Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Remedial Substantive
Exceptions:
To afford protection to the accuseds constitutional rights;
When necessary for the orderly administration of justice or to
avoid multiplicity of actions;
When theres a prejudicial question which is sub judice;
When the acts of the officer are without or in excess of authority;
WHEN INJUNCTION MAY BE ISSUED TO
RESTRAIN CRIMINAL PROSECUTION
Exceptions:
When the prosecution is under an invalid law, ordinance or
regulation;
When there is double jeopardy;
When the court has no jurisdiction over the offense;
In case of persecution rather than prosecution
When the charges are manifestly false and motivated by lust or
vengeance;
When there is no prima facie case against the accused and a
MTQ on that ground has been denied; or
Preliminary injunction has been issued by the Supreme Court
to prevent threatened unlawful arrest.
B. SEARCH AND SEIZURE
NATURE OF SEARCH WARRANT
The rules on searches and seizures The rules on arrest are concerned with
cover a wider spectrum of matters on the seizure of a person. A search may
the search of both persons and places follow an arrest but the search must be
and the seizure of things found therein. incident to a lawful arrest.
APPLICATION FOR SEARCH WARRANT,
WHERE FILED
1. Any court within whose territorial jurisdiction a
crime was committed. (Rule 126, Sec.2)
2. For compelling reasons stated in the application:
If the place of the commission of the crime is known, any court
within the judicial region where the crime was committed.
Any court within the judicial region where the warrant shall be
enforced.
3. However, if the criminal action has already been
filed, the application shall only be made in the
court where the criminal action is pending.
Exception: Malaloan v. CA (1994), subject to Rule 126, Sec. 1
if a case has not yet been filed, it may be filed in a court with a
territorial jurisdiction other than that where the illegal articles
sought to seized are located.
APPLICATION FOR SEARCH WARRANT,
WHERE FILED
4. In intellectual property rights cases (see A.M. No. 10-3-
10-SC, 18 October 2011):
The issuance of these writs shall be governed by the rules prescribed
in Re: Proposed Rule on Search and Seizure in Civil Actions for Infringement
of Intellectual Property Rights (A.M. No. 02-1-06-SC, which took effect
on February 15, 2002).
9. Hot Pursuit.
A peace officer or a private person may, without a warrant,
arrest a person 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 (Rule 113, Sec. 5). In this case, the person lawfully
arrested may be searched for dangerous weapons or anything
which may have been used or constitute proof in the commission
of an offense (Rule 126, sec. 13).
EXCEPTIONS TO SEARCH WARRANT
REQUIREMENT
10. Prisoner who has escaped from a penal establishment.
A peace officer or a private person may, without a warrant,
arrest a prisoner who has escaped from a penal
establishment or place where he is serving final judgment or
is temporarily confined while his case is pending, or has
escaped while being transferred from one confinement to
another (Rule 113, Sec. 5). In this case, the person lawfully
arrested may be searched for dangerous weapons or
anything which may have been used or constitute proof in
the commission of an offense (Rule 126, sec. 13).
Remedies from unlawful search and seizure
Employ any means to prevent search.
Without a SW, the officer cannot insist on entering a citizens
premises. If he does so, he becomes an ordinary intruder.
The person to be searched may resist the search and employ
any means necessary to prevent it, without incurring any
criminal liability. (People v. Chan Fook, 1921)
Exception:
When the law prescribes a single punishment for various
offenses.
Remedy of accused when the information charges more than
one offense: file a Motion to Quash.
Section 3, Rule 120 states that "[w]hen two or more offenses are
charged in a single complaint or information but the accused
fails to object to it before trial, the court may convict the
appellant of as many as are charged and proved, and impose
on him the penalty for each offense, setting out separately the
findings of fact and law in each offense."
AMENDMENT OR SUBSTITUTION OF
COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION
Amendments in form and substance before plea
General Rule:
It must be made before the accused enters his plea.
Exception:
If the amendment downgrades the nature of the offense charged in, or
excludes any accused from, the complaint/information, it can be made
only upon motion of the prosecutor, with notice to the offended party
and with leave of court.
Substantial amendments after plea are proscribed. Unlike formal
amendments, substantial amendments cannot be introduced after
plea. (Leviste v. Almeda, 2010)
Formal amendments may be made after plea and during trial; but it
should not cause prejudice to the rights of the accused.
Amendment v. Substitution
Amendment
formal or substantial changes;
can be effected without leave of court;
if only as to form, no need for another PI and plea;
the amended information refers to the same offense
charged in the original information or to an offense
included in the original charge;
accused can invoke double jeopardy.
Amendment v. Substitution
Substitution
involves a substantial change from the original charge;
must be with leave of court;
another preliminary investigation is entailed and the
accused has to plead anew to the new information; and
requires or presupposes that the new information
involves a different offense which does not include or is
not necessarily included in the original charge, hence
the accused cannot claim double jeopardy.
DR. JOEL C. MENDEZ v. PEOPLE
G.R. No. 179962, 11 June 2014
Dr. Joel Mendez was charged with tax evasion. However,
the prosecutor filed an amended complaint which changed the
date of the commission of the offense. The court ruled that
amendments that do not charge another offense different from
that charged in the original one; or do not alter the
prosecution's theory of the case so as to cause surprise to the
accused and affect the form of defense he has or will assume
are considered merely as formal amendments. The test on
whether a defendant is prejudiced by the amendment of an
information pertains to the availability of the same defense and
evidence that the accused previously had under the original
information.
VENUE OF CRIMINAL ACTIONS
Venue - the place where action is to be instituted.
Libel cases
If a private individual, action may also be filed in the
province where he actually resides at the time of the
commission of the offense. If a public officer, action may
be filed in the court of the province or city where he held
office at the time of the commission of the offense. (Art
360, RPC)
VENUE OF CRIMINAL ACTIONS
Offense committed on railroad
Action may be instituted and filed in the court of the first port
of entry or any municipality or territory where said train,
aircraft or vehicle passed thru, including place of departure or
arrival. (Rule 110, Sec.15[b])
Exceptions:
Where, from the nature of the crime and the law defining
and punishing it, no civil liability arises in favor of a
private offended party.
Where, from the nature of the offense, the private
offended party is entitled to civil indemnity arising
therefrom but he waived the same or has expressly
reserved his right to institute a separate civil action or he
has already instituted such action.
Offended party has already instituted action.
LEONARDO A. VILLALON, et al. v.
AMELIA CHAN
G.R. No. 196508, 24 September 2014
Sec. 16 of Rule 110 of the Revised Rules of Criminal
Procedure expressly allows an offended party to intervene
by counsel in the prosecution of the offense for the recovery
of civil liability where the civil action for the recovery of
civil liability arising from the offense charged is instituted
with the criminal action. The civil action shall be deemed
instituted with the criminal action, except when the
offended party waives the civil action, reserves the right to
institute it separately or institutes the civil action prior to
the criminal action.
LEONARDO A. VILLALON, et al. v.
AMELIA CHAN
G.R. No. 196508, 24 September 2014
In this case, the Court of Appeals found no such waiver
from or reservation made by Chan. The fact that Chan, who
was already based abroad, had secured the services of an
attorney in the Philippines reveals her willingness and
interest to participate in the prosecution of the bigamy case
and to recover civil liability from the petitioners. Thus, the
trial court should have allowed, and should not have
disqualified, Atty. Atencia from intervening in the bigamy
case as Chan, being the offended party, is afforded by law
the right to participate through counsel in the prosecution of
the offense with respect to the civil aspect of the case
D. PROSECUTION OF CIVIL
ACTION
RULE ON IMPLIED INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ACTION WITH
CRIMINAL ACTION
General Rule:
When a criminal action is instituted, the civil action for the recovery
of damages is deemed instituted with the criminal action. (Rule 111,
Sec. 1)
Exception:
If the offended party:
waives a civil action;
institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action; or
reserves the right to institute it separately.
Exceptions:
If civil liability is predicated on other sources of obligations, as with
independent civil actions, recovery may still be made against the estate of the
deceased or legal representative after proper substitution.
If death is while appeal is pending it extinguishes criminal liability and civil
liability based thereon.
Civil
indemnity is automatically awarded upon proof of
the commission of the crime by the offender. (People v.
Corpuz, G.R. No. 175836, 30 January 2009).
The rule is that the acquittal of an accused of the crime
ENRILE v. SANDIGANBAYAN
G.R. No. 213847, 18 August 2015
IMPROVIDENT PLEA
Motion to Quash:
Filed before accused enters plea
Does not go into the merits of the case
Demurrer to Evidence:
Filed after the prosecution has rested its case
Based upon the inadequacy of evidence
adduced by the prosecution
EFFECTS OF SUSTAINING THE
MOTION TO QUASH
PRE-TRIAL ORDER
When issued
Effects
It binds the parties, limits the trial to matters
not disposed of, and controls the course of
action during trial, unless modified by the
court to prevent manifest injustice (Rule 118,
Sec. 4).
REFERRAL OF SOME CASES FOR COURT
ANNEXED MEDIATION AND JUDICIAL
DISPUTE RESOLUTION
AM No. 03-1-09-SC
Presence is mandatory:
For purposes of identification;
At arraignment; (Rule 116, Sec. 1[b])
At the promulgation of judgment;
Exception: If the conviction is for a light offense.
(Rule 120, Sec. 6)
Examination of prosecution witness (Rule 119,
Sec. 15)
When it satisfactorily appears that a witness for
the prosecution is too sick or infirm to appear at
the trial as directed by the court, or has to leave
the Philippines with no definite date of returning,
he may forthwith be conditionally examined
before the court where the case is pending. Such
examination, in the presence of the accused, or in
his absence after reasonable notice to attend the
examination has been served on him, shall be
conducted in the same manner as an examination
at the trial. Failure or refusal of the accused to
attend the examination after notice shall be
considered a waiver. The statement taken may be
admitted in behalf of or against the accused.
REQUISITE BEFORE TRIAL CAN BE
SUSPENDED ON ACCOUNT OF ABSENCE
OF WITNESS
Requisites:
Accused has been arraigned;
He was duly notified of trial; and
His failure to appear is unjustified.
Conviction
(b) Impose on him the penalty for each offense, setting out
separately the findings of fact and law in each offense.
Exception: maximum duration of offense: Follow the
three-fold rule on the service of penalty (Revised Penal
Code, Art. 70).
Judgment in case of variance between
allegation and proof
N.B.: The fact that the trial judge who rendered judgment
was not the one who had the occasion to observe the
demeanor of the witnesses during trial but merely relied
on the records of the case does not render the judgment
erroneous, especially where the evidence on record is
sufficient to support its conclusion. (People v. Paling, G.R.
No. 185390, 16 March 2011)
N. NEW TRIAL OR RECONSIDERATION
GROUNDS FOR NEW TRIAL. (RULE 121, SEC. 2)
(1) That errors of law or irregularities prejudicial to the
substantial rights of the accused have been committed
during the trial;
General Rule: Error of the defense counsel in the conduct of the
trial is neither an error of law nor an irregularity.
Exception: Acquittal would in all probability have allowed the
introduction of certain testimony which was not submitted at
the trial under improper or injudicious advice of incompetent
counsel.
Irregularities must be with much seriousness as to affect
prejudicially the substantial rights of the accused.
GROUNDS FOR NEW TRIAL. (RULE 121, SEC. 2)
(2) That new and material evidence has been discovered which the
accused could not with reasonable diligence have discovered and
produced at the trial and which if introduced and admitted would
probably change the judgment.
B. Newly-discovered evidence
Evidence already adduced shall stand and the newly-
discovered and such other evidence shall be taken and
considered together with the evidence already on
record.
All proceedings and evidence affected shall be set
aside and taken anew.
Further, the Court may allow introduction of
additional or other evidence in the interest of justice.
APPLICATION OF NEYPES DOCTRINE
IN CRIMINAL CASES.
Neypes v. CA, 2005:
(SEE YU v. TATAD)
Fresh Period of Appeal after denial of Motion for New
Trial or Motion for Reconsideration
Henceforth, the fresh period rule shall also apply
to Rule 40 governing appeals from the MTCs to the
RTCs; Rule 42 on petitions for review from the RTCs
to the CA; Rule 43 on appeals from quasi-judicial
agencies to the CA and Rule 45 governing appeals by
certiorari to the Supreme Court.
APPLICATION OF NEYPES DOCTRINE
IN CRIMINAL CASES.
The raison dtre for the "fresh period rule" is to
standardize the appeal period provided in the Rules
and do away with the confusion as to when the 15-
day appeal period should be counted. Litigants today
need not concern themselves with counting the
balance of the 15-day period to appeal since the 15-
day period is now counted from receipt of the order
denying a motion for new trial or motion for
reconsideration or any final order or resolution. (Yu v.
Samson-Tatad, GR No. 170979, 9 February 2011)
JUDITH YU V. SAMSON-TATAD
GR No. 170979, 9 February 2011
An information for estafa against petitioner was filed with
the Regional Trial Court which convicted the petitioner as
charged. Fourteen days later, petitioner filed a motion for
new trial, alleging that she discovered new and material
evidence that would exculpate her of the crime for which she
was convicted. The respondent judge denied the petitioner's
motion for new trial for lack of merit.
The petitioner filed a notice of appeal with the Regional
Trial Court, alleging that she had a fresh period of 15 days
from the receipt of the denial of her motion for new trial,
within which to file a notice of appeal. The prosecution filed
a motion to dismiss the appeal for being belatedly filed and a
Motion for execution of the decision.
JUDITH YU V. SAMSON-TATAD
GR No. 170979, 9 February 2011
To standardize the appeal period provided in the Rules and
do away with the confusion as to when the 15-day appeal period
should be counted, the fresh period rule applies to appeals in
criminal cases. Were we to strictly interpret the fresh period
rule in Neypes and make it applicable only to the period to
appeal in civil cases, we shall effectively foster and encourage an
absurd situation where a litigant in a civil case will have a better
right to appeal than an accused in a criminal case a situation
that gives undue favor to civil litigants and unjustly
discriminates against the accused-appellants. It suggests a
double standard of treatment when we favor a situation where
property interests are at stake, as against a situation where
liberty stands to be prejudiced. We must emphatically reject this
double and unequal standard for being contrary to reason.
O. APPEAL
EFFECT OF AN APPEAL
An appeal in a criminal proceeding in throws the
whole case open for review and it becomes the
duty of the appellate court to correct an error as
may be found in the appealed judgment, whether
or not it is made the subject of assignment of
errors. (People v. Calayca, 1999)
WHERE TO APPEAL
To the RTC from the MTC/MeTC/MCTC
To the Sandiganbayan from the RTC or
MTC/MeTC/MCTC if accused is government-official
or employee and act is duty-related (i.e. filed under
EO 1, 2, 4 and 14-A)
To the CA from the RTC (if it involves questions of
questions of fact and of law)
WHERE TO APPEAL
To the SC from the RTC
If it involves questions of law only
If it involves constitutionality or validity of any treaty /
ordinance / Executive Order / regulation or the
jurisdiction of the inferior court
In criminal cases involving offense for which penalty
imposed is death or life imprisonment
Other offenses, which, arose out of the same occurrence
or which may have been committed by the accused on
the same occasion, as that giving rise to the more serious
offense
WHERE TO APPEAL
To the SC from the CA or the Sandiganbayan
Improper designation
The designation of the wrong court does not
necessarily affect the validity of the notice of appeal.
However, the designation of the proper court
should be made within the 15-day period to appeal.
Otherwise, Section 2, Rule 50 of the Rules of Court
would apply. (Torres v. People, 2011)
HOW APPEAL TAKEN (RULE 122,
SEC. 9)
Transmission of record to RTC
Within 5 days from the perfection of the appeal, the clerk
of court shall transmit the original record to the
appropriate RTC.
Notifications of parties
Upon receipt of the complete record, Transcript of
Stenographic Notes (TSN) and evidence of the case, the
RTC clerk of the court shall notify the parties of such fact.
HOW APPEAL TAKEN (RULE 122,
SEC. 9)
Submission of memoranda/briefs
Within 15 days from the receipt of notice, the parties
may submit memoranda/briefs, or may be required by
the RTC to do so.
Decision
After the submission of such memoranda/briefs or upon
the expiration of the period to file the same, the RTC
shall decide the case on the basis of the entire record of
the case and of such memoranda/briefs as may have
been filed.
WHEN APPEAL TO BE TAKEN (RULE
122, SEC. 6)
Within 15 days from the promulgation of the judgment
or from notice of the final order appealed from.
Rules prescribing the time within which certain acts
must be done, or certain proceedings taken, are
absolutely indispensable to the prevention of needless
delays and the orderly and speedy discharge of judicial
business. Strict compliance with such rules is
mandatory and imperative. Only strong considerations
of equity will lead us to allow an exception to the
procedural rule in the interest of substantial justice.
(Villamor v. People; and Vios v. People, 2011)
EFFECT OF APPEAL BY ANY OF
SEVERAL ACCUSED
General Rule: An appeal taken by one or more of
several accused shall not affect those who did not
appeal.
As to the appealing party, the execution of judgment
appealed from is stayed upon the perfection of the appeal.
As to the co-accused who did not appeal, the judgment of
the trial court insofar as it relates to him becomes final
and the appellate court has no power to interfere with it.
(Salvatierra v. CA, 1996)
EFFECT OF APPEAL BY ANY OF SEVERAL
ACCUSED
Exception: Insofar as the judgment of the appellate
court is favorable and applicable to those who did
not appeal or who withdrew his appeal. (People v.
Escano)
The appeal of the offended party from the civil aspect
shall not affect the criminal aspect of the judgment or
order appealed from.
GROUNDS FOR DISMISSAL OF
APPEAL
When appeal by the people will not lie:
The People/State cannot appeal when it will put the
accused in double jeopardy.
The prosecution cannot appeal from a judgment of
acquittal.