Professional Documents
Culture Documents
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE*
4. Cases where civil courts of equal rank are vested with concurrent jurisdiction:
a. Features stated in Art. 2, RPC
à Cognizable by proper court in which charge is first filed
b. Continuing crimes committed in different judicial regions
c. Offenses wherein any of the essential elements were committed in different
territorial jurisdictions
d. Offenses committed aboard a train, vehicle, aircraft or vessel (see R110, §15)
i. Railroad, train, aircraft
(1) Territory or municipality where vehicle passed
(2) Place of departure
(3) Place of arrival
ii. Vessel
(1) First port of entry
(2) Thru which it passed during voyage
e. Libel and written defamation
5. Remedies of offended party when fiscal unreasonably refuses to file an information
or include a person therein as an accused
a. In case of grave abuse of discretion, action for mandamus
b. Lodge a new complaint against the offenders
c. Take up matter with the Secretary of Justice
*
This is the old Criminal Procedure. As of printing time, the coverage for the Bar Exams has not
been released yet, so we included the old Criminal Procedure. The Memory Aid for the 2000
Rules of Criminal Procedure will be in the Annex.
2
REMEDI AL L AW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
MEMORY AID
ATENEO CENTRAL BAR OPERATIONS 2001
the court which has discretion over the disposition of the case (Republic
vs. Sunga)
à Objection to the amendment of an information or complaint must be
raised at the time the amendment is made; otherwise, deemed to have
consented thereto.
15. Remedies
a. Motion to quash
à May be filed after arraignment but before plea on the grounds provided by the
rules (generally, a flaw in the info)
à If duplicity of offense charged is not raised in trial through a motion to quash
info, the right to question it is waived (People vs. Ocapan)
b. Motion to dismiss
à May be filed after plea but before judgment on most of grounds for motion to
quash
16. Duplicity of Offense (in information or complaint)
à Defined as the joinder of separate and distinct offenses in one and the same
information/complaint
à Remedy: file a motion to quash; failure is equivalent to a waiver
à Exception: when existing laws prescribe a single punishment (complex
crimes)
b. WITHOUT WARRANT:
i. Person is arrested
ii. Person arrested may waive right to Art. 125, RPC and ask for preliminary
investigation or inquest
à Fiscal is not judicial authority contemplated under Art. 125 (Sayo vs. Chief
of Police)
iii. Fiscal files info
5. Requisites for a warrant of arrest:
a. Probable cause
b. Signed by judge
c. Specifically naming or particularly and sufficiently describing person to be
arrested
à John Doe warrants are void for being general warrants (Pangandaman vs.
Cesar)
6. Remedies
a. Petition for writ of habeas corpus
à Filed with any court, to effect immediate release of the person detained
à Filed when a person is being illegally detained (without judicial process), or
was illegally arrested (void warrant or unlawful warrantless arrest, or
warrantless arrest beyond period with no information filed)
à Habeas corpus is not allowed when:
i. The person is in custody of an officer under process of law, and
ii. The court had jurisdiction to issue the process (Luna vs. Plaza)
à If an arrest is improper, the remedy is a motion for quashal of the warrant of
arrest and/or a motion to quash the information, not habeas corpus (Ilagan
vs. Enrile)
à Habeas corpus is no longer available after an information has been filed, the
information being the judicial process required by law (Ilagan vs. Enrile)
à Habeas corpus is proper when a person is being restrained illegally, e.g.,
imprisoned past maximum penalty allowed by law (Gumabon vs. Director of
Prisons)
b. Quashal of warrant of arrest
à Filed with court which issued the warrant of arrest when the warrant of arrest
is fatally flawed
c. Motion to quash information
à Filed with court when information against the person arrested has been filed
à Must be made in a "special appearance" before the court questioning only its
lack of jurisdiction over the person of the accused
à Otherwise, the voluntary appearance of the person arrested by filing a motion
before the court would be deemed a submission to the authority of the court,
thus granting it whatever jurisdiction it lacked over the person
à Any irregularity in the arrest is cured when the petitioner submits himself to
the jurisdiction of the court, e.g., by filing for bail (Bagcal vs. Villaraza)
7. V.V. Mendoza, "Rights to Counsel in Custodial Investigation"
à Evolution of rights of the accused under custodial investigation
a. All involuntary confession were inadmissible; accused had to prove
involuntariness
b. Involuntary confessions were inadmissible only if they were false
c. Revert to exclusionary rule: any involuntary confession is inadmissible
11
REMEDI AL L AW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
MEMORY AID
ATENEO CENTRAL BAR OPERATIONS 2001
4. When bail is discretionary (application filed with court where case is pending)
a. Upon conviction by RTC of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion
perpetua or life imprisonment
b. Provisional liberty under same circs. but during period to appeal subject to
consent of bondsman
c. In case he has applied for probation after final judgment, he may be allowed
temporary liberty under his bail or recognizance
5. Procedure
a. Offense charged is not capital:
i. Accused applies for bail
(1) Where information against him was filed or where case is pending
(2) Absent (1), in another branch of the same court within the province or city
where he is held
(3) If arrested in another province, city or municipality, file with the RTC
(4) Absent (3), with the MTC
ii. Judge sets bail
iii. Accused may move to reduce bail, and hearing will be set
iv. Accused posts bail and deposits the same with the Municipal/City/Provincial
Treasurer or, if cash, with the Collector of Internal Revenue
v. Accused is released
b. Offense charged is capital:
i. Accused petitions for bail
ii. Judge sets hearing to determine whether evidence of guilt is strong
à Ex-parte hearing on bail is arbitrary and unacceptable (Herras vs.
Teehankee)
iii. Prosecution presents evidence
iv. Court may not force fiscal to produce evidence (Herras vs. Teehankee)
v. If evidence is strong, bail is denied
vi. Otherwise, judge sets bail and procedure for non-capital offense is followed
à In capital crimes, judge's discretion is limited to determining strength of
evidence and does not cover determining whether bail should be allowed
(Herras vs. Teehankee)
à Evidence must be strong that the accused is guilty of the capital offense
charged, not just of any offense (Bernardez vs. Valera)
6. Bail bond – an obligation under seal given by accused with one or more sureties and
made payable to proper officer with the condition to be void upon
performance by the accused of such acts as he may legally be required
to perform
7. Recognizance
a. Obligation of record entered into before some court of magistrate duly authorized
to take it, with the condition to do some particular act, the most usual condition in
criminal cases being the appearance of the accused for trial
b. Does not require signature of accused for trial
c. Does not require signature of accused to be valid
8. Prosecution witnesses may be required to post bail to ensure their appearance at the
trial, except:
a. Substitution of info (see R110, §14)
b. Court believes that material witness may not appear at the trial
13
REMEDI AL L AW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
MEMORY AID
ATENEO CENTRAL BAR OPERATIONS 2001
9. When bail required under RA 6036 (violation of ordinance, light felony, criminal
offense – not higher that 6 month imprisonment and/or P2000 fine, or both)
a. Caught in flagrante
b. Confessed to commission of offense unless repudiated (force and intimidation)
c. Previously escaped, evaded sentence or jumped bail
d. Violation of Sec. 2 (fails to report to clerk of court periodically under his
recognizance)
e. Recidivist, habitual delinquent previously convicted for an offense to which the
law or ordinance attaches an equal or greater penalty or for 2 or more offenses to
which it attaches a lighter penalty
f. Committed offense while on parole or under conditional pardon
g. Previously pardoned by municipal or city mayor for violation of ordinance for at
least 2 times
10. Instances when accused may be released on recognizance:
a. Offense charged is a violation of an ordinance, a light felony or criminal offense
the imposable penalty to which does not exceed 6 months and or P2000 fine
b. Person has been in custody for a period equal to or more than the minimum of
the imposable principal penalty, without application of the Indeterminate
Sentence Law or any modifying circumstance
c. Accused has applied for probation and before the same has been resolved, but
NO BAIL was filed or accused is incapable of filing one
d. Youthful offender held for physical and mental examination, trial or appeal, if
unable to furnish bail
11. Cancellation of bail
a. Upon application with the court and due notice to the fiscal
i. Accused surrenders back to custody
ii. Accused dies
b. Automatic cancellation
i. Case is dismissed
ii. Accused is acquitted
iii. Accused is convicted and surrenders for execution of judgment
12. When bail cancelled or denied: after RTC imposes imprisonment exceeding 6 years,
but not more than 20 years, and:
a. Accused is a recidivist, quasi-recidivist, habitual delinquent or guilty of the
aggravating circumstance of reiteration;
b. Provisionally escaped, evaded sentence, violated provisions of bail;
c. Committed offense while on probation, parole, or conditional pardon;
d. Probability of flight; or
e. Undue risk that during appeal, he may commit another crime
13. When bail is forfeited
a. Accused fails to appear before court when required
à 30 days for bondsman to show cause why judgment should not be rendered
against him
b. Bondsman fails to produce him within 30 days
c. Bondsman fails to satisfactorily explain to the court why accused did not appear
when first required to do so
à Sureties guarantee only appearance of the accused, not his conduct (US vs.
Bonoan)
14
REMEDI AL L AW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
MEMORY AID
ATENEO CENTRAL BAR OPERATIONS 2001
b. The facts constituting the graver offense were only discovered after the filing of
the earlier information
à No double jeopardy if the new fact which justified the new charge arose only
after arraignment and conviction (People vs. City Court)
à No double jeopardy where the trial was a sham since there was no
competent court (Galman vs. Sandiganbayan)
à No double jeopardy if first case was dismissed with consent of the accused
(Caes vs. IAC)
à There is double jeopardy if a person is charged twice under different penal
statutes for the same acts (People vs. Relova)
c. Plea of guilty to a lesser offense without the consent of the fiscal and the
offended party
5. Remedies
a. Motion to quash
b. Motion to dismiss
à Both filed on the ground of violation of accused's rights, thereby ousting the
court of jurisdiction
6. NOTES:
à Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 1
No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law, nor
shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.
à Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 14
a. No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of
law.
b. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until the
contrary is proved, and shall enjoy the right to be informed of the nature and
cause of the accusations against him, to have a speedy, impartial and public trial,
to meet the witnesses face to face, and to have compulsory process to secure
the attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence in his behalf.
However, after arraignment, trial may proceed notwithstanding the absence of
the accused provided that he has been duly notified and that his failure to appear
is unjustifiable.
à Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 16
All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition of their cases before all
judicial, quasi-judicial, or administrative bodies.
à Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 17
No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
à Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 21
No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense.
If an act is punished by a law or ordinance, conviction or acquittal under either shall
constitute a bar to another prosecution for the same act.
b. Improvident plea of guilty may be changed to not guilty any time before judgment
is rendered
c. A plea of not guilty may not be changed to guilty, as doing so would only spare
the prosecution of presenting evidence and still result in the conviction of the
accused.
4. Remedies
a. Motion for specification
à May be filed any time before plea, even after a MTQ
à Filed when the information is insufficient in form or is generally worded, that a
Bill of Particulars is necessary to clarify the acts for which the accused is
being charged
b. Motion to quash
à May be filed at anytime before plea is entered
à Based on grounds provided by the rules
c. Motion to suspend arraignment
à Filed when the accused seems mentally unsound or if there is a prejudicial
question in a pending civil case
d. Motion to withdraw an improvident plea of guilt
à May be filed at any time before judgment of conviction becomes final, when it
can be shown that the accused was not aware of the significance of pleading
guilty to the charges
à No double jeopardy if first case was dismissed with the consent of the
accused (Que vs. Cosico), unless ground for dismissal is: (a) denial of right to
speedy trial; or (b) insufficiency of evidence.
à If the first case was dismissed due to a deficient information, then there was
no valid information and there could be no double jeopardy (Caniza vs.
People)
à Cudia vs CA – it should be the Provincial Prosecutor of Pampanga, not the
City Prosecutor, who should prepare informations for offenses committed
within Pampanga but outside Angeles City. An information must be prepared
and presented by the prosecuting attorney or someone authorized by law. If
not, the court does not acquire jurisdiction. Although failure to file a motion to
quash the information is a waiver of all objections to it insofar as formal
objections to pleadings are concerned, questions relating to want of
jurisdiction may be raised at any stage of the proceedings. Moreover, since
the complaint or information was insufficient because it was so defective in
form or substance that conviction upon it could not have been sustained, its
dismissal without the consent of the accused cannot be pleaded as prior
jeopardy, and will not be a bar to a second prosecution.
d. More than one offense was charged, EXCEPT where law prescribes single
punishment for various offenses
e. Facts alleged do not constitute an offense
à May be raised at any time
à No waiver
à For charge to be complete, it is necessary to state that it was exempted from
any amnesty existing at the time
f. Criminal action or liability has been extinguished
g. Information contains allegations which, if true, would be a legal excuse or
justification
h. Officer who filed the information had no authority
à Presentation of evidence cannot cure an invalid information (People vs.
Asuncion)
NOTE: Court will consider no other grounds other than those raised, EXCEPT lack
of jurisdiction over offense charged.
4. Requisites of Double jeopardy
a. Valid information or complaint, sufficient in form and substance
b. Before court of competent jurisdiction
à Doctrine of “Jurisdiction by Estoppel”: depends upon whether the lower court
actually had jurisdiction or not. If it had no jurisdiction, but the case was tried
and decided upon the theory that it had jurisdiction, the parties are not barred
on appeal, from assailing such jurisdiction, for the same 'must exist as a
matter of law, and may not be conferred by consent of the parties or by
estoppel'. However, if the lower court had jurisdiction, and the case was
heard and decided upon a given theory, such, for instance, as that the court
had no jurisdiction, the party who induced it to adopt such theory will not be
permitted, on appeal, to assume an inconsistent position — that the lower
court had jurisdiction. Here, the principle of estoppel applies. The rule that
jurisdiction is conferred by law, and does not depend upon the will of the
parties, has no bearing thereon.
c. Accused had pleaded
d. Conviction, acquittal, or dismissal or termination of case without consent of
accused
e. Bar to offense charged, attempt to commit the same or necessarily includes or is
necessarily included
20
REMEDI AL L AW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
MEMORY AID
ATENEO CENTRAL BAR OPERATIONS 2001
à If the court finds the prosecution's evidence insufficient, the case will be
dismissed
à Otherwise, if demurrer denied
i. If the demurrer was made with leave of court, defense gets to present
evidence
ii. If the demurrer was made without leave of court, defense is deemed to
have waived the right to present evidence and the case is submitted for
judgment
à Case may also be dismissed motu proprio
g. Motion to reopen
à Filed after the case is submitted for judgment but before judgment is actually
rendered
à To allow either side to present additional evidence, if such could not be found
before
à Granted on discretion of the judge
à The accused cannot move to reopen the case to allow him to adduce
evidence in his behalf when his failure to adduce them during the trial was his
own fault (People vs. Cruz)
NOTE: When dismissal is capricious, certiorari lies and no double jeopardy since
validity and not correctness of dismissal is being challenged.