Professional Documents
Culture Documents
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
I. PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
A. Basic Concepts
- Criminal procedure – series of processes by which the criminal laws are enforced and by which the
State prosecutes persons who violate penal laws.
- Starts with the initial contact of the alleged lawbreaker with the justice machinery.
- Concludes with judgment exonerating accused or final imposition of a penalty against him.
- Ultimate goal – harmonizing the governmental functions of maintaining and promoting
law and order, while at the same time protecting the constitutional rights of its citizens.
- Philippines follows adversarial/accusatorial system
- Two contending parties (prosecution and defense) before court which hears them
impartially and renders judgment after trial
- Court has passive role (vs. inquisitorial system, where court plays active role and is not limited
to evidence presented before it)
- Criminal procedure rules are part of rules of court. Liberally interpreted in order to promote its
objective of securing a just, speedy, and inexpensive disposition of every action and proceeding.
- Due process is mandatory. Alonte v Savellano, requirements of due process in a criminal proceeding:
1. Court or tribunal trying case is properly clothed with judicial power to hear and determine the
matter before it
2. Jurisdiction is lawfully acquired by it over the person of the accused
3. Accused is given opportunity to be heard
4. Judgment is rendered only upon lawful hearing
Relation to office has to be such that, in the legal sense, the offense cannot
•
exist without the office
• Or the information avers (requires specific factual averments) an
intimate connection between the office and the offense
3. Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection with EO 1, 2, 14, and 14-A
(1986)
• Exclusive original jurisdiction over amounts more than Php1M
• Exclusive appellate jurisdiction over RTC judgments (no amount stated
or less than Php1M)
• Exclusive original jurisdiction over petitions for the issuance of writs of
mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, habeas corpus, mas, etc.
d. Court of Tax Appeals
1. Exclusive original jurisdiction over criminal violations of the National Internal
Revenue Code, Tariff and Customs Code, other laws administered by the BIR or
Customs if principal amount of taxes and fees involved is at least Php1M. (If less than
Php1M, then RTC à CTA à SC)
2. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction in other tax cases and tax collection cases
e. Court of Appeals
1. Exclusive original jurisdiction over actions for annulment of RTC judgments
2. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all final judgments, decisions, resolutions,
orders, or awards of the RTC
• Except those falling within appellate jurisdiction of the SC in accordance
with the Constitution, Labor Code, Judiciary Act, etc.
f. Supreme Court
1. Appellate jurisdiction over SB, CTA, and CA decisions.
2. Automatic review of all criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is reclusion
perpetua or higher
• But can even be stopped earlier, such as if investigation of another body is indispensible
before PI (eg SEC v Interport). In general, whatever is the initial step of the
proceedings against the offender. If you can detect that a step is necessary before
filing case, then that’s the beginning of the interruption.
• People v Panglininan: even in special laws and municipal ordinances (governed by
Act3326), the rule should be the same.
- People v Bautista: prescription does not run again due to delays on the part of the
prosecution. Unjust to deprive the injured party of right to obtain vindication on account of
delays that are not under his control. More appropriate course of action should be fling of
disciplinary action against erring officials.
• Shall not be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by the offended party or her parents, grandparents
or guardian, nor, in any case, if the offender has been expressly pardoned by any of them.
• The offended party – even if a minor.
• Where the offended party, who is a minor, fails to file the complaint, her parents,
grandparents, or guardian may file the same. The right to file the action granted to parents,
grandparents or guardian shall be exclusive of all other persons and shall be exercised
successively in the order herein provided, except that…
• If the offended party dies or becomes incapacitated before she can file the complaint, and she
has no known parents, grandparents or guardian, the State shall initiate the criminal action.
• People v dela Cerna: pardon must be given before complaint is filed. After filing of
complaint, control of prosecution is removed from offended party’s hands.
- Defamation which consists in the imputation of the above crimes – only offended party can initiate
criminal action.
- Special laws – shall be governed by the provisions thereof.
D. V enue
- Subject to existing laws, the criminal action shall be instituted and tried in the court of the municipality or territory where the
offense was committed or where any of its essential ingredients occurred.
- Special circumstances to consider:
a. Offense committed in train, aircraft, or other public or private vehicle while in the course of its trip – court of
any municipality or territory where such train, aircraft or other vehicle passed during such trip, including the place
of its departure and arrival.
b. Offense committed on board a vessel in the course of its voyage – court of the first port of entry or of any
municipality or territory where the vessel passed during such voyage, subject to the generally accepted principles of
international law.
c. Crimes committed outside the Philippines but punishable under Art 2 RPC – cognizable by the court where the
criminal action is first filed.
• Offense while on a Philippine ship or airship
• Forgery or counterfeiting any coin or currency note of the Philippine Islands or
obligation and securities issued by the Government of the Philippines
• Acts connected with the introduction into these islands of the obligations and
securities mentioned above
• While being public officer and employees, should commit an offense in the
exercise of their functions
• Any of the crimes against national security (Treason, conspiracy and proposal to
commit treason, misprision of treason, espionage, inciting to war and giving motives for
reprisal, violation of neutrality, correspondence with hostile country, flight to enemy’s
country) and the law of nations (piracy and mutiny under Art 122 and qualified piracy
under Art 123)
d. Written defamation
• May be filed where the libelous article was printed and first published, or where
the offended party held office (if public official) or resided (if private individual)
at the time of the commission of the offense,
• Either one of these statements must be alleged in the information itself and the
absence of both from the very face of the information renders the latter fatally defective.
• If libelous material published online, can only be filed where any of the offended
parties reside.
e. If continuing crime, file in any court in place where any of the elements occurred, it being
understood that the first court taking cognizance of the case excludes the other.
• In BP22, material acts are drawing, issuing, delivery, and dishonor of check.
• In estafa, (a) property received in trust, (b) misappropriation, (c) to the prejudice
of another, (d) there is demand by offended party.
f. Perjury – if committed through the making of a false affidavit, committed at the time the
affiant subscribes and swears to affidavit. If committed through false testimony under
oath, venue is at the place where the testimony is given. If in lieu of or as supplement to
the actual testimony made, a written sworn statement is submitted, venue may either be
at the place where the sworn statement is submitted or where the oath was taken.
- Substitution
- If it appears at any time before judgment that a mistake has been made in charging the proper offense, the court
shall dismiss the original complaint or information upon the filing of a new one charging the proper offense.
• Provided the accused shall not be placed in double jeopardy. (Needs to be completely different
offense in order not to institute double jeopardy, e.g. murder à in furtherance of
rebellion)
- The court may require the witnesses to give bail for their appearance at the trial.
- Distinctions from amendment:
• Necessarily involves substantial change (vs. formal). Essentially charging a
distinct and different offense from original offense.
• There is identity between the two offenses when the evidence to support a
conviction for one offense would be sufficient to warrant a conviction for the
other, or when the second offense is exactly the same as the first, or when the
second offense is an attempt to commit or the frustration of, or when it
necessarily includes or is included in, the offense charged in the first
information.
• Would entail another PI, plea, and information
- Basic principles/ideas:
- Art 100 RPC – every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable.
• Corpus v Siapno: court trying criminal case must also judge on civil liability of
accused.
• Exceptions – when no actual damage results from an offense (eg espionage,
violation of neutrality, etc).
- Purpose of civil action – the resolution, reparation, or indemnification of the private
offended party for the damage or injury he sustained.
- Parties in interest in civil action – offended party and accused. Public prosecutor generally has
no interest.
- Applicable rule in civil action instituted with criminal action – Rules of Criminal
Procedure and not Rules of Civil Procedure.
- General rule: 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.
- Filing fees:
• Actual damages
• Except as otherwise provided in these Rules, no filing fees shall be required for actual damages.
• In cases of violation of BP 22. Offended party shall pay in full the filing fees based on
the amount of the check involved, which shall be considered as the actual damages claimed.
• Moral, exemplary, nominal, temperate, liquidated damages
• Corresponding filing fees shall be paid by the offended party upon the filing thereof in court.
• If no amount specified in complaint or information, the filing fees thereof shall constitute a first
lien on the judgment awarding such damages.
- No counterclaim, crossclaim or thirdparty complaint may be filed by the accused in the criminal case, but any
cause of action which could have been the subject thereof may be litigated in a separate civil action.
- Exceptions:
1. Offended party waives civil action.
2. Or reserves the right to institute it separately.
• Shall be made before the prosecution starts presenting its evidence and under circumstances affording the
offended party a reasonable opportunity to make such reservation.
• Exception – no reservation to file civil action separately for violation of BP 22 shall be allowed.
• Sarmiento v CA: if court decision is completely silent on civil liability, this is
deemed an implied reservation if such can be supported by the facts of the case
(such as if private prosecutor does not actively intervene in proceedings/when he moves
to withdraw his appearance)
3. Or institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action.
• If criminal action filed first – civil action cannot be instituted until after final judgment
• If the criminal action is filed after – civil action shall be suspended in whatever stage it may be found
before judgment on the merits, until final judgment is rendered in the criminal action.
• Pending civil action may also be consolidated with the criminal action in the court trying the
criminal action.
• How to consolidate – motion of the offended party, application with criminal court
• In case of consolidation, the evidence already adduced in the civil action shall be deemed
automatically reproduced in the criminal action without prejudice to the right of the prosecution
to crossexamine the witnesses presented by the offended party in the criminal case and of the
parties to present additional evidence. The consolidated criminal and civil actions shall be tried
and decided jointly.
• During the pendency of the criminal action, the running of the period of prescription of the civil action
which cannot be instituted separately or whose proceeding has been suspended shall be tolled.
4. In case of independent civil action
• Independent civil actions:
a. Art 32 CC – civil code counterpart of Bill of Rights
b. Art 33 CC – defamation, fraud, and physical injuries
c. Art 34 CC – member of city or municipal police force refuses or fails to
render aid or protection to any person in case of danger to life or property
d. Art 2176 CC – quasi-delicts
e. Contractual obligations, and all other civil actions based on obligations not
arising from the act or omission complained of as a felony.
• Shall proceed independently of the criminal action (and shall require only a preponderance of evidence).
Implications:
• Right to bring foregoing actions need not be reserved in criminal prosecution.
Institution or waiver of right to file separate civil action arising from the
crime charged does not extinguish right to bring independent criminal
action.
• Even if a civil action is filed separately, civil liability in criminal prosecution
remains.
• Independent civil action not affected by the results of criminal action.
• Qualification – offended party cannot recover damages twice for the same act or omission charged in the
criminal action.
- Effect of death of the accused on civil action
a. After arraignment and during pendency of criminal action:
• Civil liability arising from delict extinguished.
• Independent civil action may be continued
• If quasi-delict or based on injury to person or property, file against
executor/legal representative of estate.
• If contractual, file against estate.
b. Before arraignment – case shall be dismissed without prejudice to any civil action the offended party may file
against the estate of the deceased.
- Prejudicial question:
- Definition – an issue involved in a civil case which is similar or intimately related to the issue
raised in the criminal action, the resolution of which determines whether or not the
criminal action may proceed. Allows for the suspension of the criminal case in order to
await resolution of prejudicial question in civil case.
- Requisites:
a. Civil action is instituted previously or ahead of criminal action.
• Also means that civil action is being tried in a tribunal different from that
trying criminal action.
• San Miguel v Perez: action for specific performance is civil, although according to
the rules it is filed with administrative body.
b. Involves an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the subsequent criminal action
c. Resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action may proceed.
• San Miguel v Perez: prejudicial question need not conclusively resolve the
guilt or innocence of the accused. It is enough for the prejudicial
question to simply test the sufficiency of the allegations in the
information in order to sustain the further prosecution of the criminal
case.
- A petition for suspension of the criminal action based upon the pendency of a prejudicial question may be filed:
a. In the office of the prosecutor conducting the preliminary investigation.
b. When the criminal action has been filed in court for trial, the petition to suspend shall be filed in the
same criminal action at any time before the prosecution rests.
- More on the relationship of criminal and civil actions:
- Final judgment rendered in a civil/administrative action absolving the defendant from civil liability is not a bar
to a criminal action against the defendant for the same act or omission subject of the civil action.
- Payment of or compromise upon civil liability does not extinguish criminal liability.
- The extinction of the penal action does not carry with it extinction of the civil action.
• Where reasons for extinction of penal action are (a) acquittal based on reasonable
doubt, (b) court declares that liability of the accused is only civil, (c) civil liability is
independent of crime.
• However, civil action based on delict shall be extinguished if there is a finding in a final judgment in the
criminal action that the act or omission from which the civil liability may arise did not exist.
• Trial court, in case of acquittal of accused, must state whether prosecution
absolutely failed to prove guilt or merely failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable
doubt. And in either case, it shall determine if the act or omission from which the civil
liability might arise did not exist.
- Preliminary investigation is an inquiry or proceeding to determine whether there is sufficient ground to engender a
wellfounded belief that a crime has been committed and the respondent is probably guilty thereof, and should be held for
trial.
- Ultimate purpose – to secure innocent against hasty, malicious, and oppressive
prosecution and to protect him from an open and public accusation of a crime, from the
trouble, expenses, and anxiety of a public trial, and also to protect the State from useless
and expensive prosecutions.
• Not a trial. Does not involve the examination of witnesses by way of direct or cross-
examination. Not the occasion for the full and exhaustive display of the parties’
evidence. Purpose is not to declare respondent guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
• Executive in nature. Not a judicial function.
• Public prosecutor exercises a wide latitude of discretion in determining whether
a criminal case should be filed in court. Courts must respect the exercise of
such discretion when (a) the information filed against the person is valid on
its face, and that (b) no manifest error or grave abuse of discretion (Rule
65) can be imputed to the public prosecutor. (Compare with if quasi-judicial,
then the courts may interfere through review – Rule 43).
• Cannot be compelled through mandamus since such would apply only
for ministerial functions.
• No need to strictly conform with rules of procedure.
- Probable cause
• Does not import absolute certainty. Requires more than bare suspicion but less than
evidence to justify a conviction.
• Based on reasonable belief, the judgment of the
average/ordinary/prudent/cautious man based on common sense.
• Estrada v Ombudsman: hearsay evidence can even be admitted, as long as there is
substantial basis for crediting hearsay.
• Note – other instances in law in which probable cause is determined:
2. Warrant of arrest (judge)
3. Search warrant (judge)
4. Warrantless arrest (arresting officer)
- Nature of the right to a preliminary investigation:
• Not a fundamental right and not included in the Bill of Rights. May be invoked only
when specifically created by statute.
• But when granted by a statute, the right is not a mere formal or technical right, but a
substantive right (thus, can be waived)
• Waiver or objection
• Accused must raise issue before he enters his plea (by refusing to enter
plea, or filing motion for reinvestigation). The court shall resolve the matter as
early as practicable but not later than the start of the trial.
• Failure to invoke right before entering plea will amount to a waiver.
• Participation in irregular preliminary investigation amounts to estoppel.
• An application for or admission of the accused to bail does not bar him from
raising such question.
- When required:
- Offenses where the penalty prescribed by law is at least 4-2-1 without regard to the fine.
- Exception: when a person is lawfully arrested without a warrant. In which case, three possible outcomes:
1. Conduct an inquest – summary investigation, whose purpose is to determine whether
or not the person detained should remain under custody and then charged in
court.
• Inquest officer will summarily examine the arresting officers on the
circumstances surrounding the arrest or apprehension of the detained person. If
inquest officer finds that:
§ Arrest should not have been made – recommend release of
detainee. Note: may be a release for further investigation (in which
case detainee shall be given notice of preliminary investigation).
examined the affiants and that he is satisfied that they voluntarily executed and understood
their affidavits.
• If no certification, will not invalidate complaint. Mere defect in form.
c. In such number of copies as there are respondents, plus 2 copies for the official file.
2. Within 10 days after the filing of complaint, the investigating officer shall either:
a. Dismiss it if he finds no ground to continue with the investigation
b. Issue a subpoena to the respondent attaching to it a copy of the complaint and its supporting affidavits
and documents
• Note: objects as evidence need not be furnished a party but shall be made available for
examination, copying, or photographing at the expense of the requesting party. If the evidence is
voluminous, the complainant may be required to specify those which he intends to present
against the respondent, and these shall be made available for examination or copying by the
respondent at his expense.
• Note: rule does not include affidavits of other respondents
3. If subpoena is issued:
• Within 10 days from receipt of the subpoena with the complaint and AS, respondent shall submit his
counteraffidavit and that of his witnesses and other supporting documents relied upon for his defense.
• The counteraffidavits shall be subscribed and sworn to and certified as above, with copies
thereof furnished by him to the complainant.
• The respondent shall not be allowed to file a motion to dismiss in lieu of a counteraffidavit.
• Reply to counter-affidavit (reply-affidavit) and rebut to reply-affidavit
(rejoinder-affidavit) also allowed.
• If the respondent cannot be subpoenaed, or if subpoenaed, does not submit counteraffidavits within the
10 day period, the investigating officer shall resolve the complaint based on the evidence presented by the
complainant (ex-parte investigation).
• But respondent is allowed to have proceedings reopened. Should be done
before prosecutor has issued a resolution in the case and should contain
an explanation for the failure to timely file the counter-affidavit.
4. Clarificatory hearing – investigating officer may set a hearing if there are facts and issues to be clarified from a
party or a witness.
• The parties can be present at the hearing but without the right to examine or crossexamine. They may,
however, submit to the investigating officer questions which may be asked to the party or witness
concerned.
• The hearing shall be held within 10 days from submission of the counteraffidavits and other documents
or from the expiration of the period for their submission. It shall be terminated within 5 days.
5. Resolution – within 10 days after the investigation, the investigating officer shall determine whether or not there
is sufficient ground to hold the respondent for trial.
• If he finds no cause to hold respondent for trial – recommend dismissal of the complaint.
• If he finds – prepare information.
• He shall certify under oath in the information that he, or as shown by the record, an
authorized officer, has personally examined the complainant and his witnesses; that there is
reasonable ground to believe that a crime has been committed and that the accused is probably
guilty thereof; that the accused was informed of the complaint and of the evidence submitted
against him; and that he was given an opportunity to submit controverting evidence.
• If certification absent, information is still valid.
6. Forward case to boss within 5 days:
• No complaint or information may be filed or dismissed by an investigating prosecutor without the prior
written authority or approval of the provincial or city prosecutor or chief state prosecutor or the
Ombudsman (for offenses cognizable by the Sandiganbayan in the exercise of its original
jurisdiction) or his deputy.
• They shall act on the resolution within 10 days from their receipt thereof and shall immediately inform
the parties of such action.
• Resolution is to dismiss case – if disapproved by the boss on the ground that a probable cause
exists, the latter may, by himself, file the information against the respondent, or direct any other assistant
prosecutor or state prosecutor to do so without conducting another preliminary investigation.
7. Appealing the decision of the prosecutor:
• Aggrieved party not precluded from filing an MR.
• If MR is denied, aggrieved party may appeal to Secretary of Justice/Ombudsman.
• Secretary of Justice/Ombudsman shall direct the prosecutor concerned either to file the
corresponding information without conducting another preliminary investigation, or to dismiss
or move for dismissal of the complaint or information with notice to the parties. If he finds
the same to be patently without merit or manifestly intended for delay, or when
the issues raised therein are too insubstantial to require consideration, he may
dismiss the petition outright.
• Chan v DOJ Sec: if case already filed in court, authority of the Justice
Secretary to review the prosecutor’s findings subsists. Court, however, is
not bound by the Resolution of the Justice Secretary, but must evaluate it before
proceeding with the trial. While the ruling of the Justice Secretary is
persuasive, it is not binding on courts.
• If aggrieved party does not like the decision of the Secretary of Justice:
• May file MR.
• May further appeal to the Office of the President if the following conditions
are present, which have to be established as jurisdictional facts: (a) offense
involved is punishable by reclusion perpetua to death, (b) new and material
issues are raised which were not previously presented before the DOJ and
thus were not ruled upon, (c) appeal or petition for review is filed within 30
days from notice, (d) prescription of offense not due within 6 months.
§ If adverse decision, appeal to CA under Rule 43, and then to SC under
Rule 45.
• If decision tainted with grave abuse of discretion, petition for certiorari under
Rule 65 with the Court of Appeals, whose decision may then be appealed to the
SC by way of a petition for review on certiorari.
8. File complaint or information in court.
• Shall be supported by AS.
• The record of the preliminary investigation, whether conducted by a judge or a fiscal, shall not form part
of the record of the case. However, the court, on its own initiative or on motion of any party, may order
the production of the record or any its part when necessary in the resolution of the case or any incident
therein, or when it is to be introduced as an evidence in the case by the requesting party. (This is
because judgment should be based on independent decision of the court and that the
evidence in the PI is not offered by parties as part of the trial)
- Procedure upon filing of complaint or information:
1. Within 10 days from the filing of the complaint or information, the judge shall personally evaluate the resolution of
the prosecutor and its supporting evidence.
• Prosecutor’s report does not bind the judge.
• Note: judicial determination of probable cause is not appellate review. Prosecutor
still maintains direction and control of prosecuting case.
2. May find that:
a. Evidence fails to establish probable cause – dismiss case.
b. Engenders a doubt as to the existence of probable cause – order prosecution to submit additional evidence
within 5 days. Issue must be resolved within 30 days from filing of complaint or information.
c. Establishes probable cause – issue warrant of arrest. Exceptions (when warrant of arrest not
necessary):
i. Complaint or information was filed pursuant to lawful warrantless arrest (in which case,
commitment order)
ii. Offense penalized by fine only.
iii. When the case is subject to the rules on summary procedure.
3. The court shall then proceed in the exercise of its original jurisdiction.
• Crespo v Mogul: once a criminal complaint or information is filed in court (and even
before arraignment), any disposition of the case, dismissal, acquittal, conviction
rests within the exclusive jurisdiction, competence, and discretion of the trial
court.
• Court’s jurisdiction nor validity of information is not adversely affected by
deficiencies in the preliminary investigation. Absence or irregularity of preliminary
investigation is not one of the grounds for a motion to quash. Courts should not
dismiss information, but should remand the case to the prosecutor so that the
investigation may be conducted.
- Rules for filing when no preliminary investigation required:
1. If the complaint is filed directly with the prosecutor
• Procedure outlined in section 3(a) shall be observed.
• 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 direct filing with court
• Procedure in section 3(a) shall be observed.
• Within 10 days after filing of complaint or information, judge must personally evaluate evidence, or
personally examine in writing and under oath the complainant and his witnesses in the form of searching
questions and answers.
a. If no probable cause – dismiss.
b. If insufficient evidence – require the submission of additional evidence, within 10 days
from notice. If the judge still finds no probable cause despite the additional evidence, he shall,
within 10 days from its submission or expiration of said period, dismiss the case.
c. If probable cause – issue a (i) warrant of arrest, or a (ii) commitment order if the accused had
already been arrested, or (iii) summons if the judge is satisfied that there is no necessity for
placing the accused under custody. And hold him for trial.
• Underscores the exclusive and personal responsibility of the judge to satisfy himself of
the existence of probable cause. What the law requires is that he make a personal
determination, and not rely solely on prosecutor’s report.
• Personal examination of witnesses not mandatory.
• He shall: (a) personally evaluate the report and the supporting documents
submitted by the fiscal, or (b) if he finds no probable cause, he may disregard the
fiscal’s report and require the submission of supporting affidavits of witnesses to
aid him in arriving at a conclusion.
• Note: if the complaint or information is directly filed with MTC, see rule above.
- Lawful warrantless arrests:
1. When, in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit
an offense (in flagrante delicto). Requisites:
a. Person to be arrested must execute an overt act that would indicate that he has
committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit an offense.
• Reliable information alone, absent any over act indicative of a felonious
enterprise, is not sufficient to constitute probable cause
• People v Edano: flight is not a reliable indicator of guilt without other
circumstances.
b. Overt act is done in the presence or within the view of the arresting officer or
private person.
• Usual case – arrest made after entrapment.
• Distinguish from instigation (an absolutory cause)
• Details of transaction during entrapment must be clearly shown and must be
subject to strict scrutiny (following objective test). At the same time, however,
conduct of police should not disable courts into ignoring accused’s
predisposition to commit the crime. If there is overwhelming evidence of
habitual delinquency, recidivism, or plain criminal proclivity, then this must also
be considered (subjective test).
• No textbook method of conducting buy-bust operations. Selection of
effective means is left to discretion of police authorities. Prior surveillance not
required.
2. When an offense has just been committed, and he has probable cause to believe based on personal knowledge of
facts or circumstances that the person to be arrested has committed it (hot pursuit). Requisites:
a. An offense has just been committed.
b. The person making the arrest has personal knowledge of facts indicating that the
person to be arrested has committed it.
• Does not require arresting officers to personally witness commission of offense.
• Personal knowledge means actual belief or reasonable grounds of
suspicion. The grounds are reasonable based on actual facts/strong supporting
evidence, coupled with good faith on the part of the officers making the
arrest. And understand that officer is acting within a limited time frame, and in
haste.
3. When the person to be arrested is an escaped prisoner (detainee or by final judgment)
- In addition:
4. If a person lawfully arrested escapes or is rescued, any person may immediately pursue or retake him without a
warrant at any time and in any place within the Philippines.
5. An accused released on bail, if he attempts to depart from the Philippines without permission
of the court where the case is pending.
- And for the above exceptions to apply, note further that there must have been no opportunity
for the arresting officer to obtain a search warrant.
- Lawful warrantless arrests may be made either by a peace officer or a private person (citizen’s arrest).
- How to make an arrest:
- Arrest with warrant:
• Warrant of arrest is issued by a judge.
• The head of the office to whom the warrant of arrest was delivered for execution shall cause the warrant
to be executed within 10 days from its receipt.
• Officer shall (a) inform the person to be arrested of the cause of the arrest and (b) of the fact that a
warrant has been issued for his arrest, except when he (a) flees or (b) forcibly resists before the officer has
opportunity to so inform him, or (c) when the giving of such information will imperil the arrest.
• The officer need not have the warrant in his possession at the time of the arrest but after the arrest, if the
person arrested so requires, the warrant shall be shown to him as soon as practicable.
• Within 10 days after the expiration of the period, the officer to whom it was assigned for execution shall
make a report to the judge who issued the warrant. In case of his failure to execute the warrant, he shall
state the reasons therefor.
- Arrest without warrant:
• Arrest by officer – the officer shall inform the person to be arrested of (a) his authority and (b) the
cause of the arrest.
• Arrest by private person – person shall inform the person to be arrested of the intention to arrest
him and cause of the arrest.
• Neither officer nor private person need to give the above information to person arrested
if he is (a) engaged in the commission of an offense, (b) is pursued immediately after its commission, (c)
has escaped, flees or (d) forcibly resists before the officer has opportunity so to inform him, or (e) when the
giving of such information will imperil the arrest.
- For arrests whether with or without warrant:
• Time of arrest – an arrest may be made on any day and at any time of the day or night.
• No violence or unnecessary force shall be used in making an arrest. The person arrested shall not be
subject to a greater restraint than is necessary for his detention.
• An officer making a lawful arrest may orally summon as many persons as he deems necessary to assist
him in effecting the arrest. Every person so summoned by an officer shall assist him in effecting the arrest
when he can render such assistance without detriment to himself.
• An officer, in order to make an arrest, may break into any building or enclosure where the person to be
arrested is or is reasonably believed to be, if he is refused admittance thereto, after announcing his
authority and purpose. And he may break out therefrom when necessary to liberate himself.
• Duty of the officer executing the arrest to deliver the accused to the nearest police station or jail without
unnecessary delay.
- Rights of a person arrested (RA7438):
1. Right to be assisted by counsel at all times
• Competent and independent counsel, preferably of his own choice.
• If such person cannot afford the services of his own counsel, he must be provided with a competent and
independent counsel by the investigating officer.
2. Right to remain silent.
3. Right to be informed of the above rights.
4. Right to be visited by immediate members of family, counsel, national or international NGOs (duly accredited by
CHR or OP, respectively), medical doctor, priest/religious minister.
5. The following must be done in the presence of counsel, in writing, and signed by arrested person:
• Waiver of provisions of Art 125 of the RPC (otherwise, null and void)
• Extrajudicial confession (otherwise, inadmissible as evidence in any proceeding)
• If no counsel, upon valid waiver, may be done in the presence of any of the parents, elder
brothers and sisters, his spouse, the municipal mayor, the municipal judge, district school
supervisor, or priest or minister of the gospel as chosen by him.
• Search is limited to (a) person of the suspect and (b) area within the suspect’s
reach/immediate control (ie area within which he might gain possession of a weapon
or destructible evidence).
• Allowable search is limited to search for: (a) dangerous weapons, (b) anything which
may have been used in the commission of the offense, (c) anything which
constitutes proof in the commission of an offense.
2. Seizure of evidence in plain view. Requisites:
a. Law enforcement officer has prior justification for intrusion, or is in a position from
which he can view a particular area.
b. Discovery of evidence is inadvertent.
• Officer must not have known in advance of location of evidence. Discovery
must not be anticipated. Must not have searched for evidence on purpose.
c. It is immediately apparent to officer that the item he observes may be evidence of
a crime, contraband, or otherwise subject to seizure.
3. Stop and frisk/Terry searches
• Purpose:
a. General interest of effective crime prevention and detection
b. Safety of police officer
• Test – reasonable belief or genuine reason, in the light of the officer’s experience
and the surrounding circumstances, that a crime has either taken place or is about to
take place and the person to be stopped is armed and dangerous.
• Must be based on specific and articulable facts/knowledge and experience and
not merely upon officer’s bare suspicion or hunch.
• Not the existence of probable cause because no full arrest is made
• Valid frisk – must be a mere pat down outside the person’s garment and not
unreasonably intrusive, for purpose of discovering weapons.
4. Search of moving vehicle
• Justified on ground that it is not practicable to secure warrant, because vehicle can be
quickly moved out of locality or jurisdiction in which warrant must be sought.
• Valid for as long as there is probable cause to believe that instrumentality or
evidence pertaining to a crime is in the vehicle to be searched.
• Check points – must be warranted by exigencies of public order and conducted
in a way least intrusive to motorists. Allowed for as long as vehicle is neither
searched nor its occupants subjected to a body search, and the inspection of the
vehicle is limited to a visual search.
5. Search of vessels and aircraft
6. Consented warrantless search – not to be lightly inferred, but must be shown by clear and
convincing evidence.
7. Exigent and emergency circumstances
8. Customs search
9. Inspection of buildings and other premises for the enforcement of fire, sanitary, and building
regulations
- Illegal search and seizure
- Motion to quash warrant and/or motion to suppress evidence obtained thereby
a. If no criminal action has been instituted, file in court that issued the search warrant. If such court fails to
resolve the motion and a criminal case is subsequent filed in another court, the motion shall be resolved
by the latter court.
b. If criminal action instituted, file in court where such action has been instituted.
• If motion to quash warrant must be made before entering of plea. Otherwise,
objection is deemed waived. If motion to suppress evidence, not waivable.
• Note – opposing motions to quash (World Wide Web Corp v People): if doing so in SW
court, private party may appeal. If records already in court trying criminal case and issue
is interlocutory/incidental to case, only public prosecutor can appeal.
- Effects:
• Exclusionary rule – any evidence obtained shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding
(Bill of Rights).
• Erring officers may be liable criminally for violation of domicile, search warrant
maliciously obtained or abuse in service of those legally obtained, searching
domicile without witnesses.
• Those aggrieved may also have right to seek damages/civil liability (which would be
an independent civil action under Art 32 of Civil Code).
- Bail – 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 the conditions hereinafter specified.
- A constitutional right based on Sec 13, Art III – All persons, except those charged with offenses
punishable by reclusion perpetua when evidence of guilt is strong, shall, before conviction, be bailable by sufficient
sureties, or be released on recognizance as may be provided by law. The right to bail shall not be impaired even
when the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is suspended. Excessive bail shall not be required.
- Springs from the presumption of innocence accorded every accused upon whom should not be
inflicted incarceration at the outset.
- No impact on civil liability of accused.
- No person under detention by legal process shall be released or transferred except upon order of the court or when
he is admitted to bail.
- Who may be granted bail
1. Persons in custody of law
• That is, those who have been arrested or have surrendered themselves to the jurisdiction
of the court.
• May apply for bail as soon as he is deprived of liberty, even before complaint or
information is filed against him.
• Arraignment not required. Otherwise, the accused would be precluded from
filing a motion to quash. However, does not mean that hearing on petition for
bail should at all times precede arraignment.
• No inconsistency exsits between petition for bail and filing of motion to quash.
• Application shall not bar the accused from challenging the validity of his arrest or the legality
of the warrant issued therefor, or from assailing the regularity or questioning the absence of a
preliminary investigation of the charge against him, provided that he raises them before entering
his plea. The court shall resolve the matter as early as practicable but not later than the start
of the trial of the case.
2. Exceptional circumstance – material witness, when there is proof that he will not testify when
required.
3. Exceptional circumstance – when information is substituted, court may require witnesses to give bail for
their appearance at the trial.
- Forms of bail
1. Corporate surety
• Can be given by any domestic or foreign corporation, licensed as a surety in accordance with law and
currently authorized to act as such
• Given by a bond subscribed jointly by the accused and an officer of the corporation duly authorized by
its board of directors.
2. Property bond
• Constituted as a lien on real property given as security for the amount of the bail.
• Within 10 days after approval of bond, accused shall cause annotation of lien on (a) certificate of title
(registered land) or registration book (unregistered land) in Registry of Deeds, and in (b) tax
declaration. Must submit to court compliance with this requirement within the same period, or else the
bond can be cancelled.
• No bail shall be approved unless the surety is qualified. Qualification of sureties in a property bond:
a. Must be resident owner of real estate within the Philippines
b. Real estate must be worth at least the amount of the undertaking. If there are two or more
sureties, aggregate of the justified sums must be equivalent to the whole amount of bail
demanded.
c. Must be worth the amount specified in his own undertaking over and above all just debts,
obligations and properties exempt from execution.
3. Cash deposit
• Deposit in cash with the nearest CIR/prvoincial, city, or municipal treasurer the amount of bail.
• Submit certificate of deposit with court and written undertaking showing compliance with terms of bail
(see below), after which the accused shall be discharged from custody.
• The money deposited shall be considered as bail and applied to the payment of fine and costs. The excess,
if any, shall be returned to the accused or to whoever made the deposit.
4. Recognizance
• Whenever allowed by law or these Rules, the court may release a person in custody to his own
recognizance or that of a responsible person.
• RA10389: release on recognizance of any person in custody or detention for the
commission of an offense is a matter of right when the offense is not punishable by
DRL (death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment), provided application is filed:
a. Before or after conviction by MTC
b. Before conviction by RTC
- Cases when bail may or may not be applied
1. When person can be released without posting bail
a. When the law or these Rules so provide.
b. When a person has been in custody for a period equal to or more than possible max imprisonment
prescribed for the offense charged – immediate release.
• Without prejudice to the continuation of the trial or the proceedings on appeal.
c. If max penalty to which the accused may be sentenced is destierro – release after 30 days of preventive
imprisonment.
d. In MTC cases, when no arrest is made.
e. Under RA6036: violation of a municipal/city ordinance, a light felony and/or a criminal
offense punishable by 0-6-0 max and/or Php2000 fine, or both.
• Where said person has established to the satisfaction of the court that he is
unable to post the required cash or bail bond.
• But with exceptions. Eg when accused is caught in flagrante, or when he
confesses to commission of offense.
• Instead of bail, required to sign sworn statement binding himself, pending final
decision of his case, to (a) report to clerk of court periodically and (b) accept
authority of responsible citizen in community if he is placed under such a
person’s custody, at the discretion of the court.
• Except when his failure to report is for justifiable reasons including
circumstances beyond his contro, any violation of this sworn statement shall
justify the court to order his immediate arrest unless he files bail in the amount
forthwith fixed by the court.
2. When bail is a matter of right
a. Before or after conviction by the MTC
b. Before conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by DRL
• San Miguel v Maceda: where bail is a matter of right, bail must be allowed irrespective of
such circumstance. The existence of a high degree of probability that the defendant will
abscond confers upon the court no greater discretion than to increase the bond.
3. When bail is a matter of discretion
a. Before conviction by the RTC of an offense punishable by DRL
• Bail is allowed only when evidence of guilt is not strong
• Whether or not evidence of guilt is strong is a matter to be determined by the
court after a hearing. Hearing is indispensable (even when prosecution
interposes no objection to bail) before a judge can determine whether the
evidence for the prosecution is strong.
• Court must give reasonable notice of the hearing to the prosecutor or require him to
submit his recommendation.
• Prosecution has the burden of showing that evidence of guilt is strong.
• Hearing is summary in nature. Serapio v Sandiganbayan: court has
jurisdiction to hear case jointly with case of a co-accused, except that
the case must still be summary in nature.
• Strong evidence of guilt – does not mean proof beyond reasonable doubt.
• Note: even if evidence of guilt is weak, right to bail may justifiably still be
denied if the probability of escape is great. (?)
• The evidence presented during the bail hearing shall be considered automatically reproduced at
the trial, but upon motion of either party, the court may recall any witness for additional
examination unless the latter is dead, outside the Philippines, or otherwise unable to testify.
b. Upon conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by DRL.
• Should the court grant the application, the accused may be allowed to continue on provisional
liberty during the pendency of the appeal under the same bail subject to the consent of the
bondsman.
• Accused shall be denied bail/bail shall be cancelled if:
§ Penalty imposed by the trial court is more than 6 years imprisonment and
§ Upon a showing by the prosecution, with notice to the accused, of the following or
other similar circumstances: (a) that he is a recidivist, quasirecidivist, or habitual
delinquent, or has committed the crime aggravated by the circumstance of reiteration;
(b) that he has previously escaped from legal confinement, evaded sentence, or violated
the conditions of his bail without valid justification; (c) that he committed the offense
while under probation, parole, or conditional pardon; (d) that the circumstances of
his case indicate the probability of flight if released on bail; or (e) that there is undue
risk that he may commit another crime during the pendency of the appeal.
§ Leviste v CA: even when the above circumstances are absent, grant of
bail still discretionary. Can still be denied. Except that court is
authorized to use sound (vs stringent) discretion approach.
§ The appellate court may, motu proprio or on motion of any party, review the
resolution of the RTC after notice to the adverse party.
• People v Fitzgerald: bail is not a sick pass for an ailing or aged detainee or prisoner needing
medical care outside the prison facility. A mere claim of illness is not a ground for bail.
4. When bail is not allowed (person cannot be released)
a. When charged with a offense punishable by DRL when evidence of guilt is strong
• Whenever bail is filed with a court other than where the case is pending, the judge who accepted the bail
shall forward it, together with the order of release and other supporting papers, to the court where the case
is pending, which may, for good reason, require a different one to be filed.
- Guidelines for fixing amount:
• Basic rule – excessive bail shall not be required.
• In fixing bail, the amount should be high enough to assure the presence of the accused
when such presence is required, but no higher than is reasonably calculated to fulfill this
purpose. Consider the good of the public as well as the rights of the accused.
• The judge who issued the warrant or granted the application shall fix a reasonable amount of bail
considering primarily, but not limited to, the following factors: (a) Financial ability of the accused to give
bail; (b) Nature and circumstances of the offense; (c) Penalty for the offense charged; (d) Character and
reputation of the accused; (e) Age and health of the accused; (f) Weight of the evidence against the
accused; (g) Probability of the accused appearing at the trial; (h) Forfeiture of other bail; (i) The fact that
accused was a fugitive from justice when arrested; and (j) Pendency of other cases where the accused is on
bail.
• A person in custody for a period equal to or more than the minimum of the principal penalty prescribed
for the offense charged, without application of the Indeterminate Sentence Law or any modifying
circumstance, shall be released on a reduced bail or on his own recognizance, at the discretion of the court.
- If accused does not have financial ability to post amount of bail, he may move for its reduction.
- The order fixing the amount of bail shall not be subject to appeal.
- The accused must be discharged upon approval of the bail by the judge with whom it was filed.
- Rules after grant of bail
- Court may, upon good cause, either increase or reduce its amount.
• When increased, the accused may be committed to custody if he does not give bail in the increased amount
within a reasonable period.
• An accused held to answer a criminal charge, who is released without bail upon filing of the complaint or
information, may, at any subsequent stage of the proceedings and whenever a strong showing of guilt
appears to the court, be required to give bail in the amount fixed, or in lieu thereof, committed to custody.
• Andres v Beltran: in order to increase or reduce bail, a hearing is again required.
- Cancellation of bail
a. When bail-negating circumstances are present
b. Upon application of bondsmen (and with due notice to prosec) – if accused has surrendered
(voluntarily) or upon proof of his death.
c. Automatically – upon acquittal of the accused, dismissal of the case, or execution of the judgment of
conviction.
• In all instances, the cancellation shall be without prejudice to any liability on the bond.
- In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be entitled to the following rights:
• GSA – burden is shifted only as to establishment of fact, not guilt. Thus, not really a
presumption of guilt but rather a presumption of facts based on rationality.
- Proof beyond reasonable doubt – does not mean absolute certainty. Moral certainty only is
required, or that degree of proof which produces conviction in an unprejudiced mind.
• State has to prove identity of the accused as malefactor and fact of commission of the
crime.
• Prosecution must rest on strength of its own evidence and must not rely on the
weakness of the defense.
• If prosecution fails to meet its burden of proof, the defense may logically not even
present evidence on its own behalf. In such case, accused should be acquitted.
• Equipoise rule – where evidence in a criminal case is evenly balanced, presumption of
innocence tilts the scales in favor of the accused.
• Once the presumption of innocence is overcome, defense bears burden of evidence to
show reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the accused.
2. To be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him.
- See requisites for Complaint or Information above.
- Formal: Arraignment; Actual: Complaint/Information
- Substantial variance between information and evidence (eg identity of check in a BP22 case) –
violates right of accused to be informed. Information invalid.
- A minor variance between the information and the evidence does not alter the nature of the
offense, nor does it determine or qualify the crime or penalty – right to be informed not violated.
- Not waivable.
- Note also: accused can, upon showing good cause, ask to inspect or copy witness testimonies or material evidence
not otherwise privileged under the control of the prosecution.
3. To be present and defend in person and by counsel at every stage of the proceedings, from arraignment to promulgation of the
judgment.
- When presence of accused cannot be waived:
a. Arraignment
b. His presence is specifically ordered by the court for purposes of identification.
c. Promulgation of judgement. Exception: light offense, in which case accused may appear
by counsel or representative.
- Waiver of presence at trial:
a. Accused may waive pursuant to the stipulations set forth in his bail
b. The absence of the accused without justifiable cause at the trial of which he had notice shall be considered
a waiver of his right to be present thereat.
c. When an accused under custody escapes, he shall be deemed to have waived his right to be present on all
subsequent trial dates until custody over him is regained.
- Upon motion, the accused may be allowed to defend himself in person when it sufficiently appears to the court that
he can properly protect his right without the assistance of counsel.
- Right to counsel
• Enjoyed by every person under custody of law.
• Even before trial. For as long as person is already under custodial investigation
(the stage where the police investigation is no longer a general inquiry into an
unsolved crime, but has begun to focus on a particular suspect taken into
custody by the police; remember that being invited for questioning already
constitutes custodial investigation)
• Police line-up not part of custodial investigation. At this stage, accused is not
yet being investigated.
• See rights of persons under custodial investigation above.
• Preferably of one’s own choice
- Cannot be invoked to prevent incriminating a person other than oneself, or to refuse to hand
over evidence not held in one’s personal capacity.
- Can be asserted in any proceeding – civil or criminal, administrative or judicial, investigatory or
adjudicatory. Wherever the answer might tend to subject to criminal responsibility him who gives
it.
6. To confront and crossexamine the witnesses against him at the trial.
- Either party may utilize as part of its evidence the testimony of a witness who is deceased, out of or can not with
due diligence be found in the Philippines, unavailable or otherwise unable to testify, given in another case or
proceeding, judicial or administrative, involving the same parties and subject matter, the adverse party having the
opportunity to crossexamine him.
- May be waived expressly or impliedly.
- In the absence of a cross-examination, the direct examination of the witness should be expunged
from the records.
7. To have compulsory process issued to secure the attendance of witnesses and production of other evidence in his behalf.
- Accused may move the court for the issuance of a subpoena ad testificandum or duces tecum.
- In case of unjustified failure of witness to comply to subpoena, court may issue warrant for
witness’ arrest.
8. To have speedy, impartial and public trial.
- Does not preclude justifiable postponements and delay when warranted by the situation. What
the Constitution prohibits are unreasonable, arbitrary, and oppressive delays which render rights
nugatory.
- A flexible concept. Due regard must be given to the facts and circumstances surrounding each
case.
• Perez v People: consider length of delay, the reason for the delay, the defendant’s assertion
of his right, and prejudice to the defendant. Note for ‘assertion of right’ – failure to
assert right will make it difficult for a defendant to prove that he was denied a speedy
trial. Note for ‘prejudice to defendant’ – three such interests are (a) to prevent
oppressive pretrial incarceration, (b) to minimize anxiety and concern of the accused, (c)
to limit the possibility that the defense will be impaired.
- Remember that speed is not chief objective of trial, but administration of justice.
- USA: Fixed-time period and demand-waiver rule. Philippines: Balancing Test (Ombudsman v
Jurado). Consider:
• Length of delay
• Reasons for delay
• Assertion/Failure to assert right by the accused
• Prejudice caused by the delay
- Remedy for violation
• Trial court may dismiss case. Equivalent to an acquittal.
• But accused should ask for trial first instead of moving for its dismissal outrightly. If
prosecution cannot produce witnesses or evidence and its motion for postponement is
denied, then accused should move for dismissal of the case.
9. To appeal in all cases allowed and in the manner prescribed by law.
- Arraignment – 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
- Accused is for the first time granted the opportunity to know the precise charge that confronts
him. An indispensable requirement of due process.
- Recall:
• The arraignment shall be 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.
• Both arraignment and plea shall be made of record, but failure to do so shall not affect the validity of the
proceedings.
• Options:
o Guilty
o Not guilty
o Guilty to a lesser offense (plea bargaining)
- Plea of not guilty, when made:
1. Actual plea of not guilty
2. When the accused refuses to plead or makes a conditional plea, a plea of not guilty shall be entered for him.
• Essence of plea of guilty that accused admits absolutely and unconditionally his guilt and
responsibility for offense imputed to him. If given with conditions, equivalent to plea of
not guilty.
• When a plea of guilty is not definite, or ambiguous, or not absolute, the same amounts
to a plea of not guilty.
3. When the accused pleads guilty but presents exculpatory evidence, his plea shall be deemed withdrawn and a plea
of not guilty shall be entered for him.
4. At any time before the judgment of conviction becomes final, the court may permit an improvident plea of guilty to
be withdrawn and be substituted by a plea of not guilty.
• When trial court fails in its duty to conduct the prescribed searching inquiry into
voluntariness of accused plea of guilty and full comprehension thereof, plea of guilty is
deemed made improvidently and rendered inefficacious.
• Note: manner in which plea is made, even if flawed, loses legal significance if conviction
is, indepedently of plea, based on evidence proving the commission by the accused of
the offense charged.
- Plea of guilty:
- A judicial confession of guilt. An admission of all the material facts alleged in the information,
including alleged aggravating circumstances.
• Note – admits facts and not conclusions of law.
• Exception to admission of aggravating circumstance – if such circumstances are
disproved by evidence.
- Plea bargaining – process whereby accused and prosecution work a mutually satisfactory
disposition of case subject to court approval.
• Accused, (a) with the consent of the offended party and the prosecutor, may be allowed by the trial court
to plead guilty to a lesser offense which is (b) necessarily included in the offense charged.
• In case of failure of the offended party to appear despite due notice, the court may allow the
accused to plea bargain with the conformity of the trial prosecutor alone.
• Can be done:
a. During arraignment
b. After arraignment but before trial, after withdrawing plea of not guilty.
c. Even during trial.
• Incumbent upon trial court judge to ascertain and be fully convinced that the plea of
guilty was voluntarily made and its consequences fully comprehended by the accused.
• No amendment of the complaint or information is necessary. Conviction under plea shall be
equivalent to conviction of offense charged for purposes of double jeopardy.
• Note: does not entitle accused to mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender. Under
RPC, to be voluntary, plea of guilty must be to the offense charged.
• Subject to court approval – court has discretion to allow plea bargaining or not.
2. That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the offense charged
• Eg when jurisdiction over offense or offense necessarily included is with another court,
appeal perfected and jurisdiction transferred to another court, when accused were absent
during promulgation of judgement and lost right to avail of remedies under ROC
3. That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the person of the accused
• The court acquires jurisdiction over the accused through arrest or voluntary surrender.
4. That the officer who filed the information had no authority to do so
• People v Garfin: this also amounts to lack of jurisdiction of court (due to improper filing
of information).
5. That it does not conform substantially to the prescribed form
6. That more than one offense is charged except when a single punishment for various offenses is prescribed by law
7. That the criminal action or liability has been extinguished
8. That it contains averments which, if true, would constitute a legal excuse or justification
9. That the accused has been previously convicted or acquitted of the offense charged, or the case against him was
dismissed or otherwise terminated without his express consent (double jeopardy – see notes below)
- Related matters:
- Grounds must be specified in motion to quash. The court shall consider no ground other than those stated
in the motion.
• Exception – (2) can be considered even if not stated in motion.
o If any other ground is raised by the accused then that would imply that the
accused acknowledges jurisdiction of the court.
- Grounds can be waived. The failure of the accused to assert any ground of a motion to quash before he pleads
to the complaint or information, either because he did not file a motion to quash or failed to allege the same in said
motion, shall be deemed a waiver of such objections.
• Exception – (1), (2), (7), (9) cannot be waived.
- If the motion to quash is sustained, court may order amendment or re-filing of information (see
below).
• Exception – (7), (9) serve as a bar to another prosecution for the same offense. Information cannot
be re-filed.
- Note – not grounds for motion to quash:
1. Execution by offended party of an affidavit of desistance
2. Absence of probable cause for the issuance of warrant of arrest (although this is a ground for
eventual dismissal of the case)
3. Matters of defense (except those enumerated above)
4. Absence of preliminary investigation (proper ground for petition for reinvestigation
extraordinary proceeding must clearly demonstrate that the trial court blatantly abused
its authority to a point so grave as to deprive it of its very power to dispense justice.
• Express consent – must be positive, direct, unequivocal, and requiring no inference or
implication to supply its meaning.
• If dismissed with express consent, operates as waiver of right against double jeopardy
for the reason that he effectively prevents court from proceeding to trial on the merits
and rendering a judgement of conviction against him.
• Dismissals equivalent to acquittal even with consent of the accused – if ground is (a)
insufficiency of evidence, or (b) denial of the right to speedy trial, or (c) discharge of an
accused to be state witness (unless he later fails or refuses to testify in accordance with
the basis of his discharge)
• Note: PI is not a trial to which double jeopardy attaches. Dismissal of a case during its
PI does not constitute double jeopardy.
• Note: Double jeopardy rule has reference only to criminal aspect of case. Does not
apply to civil and administrative aspects. Offended party may still appeal civil aspect of
case.
2. By a court of competent jurisdiction
• If court acted with grave abuse of discretion or there was a mistrial, judgement is
considered issued without jurisdiction and void.
• Where there is violation of basic constitutional rights (such as right to due process of the
State), courts are ousted of their jurisdiction.
• A court initially with jurisdiction may be ousted of that same jurisdiction, an event which
would bar any invocation of double jeopardy.
3. Upon a valid complaint or information or other formal charge sufficient in form and substance to sustain a
conviction
4. After the accused had pleaded to the charge (should have been validly arriagned)
5. Second jeopardy must be for the same offense, or the second offense includes or is necessarily included in the
offense charged in the first information, or is an attempt to commit the same or a frustration thereof
• A single criminal act may give rise to a multiplicity of offenses. Prosecution for the same
act is not prohibited. What is prohibited is prosecution for the same offense.
• Two or more offenses arising from the same act are not the same if one provision of law
requires proof of an additional act or element which the other does not.
• Exceptions (when double jeopardy shall not apply despite prior conviction):
a. Graver offense developed due to supervening facts arising from the same act or omission
constituting the former charge
b. Facts constituting the graver charge became known or were discovered only after a plea was
entered in the former complaint or information
c. Plea of guilty to the lesser offense was made without the consent of the prosecutor and of the
offended party (except if plea bargaining allowed in absence of offended party)
• In any of the foregoing cases, where the accused satisfies or serves in whole or in part the
judgment, he shall be credited with the same in the event of conviction for the graver offense.
•If the motion to quash is based on an alleged defect of the complaint or information which can be cured
by amendment.
• The motion shall be granted if the prosecution fails to make the amendment, or the complaint or
information still suffers from the same defect despite the amendment.
3. Court may order that another complaint or information be filed.
• If the order is made, the accused, if in custody, shall not be discharged unless admitted to bail.
• If no order is made or if having been made, no new information is filed within the time specified in the
order or within such further time as the court may allow for good cause, the accused, if in custody, shall
be discharged unless he is also in custody for another charge.
• See exception above.
D. Provisional Dismissal
- Contemplates a dismissal of the criminal action which is not permanent and can be revived within the
periods set by the rules.
- Distinguish motion to dismiss (with prejudice to re-filing of same case) from withdrawal of
information (without prejudice to refiling of same case).
- Motion to withdraw information is not time-barred and does not fall within ambit of rules on
provisional dismissal.
- Requisites for provisional dismissal:
1. Express consent of the accused
• Required to bar accused from subsequently asserting that the revival of the criminal case
will place him in double jeopardy.
2. Notice to the offended party.
3. Court issues an order granting the motion and dismissing the case provisionally
4. Public prosecutor is served with a copy of the order of provisional dismissal of the case
• Periods are counted after service to public prosecutor.
- If requisites are not met, case may be revived even after periods stated below, subject to the
defense of prescription or to the defense of double jeopardy when applicable.
- Also if there is justifiable necessity for delay, State may revive beyond the periods. However, in
such case, double jeopardy still applies.
- Periods set:
1. Offenses punishable by imprisonment max 6 years or a fine of any amount, or both – provisional dismissal shall
become permanent 1 year after issuance of the order without the case having been revived.
2. Offenses punishable by imprisonment of more than 6 years – provisional dismissal shall become permanent 2 years
after issuance of the order without the case having been revived.
• Periods are counted after receipt of notice by offended party and public prosecutor.
• What needs to happen within period is filing of motion to revive case, not necessarily court order
reviving case.
- How case is revived within time-bar – by re-filing of information or filing of new information.
- No need for new PI. Exceptions:
§ If after provisional dismissal, original witnesses or some of them have recanted their
testimonies, or have died, or are no longer available.
§ If new witnesses for the State have emerged.
§ If aside from original accused, other persons are charged under a new criminal
complaint.
§ If under ne complaint, original charge has been upgraded or criminal liability of accused
is upgraded.
A. Mediation
- Cases which may be subject to mediation: civil aspect of BP22 cases, civil aspect of quasi-offenses, civil
aspect of estafa and libel, civil aspect of theft.
- In court-annexed mediation, mediator is assigned to faciliate negotiation process between parties.
Lawyers stay in background.
- In JDR, judge (who is different from trial judge) facilitates settlement discussions between parties and
makes non-binding and impartial evaluation of the merits of their cases. Goal is to persuade parties to
settle their case amicably.
- If no settlement is reached, case is raffled for pre-trial and trial.
• Failure of the accused to move for dismissal prior to trial shall constitute a waiver of the right
to dismiss.
- Exclusions – the following periods of delay shall be excluded in computing the time within which trial must commence:
1. Any period of delay resulting from other proceedings concerning the accused, including:
a. Examination of the physical and mental condition of the accused
b. Proceedings with respect to other criminal charges against the accused
c. Extraordinary remedies against interlocutory orders
d. Pretrial proceedings; provided delay does not exceed 30 days
e. Orders of inhibition, or proceedings relating to change of venue of cases or transfer from other courts
f. Finding of the existence of a prejudicial question
g. Any proceeding in which the accused is under advisement; not to exceed 30 days
2. Any period of delay resulting from the absence or unavailability of an essential witness.
• Essential – one whose testimony dwells on the presence of some or all of the elements
of the crime and whose testimony is indispensible to the conviction of the accused.
• Absent – whereabouts are unknown or cannot be determined by due diligence
• Unavailable – whereabout are known, but presence for trial cannot be obtained by due diligence
3. Any period of delay resulting from the mental incompetence or physical inability of the accused to stand trial.
4. If the information is dismissed upon motion of the prosecution and thereafter a charge is filed against the accused
for the same offense, any period of delay from the date the charge was dismissed to the date the time limitation
would commence to run as to the subsequent charge had there been no previous charge.
5. A reasonable period of delay when the accused is joined for trial with a coaccused over whom the court has not
acquired jurisdiction, or, as to whom the time for trial has not run and no motion for separate trial has been
granted.
6. Any period of delay resulting from a continuance granted by any court (motu proprio, or on motion of either the
accused or his counsel, or the prosecution). Factors for granting continuance (subject to judicial
discretion):
a. Whether or not the failure to grant a continuance in the proceeding would likely make a continuation of
such proceeding impossible or result in a miscarriage of justice
b. Whether or not the case taken as a whole is so novel, unusual and complex, due to the number of
accused or the nature of the prosecution, or that it is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation within
the periods of time established therein.
• No continuance shall be granted because of (a) congestion of the court's calendar or (b) lack of diligent
preparation or failure to obtain available witnesses on the part of the prosecutor.
• Basis must be that that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the best interest of the
public and the accused in a speedy trial
- Rules on witnesses:
- Witnesses may be examined even before trial of the case.
• Grounds to allow such:
• Accused – witness is sick or infirm as to afford reasonable ground for believing that he will
not be able to attend the trial, or resides more than one 100 kilometers from the place of trial
and has no means to attend the same, or that other similar circumstances exist that would
make him unavailable or prevent him from attending the trial.
• Prosecution – witness is too sick or infirm to appear at the trial as directed by the order of
the court, or has to leave the Philippines with no definite date of returning,
• Who to present to:
• Accused – the examination shall be taken before a judge, or before a designated inferior
court, or if not practicable, a designated member of the bar in good standing
• Prosecution – before the court where the case is pending.
- Discharge of accused to be a state witness, requisites:
1. Two or more persons are jointly charged with the commission of any offense
• Note: when two or more accused are jointly charged with any offense, they shall be tried jointly
unless the court, in its discretion and upon motion of the prosecutor or any accused, orders
separate trial for one or more accused.
2. Upon motion of the prosecution before resting its case
3. Prosecution presents evidence and the sworn statement of each proposed state witness at a hearing in
support of the discharge.
• Evidence adduced in support of the discharge shall automatically form part of the trial. If the
court denies the motion for discharge of the accused as state witness, his sworn statement shall
be inadmissible in evidence.
4. The court is satisfied that:
a. There is absolute necessity for the testimony of the accused whose discharge is requested
b. There is no other direct evidence available for the proper prosecution of the offense committed,
except the testimony of said accused
c. The testimony of said accused can be substantially corroborated in its material points
d. Said accused does not appear to be the most guilty
e. Said accused has not at any time been convicted of any offense involving moral turpitude
• The order shall amount to an acquittal of the discharged accused and shall be a bar to future prosecution
for the same offense, unless the accused fails or refuses to testify against his coaccused in accordance with
his sworn statement constituting the basis for the discharge.
- Trial in absentia, requisites:
1. Accused has already been arraigned.
2. Accused has been duly notified of the trial or hearings.
3. Absence of the accused or his failure to appear is unjustified.
- Order of trial:
1. The prosecution shall present evidence to prove the charge and, in the proper case, the civil liability.
2. The accused may present evidence to prove his defense, and damages, if any, arising from the issuance of a
provisional remedy in the case.
3. The prosecution and the defense may, in that order, present rebuttal and surrebuttal evidence.
• Unless the court, in furtherance of justice, permits them to present additional evidence bearing upon the
main issue.
4. Upon admission 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.
- When the accused admits the act or omission charged in the complaint or information but interposes a lawful
defense, the order of trial may be modified.
- Demurrer to evidence
- After the prosecution rests its case, the court may dismiss the action on the ground of insufficiency of evidence: (a)
on its own initiative (motu proprio) after giving the prosecution the opportunity to be heard or (b) upon
demurrer to evidence filed by the accused with or without leave of court.
- Demurrer to evidence
• An objection by one of the parties in an action to the effect that the evidence which his
adversary produced is insufficient to make out a case or sustain the issue.
• Calls for the appreciation of the evidence adduced by the prosecution and its sufficiency
to warrant conviction.
• Actually a motion to dismiss that is filed by the accused. Guidelines in determining
whether motion is a demurrer to evidence or just a motion to dismiss:
a. Allegations
b. State of the proceeding at which it is filed (demurrer is after prosec rests its
case)
c. Primary objective of the party filing it
• Why distinction is important – to determine whether or not accused has waived
his right to present evidence in his defense.
• An offense charged necessarily includes the offense proved when some of the essential elements or
ingredients of the former, as alleged in the complaint or information, constitute the latter. And
an offense charged is necessarily included in the offense proved, when the essential ingredients of
the former constitute or form a part of those constituting the latter.
2. Aggravating or mitigating circumstances which attended its commission
3. Participation of the accused in the offense, whether as principal, accomplice, or accessory after the fact
4. Penalty imposed upon the accused
5. Civil liability or damages, if any
• Note – principle of exclusionary jurisdiction. If there are 2 different cases for different
offenses, even if proceeding from same act, judgement in one does not bar judgement in
another. In both civil and criminal aspects.
- If judgement of acquittal
1. State whether the evidence of the prosecution absolutely failed to prove the guilt of the accused or merely
failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt
2. Shall determine if the act or omission from which the civil liability might arise did not exist
- Promulgation of judgement:
1. Notify accused of hearing
• Personally or through his bondsman/warden and counsel.
• If he jumped bail or escaped from prison, notice shall be served at his last known address.
2. Judgement must be read in the presence of the accused (with the presence/assistance of his counsel as per
the Rule on the Rights of the Accused.
• Exception: if the conviction is for a light offense, the judgment may be pronounced in the presence of his
counsel or representative.
• If absent despite notice, promulgation shall be made by recording the judgment in the criminal docket and
serving him a copy thereof at his last known address or thru his counsel.
• If the judgment is for conviction and the failure of the accused to appear was without justifiable cause, he
shall lose the remedies available in these rules against the judgment and the court shall order his arrest.
• Within 15 days from promulgation of judgment, however, the accused may (a) surrender and
(b) file a motion for leave of court to avail of these remedies. He shall state the reasons for his
absence at the scheduled promulgation and if he proves that his absence was for a justifiable
cause, he shall be allowed to avail of said remedies within 15 days from notice.
3. Judgement is given by any judge of the court in which it was rendered
• When the judge is absent or outside of pcm, may be promulgated by the clerk of court.
• If the accused is detained in another pcm, may be promulgated by the executive judge of the RTC with
jurisdiction, upon request of the court which rendered the judgment.
- Judgement becomes final
- Judgement of acquittal – immediately.
- Judgement of conviction:, a judgment becomes final:
1. After the lapse of the period for perfecting an appeal, or
2. When the sentence has been partially or totally satisfied or served, or
3. When the accused has waived in writing his right to appeal, or
4. When the accused has applied for probation.
- Exception: where the death penalty is imposed
- At any time (a) before finality of the judgment of conviction, the judge may, (b) motu proprio or upon motion, (c)
with hearing in either case, reopen the proceedings (d) to avoid a miscarrage of justice. The proceedings shall be (e)
terminated within 30 days from the order granting it.
- Judgment of conviction, before finality, may be modified or set aside (upon motion of the accused):
1. New trial
2. Reconsideration
3. Appeal
a party to the case and RTC not required to serve it with notices or copies of case. It is
duty of prosec to notify OSG.
2. Stenographic reporter transcribes notes of the proceedings and files notes with clerk of court.
3. Clerk transmits complete records of case to clerk of appellate court
4. If appeal is to RTC:
• Upon receipt of the complete record of the case, clerk of court notifies the parties of such fact.
• Parties may submit memoranda or briefs, or may be required by the RTC to do so.
• After the submission of such memoranda or briefs, or upon the expiration of the period to file the same,
the RTC shall decide the case.
5. If appeal is to MTC (Rule 123):
• Same as RTC, except if particular provisions in Revised Rule on Summary Procedure.
6. If appeal is to CA (Rule 124):
• Parties are notified of transmittal of records.
• Filing of briefs
• Appellant files brief
• After receipt of appelant’s brief, appellee files brief.
• Appellant may file reply brief traversing matters raised in the former but not covered in the
brief of the appellant.
• CA can dismiss appeal if:
a. Appellant fails to file his brief within the time prescribed
b. Appellant escapes from prison or confinement, jumps bail or flees to a foreign country during
the pendency of the appeal.
• Exception: if sentence is death (automatic review no matter what; People v
Latayada)
• Rendering judgement:
• No judgment shall be reversed or modified unless the CA, after an examination of the record
and of the evidence adduced by the parties, is of the opinion that error was committed which
injuriously affected the substantial rights of the appellant.
• The CA may reverse, affirm, or modify the judgment and increase or reduce the penalty
imposed by the trial court, remand the case to the Regional Trial Court for new trial or retrial,
or dismiss the case.
• 3 CA Justices shall constitute a quorum for the sessions of a division. The unanimous vote of
the 3 Justices of a division shall be necessary for the pronouncement of a judgment or final
resolution. In the event that the 3 Justices cannot reach a unanimous vote, form a special
division of 5 members and the concurrence of a majority of such division shall be necessary for
the pronouncement of a judgment or final resolution. The designation of such additional
Justices shall be made strictly by raffle and rotation among all other Justices of the CA.
• Motion for new trial/reconsideration:
• At any time after the appeal from the lower court has been perfected and before the judgment of
the Court of Appeals convicting the appellant becomes final, the latter may move for a new
trial on the ground of newlydiscovered evidence material to his defense.
• When a new trial is granted, the CA may conduct the hearing and receive evidence or refer the
trial to the court of origin.
• A motion for reconsideration shall be filed within 15 days after from notice of the decision or
final order of the CA. No party shall be allowed a second motion for reconsideration of a
judgment or final order.
7. If appeal is to SC (Rule 125):
• Same as CA, unless otherwise provided by the Constitution or by law
• When the Supreme Court en banc is equally divided in opinion or the necessary majority cannot be had
on whether to acquit the appellant, the case shall again be deliberated upon and if no decision is reached
after redeliberation, the judgment of conviction of the lower court shall be reversed and the accused
acquitted.
- Withdrawal of appeal – may be granted by:
- Original court before records of case are transmitted to appellate court.
- RTC who receives appeal from MTC case, before rendition of judgement. In such a case, MTC judgement becomes
final and case remanded for execution of judgement.
- Effects of appeal:
- An appeal taken by one or more of several accused shall not affect those who did not appeal, except insofar as the
judgment of the appellate court is favorable and applicable to the latter
- The appeal of the offended party from the civil aspect shall not affect the criminal aspect of the judgment or order
appealed from.
- Upon perfection of the appeal, the execution of the judgment or final order appealed from shall be stayed as to the
appealing party.
- Appeal throws the case wide open for review and reviewing tribunal can correct errors or even
reverse the trial court’s decision on grounds other than those that the parties raised as errors.