plea of guilty is not definite or ambiguous, or not absolute, the
same amounts to a plea of not guilty. (People vs. Strong, 63 SCRA 133, 135-136)

8. Plea of guilty to a lesser offense; plea bargaining- Plea bargaining in criminal cases, is a process whereby the
accused and the prosecution work a mutually satisfactory disposition of the case subject to court approval. It
usually involves the defendant’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. (Daan vs.
Sandiganbayan, 550 SCRA 23, 240-241)

a. Requisites for a plea of guilty to a lesser offense-

a.1 The lesser offense is necessarily included in the offense charged; and

a.2 The plea must be with the consent of both the offended party and the prosecutor. The consent of the
offended party will not be required if said party, despite due notice, fails to appear during the arraignment.
(Section 2, and Section 1f, Rule 116.

b. What is plea bargaining? In Daan vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 163972-77, March 28, 2008 , it 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 defendant’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 that for the graver charge. Ordinarily,
plea bargaining is made during the pre-trial stage of the proceedings. It is authorized under Section 2, Rule 116
of the Rules of Court.
16 | P a g e
c. Plea bargaining in drug cases- In the landmark case of Salvador Estipona vs. Judge Lobrigo (En Banc), G.R.
No. 226679, August 15, 2017, the Supreme Court declared Section 23, Ra 9165 prohibiting plea bargaining in
drug cases to be unconstitutional.

Why is it that under the Revised Guidelines for Continuous Trial of Criminal Cases, plea bargaining in drug
cases is not allowed?

The reason is that Section 23, of RA 9165 has yet to be declared unconstitutional that time because the
Revised Guidelines for Continuous Trial of Criminal Cases was issued on April 25, 2017 or almost four (4)
months before the decision in Estipona case was rendered.

After the Estipona case, what guidelines were issued on plea bargaining in drug cases?

1) The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) issued OCA Circular No. 90-18, adopting the Supreme
Court En Banc resolution dated April 10, 2018 or Adoption of the Plea Bargaining Framework in Drug
Cases. It sets the limits to be observed in plea bargaining in drug cases including the specific violations
subject of plea bargaining.
2) The Department of Justice also issued DOJ Circular No. 27 on June 26, 2018 or the Amended Guidelines
on Plea Bargaining for RA 9165 , to serve as an internal guideline for the prosecutors to observe before
they give their consent to proposed plea bargains. It offers stiffer penalties than that of OCA Circular
90-18.
3) In a recent decision of the Supreme Court, it granted the petition of the OSG and set aside the Naga
RTC and Ca’s decision in the case of one Naci Borras. The Court ruled that the consent of the
prosecutor is indispensable in allowing an accused to make a plea bargain in drug cases. (May, 2021)
*See case of People vs. Reafor, G.R. No. 247575, Nov. 16, 2020 (plea bargaining still allowed, with the
consent of the prosecutior)

9.Plea of Guilty to a capital offense- Requirements for the Court to:

a. Conduct a searching inquiry (i.) to ascertain the voluntariness of the plea, and (ii) ascertain
whether or not the accused has full comprehension of the consequences of his plea;
b) To require the prosecution to prove the following: (i.) the guilt of the accused; and (ii) the
precise degree of his culpability;
c) to ask the accused if he wishes to present evidence in his behalf and be allowed to do so , if he
desires. (Section 3, Rule 116 of the Rules of Court; People vs. Gambao, 706 SCRA 508, 522, October
1, 2013)

PART IX- MOTION TO QUASH (Rule 117)

1) What is a Motion to Quash?
2) Time to Move to Quash- by the accused, before entering his plea Section 1, Rule 117
3) Form and Contents- Section 2, Rule 117 – must be in writing, signed by the accused or his
counsel and shall distinctly specify its factual and legal grounds. The court shall consider no
other ground other than those stated in the motion , except lack of jurisdiction over the offense
charged.
4) Grounds- Section3, Rule 117
5) Amendment of Complaint or information- Section 4
When Court shall order the amendment of the information or complaint
a. The existence of a valid ground for sustaining a motion to quash will not necessarily result
in the dismissal of the information or complaint. If the motion to quash is based on the
alleged defect of the complaint or information, and the defect can be cured, the court shall
order that an amendment be made.
b. Even if an information may be defective because the facts charges do not constitute an
offense, the dismissal shall be given a chance to correct the defect and the court can order
the dismissal only upon the prosecution’s failure to do so. It would constitute an arbitrary
exercise of the power correctible by certiorari if the trial court would not provide the

17 | P a g e
 prosecution the opportunity to correct the defect. (Go vs. BangkoSentral ng Pilipinas, 604
SCRA 322, 335, 2009; People vs. Odtuhan, 701 SCRA 506, July 17, 2013)

6) Order sustaining a motion to quash is not a bar to another prosecution; exceptions- See
Section 5, Rule 117; People vs. Odtuhan, 701 SCRRA 506; 514, July 17, 2013.
7) The Principle of Double Jeopardy- Section 21, Article III of the Constitution; Double jeopardy, as
a criminal law concept, refers to jeopardy of punishment for the same offense, suggesting that
double jeopardy presupposes two separate criminal prosecutions (Garcia vs. Sandiganbayan,
604 SCRA 348, 361)- See also Section 7, Rule 117
8) Distinguish motion to quash from demurrer to evidence.
9) Effect of sustaining the motion to quash- Section 5, Rule 117
10) Order sustaining the motion to quash is not a bar to another prosecution, exception- Section 6,
Rule 117
11) Former conviction and acquittal and double jeopardy- Section7, Rule 117
12) Provisional Dismissal- Section 8
a. The case may only be provisionally dismissed with the consent of the accused;
b. For cases punishable by imprisonment not exceeding 6 years of fine of any amount, or both,
shall become permanent one (1) year after issuance of the order without the case having been
revived. Those offenses with imprisonment of more than 6 years, their provisional dismissal
will become permanent two (2) years after issuance of the order without the case having been
revived.- Section8 Rule 117.
c. Other Rules on Provisional Dismissal- See Section 10, A.M. No. 12-11-2-SC (Guidelines for
Decongesting Holding Jails by Enforcing the Rights of the Accused Persons to Bail and to Speedy
Trial)

13) Failure to move to quash or to allege any ground therefor- Section 9

PART X. PRE-TRIAL, TRIAL, DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE (RULES 118-119)

X-1. PRE-TRIAL

1. Pre-trial is mandatory In criminal cases. An order of pre-trial conference considers 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 matters as will promote a fair and expeditious trial of the criminal and civil aspects of the case
(Section 1, Rule 118)
Note: No evidence shall be allowed to be presented and offered during the trial other than those
identified and marked during the pre-trial other than those identified and marked during the pre-
trial except when allowed by the court for good cause shown. (A. M. No. 03-1-09-SC, July13, 2004)

2. When pre-trial shall be held- See Revised Guidelines for Continuous Trial of Criminal Cases and A.M.
No. 12-11-2-SC

3. Pre-trial agreement shall be reduced in writing. (Section 2, Rule 118)

4. Non-appearance at pre-trial conference- If the counsel for the accused or the prosecutor does not
appear 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 3, Rule 118

5. Pre-trial Order; effect

18 | P a g e
 a. Within 10 days after the termination of the pre-trial, the trial judge shall issue a Pre-trial Order
setting forth the actions taken during the pre-trial conference, the facts stipulated, the admissions
made, the evidence marked, the witnesses to be presented and the schedule of trial.
b. The Pre-Trial Order shall bind the parties, limit the trial to matters not disposed of and control the
course of the action during the trial, unless modified by the court to prevent manifest injustice.
(See A.M. No. 03-1-09-Sc, July 13, 2004 and Rule 118, Section 4, Rules of Court)

6. See also the Revised Guidelines for Continuous Trial of Criminal Cases on Mediatable Offenses, referral
to Mediation Proceedings only as to the civil aspect of the case

X-2. TRIAL (Rule 119)

1. Time to prepare for Trial – after entering a plea of not guilty, the accused has at least 15
days to prepare for trial (Section 1)
2. Effect of not bringing the accused to trial within the prescribed period
a. If the accused is not brought to trial in accordance with the time limit set by Section 6,
Rule 119, the information may be dismissed upon the motion of the accused. The
ground for dismissal is the denial of his right to speedy trial. In the case of denial of the
right to speedy trial, the dismissal shall be subject to the rules on double jeopardy.
(Section 9, Rule 119)
b. The motion for dismissal must be made prior to trial ; otherwise, the failure to do so
shall be deemed a waiver of the right to have the charge dismissed under Section 9, Rule
119.
3. Delays to be excluded in computing the period for commencement of the trial (See Section
3, Rule 119)
4. Continuous Trial -Section 2, Rule 119
5. Trial Period- In no case shall the entire trial period exceed 180 days from the first day of
trial, except as otherwise authorized by the Supreme Court (Section2 , Rule 119)
6. Postponement or continuance, factors to be considered for granting continuances or
postponements, prohibited grounds for continuance (Section 4, Rule 119 in relation to
Section 3 f of Rule 119)
7. How to secure appearance of a material witness
a. Either party, upon motion, secure an order from the court for a material witness to post
bail for such sum as may be deemed proper, if the court is satisfied upon either a) proof,
or b) oath that a material witness will not testify when required. (Section 14, Rule 119)
b. If the witness refuses to post bail, the court shall commit him to prison, until he
complies or is legally discharged after his testimony has been taken (Section 14, Rule
119)
8. Requisites for the discharge of the accused to be a state witness, requisites- Section 17,
Rule 119
Cases: Jimenez, Jr. vs. People , G.R. No. 209195, Sept. 17, 2014
People vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 185729-32, June 26, 2013
Ampatuan, Jr. vs. De Lima, 695 SCRA 159, April 3, 2013
9. Mistake in charging the proper offense- Section 19, Rule 119
When a mistake in charging the proper offense become manifest at any time before
judgment, and the accused cannot be convicted of the offense charged, or any other
offense necessarily included therein, the court shall order the filing of a new information.
Upon filing of said information the court shall dismiss the original cases and shall commit
the accused to answer for the proper offense. The accused shall not be discharged if there
appears good cause to detain him. (Seection 19, Rule 119)

10. ORDER OF TRIAL (Section 11, Rule 119)

Trial shall proceed in the following order:

19 | P a g e
 1. The Prosecution shall present is evidence first (a) to prove the charge, and (b) to prove the
civil liability in the proper case.
2. The Accused may then present his evidence to prove his defense and the damages he
sustained, if any, arising from the issuance of a provisional remedy in the case;
3. The Prosecution may present its rebuttal evidence, unless the court allows it to present
additional evidence bearing on the main issue;
4. The accused may present sur-rebuttal evidence, unless the court allows him to present
additional evidence bearing on the main issue;
5. Upon submission 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 .

11. TRIAL IN ABSENTIA

A. An accused need not always be present in every hearing although it is his right to be
present, if he so desires, from arraignment to the rendition of the judgment. (Section
14 (2) Bill of Rights, Phil Constitiution
B. Requisites for Trial in Absentia:
B1. The accused has already been arraigned;
B2. The accused has been duly notified of the trial or hearings; ;and
B3. The absence of the accused or his failure to appear is unjustified (Section 14 (2)
Article III of the 1987 Constitution, Bernardo vs. People, 520 SCRA 332)
C. When the presence of the accused is required:
c.1. At the arraignment and plea, whether of innocence or of guilt;
c.2. during trial, whenever necessary for identification purposes; and
c.3 at the promulgation of sentence, unless it is for a light offense, in which case, the
accused may appear by counsel or representative. At such stages of the proceedings,
his presence is required and can not be waived. (People vs. De Grano, 588 SCRA 550)

12. FORMAL OFFER OF EVIDENCE

A. “The Court shall consider no evidence which has not been formally offered.” – Section
34, Rule 132. The formal offer of evidence allows the parties to object to the
presentation of an evidence which may not be admissible for the purpose for which it is
offered. The Court, likewise, emphasized that a piece of document will remain a scrap
of paper without probative values unless and until admitted by the court in evidence for
the purpose or purposes for which it is offered. (Laborte vs. Pagsanjan Tourism
Consumer’s Cooperative, G.R. No. 183860, January 15, 2014)
B. A formal offer is necessary because judges are mandated to rest their findings of facts
and their judgment only and strictly upon the evidence offered by the parties at the
trial. Its function is to enable the trial judge to know the purpose or purposes for which
the proponent is presenting the evidence. (People vs. Villanueva, 629 SCRA 720)
C. When is formal offer of evidence not necessary?
C1. The evidence was duly identified by testimony duly recorded;
C2. The evidence was incorporated in the records of the case.
Cases: Barut vs. People, G.R. No. 167454, Sept. 24, 2014
Laborte vs. Pagsanjan Tourism Consumer’s Cooperative, G.R. No. 183860,
January 15, 2014

X-3. DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE (RULE 119)

1. A demurrer to evidence is actually a motion to dismiss that is filed by the accused after the
prosecution has rested its case. (Section 23, Rule 119)
2. Demurrer to the evidence is “an objection by one of the parties in an action, to the effect that the
evidence which his adversary produced is insufficient in point of law, whether true or not, to make
out a case or sustain the issue. The party demurring challenges the sufficiency of the whole
evidence to sustain a verdict.
To be considered sufficient therefore, the evidence must prove: (a) the commission of the
crime, and (b) the precise degree of participation therein by the accuse. “Thus, when the accused

20 | P a g e
 files a demurrer, the court must evaluate whether the prosecution evidence is sufficient enough to
warrant the conviction of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
The grant or denial of a demurrer to evidence is left to the sound discretion of the trial court,
and its ruling on the matter shall not be disturbed in the absence of a grave abuse of such
discretion. As to the effect, “the grant of a demurrer to evidence amounts to an acquittal and
cannot be appealed because it would place the accused in double jeopardy. The order is
reviewable only by certiorari if it was issued with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
excess of jurisdiction.” When grave abuse of discretion is present, an order granting a demurrer
becomes null and void. (People vs. Go, G.R. No. 191015, Augus 6, 2014)
3. What is sufficiency of evidence? Sufficient evidence for purposes of frustrating a demurrer thereto
is such evidence in character, weight or amount as will legally justify the judicial or official action
demanded according to the circumstances. To be considered sufficient therefore, the evidence
must prove (a) the commission of the crime, and (b) the precise degree of participation therein by
the accused. (Singian vs. Sandiganbayan, 706 SCRA 451, Sept. 30, 2013)
4. The Court, may on its own initiate dismiss the action without waiting for a demurrer from the
accused also on the ground of insufficiency of evidence. The rule, however, requires that the court
shall do so only after giving the opportunity to be heard. (Section 23, Rule 119)
5. It has long been settled that the grant of a demurrer is tantamount to an acquittal. An acquitted
defendant is entitled to the right of repose as a direct consequence of the finality of its acquittal.
(People vs. Lagos, 692 SCRA 602, G.R. No. 184658, March 6, 2013)

PART XI. JUDGMENT, REMEDIES AFTER JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND

PROVISIONAL REMEDIES
XI-1. JUDGMENT (Rule 120)

1. A judgment is the adjudication by the court that the accused is guilty or not guilty of the offense
charged and the imposition on him of the proper penalty and civil liability, if any (Section 1, Rule 120)
2. Requisites of a judgment:
a. It must be written in the official language;
b. It must be personally and directly prepared and signed by the judge; and
c. It must contain clearly and distinctly a statement of the facts, and the law upon which it is based.
(Section 1, Rule 120)
3. Jurisdictional requirements; Jurisdiction over the subject matter, jurisdiction over the territory,
jurisdiction over the person of the accused (Cruz vs. CA, 388 SCRA 72; Antiporda Jr. vs. Garchitorena,
321 SCRA 551)
4. Contents of a judgment of Conviction:
a. The legal qualification of the offense constituted by the acts committed by the accused;
b. The aggravating and mitigating circumstance which attended the commission of the offense;
c. The participation of the accused in the offense whether as (i) principal, (ii) accomplice, or (iii)
accessory;
d. The penalty imposed upon the accused;
e. The civil liability or damages caused by his wrongful act or omission to be recovered from the
accused by the offended party, if there is any, unless the enforcement of the civil liability by a
separate civil action has been reserved or waived. (Section 2, Rule 120, Rules of Court; Bacolod vs.
People, 701 SCRA 229, July 15, 2013)

5. Well-entrenched in jurisprudence is the rule that conviction of the accused must rest, not on the
weakness of the defense, but on the strength of the prosecution. The burden is on the prosecution to
prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, not on the accused to prove his innocence. (Baac vs. People, 570
SCRA 533)

6. Contents of a Judgment of Acquittal:

a. State whether or not the evidence of the prosecution (i) absolutely failed to prove the guilt of
the accused, or (ii) merely failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

21 | P a g e
 b. Determine if the act or omission from which the civil liability might arise did not exist. (Section
2, Rule 120) A verdict of acquittal is immediately final. (People vs. Serrano, 315 SCRA 686,689)

7. PROMULGATION OF JUDGMENT
A. As a rule, a judgment is promulgated by reading it in the presence of the accused and any judge of
the court in in which it was rendered. However, if the conviction is merely for a light offense, the
judgment may be pronounced in the presence of his counsel or representative. (Section 6, Rule
120)
B. If the accused is confined or detained in another province or city, the judgment may be
promulgated by the executive judge of the Regional Trial Court having jurisdiction over the place of
confinement or detention upon request of the court which rendered the judgment (Section 6, Rule
120)

8. Rules if the accused fails to appear in the promulgation of judgment

A. If the accused fails to appear the scheduled promulgation of judgment despite notice, the
promulgation shall not be suspended; instead, it shall be made by (a) recording the judgment in the
criminal docket and (b) serving him a copy thereof as his last known address or through his counsel
(Section 6, Rule 120)
B. If the judgment is for conviction, and the failure of the accused to appear was without justifiable
cause, the consequences are more severe. He shall also los the remedies available in the Rules of
Court against the judgment and the court shall order his arrest.
He still has a remedy though that within fifteen (15) days from promulgation of the judgment,,
he surrenders and files a motion for leave to avail of the remedies. (Section 6, Rule 120; People vs.
De Grano, 588 SCRA 550)
9. When judgment becomes final
A judgment becomes final (a) after the lapse of the period for perfecting an appeal, or (b) when
the sentence has been partially or totally satisfied or served, or (c) when the accused has
waived in writing his right to appeal, or (d) has applied for probation (Section 7, Rule 120)
10. Probation and Entry of Judgment
A. Applying for probation is necessarily deemed a waiver of one’s right to appeal. Appeal and
probation are mutually exclusive remedies. Implicit in an application for probation is an admission
of guilt. (Enrique Almero vs. People, G.R. No. 188191, March 12, 2014)
B. Entry of Judgment- After the judgment has become final, it shall be entered in accordance with
Rule 36 (Section 8, Rule 120, Rules of Court)
11. REMEDIES AFTER CONVICTION
A. Modification of the judgment (Section 7, Rule 120)
B. Reopening of the proceedings (Section 24, Rule 119)
C. Motion for New Trial (Section 1, Rule 121)
D. Motion for Reconsideration (Section 1, Rule 120)
E. Appeal from Judgment (Rule 122)
12. Grounds for New Trial (Rule 121)

APPEALS

1. Appeal is not a natural right nor a part of due process but merely a statutory privilege. (Esstarija vs.
People, 604 SSCRA 464, 468)
2. Who may appeal?
a. Any party may appeal from a judgment or final order, unless the accused will be placed in double
jeopardy. (Section 1, Rule 122)
b. The accused bay appeal from a judgment of conviction. (Philippine Rabbit vs. People, 427 SCRA
456)

3. Where to appeal?
A. To the Regional Trial Court, in cases decided by the Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court
in Cities, Municipal Trial Court , or Municipal Circuit Trial Court;
B. To the Court of Appeals or to the Supreme Court (in proper cases provided by law), in cases
decided by the Regional Trial Court;
22 | P a g e
 C. To the Supreme Court, in cases decided by the Court of Appeals (Section 2, Rule 122)

4. How to appeal
A. When the judgment appealed from is that of the Municipal Trail Court, the appeal shall be to the
Regional Trial Court by notice of appeal filed with the court which rendered the judgment or final
order appealed from and by serving a copy therof upon the adverse party. (Section 3a of Rule 122)
B. When the judgment appealed from is that of the Regional Trial Court in the exercise of its original
jurisdiction, the appeal shall be to the Court of Appeals by notice of appeal filed with the court
which rendered the judgment or final order appealed from and by serving a copy thereof upon the
adverse party. (Section 3a of Rule 122)
C. When the judgment appealed from is that of the Regional Trial Court I the exercise of is appellate
jurisdiction, the appeal shall be to the Court of Appeals by filing a petition for review with the said
court under Rule 42 (Section 3b, Rule 122)
D. Where the penalty imposed by the Regional Trial Court is reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment,
or where a lesser penalty is imposed but for offenses committed on the same occasion or which
arose out of the same occurrence that gave rise to the more serious offense for which the penalty
for death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment is imposed, the appeal shall be by notice of
appeal to the Court of Appeals in accordance with par.a of Section 3, Rule 122.
E. As to death penalty, Section 1 RA 9346 approved on June 24, 2004 the prohibition of the imposition
of the death penalty.
F. When the appeal is from the decision of the Court of Appeals, the appeal is generally made by
fililng a petition for review o n certiorari under Rule 45 with the Supreme Court (Section 3e of Rule
122)

PROVISIONAL REMEDIES IN CRIMINAL CASES

1. 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. (Section 1, Rule 127)

2. 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, except of course when the
offended party waives the civil action, reserves the right to institute it separately or institutes the civil
action prior to the criminal action. (Section 1, Rule 111) Provisional remedies may be availed of in
connection with the civil action.

3. Since provisional remedies are available in connection with the civil action properly instituted in the
criminal action, 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. (Sec. 2, Rule 127)

4. When preliminary attachment is available, See Rule 111, Rules of Court and Section 2, Rule 127, Rules
of Court

Other relevant Rules: Revised Rules on Continuous Trial of Criminal Cases, Rules on Summary Procedure, A.M.
No. 12-11-2-SC, The Speedy Trial Act of 1998 (RA 8493) , Rules on Expedited Procedure

Method of Teaching: Socratic Method/ online-synchronous and asynchronous . will conduct also face to face,
to be announced in class

Grading system- Mid Term Grade- Mid term Exams- 70%

Recitations, group work, quizzes, attendance-30%

Final Grade- Mid Term Grade -50%

Final Examinations-50%

23 | P a g e
Textbook- any Criminal procedure book, but I recommend Criminal Procedure by Dean Willard Riano (Rex
Bookstore) Please have a codal of The Revised Rules of Court. Thank you and stay safe! God bless you.

/TSD August 2023

*****************************************END *********************************************

24 | P a g e