1st ASSIGNMENT IN CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (JD 601 & LAW 203)

NEMSU – College of Law

Instruction: Since this is a pdf file, answer in a separate MSWord (or your
preferred word software) file. Be brief and concise. Once you are done,
convert your file into pdf and email to me at
emmalazarte@nemsuu.edu.ph. Your answer should be emailed/submitted
not later than 5PM of August 27, 2023 (or this Sunday). And because you
have at least three days to work on your answers, the rating will also
consider logical presentation and grammar. So, review and write well.

Consistent with the pertinent rules on pleadings, use a legal size

paper format (11” x 13”), 14 size point (your choice as to font style), single
spacing, and with the following margins: Left at 1.5”, Top-Right-Bottom at
1.”

Case 1:

Charisse and Mario are married. Mario works as a cook in Abu Dhabi.
Charisse stays at home here in Tandag City to care for their two children.
While in Abu Dhabi, Mario engaged in an extra-marital relationship with
Joanna, a Filipina who is also working in Abu Dhabi. Mario decided to leave
Charisse, denied her financial support, and now lives with Joanna in Abu
Dhabi.

Charisse has filed a criminal case for psychological abuse arising out
of marital infidelity against Mario, a crime defined under Sec. 5(i) of RA 9262.
The case is docketed before the Regional Trial Court of Tandag City, Branch
27. [Note: the elements of this crime are (1) the offended party is the wife
of the offender; (b) the offended party suffers emotional anguish and
mental suffering; and (c) such anguish and suffering is inflicted by the
offender when he engaged in an extramarital affair with another woman.]

Mario moves for the dismissal of this case arguing that (a) RTC Br. 27
has no jurisdiction over the case because it is not the designated Family
Court (which is Family Court Branch 15 of Tandag City); and (2) that
whether it be RTC Br. 27 or Family Court Br. 15, both have no jurisdiction over
the case because the act of marital infidelity happened in Abu Dhabi or
outside the Philippines.

(A) Is Mario correct on both counts? Explain. (10 pts)

(B) Assuming that it is Family Court Br. 15 which has jurisdiction over
the case and not RTC Br. 27, should the latter grant the motion and dismiss
the case? Explain. (5 pts)
 Case 2:

The 17-year-old Tony is charged with Robbery in An Inhabited House

(Art. 229, RPC) for having taken P5,000 worth of valuables. The Information
further alleges that Tony was not armed when he committed the crime. The
prescribed penalty of the offense charged is prision correccional. Which
court has jurisdiction over the crime: RTC or MTC? Explain. (5 pts)

Case 3:

Xandor is the Governor of Surigao Oriental. As governor of a

province, he holds a Salary Grade 29. Xandor is accused of killing Trisha.
He had been courting Trisha for some time but she refused him. Angered,
he threatened Trisha. Fearing for her life, Trisha went into hiding. But being
the Governor, Xandor called on the help of the police in looking for Trisha
concocting a story that Trisha embezzled money from the province. Thus,
Xandor was able to locate Trisha and had her shot to death. Xandor is now
charged with Murder for the killing of Trisha.

(A) Where should we file the case: the Sandiganbayan or the

Regional Trial Court? Explain. (5 pts)

(B) Assume that jurisdiction lies with the Regional Trial Court and
that Xandor is convicted. Where should he file his appeal: the Supreme
Court, the Court of Appeals, or the Sandiganbayan? Explain. (5 pts)

Case 4:

Charlie is charged with Robbery in an Inhabited House for carting

P45,000.00 worth of jewelry from the house of Diana in Madrid, Surigao del
Sur. Charlie was not carrying any arms when he committed the robbery.
The prescribed penalty for this offense is prision mayor per Art. 299 (3rd
paragraph) of the RPC. The case is thus filed with RTC Cantilan.

While the case was on trial, Art. 299 of the RPC was amended by R.A.
10951 (read the law!) which adjusted the value of the property taken for
this crime and, insofar as accused Charlie is concerned, had the effect of
reducing the prescribed or imposable penalty to arresto mayor.

Charlie now moves for the dismissal of the case on the ground of lack
of jurisdiction. Is he correct? Explain. (10 pts)

Case 5:

Jose is charged with the crime of Urinating in Public, a crime defined

and penalized under Ordinance No. 25 of the Municipality of Tago. The
prescribed penalty for this offense is one month of imprisonment. The crime
occurred on February 25, 2023. The Chief of Police of Tago filed the
complaint with the Provincial Prosecutor’s Office on March 1, 2023. The
Information was not filed until April 30, 2023.

(A) Jose moves to quash the Information (i.e., dismiss the case)
arguing that his criminal liability, if any, has been extinguished by
prescription? Is he correct? Explain. (5 pts)

(B) Would your answer be the same if the incident happened in

Tandag City (with Ordinance No. 25 being that of Tandag City) and the
case filed by the City Prosecutor of Tandag? Explain. (5 pts)

*** END ***