CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

Week 1

I. General Matters

a. Criminal Procedure (definition)

- consists in a sequence of acts or procedures conducted by officials aimed at determining
whether crimes were committed, who committed them, and what their punishment, if
any, should be.
- Criminal procedure is the method prescribed by law for the apprehension and
prosecution of persons accused of any criminal offense and for their punishment, in case
of conviction.
- Procedure for the prosecution of criminal action
- Law that provides and regulates the steps by which one who committed a crime is to be
punished. (People v. Lason)
- Adjudication process of criminal law

b. Criminal Law vs. Criminal Procedure

- Criminal Law is the rights and obligations of individuals in society (Did the defendant
commit a crime? Which crime did the defendant commit? Does the defendant have a
defense?)
- Criminal Procedure is the enforcement of individuals rights during the criminal process.
(Did the government act legally? When investigating, arresting, and prosecuting the
defendant?)
- Criminal law is substantive; it defines crimes, treats of their nature, and provides for their
punishment. Criminal procedure, on the other hand, is remedial or procedural; it provides
for the method by which a person accused of a crime is arrested, tried and punished.
Criminal law declares what acts are punishable, while criminal procedure provides how
the act is to be punished.

c. Criminal Litigation Process

Crime which requires preliminary investigation
- Preliminary investigation is the proceeding where the public prosecutor is given broad
discretion to determine whether probable cause exists for the purpose of filing a criminal
information in court. This is an executive determination of probable cause.
- During the preliminary investigation, the police investigate what has happened and what
damages have occurred to the victims of crime. The police will question the victim of
crime, the suspect and any witnesses, as well as collect evidence

RULE 112 - PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION

Section 1. Preliminary investigation defined; when required. – Preliminary investigation is
an inquiry or proceeding to determine whether there is sufficient ground to engender a
well-founded belief that a crime has been committed and the respondent is probably guilty
thereof, and should be held for trial.
Except as provided in Section 7 of this Rule, a preliminary investigation is required to
be conducted before the filing of a complaint or information for an offense where
the penalty prescribed by law is at least four (4) years, two (2) months and one (1) day
without regard to the fine.

The following may conduct preliminary investigations

1. Provincial or City Prosecutors and their assistants;
2. Judges of the Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts
3. National and Regional State Prosecutors
4. Other officers as may be authorized by law.

Preliminary investigation will be conducted by the Investigating Prosecutor in the following

manner:
(a)The complainant together with his witnesses shall prepare their affidavits duly subscribed and
sworn to before any prosecutor or government official authorized to administer oath, or, in their
absence or unavailability, before a notary public. The officer administering the oath shall certify
that he personally examined the affiants and that he is satisfied that they have voluntarily
executed and understood their affidavits.
(b)Within 10 days after the filing of the complaint, the investigating prosecutor shall either
dismiss it if he finds that there are no grounds to base the preliminary investigation on; or issue
a subpoena to the respondent, attaching to it a copy of the complaint and its supporting
affidavits and documents.
(c) Within ten 10 days from the receipt of the subpoena with the complaint and supporting
affidavits and documents, the respondent shall submit his counter-affidavit and that of his
witnesses, as well as other supporting documents relied upon for his defense. The
counter-affidavits shall be subscribed and sworn to and certified by the officers mentioned
above. The respondent shall not be allowed to file a motion to dismiss in lieu of a
counter-affidavit.
(d) If the respondent cannot be subpoenaed, or if subpoenaed, does not submit a
counter-affidavit within a 10-day period, the investigating prosecutor shall resolve the complaint
based on the evidence presented by the complainant.
(e) The investigating prosecutor may set a hearing if there are facts and issues to be clarified
from a party or a witness. The hearing shall be held within 10 days from submission of the
counter-affidavits and other documents, and shall be terminated within 5 days. The parties can
be present but do not have the right to examine or cross-examine. They may, however, submit
to the investigating prosecutor questions which may be asked to the party or witness concerned.
(f) Within 10 days after the investigation, the investigating prosecutor shall determine whether or
not there are sufficient grounds to hold the respondent for trial.
(g) If the investigating prosecutor finds cause to hold the respondent for trial, he shall prepare
the resolution and information. Otherwise, he shall recommend the dismissal of the complaint.
(h)Within 5 days from his resolution, he shall forward the record of the case to the provincial or
city prosecutor or chief state prosecutor, or to the Ombudsman or his deputy in cases of
offenses cognizable by the Sandiganbayan. They shall act on the resolution within 10 days from
their receipt thereof and shall immediately inform the parties of their action (Sections 3 and 4,
Rule 112).

Note: No preliminary investigation is required for arrests without a warrant, unless the
respondent requests for it when his or her continued detention is ordered by the inquest
prosecutor (Section 6, Rule 112). Preliminary investigation is also not required for offenses
where the penalty is less than 4 years, 2 months and 1 day.

Crime which does not require preliminary investigation

- No preliminary investigation is required for arrests without a warrant, unless the
respondent requests for it when his or her continued detention is ordered by the inquest
prosecutor (Section 6, Rule 112)

Section 9
In cases which falls under the original jurisdiction of the MTC, which does not require a
preliminary investigation nor does it fall under the Rules of Summary Procedure, the case may
either be filed in court by a prosecutor or directly filed in court by the offended party.

1. If filed with the prosecutor, the prosecutor shall act on the complaint based on the affidavits
and other supporting documents submitted by the complainant within 10 days from its filing.

2. If filed with the MTC:

a. If within 10 days from the filing of the complaint or information, the judge finds no probable
cause after personally examining the evidence in writing and under oath of the complainant and
his witnesses in the form of searching questions and answers, he shall dismiss the complaint or
information.
b. He may require the submission or additional evidence, within 10 days from notice. If he still
finds no probable cause, he shall dismiss the case.
c. If he finds probable cause, he shall issue a warrant of arrest or a commitment order and hold
him for trial. If he thinks that there is no necessity for placing the accused under custody, he may
issue summons instead of a warrant of arrest.

Crime committed in flagrante delicto

- A person can be arrested without a warrant if, in the presence of the police officer, the
person has committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit an offense.
Essentially, the police officer is witnessing the crime as it happens.
- Flagrante delicto (also known as in flagrante delicto or in flagrante delicto) refers
to a situation in which a person is caught in the act of committing a crime or immediately
after committing a crime. In other words, it is a situation where the crime is being
committed at the moment it is discovered or very shortly thereafter.
- Flagrante delicto can be detected by any person, whether an ordinary citizen or a police
officer. When a person is caught in the act of committing a crime, he or she is said to be
in flagrante delicto and can be arrested by the police without a warrant. If you find
yourself in this situation, it is advisable to seek advice from a criminal lawyer.
 - Arrest in flagrante delicto is an exceptional measure and is used to protect public safety
and ensure the immediate arrest of the alleged offender. The law establishes certain
limits and procedures that must be followed in the event of an arrest in flagrante delicto,
in order to guarantee the rights of the detainee and to avoid abuses or arbitrariness.

The following requirements must be met for an offence to be committed in flagrante delicto:
● The commission of the offence: It is necessary that the offence is being committed, has
been committed recently or is being attempted. In other words, the person must be
caught in the act of committing the offence or immediately after committing it.
● Perception of the offence: The offence must be perceived by a person other than the
perpetrator, i.e. by a witness or by an authority with the power to prosecute the offence,
such as a police officer.
● The possibility of immediate apprehension: The person committing the offence must be
within reach of the authorities, i.e. it must be possible to apprehend him/her immediately
without pursuit.
● Certainty of the offence: The authority arresting the alleged offender must be certain that
an offence is being committed or has been committed recently. This certainty can be
obtained by direct perception of the crime or by information provided by witnesses or
complainants.

Arrest in flagrante delicto is an exceptional measure used to ensure public safety and protect
society from potential crimes.

The consequences of a flagrante delicto vary depending on the type of offence and the laws of
the country where the offence is committed. In general, consequences may include:
● Immediate arrest: If a person is caught in flagrante delicto, the police can arrest him or
her immediately without a warrant. The person arrested must be informed of the reasons
for his or her arrest and of his or her legal rights.
● Criminal prosecution: A person arrested in flagrante delicto may be subject to criminal
prosecution for the commission of the offence. Criminal proceedings may include an
investigation, trial and sentencing, which may result in imprisonment, fines or other
penalties.
● Confiscation of property: In some cases, property used to commit the offence may be
confiscated by the authorities, even if it does not belong to the offender. This may
include vehicles, weapons or other objects.
● Criminal record: If the person is convicted of the offence committed in flagrante delicto,
this may result in a criminal record, which may negatively affect their future employment
and other areas of their life.

d. Requisites for the Exercise of Criminal Jurisdiction

Criminal Jurisdiction
- It is the authority to hear and try a particular offense and impose the punishment for it
(People v. Mariano, GR. No. L-40527, June 30, 1976).
Note: Where the court has no jurisdiction, lower courts should simply dismiss the case. On the
other hand, the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals may refer the case to the court of
proper jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction over the subject matter

- It is conferred by law which may be either the Constitution or a statute.
- It is determined by the allegations of the complaint, character of the relief sought,
whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to recover upon all or some of the claims asser
therein.
- In order to ascertain whether the court has jurisdiction the provision of the law shall be
inquired as the jurisdiction over the subject matter cannot be presumed it must be
expressly provided by law.
- determined by the allegation in the information and not determined by the evidence
presented during trial.
- Derived from the law. It can never be acquired solely by consent of the accused.
- Objection that the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter may be made at any
stage of the proceeding, and the right to make such objection is never waived.
- the power to hear and determine cases of general class to which the proceeding in
question belong. The offense, by virtue of the imposable penalty or its nature, is one
which the court is by law authorized to take cognizance of.

Jurisdiction over the person

- May be acquired by consent of the accused (by voluntary appearance) or by waiver of
objections.
- If he fails to make his objection on time, he will be deemed to have waived it.
- The person charged with the offense must have been brought to its presence for trial,
forcibly by warrant of arrest or upon his voluntary submission to the court.

Acquired through:
1. Upon arrest by virtue of warrant of arrest issued by the court
2. Voluntary submission to Court's Jurisdiction - Voluntary Appearance

ACTS INVOLVED:
a. asking for affirmative relief except when questioning jurisdiction
b. Filing a motion to quash and any other motion from the court
c. Appearance of counsel during arraignment
d. Entry of appearance of counsel for the accused
e. Act of posing bail without qualification

Note:
GR: Questions of jurisdiction may be raised at any stage of the proceedings and for lack of it, a
court can dismiss a case motu propio
XPN: The party raising the question is guilty of estoppel or laches (Tijam v. Sibonghanoy, G.R.
No.L-21450, Apr. 15, 1968)

Estoppel- a party who has invoked the jurisdiction of the court over a particular matter to secure
affirmative relief cannot be permitted to afterwards deny the same jurisdiction to escape liability.

Principle of Adherence of Jurisdiction

- means that once jurisdiction is vested in the court, it is retained up to the end of the
litigation. It remains with the court until the case is finally terminated. The exception to
this is where a subsequent statute changing the jurisdiction of a court is given retroactive
effect, it can divest a court of jurisdiction over cases already pending before it before the
effectivity of the statute.

Example
A was charged with an offense whose penalty was below 6 years. The case was filed in the
MTC. After trial, the MTC convicted him of an offense with a higher penalty. A questioned the
conviction, claiming that the MTC has no jurisdiction over the offense since the penalty
prescribed for it was higher than 6 years. Is A correct?
- A is wrong. Jurisdiction over the subject matter is determined by the authority of the
court to impose the penalty imposable given the allegation in the information. It is not
determined by the penalty that may be meted out to the offender after trial but to the
extent of the penalty which the law imposes for the crime charged in the complaint.