CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Rule 110 PROSECUTION of O ffenses 1.

General Rule: MTC and R TC courts gain jurisdiction ov er the offense upon the filing of complaint by a complaina nt or an information by the p rosecuting officer Court gains jurisdiction ove r the person of the accused u

pon arrest or surrender; such jurisdiction once gained can not be lost even if accused es capes (Gimenez vs. Nazareno ) Jurisdiction of the court ov er the offense is determined at the time of the institution of the action and is retained even if the penalty for the of fense is later lowered or rais ed (People vs. Lagon)

2. Complaint sworn written statement charging a person with an offense, subscribed by the offended party, any p eace officer or other public o fficial charged with the enfor cement of the law violated Information accusation in w riting charging a person with an offense, subscribed by the fiscal and filed with the cour t

3. Complaint and Informati on distinguished:

Complaint Information A sworn state Need not be s ment worn to Subscribed by the offended party, any p eace officer or other offic er Subscribed to by the fis cal charged with the enforcem

ent of the la w violated May be filed either with t he court or in the fiscals o ffice generall y to commen ce the prelim inary investig ation of the F iled with the court charges made

4.

Cases where civil courts

of equal rank are vested with concurrent jurisdiction:

1. Features stated in Art. 2, RPC

Cognizable by proper court in which charge is first filed

1. Continuing crimes committed in different judicial regions 2. Offenses wherein any of the essential elements were committed in different

territorial jurisdictions 3. Offenses committed aboard a train, vehicle, aircraft or vessel (see R110, 15)

i.

Railroad, train, aircraft

(1) Territory or municipality where vehicle passed (2) Place of departure (3) Place of arrival ii. Vessel

(1) First port of entry (2) Thru which it passed duri ng voyage e. Libel and written defamat ion 5. Remedies of offended par ty when fiscal unreasonably r efuses to file an information or include a person therein a s an accused
1. In case of grave abuse of

discretion, action for mandamus 2. Lodge a new complaint against the offenders 3. Take up matter with the Secretary of Justice 4. Institute administrative charges against the erring fiscal 5. File criminal charges under Art. 208, RPC (prosecution of offenses) 6. File civil action under Art.

27, NCC for damages (PO refuses or neglects to perform official duty) 7. Secure appointment of another fiscal 8. Institute another criminal action if no double jeopardy is involved

6. Writs of injunction or pro hibition to restrain a criminal prosecution are not availabl e, EXCEPT

1. To afford adequate protection to constitutional rights of accused 2. Necessary for the orderly administration of justice or to avoid oppression or multiplicity of actions 3. Pre-judicial question which is sub judice 4. Acts of the officer are without or in excess of authority 5. Prosecution is under an

invalid law, ordinance or regulation 6. Double jeopardy is clearly apparent 7. Court has no jurisdiction over the case 8. Case of persecution rather than prosecution 9. Charges are manifestly false and motivated by lust for vengeance 10. Clearly no prima facie case against the

accused and MTQ on that ground had been denied

7. Institution of Criminal Ac tions: a. In RTC:

By filing a complaint with t he appropriate officer for the purpose of conducting requis ite preliminary investigation therein. b. In Municipal Trial Courts

and Municipal Circuit Trial Co urts: By filing the complaint or i nformation directly with said courts, or a complaint with t he fiscals office c. In Metropolitan Trial Cour ts By filing the complaint ONL Y with the office of the fiscal In all 3 above cases, such in

stitution shall interrupt the p eriod of prescription of the o ffense charged (Rule 110, 1) d. Offenses subject to summa ry procedure [i.e. (1) violation of traffic l aws; (2) violation of rental la ws; (3) violation of municipal or city ordinances; and (4) c riminal cases where the pena lty does not exceed 6 months

or fine of P1000 or both, irr espective of other imposable penalties and civil liabilities ] The complaint or informati on shall be filed directly in c ourt without need of a prior preliminary examination or p reliminary investigation. Zaldivia vs. Reyes since a criminal case covered by the

Rules of Summary Procedure shall be deemed commenced only when it is filed in court, then the running of the presc riptive period shall be halted on the date the case is actual ly filed in court and not on a ny date before that. Reodica vs. CA [clarifies Z aldivia above] Under Art. 91 of the RPC, the period of pre scription shall be interrupted

by the filing of the complain t or information. It does not distinguish whether the comp laint is filed for preliminary e xamination or investigation o nly, or for an action on the m erits. Thus, the filing of the complaint even with the fisca ls office should suspend the running of the Statute of Limi tations. The ruling in Zaldivia is not applicable to all cases

subject to the Rules on Sum mary Procedure, since that p articular case involved a viol ation of an ordinance. There fore, the applicable law ther ein was not Art. 91 of the RP C, but Act No. 3326 (An Act to Establish Periods of Prescri ption for Violations Penalized by Special Acts and Municipa l Ordinances and to Provide when Prescription Shall Begin

to Run), 2 of which provid es that period of prescription is suspended only when judic ial proceedings are instituted against the guilty party. 8. Contents of information a. Name of the accused Information may be amend ed as to the name of the acc used, but such amendment c annot be questioned for the f

irst time on appeal (People v s. Guevarra) Error of name of the offen ded party: if material to the case, it necessarily affects th e identification of the act ch arged. Conviction for robber y cannot be sustained if ther e is a variance between the a llegation and the proof as to the ownership of the propert y stolen.

b. Designation of offense by statute (or of section/subsec tion of statute violated) Only one offense charged, EXCEPT where law prescribes a single punishment for vario us offenses. If facts do not completely allege all the elements of the crime charged, the info may be quashed; however, the pr

osecution is allowed to amen d the info to include the nec essary facts (People vs. Purisi ma) c. Acts or omissions complai ned of constituting the offens e Information need only alleg e facts, not include all the ev idence which may be used to prove such facts (Balitaan vs.

CFI) d. Name of offended party e. Approximate time of com mission Approximation of time is su fficient; amendment as to ti me is only a formal amendme nt; no need to dismiss case ( People vs. Molero) A significant discrepancy in the time alleged cannot be s

ustained since such would all ow the prosecution to prove an offense distantly removed from the alleged date, thus substantially impairing the ri ghts of the accused to be inf ormed of the charges against him (People vs. Reyes) f. Place of commission

Conviction may be had eve n if it appears that the crime

was committed not at the pl ace alleged, provided that th e place of actual commission was within the courts jurisdi ction and accused was not su rprised by the variance betw een the proof and the inform ation Qualifying and inherent ag gravating circumstances need to be alleged as they are int egral parts of the crime. If p

roved, but not alleged, beco me only generic aggravating circumstances. 9. Amendment of informatio n and Substitution of informa tion, distinguished
Amendmen t Involves eit her formal o Necessarily involv r substantial es a substantial c changes hange

Substitutio n

Without lea ve of court i f before ple a Where only Another as to form, there is no need for an other prelim inary investi gation and r etaking of p lea of accus ed Refers to th

Needs leave of co urt as original inf ormation has to b e dismissed

preliminary inves tigation is entaile d and accused ha s to plead anew

e same offe nse charged or which ne cessarily Re quires or pr esupposes t hat new inf o involves a different off ense which does not inc lude includes or i s necessarily included in original char

ges, hence, substantial amendment s to info aft er plea take n cannot be made over o bjections of accused or is not includ ed in the ori ginal charge , hence, acc used cannot claim doubl e jeopardy

for if origina l info is with drawn, accu sed could in voke double jeopardy

10. After plea, amendment o nly as to matters of form, pr ovided

1. Leave of court is obtained; and 2. Amendment is not prejudicial to rights of

accused

11. When amendment is only as to form

1. Neither affects or alters nature of offense charged 2. Charge does not deprive accused of a fair opportunity to present his defense 3. Does not involve a change in basic theory of prosecution

12. Exceptions to rule on ven ue

1. Felonies in Art. 2, RPC (cognizable by proper court in which charge is first filed) 2. Continuing offenses 3. Piracy which is triable anywhere 4. Libel (residence; or where first published) 5. In exceptional cases, to ensure fair trial and impartial inquiry

13. Special cases (who may p rosecute)

a. Adultery and concubinage Only offended spouse can b e complainant Both guilty parties must be included in complaint b. Crimes against chastity With consent of the offend ed party, offended spouse, gr andparents, guardian, or stat e asparens patriae, in that or der

 Offended party, even if mi nor, has right to initiate the prosecution of the case indep endently of parents, grandpa rents or guardian, unless she is incompetent/incapable on grounds other than minority. If offended party who is a minor fails to file the compla int, her parents, grandparent s or guardian may do so.

 In crimes against chastity, the consent of the victim is a jurisdictional requirementr etraction renders the informa tion void (People vs. Ocapan) If complexed with a public crime, the provincial fiscal m ay sign the complaint on his own c. Defamation (consisting of imputation of offenses in [a]

or [b]) Complainant must be offen ded party The offended party may int ervene in the prosecution of the criminal case because of her interest in it (Banal vs. T adeo) 14. Procedure
1. Complaint filed in MTC or info filed in RTC where an

essential ingredient of the crime took place (territorial jurisdiction) 1. Amendment as a matter of right before plea 2. Amendment upon discretion of the court after plea

Inclusion of other accused i s only a formal amendment w hich would not be prejudicial to the accused and should b e allowed (People vs. CA)

d. After plea and before jud gment, if it appears there wa s a mistake in charging prope r offense, court shall dismiss original info upon the filing o f a corrected one, provided t hat the accused will not be p laced in double jeopardy (sub stitution) Fiscal determines direction of prosecution; complainant must ask fiscal if he wants to

dismiss the case; the motion to dismiss must be addresse d to the court which has disc retion over the disposition of the case (Republic vs. Sunga) Objection to the amendme nt of an information or compl aint must be raised at the ti me the amendment is made; otherwise, deemed to have c onsented thereto.

15. Remedies a. Motion to quash May be filed after arraignm ent but before plea on the gr ounds provided by the rules ( generally, a flaw in the info) If duplicity of offense char ged is not raised in trial thro ugh a motion to quash info, t he right to question it is waiv ed (People vs. Ocapan)

b. Motion to dismiss May be filed after plea but before judgment on most of grounds for motion to quash 16. Duplicity of Offense (in i nformation or complaint)8 Defined as the joinder of s eparate and distinct offenses in one and the same informa tion/complaint Remedy: file a motion to q

uash; failure is equivalent to a waiver Exception: when existing la ws prescribe a single punishm ent (complex crimes) Rule 111 Prosecution of Civ il Action 1. General Rule: The injure d party may file a civil action independent of the criminal proceeding to recover damag

es from the offender. Article 32 is a valid cause o f a civil action for damages a gainst public officers who im pair the Constitutional rights of citizens (Aberca vs. Ver) Even if the private prosecu tor participates in the prosec ution, if he is not given the c hance to prove damages, the offended party is not barred

from filing a separate civil ac tion 2. Civil action for recovery of civil liability impliedly inst ituted, EXCEPT
1. Waiver 2. Reservation of right to institute separate action 3. Institution of civil action prior to criminal action

NOTE: Under SC Circular 57 -97, all criminal actions for vi

olations of BP Blg. 22 shall be deemed to necessarily inclu de the corresponding civil act ion, and no reservation to fil e such civil action separately shall be allowed or recognize d. San Ildefonso Lines vs. CA past pronouncements of the SC that the requirement in R ule 111 that a reservation be made prior to the institution

of an independent civil actio n is an unauthorized amend ment to substantive law is n ow no longer controlling. Far from altering substantive rig hts, the primary purpose of t he reservation requirement is to avoid multiplicity of suits, to prevent delays, to clear c ongested dockets, to simplify the work of the trial court, a nd in short, the attainment o

f justice with the least expen se and vexation to parties-liti gants. 3. Civil action suspended wh en criminal action filed, EXC EPT
1. Independent civil action (Arts. 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of NCC) 2. Prejudicial civil action 3. Civil case consolidated with criminal action

4. Civil action not one intended to enforce civil liability arising from the offense (e.g., action for legal separation against a spouse who committed concubinage)

4. Prejudicial question arises when

1. The civil action involves an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the criminal action 2. The resolution of such

issue will determine whether the criminal action will proceed or not

Requisites for a prejudicial question:

1. The civil action involves an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the criminal action: and 2. The resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action may proceed

 Petition for suspension of cr iminal action is to be filed at any time before prosecution rests. 5. Remedies a. Reservation of right to in stitute separate civil proceed ings to recover civil liability a rising from crime Must be made before prose cution presents evidence

 Action instituted only after final judgment in criminal ac tion b. Petition to suspend the c riminal action May be filed upon existenc e of a prejudicial question in a pending civil action Filed at any time before th e prosecution rests 6. Extinction of penal action

does not carry with it extinc tion of the civil unless the ex tinction proceeds from a decl aration in a final judgment th at the fact from which the ci vil might arise did not exist. Final judgment in civil abs olving defendant from civil li ability not a bar to criminal a ction 7. Filing fees:

1. Actual or compensatory damages filing fees not required 2. Moral, temperate and exemplary filing fees required 1. If alleged, fees must be paid by offended party upon filing of complaint or information 2. If not alleged, filing fees considered a first lien on the judgment

Rule 112 Preliminary Invest igation 1. Preliminary investigation inquiry or proceeding to de termine if there is sufficient ground to engender a well-fo unded belief that a crime cog nizable by the RTC has been committed, and that the resp ondent is probably guilty ther eof, and should be held for tr ial

 A preliminary investigation is only necessary for an infor mation to be filed with the R TC; complaints may be filed with the MTC without need o f an information, which is me rely recommendatory (Tando c vs. Resultan) Absence of a preliminary in vestigation is NOT a ground f or a motion to quash the info rmation; an information filed

without a preliminary investi gation is defective but not fa tal; in its absence, the accus ed may ask for one; it is the f iscals refusal to conduct a pr eliminary investigation when the accused demands one wh ich is a violation of the rights of the accused(Doromal vs. S andiganbayan). Court should not dismiss the info, but hol d the case in abeyance and ei

ther: (1) conduct its own inve stigation; or (2) require the fi scal to hold a reinvestigation. 2. GENERAL RULE: The fisca l conducts the preliminary in vestigation before filing an in formation with the RTC, EXC EPT where the accused is law fully arrested without a warr ant and an inquest is conduct ed. 3. Right to Preliminary Inves

tigation A personal right and may b e waived Waived by failure to invoke the right prior to or at least at the time of the plea 4. Who conducts Preliminar y Investigation
1. Provincial or city fiscals and their assistants 2. Judges of MTC and MCTC

3. National and regional state prosecutors 4. Such other officers as may be authorized by law 5. Duly authorized legal officers of COMELEC 5.1. The Ombudsman 2.1. The PCGG, in cases of ill-gotten wealth

5. Procedure a. If conducted prior to arre st

i. Complainant files compla int with (a) Provincial or city fiscal (b) Regional or state prosecu tor (c) MTC or MCTC judge, excl uding MTC judge of Metro Ma nila or chartered cities (d) Other offices authorized by law
1. Investigating officer either

dismisses complaint or asks by subpoena complainant and respondent to submit affidavits and counteraffidavits 2. If the investigating officer finds prima facie evidence, he prepares an information and a resolution

i.e., if fiscal finds reasonab le ground to believe that a cr ime has been committed and

accused is probably guilty th ereof Prima facie evidence is tha t evidence which, standing al one, unexplained and uncont radicted, would be enough to merit a conviction of the acc used iv. Otherwise, he recommen ds the dismissal of the compl aint

 If the investigating officer i s an MTC judge, and he finds that probable cause exists an d that there is a need to plac e the accused under custody, then he may issue a warrant of arrest Flores vs. Sumaling What differentiates the present rul e from the previous one is th at while before, it was mand atory for the investigating ju

dge to issue a warrant for the arrest of the accused if he f ound probable cause, the rul e now is that the investigatin g judges power to order the arrest of the accused is limit ed to instances in which ther e is a necessity for placing hi m in custody in order not to frustrate the ends of justice. It is therefore error for the investigating judge to order

the issuance of a warrant of arrest solely on his finding of probable cause, without maki ng any finding of a necessity to place the accused in imme diate custody to prevent a fr ustration of justice.
1. Investigating officer forwards records to the city fiscal or chief state prosecutor 2. City fiscal or state prosecutor either dismisses

the complaint or files the information in court

Decision prevails over decis ion of the MTC judge vii. Records will not form rec ords of the case proper Court on its own or on moti on may order production of r ecord b. If conducted after warran tless arrest

1. If accused waives Art. 125, RPC and asks for a preliminary investigation, with the assistance of counsel, then the procedure for one prior to arrest is followed 1.1. Inquest conducted as follows

(a) Fiscal determines the val idity of the arrest (b) Fiscal determines existen ce of prima facie evidence ba

sed on the statements of the complainant, arresting office r and witnesses (c) Fiscal either dismisses th e complaint and orders the i mmediate release of the acc used, OR prepares and files a n information While fiscal has quasi-judic ial discretion whether or not to file an information, once i

t is filed with the court, the court acquires jurisdiction gi ving it discretion over the dis position of the case and the S ec. of Justice should refrain f rom entertaining petitions fo r review or appeals from the decision of fiscal (Crespo vs. Mogul; Velasquez vs. Underse cretary of Justice) NOTE: Information may be fil ed by offended party, peace

officer or fiscal without preli minary investigation. 6. Remedies a. Motion for preliminary in vestigation Filed when accused is arres ted without warrant Must be with assistance of counsel and after waiving Art . 125, RPC b. Motion for preliminary in

vestigation Filed within 5 days after ac cused learns an information a gainst him has been filed wit hout a preliminary investigati on c. Motion for re-investigatio n d. Appeal to DOJ Filed upon denial of his mo tion for a preliminary investi

gation, on the ground that hi s rights to due process of law were violated, ousting the c ourt of jurisdiction e. Petition for prohibition Filed with appellate court to stop the criminal proceedi ngs Ordinarily, injunction will not lie but may be granted in certain cases

 When prohibition proper to restrain criminal proceeding s:

1. When strong-arm tactics are used for vindictive purposes (Salonga vs. CruzPano) 2. When the accused is deprived of his rights 3. When the statute on which the charge is based is null and void 4. When it will aid the

administration of justice (Tatad vs. Sandiganbayan) 5. When multiplicity of suits will be avoided (Guingona vs. City Fiscal)

Rule 113 Arrest 1. Arrest taking a person in to custody in order that he m ay be bound to answer for th e commission of some offens e, made by an actual restrain t of the person or by his sub

mission to custody 2. General Rule: No person may be arrested without a w arrant. Not all persons detained ar e arrested; only those detain ed to answer for an offense. Invitations are not arrest s and are usually not unconsti tutional, but in some cases m ay be taken as commands (Ba

bst vs. NBI); however, the pr actice of issuing an invitatio n to a person who is investig ated in connection with an of fense he is suspected to have committed is considered as placing him under custodial investigation. (RA 7438) Warrants of arrest remain v alid until arrest is effected, o r the warrant is lifted

 Arrest may be made at any time of the day or night 3. Warrantless arrests by a p eace officer or a private pers on a. When person to be arrest ed is committing, attempting or has committed an offense b. When an offense has just been committed and the pers on making the arrest has pers

onal knowledge that the pers on to be arrested committed it Warrantless arrest anytime for a continuing offense like rebellion, subversion (Umil vs . Ramos) The continuing crime, not t he crime finally charged, nee ds only be the cause of the ar rest (Umil vs. Ramos)

c. When person to be arrest ed is an escaped detainee (ei ther serving sentence or with case pending)
1. When a person lawfully arrested escapes 2. Bondsman, for purpose of surrendering the accused 3. Accused attempts to leave country without court permission

4. Procedure

a. With warrant
1. Complainant files application with affidavits attached 2. Judge conducts ex parte preliminary examination to determine probable cause

In determining probable ca use, judge must: (1) Personally examine witne ss

(2) Witness must be under o ath (3) Examination must be red uced to writing (Luna vs. Plaz a) In determining probable ca use, the judge may rely on fi ndings by responsible officer (Lim vs. Felix) iii. Judge issues warrant of arrest

 If without preliminary exa mination, considered irregula r (Bagcal vs. Villaraza) iv. If peace officer is unable t o serve warrant 10 days after issuance, he must file a repo rt and explanation with judge within 10 days v. If warrant served (1) Person informed that he i s being arrested

(2) Informed of cause of his arrest (3) Officer may break door o r window if admission to buil ding is refused (4) Person physically restrain ed For private citizens making an arrest May not do so except to do some service to humanity or

justice (5) No violence or unnecessa ry force may be used (6) Officer may summon assi stance (7) Person who escapes after arrest may be immediately p ursued vi. Person arrested is bro ught to nearest police station or jail

b. Without warrant:
1. Person is arrested 2. Person arrested may waive right to Art. 125, RPC and ask for preliminary investigation or inquest

Fiscal is not judicial author ity contemplated under Art. 125 (Sayo vs. Chief of Police)
1. Fiscal files info

5. Requisites for a warrant of arrest:

1. Probable cause 2. Signed by judge 3. Specifically naming or particularly and sufficiently describing person to be arrested

John Doe warrants are void for being general warrants ( Pangandaman vs. Cesar) 6. Remedies a. Petition for writ of habea s corpus

 Filed with any court, to eff ect immediate release of the person detained Filed when a person is bein g illegally detained (without judicial process), or was illeg ally arrested (void warrant or unlawful warrantless arrest, or warrantless arrest beyond period with no information fil ed)

 Habeas corpus is not allowe d when:

1. The person is in custody of an officer under process of law, and 2. The court had jurisdiction to issue the process (Luna vs. Plaza)

If an arrest is improper, th e remedy is a motion for qua shal of the warrant of arrest and/or a motion to quash the information, not habeas corp

us (Ilagan vs. Enrile) Habeas corpus is no longer available after an informatio n has been filed, the informa tion being the judicial proces s required by law (Ilagan vs. Enrile) Habeas corpus is proper wh en a person is being restraine d illegally, e.g., imprisoned p ast maximum penalty allowe d by law (Gumabon vs. Direct

or of Prisons) b. Quashal of warrant of arr est Filed with court which issu ed the warrant of arrest whe n the warrant of arrest is fat ally flawed c. Motion to quash informati on Filed with court when infor mation against the person arr

ested has been filed Must be made in a special appearance before the court questioning only its lack of j urisdiction over the person of the accused Otherwise, the voluntary a ppearance of the person arre sted by filing a motion before the court would be deemed a submission to the authority

of the court, thus granting it whatever jurisdiction it lacke d over the person Any irregularity in the arre st is cured when the petition er submits himself to the juri sdiction of the court, e.g., by filing for bail (Bagcal vs. Vill araza) 7. V.V. Mendoza, Rights to Counsel in Custodial Investig ation

 Evolution of rights of the a ccused under custodial invest igation

1. All involuntary confession were inadmissible; accused had to prove involuntariness 2. Involuntary confessions were inadmissible only if they were false 3. Revert to exclusionary rule: any involuntary confession is inadmissible 1. Miranda rule: the

accused must be informed of his rights 1.1.1.1. To remain silent 1.1.1.2. Against selfincrimination 1.1.1.3. To counsel 2. Definition of custodial investigation questioned 1.1.1.1.1. It begins only after arrest 2. Police

investigations prior to arrest are not covered 3. The rights may be waived, but the rights to be informed of these rights,i.e., to warning, may not be waived 4. Warning must not only be said, officer must make sure the person arrested

understands them specifically 4.1.1.1.1. Present rules 1.1.1.1.1.1. Volunt ary confessions are admissible 2. Test of voluntariness determined on a case-to-case basis 3. Waiver of rights must not only be

with counsel but must be in writing

Confessions made without assistance of counsel are ina dmissible as evidence to incri minate the accused, but they may be used to impeach the credibility of the accused, or they may be treated as verba l admission of the accused th rough the testimony of the w itnesses (People vs. Molas)

Rule 114 Bail 1. Bail security given for th e release of a person in custo dy of law, furnished by him o r a bondsman, conditioned u pon his appearance before an y court as required under the following conditions:
1. Undertaking effective upon approval and remains in force at all stages until promulgation of judgment,

unless sooner cancelled 2. Accused shall appear before court when required 3. Failure to appear despite notice to him or the bondsman will waive his right to be present and trial shall proceed in absentia 4. Bondsman shall surrender accused for execution of judgment

Bail applies to all persons d etained, not just to those ch

arged with the offense (Herr as vs. Teehankee) Court has power to prohibi t person out on bail from lea ving the country (Manotoc, Jr . vs. CA) Bail implies delivery of the accused to the sureties who, though not holding him priso ner, may seize him and impri son him until they can delive r him to court (US vs. Bonoan

) 2. General Rule: All persons are entitled to bail as a matt er of right, except those char ged with capital offenses. Right to bail traditionally u navailable to military person nel facing court martial, who are not in the same class as civilians (Comendador vs. de Villa) Bail should be available reg

ardless of other circumstance s or the merits of the case, if the health or the life of the detainee is in danger (Dela R ama vs. Peoples Court) Excessive bail is tantamoun t to denial of bail, which is u nconstitutional (Dela Camara vs. Enage) 3. When bail is a matter of ri ght

 Before or after conviction by MTC, MCTC, MJC Before conviction by the R TC of an offense not punisha ble by death, reclusion perpe tua or life imprisonment 4. When bail is discretionar y (application filed with cour t where case is pending)
1. Upon conviction by RTC of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or

life imprisonment 2. Provisional liberty under same circs. but during period to appeal subject to consent of bondsman 3. In case he has applied for probation after final judgment, he may be allowed temporary liberty under his bail or recognizance

5. Procedure a. Offense charged is not ca

pital: i. Accused applies for bail

(1) Where information agains t him was filed or where case is pending (2) Absent (1), in another br anch of the same court withi n the province or city where he is held (3) If arrested in another pro vince, city or municipality, fi

le with the RTC (4) Absent (3), with the MTC

1. Judge sets bail 2. Accused may move to reduce bail, and hearing will be set 4. Accused posts bail and deposits the same with the Municipal/City/Provincial Treasurer or, if cash, with the Collector of Internal Revenue 4.1. Accused is released

b. Offense charged is capita l:

1. Accused petitions for bail 2. Judge sets hearing to determine whether evidence of guilt is strong

Ex-parte hearing on bail is arbitrary and unacceptable ( Herras vs. Teehankee)

1. Prosecution presents evidence 2. Court may not force

fiscal to produce evidence (Herras vs. Teehankee) 4.2. If evidence is strong, bail is denied 3. Otherwise, judge sets bail and procedure for non-capital offense is followed

In capital crimes, judges d iscretion is limited to determ ining strength of evidence an d does not cover determining whether bail should be allow

ed (Herras vs. Teehankee) Evidence must be strong th at the accused is guilty of th e capital offense charged, no t just of any offense (Bernard ez vs. Valera) 6. Bail bond an obligatio n under seal given by accuse d with one or more sureties a nd made payable to proper o fficer with the condition to b e void upon performance by t

he accused of such acts as he may legally be required to p erform 7. Recognizance

1. Obligation of record entered into before some court of magistrate duly authorized to take it, with the condition to do some particular act, the most usual condition in criminal cases being the appearance of the

accused for trial 2. Does not require signature of accused for trial 3. Does not require signature of accused to be valid

8. Prosecution witnesses ma y be required to post bail to ensure their appearance at t he trial,except:

1. Substitution of info (see R110, 14) 2. Court believes that material witness may not

appear at the trial

9. When bail required under RA 6036 (violation of ordinan ce, light felony, criminal offe nse not higher that 6 month imprisonment and/or P2000 fine, or both)
1. a. Caught in flagrante 2. Confessed to commission of offense unless repudiated (force and intimidation) 3. Previously escaped,

evaded sentence or jumped bail 4. Violation of Sec. 2 (fails to report to clerk of court periodically under his recognizance) 5. Recidivist, habitual delinquent previously convicted for an offense to which the law or ordinance attaches an equal or greater penalty or for 2 or more offenses to which it attaches

a lighter penalty 6. Committed offense while on parole or under conditional pardon 7. Previously pardoned by municipal or city mayor for violation of ordinance for at least 2 times

10. Instances when accused may be released on recogniza nce:

1. Offense charged is a

violation of an ordinance, a light felony or criminal offense the imposable penalty to which does not exceed 6 months and or P2000 fine 2. Person has been in custody for a period equal to or more than the minimum of the imposable principal penalty, without application of the Indeterminate Sentence Law or any modifying

circumstance 3. Accused has applied for probation and before the same has been resolved, but NO BAIL was filed or accused is incapable of filing one 4. Youthful offender held for physical and mental examination, trial or appeal, if unable to furnish bail

11. Cancellation of bail a. Upon application with the

court and due notice to the f iscal

1. Accused surrenders back to custody 1.1. Accused dies

b. Automatic cancellation
1. Case is dismissed 1.1. Accused is acquitted 5. Accused is convicted and surrenders for execution of judgment

12. When bail cancelled or d

enied: after RTC imposes imp risonment exceeding 6 years, but not more than 20 years, and:
1. Accused is a recidivist, quasi-recidivist, habitual delinquent or guilty of the aggravating circumstance of reiteration; 2. Provisionally escaped, evaded sentence, violated provisions of bail; 3. Committed offense while

on probation, parole, or conditional pardon; 4. Probability of flight; or 5. Undue risk that during appeal, he may commit another crime

13. When bail is forfeited a. Accused fails to appear b efore court when required 30 days for bondsman to sh ow cause why judgment shou ld not be rendered against hi

m b. Bondsman fails to produce him within 30 days c. Bondsman fails to satisfac torily explain to the court wh y accused did not appear wh en first required to do so Sureties guarantee only ap pearance of the accused, not his conduct (US vs. Bonoan) Sureties exonerated if app

earance made impossible by an act of God, the obligee or the law (US vs. Bonoan) 14. Provisional forfeiture
1. Within 30 days, produce the body or give reason for non-production AND 2. Explain satisfactorily the absence of the accused when first required to appear

15. Remedies
1. Application for bail, when

bail can be availed of as a matter of right 2. Petition for bail, when the offense charged is a capital offense

For judge to set hearing fo r the determination of streng th of evidence of guilt 16. Circumstances to be cons idered in fixing amount of bai l:
1. Financial ability of

accused to give bail; 2. Nature and circumstances of offense; 3. Penalty of offense charged; 4. Character and reputation of accused; 5. Age and health of accused 6. Weight of evidence against accused 7. Probability of accused appearing for trial; 8. Forfeiture of other bonds; 9. Fact that accused was a

fugitive from justice when arrested; and 10. Pendency of other cases in which the accused is under bond

17. Notes:
1. Posting bail waives the right to question any irregularity attending the arrest of a person (Callanta vs. Villanueva). However, this does not result in waiver of the inadmissibility of the

articles seized incidentally to such illegal arrest. 2. Accused waived the right to question any irregularity in the conduct of the preliminary investigation when he failed to do so before entering his plea (People vs. Dela Cerna) 3. Accused out on bail may be re-arrested if he attempts to depart from the Philippines without prior

court permission (warrantless arrest allowed).

Rule 115 Rights of Accused 1. Right of the accused unde r the Rules a. To be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond re asonable doubt In an appeal from a convict ion, the accused shall again b e presumed innocent until an

d unless his conviction is affir med (Castillo vs. Felix) b. To be informed of the na ture and cause of charges The right must be substanti ally complied with; arraignm ent and later proceedings mu st be in a language the accus ed understands (People vs. C risologo) c. To be present at every st

age of proceedings, subject t o waiver by bail If an accused escapes, he waives this right and merits a trial in absentia; the accuse d forfeits his rights to be noti fied of proceedings in the fut ure and to adduce evidence i n his behalf (People vs. Salas )
1. To testify as witness on his own behalf, subject to cross-

examination on matters covered by direct examination; not to be prejudiced by his silence 2. Not to be compelled to be a witness against himself 3. To confront and examine the witnesses against him, including the right to use in evidence testimony of a witness 4. Who is deceased, out of or cannot with due diligence be

found in the RP 4.1. Given in another proceeding 5.1. With the same parties 5.2. Same subject matter 5.3. Opportunity to crossexamine

Prosecution has no privileg e to withhold the identity of informers when such informe r was crucial in the operation itself; failure to present the informer is a denial of the rig

ht to confront the witness wh ich merits the reversal of the conviction (People vs. Bagan o) g. To have compulsory proc ess to secure witnesses and e vidence in his behalf h. To have a speedy, impart ial and public trial Unreasonable postponemen ts of trial amounts to a denia

l of the right to a speedy trial , entitling the accused to ma ndamus to compel dismissal o f the case, or to habeas corp us if he is detained i. To have the right of appe al 2. Rights of the accused und er the Constitution a. To due process b. Against self-incrimination

 Right is limited to testimon ies; ocular inspection of the body may be allowed (Villafl or vs. Summers) Being informed of rights m eans a meaningful transmissi on of information, without w hich confession made by the accused is inadmissible (Peop le vs. Nicandro) Confessions obtained throu gh coercion are inadmissible

(People vs. Opida) Right against self-incrimina tion and to counsel do not ap ply during custodial investiga tion (People vs. Ayson) During trial, the right again st self-incrimination takes th e following form:
1. Accused may refuse to testify 2. If he testifies, he may refuse to answer those

questions which may incriminate him in ANOTHER offense

c. Against double jeopardy d. To be heard by himself an d counsel 3. Double jeopardy

1. First jeopardy must have attached prior to the first 2. First jeopardy attached and terminated 3. Valid complaint or

information 3.1. Competent court with jurisdiction 5.4. Accused had pleaded 6. Action ended in conviction, acquittal or termination without the consent of the accused

c. Offense charged in late r case is:

1. Same as that in previous case 2. Necessarily includes or

is included in the previous case 7. An attempt or frustration of the offense in previous case 3. An offense lesser than that charged to which the accused pleaded guilty with the consent of the fiscal and the offended party

4. Exceptions to double jeop ardy

1. The offense was made graver by supervening events 2. The facts constituting the graver offense were only discovered after the filing of the earlier information

No double jeopardy if the new fact which justified the new charge arose only after a rraignment and conviction (P eople vs. City Court) No double jeopardy where the trial was a sham since th

ere was no competent court ( Galman vs. Sandiganbayan) No double jeopardy if first case was dismissed with cons ent of the accused (Caes vs. I AC) There is double jeopardy if a person is charged twice un der different penal statutes f or the same acts (People vs. Relova) c. Plea of guilty to a lesser

offense without the consent of the fiscal and the offende d party 5. Remedies
1. Motion to quash 2. Motion to dismiss

Both filed on the ground of violation of accuseds rights, thereby ousting the court of jurisdiction 6. NOTES:

 Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 1 No person shall be deprived o f life, liberty or property wit hout due process of law, nor shall any person be denied th e equal protection of the law s. Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 14
1. No person shall be held to

answer for a criminal offense without due process of law. 2. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved, and shall enjoy the right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusations against him, to have a speedy, impartial and public trial, to meet the witnesses face to face, and to have compulsory

process to secure the attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence in his behalf.

However, after arraignment, trial may proceed notwithsta nding the absence of the acc used provided that he has be en duly notified and that his failure to appear is unjustifia ble. Constitution, Art. III, Sec.

16 All persons shall have the rig ht to a speedy disposition of their cases before all judicial , quasi-judicial, or administra tive bodies. Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 17 No person shall be compelled to be a witness against hims elf.

 Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 21 No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment fo r the same offense. If an act is punished by a law or ordinance, conviction or a cquittal under either shall co nstitute a bar to another pros ecution for the same act. Rule 116 Arraignment and

Plea 1. Procedure
1. Court informs accused of his right to counsel and asks him if he wants one 2. Court appoints counsel de oficio if accused has none

If no such member of the a vailable, any person who is a resident of the province, of g ood repute for probity and ab ility to defend accused

c. Court gives counsel time to confer with accused at lea st an hour before arraignmen t Period allowed for counse l de oficio to confer with acc used must be substantially co mplied with; if not, case may be remanded for re-arraign ment (People vs. Gonzaga)
1. Accused given a copy of the information, which is

read to him in a language he understands 2. Accused is asked whether he pleads guilty or not guilty 3. Accused files a motion to quash or makes plea 4. Accused personally makes his plea 5. Plea is entered into record 6. If accused makes plea of not guilty, counsel has at least 2 days to prepare for trial

 People vs. Agbayani the ri ght for 2 days to prepare mus t be expressly demanded. On ly when so demanded does d enial thereof constitute rever sible error and ground for ne w trial. Further, such right may be waived, expressly or i mpliedly. NOTE, HOWEVER, under SC Circular 38-98 (implementing Speedy Trial Act of 1997),

accused must be given at lea st 15 days to prepare for trial , which shall commence withi n 30 days from receipt of Pre -Trial Order. j. Case proceeds to pre-tria l, trial or hearing, depending on the plea Statement in the judgment that the accused was arraign ed and pleaded is sufficient;

the manner of statement of s uch fact is immaterial (Peopl e vs. Cariaga) 2. Kinds of plea
1. No plea a plea of not guilty shall be entered 2. Conditional plea of guilt a plea of not guilty shall be entered 3. Not guilty case proceeds to trial or pre-trial 4. Guilty to a lesser offense

if fiscal and offended party consents, conviction under offense charged for purposes of double jeopardy 5. Info may be amended 5.1. Case goes to trial 8. Even if info is not amended, and even if lesser offense is not included in offense charged, court may still find the accused guilty of that lesser offense

e. Guilty to a capital offens e Court conducts searching i nquiry to determine if accuse d was aware of the charges, of his plea, and its conseque nces Court requires prosecution to present evidence to prove guilt of accused and determi ne his degree of culpability,

and accused may still establis h presence of mitigating circ umstances in his favor f. Guilty to a non-capital of fense Court receives evidence fro m the parties to determine p enalty to impose Plea of guilty not necessaril y followed by conviction. Up on receipt of exculpatory evi

dence (if accused pleaded gu ilty), trial court should consi der the plea withdrawn and i n its place, order the plea of not guilty Plea of guilty waives only d efects which may be taken a dvantage of by motion to qua sh or by plea in abatement; c annot cure jurisdictional defe cts.

3. Effects a. Entry of plea will waive

1. Right to question illegality of the arrest 2. Right to question any irregularity in the preliminary investigation 3. Right to file a motion to quash

b. Improvident plea of guilt y may be changed to not guil ty any time before judgment

is rendered c. A plea of not guilty may n ot be changed to guilty, as d oing so would only spare the prosecution of presenting evi dence and still result in the c onviction of the accused. 4. Remedies a. Motion for specification May be filed any time befo re plea, even after a MTQ

 Filed when the information is insufficient in form or is g enerally worded, that a Bill o f Particulars is necessary to c larify the acts for which the accused is being charged b. Motion to quash May be filed at anytime be fore plea is entered Based on grounds provided by the rules

c. Motion to suspend arraign ment Filed when the accused see ms mentally unsound or if th ere is a prejudicial question i n a pending civil case d. Motion to withdraw an im provident plea of guilt May be filed at any time be fore judgment of conviction becomes final, when it can b

e shown that the accused wa s not aware of the significanc e of pleading guilty to the ch arges Rule 117 Motion to Quash 1. Motion to quash a hy pothetical admission that eve n if all the facts alleged were true, the accused still canno t be convicted due to other r easons

2. When to file Motion to Qu ash General Rule: Before enterin g plea; all grounds not raised deemed waived Exception: The following gro unds may be used in MTQ eve n after plea
1. No offense charged 2. Lack of jurisdiction over the offense charged 3. Extinction of the offense

or of the penalty 4. Double jeopardy

3. Grounds a. Information does not conf orm to prescribed form For the info to charge a co mplex crime, it is not necess ary that it be defined by law, only that it alleges that one offense was necessary to com mit the other (People vs. Ala

gao) b. Court has no jurisdiction

1. No territorial jurisdiction 2. No jurisdiction over offense ch arged may be raised at any time; no waiver considered even upon failure to move to quash on such ground 3. No jurisdiction over person of the accused

The court gained jurisdicti

on over the person of the acc used when he voluntarily app eared for the pre-suspension hearing (Layosa vs. Rodriguez ) c. Accused would be put in double jeopardy Bars another prosecution No waiver No double jeopardy if first case was dismissed with the

consent of the accused (Que vs. Cosico), unless ground for dismissal is: (a) denial of rig ht to speedy trial; or (b) insu fficiency of evidence. If the first case was dismiss ed due to a deficient informa tion, then there was no valid information and there could be no double jeopardy (Caniz a vs. People) Cudia vs CA it should be t

he Provincial Prosecutor of P ampanga, not the City Prosec utor, who should prepare inf ormations for offenses commi tted within Pampanga but ou tside Angeles City. An inform ation must be prepared and p resented by the prosecuting attorney or someone authoriz ed by law. If not, the court d oes not acquire jurisdiction. Although failure to file a mot

ion to quash the information is a waiver of all objections t o it insofar as formal objecti ons to pleadings are concern ed, questions relating to wan t of jurisdiction may be raise d at any stage of the proceed ings. Moreover, since the co mplaint or information was in sufficient because it was so d efective in form or substance that conviction upon it could

not have been sustained, its dismissal without the consent of the accused cannot be ple aded as prior jeopardy, and will not be a bar to a second prosecution. d. More than one offense wa s charged, EXCEPT where law prescribes single punishment for various offenses e. Facts alleged do not cons

titute an offense May be raised at any time No waiver For charge to be complete, it is necessary to state that i t was exempted from any am nesty existing at the time f. Criminal action or liabilit y has been extinguished g. Information contains alle gations which, if true, would

be a legal excuse or justificat ion h. Officer who filed the info rmation had no authority Presentation of evidence c annot cure an invalid informa tion (People vs. Asuncion) NOTE: Court will consider no other grounds other than tho se raised, EXCEPT lack of juri sdiction over offense charged

. 4. Requisites of Double jeop ardy a. Valid information or comp laint, sufficient in form and s ubstance b. Before court of competen t jurisdiction Doctrine of Jurisdiction b y Estoppel: depends upon w hether the lower court actual

ly had jurisdiction or not. If i t had no jurisdiction, but the case was tried and decided u pon the theory that it had jur isdiction, the parties are not barred on appeal, from assail ing such jurisdiction, for the same must exist as a matter of law, and may not be confe rred by consent of the partie s or by estoppel. However, i f the lower court had jurisdic

tion, and the case was heard and decided upon a given the ory, such, for instance, as th at the court had no jurisdicti on, the party who induced it to adopt such theory will not be permitted, on appeal, to assume an inconsistent positi on that the lower court ha d jurisdiction. Here, the prin ciple of estoppel applies. The rule that jurisdiction is conf

erred by law, and does not d epend upon the will of the pa rties, has no bearing thereon . c. Accused had pleaded d. Conviction, acquittal, or dismissal or termination of ca se without consent of accuse d e. Bar to offense charged, a ttempt to commit the same o

r necessarily includes or is ne cessarily included Conviction for physical inju ries through reckless imprude nce constitutes double jeopa rdy to the charge of damage to property through reckless i mprudence. 5. Procedure
1. MTQ filed 2. If based on defect in info which can be cured, court

shall order its amendment 3. Quashing the info shall NOT be a bar to subsequent prosecution (accused has not pleaded yet), EXCEPT when the ground is: 3.1. Double jeopardy OR 8.1. Extinction of criminal liability

6. Remedies
1. Motion to dismiss if certain grounds were not raised or denied in a MTQ

2. Trial

If there was really no basis for the info, then such could be proved in the trial Upon denial of a MTQ, the proper remedy is to go on tri al and later to appeal, if nec essary; mandamus or certiora ri will only be granted if ther e is not other plain, simple a nd adequate remedy 7. Failure to move to quash

or to allege any ground there for deemed a waiver of such grounds,except:

1. Failure to charge an offense 2. Lack of jurisdiction over the offense charged 3. Extinction of the offense or of the penalty 4. Double jeopardy

Rule 118 Pre-Trial 1. Plea bargaining process whereby the accused and th

e prosecution in a criminal ca se work out a mutually satisf actory disposition of the case subject to court approval. It usually involves the defenda nts pleading guilty to a lesse r offense or to only some of t he counts of a multi-count in dictment in return for a light er sentence than that for the greater charge. Under Speedy Trial Act of

1997, in all criminal cases c ognizable by the MTC, MCTC, MeTC, RTC and Sandiganbay an, pretrial is mandatory. Under SC Circular 38-98, i mplementing the Speedy Tri al Act of 1997, an accused may plea guilty to a lesser of fense only if said offense is n ecessarily included in the off ense charged.

2. Stipulation of facts Facts which both parties a nd respective counsels agree on as evidenced by their sign atures; these facts need not be proved by evidence in tria l Stipulation is inadmissible i f unsigned by either accused or counsel; a later memo of c onfirmation, signed only by c

ounsel, cannot cure defect (F ule vs. CA) 3. Pre-trial order binds the parties, limits the trial to m atters not yet disposed of, an d controls the course of actio n during the trial 4. Procedure
1. Judge must calendar pretrial 2. Either party may waive the pre-trial

3. If court appoints counsel de oficio, counsel has at least 2 days to prepare 4. In the pre-trial conference 5. Plea bargaining 6. Stipulation of facts 7. Marking of evidence (does not imply conceding to its admissibility or credibility) 8. Waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence 9. Other matters which will promote a fair and

expeditious trial

e. Judge issues pre-trial ord er Rule 119 Trial 1. In trial, the defense tries
1. To assail the admissibility of evidence which prove the elements of the offense charged 2. To assail the credibility of such evidence 3. To prove another version,

possibly admitting certain evidence of the prosecution and adding other evidence to cast reasonable doubt

Even in summary procedur e, the judge cannot base his decision simply on affidavits; he must give the defendant the chance to cross-examine (Combate vs. San Jose) 2. Procedure a. Parties notified of date of

trial 2 days before trial date (R119, 1) HOWEVER, under SC Circula r 38-98, accused must be giv en at least 15 days to prepar e for trial, which shall comm ence within 30 days from rec eipt of Pre-Trial Order.
1. Accused may move that his witnesses be examined 2. Defense witnesses examined by any judge or

lawyer 3. Prosecution witnesses, if they would be unable to attend trial, may be examined by the judge handling the case 4. Trial continues from day to day, unless postponed for a just cause 5. Prosecution presents evidence

Presentation Testimonies: direct examin

ation Cross-examination Re-cross Offer

1. Accused may move for discharge 2. Prosecution rests 3. Defense may, with or without leave of court, file a demurrer to evidence 4. Defense presents evidence 5. Defense rests

6. Prosecution presents rebuttal evidence 7. Defense presents rebuttal evidence 8. Trial is closed; case is submitted for judgment

3. When mistake made in ch arging proper offense

1. If Accused cannot be convicted of offense charged or offense necessarily included therein 2. Accused detained, not

discharged 3. Original case dismissed upon filing of proper information

Example: Charged with the ft. At trial, appears that offe nse is estafa. The prosecutio n can ask for the dismissal of the info in order to file a ne w one for estafa. No Double Jeopardy because no valid inf o in the first case.

4. Application for examinati on of witnesses for accused b efore trial

1. Sick or infirm; unable to attend trial 2. Resides more than 100 km. from means of trial; no means to attend

5.

Application (prosecution)

1. Sick or infirm 2. Has to leave the RP with indefinite date of returning

6. Requisites for postponeme nt due to absence of a witnes s

1. Witness is really material and appears to the court to be so 2. Party who applies for postponement has not been guilty of neglect 3. Witness can be had at the time to which the trial has been deferred 4. No similar evidence could

be obtained

7. Requisites to discharge of an accused as State Witness

1. Testimony of accused absolutely needed 2. No other direct evidence available EXCEPT his testimony 3. Testimony can be corroborated on material points 4. Accused does not appear to be most guilty

5. Accused has never been convicted of offense involving moral turpitude

Discharge of accused, whe n not all the requisites were met, cannot be revoked as lo ng as he testified according t o what was expected of him ( People vs. Aninon) 8. Remedies a. Motion for separate trials Filed by the fiscal to try se

veral accused separately Granted at the courts disc retion May also be ordered by the court motu proprio b. Motion to consolidate Upon the courts discretion , separate charges may be tri ed in one single case if the of fenses charged arise form the same facts or form part of a

series of similar offenses Court allowed consolidatio n of rape cases substantially committed in the same mann er (People vs. David) c. Motion for continuance filed to postpone trial for jus t cause d. Motion to exclude public Excluding parties, counsels and court personnel

 May also be ordered by cou rt motu proprio e. Motion for discharge Filed before the prosecutio n rests Hearing to determine exist ence of requisites for dischar ge Prosecution will present ev idence and the sworn statem ent of the proposed state wit

ness Evidence adduced in this s aid hearing automatically for m part of trial; however, if c ourt denies motion for discha rge, his sworn statement shal l be inadmissible in evidence. Discharge of the accused h as the effect of acquittal, unl ess accused fails or refuses t o testify against his co-accus

ed in accordance with his sta tement (which formed the ba sis for his discharge) f. Demurrer to evidence

May be made after the pro secution rests its case If the court finds the prose cutions evidence insufficient , the case will be dismissed Otherwise, if demurrer den ied

1. If the demurrer was made with leave of court, defense gets to present evidence 2. If the demurrer was made without leave of court, defense is deemed to have waived the right to present evidence and the case is submitted for judgment

Case may also be dismisse d motu proprio g. Motion to reopen

 Filed after the case is sub mitted for judgment but befo re judgment is actually rende red To allow either side to pres ent additional evidence, if su ch could not be found before Granted on discretion of th e judge The accused cannot move t o reopen the case to allow hi

m to adduce evidence in his behalf when his failure to ad duce them during the trial w as his own fault (People vs. C ruz) Rule 120 Judgment 1. Judgment adjudication b y the court that the accused i s guilty or not guilty of the of fense charged, and the impos ition of the proper penalty an d civil liability provided by la

w on the accused 2. General Rule: If the accus ed is found not guilty, he will be acquitted and the acquitt al immediately becomes final and executory. If the accuse d is found guilty, penalty and civil liability will be imposed on him. 3. Accused may be convicted of

1. The offense charged 2. A lesser offense necessarily included in the offense charged

Accused cannot be convict ed for an offense graver than that charged (People vs. Gue varra) 4. Contents
1. Written in official language 2. Personally prepared and

signed by the judge 3. Contains facts proved 4. Contains law upon which judgment is based

In case of conviction, judg ment must state:

1. Legal qualification of offense and aggravating and mitigating circumstances 2. Level of participation 3. Penalty imposed 4. Civil liability for damages, unless right to separate civil

action has been reserved

In case of acquittal, judgm ent must state:

1. Civil liability for damages, unless acts alleged clearly did not exist 2. Basis of liability

5. Procedure
1. Judge reads judgment in presence of accused 2. If judgment is of acquittal 3. It becomes final and

executory 4. It bars subsequent prosecution for the same offense

c. If judgment is of convicti on, remedy is to file:

1. Motion for reconsideration 2. Motion for new trial 3. Notice of appeal

Or else, judgment becomes final and is entered in the b ook of Judgments

6. When judgment in a crim inal case becomes final:

1. After lapse of period for perfecting an appeal; or 2. When sentence partially or totally satisfied or served; or 3. Accused has expressly waived in writing his right to appeal, EXCEPT in cases of automatic review where death penalty is imposed 4. Accused has applied for probation

7. Only a judgment in convi ction can be modified or set aside

1. Before judgment had been final (otherwise double jeopardy); 2. Before appeal had been perfected; or 3. To correct clerical errors in the judgment

8. Remedies a. Appeal

 Filed within 15 days of pro mulgation of judgment Period is interrupted by fili ng of a motion for new trial o r reconsideration On motion of accused or at its own instance with consen t of the accused b. Motion for reconsideratio n Filed when there are errors

of law or fact in the judgme nt Shall require no further pro ceedings Notice should be given to t he fiscal c. Motion for new trial Notice should be given to t he fiscal Filed on the following grou nds:

1. Error of law or irregularities have been made during trial which are prejudicial to the substantial rights of the accused

ii. New evidence has been fo und which could not have be en found before and which c ould change the judgment 9. Procedure for new trial
1. Hearing shall be set and held

2. All evidence not alleged to be in error shall stand 3. New evidence will be introduced 4. Old judgment may be set aside and a new one rendered

10. Notes: Suspension of sentence for youthful offenders after co nviction, minor is committed to custody and care of DSWD or any training institution unt

il reaches 21 years of age, or a shorter period Probation disposition un der which a defendant after conviction and sentences, is r eleased subject to conditions imposed by the court and to the supervision of a probatio n officer Parole the conditional rel ease of an offender from a p enal or correctional institutio

n after he has served the min imum period of his prison sen tence under the continued cu stody of the state and under conditions that permit his rei ncarceration if he violated th e conditions of his release Rule 121 New Trial or Reco nsideration 1. Reopening of the case
1. Made by the court before judgment is rendered in the

exercise of sound discretion 2. Does not require consent of accused 3. May be made at the instance of either party who can thereafter present additional evidence

2. Motion for new trial

1. Filed after judgment is rendered but before the finality thereof 2. At the instance or with the consent of the accused

3. The prosecution can move only for the reconsideration of the judgment but cannot present additional evidence

3. Motion for New Trial is d enied if:

1. Only impeaching evidence is sought to be introduced as the court had already passed upon issue of credibility 2. Only corroborative evidence is offered 3. Prisoner admits

commission of crime with which accused is charged (facility with which such confession can be obtained and fabricated) 4. Alleged new evidence is inherently improbable and could easily be concocted 5. Alleged new evidence consists of recantations of prosecution witness, due to unreliability of such recantations, EXCEPT if no

other evidence to sustain conviction aside from recanted testimony

4. New Trial vs. Reconsidera tion Motion for recon is based o n the grounds of errors of law in the judgment is court is n ot asked to reopen the case f or further proceedings, but t o reconsider its findings or co nclusions of law and make th

em conformable to the law a pplicable to the case on the j udgment the court has to ren der anew. 5. New Trial vs. Modificatio n of Judgment In New Trial, irregularities are expunged from the recor d and/or new evidence is intr oduced. In modification of ju dgment, no new hearings or

proceedings of any kind or ch ange in the record or evidenc e. A simple modification is m ade on the basis of what is o n the record. 6. New Trial vs. Reopening of the Case New trial presupposes that existence of a judgment to b e set aside upon the granting of a new trial

 In reopening, no judgment has yet been rendered, altho ugh the hearing may have alr eady been closed 7. Motion for Reconsideratio n Grounds are errors of law o r fact in judgment, which req uire no further proceedings. 8. Effects of Granting Motion for New Trial or Reconsidera

tion a. Based on error of law or i rregularities during trial: Proceedings and evidence not affected by irregularities stand, and those affected are set aside. Court may allow i ntroduction of new evidence b. Based on newly discovere d evidence: Evidence already taken shal

l stand; new evidence taken with the old Rule 122 Appeal 1. Procedure a. Filed with RTC, if original case was with MTC Notice served to lower cou rt and to adverse party b. Filed with the CA or SC, i f original case was with RTC i. With CA: notice of appeal

with court, and with copy on adverse party If CA is of opinion that pen alty should be reclusion perp etua or higher, it shall render judgment imposing said pen alty, but refrain from enterin g judgment and then certify t he case and the entire record thereof to the SC for review (R124, 13)

 CA may reverse, affirm, or modify judgment of RTC, or r emand case for new trial or r e-trial, or dismiss the case If RTC decided case in app ellate jurisdiction: Petition f or Review ii. With SC: notice of appea l where penalty imposed is lif e imprisonment, or lesser pe nalty involving offenses com

mitted on the same occasion, or arising out of same occurr ence where graver penalty of death is available but life im prisonment is imposed; all ot her cases, by petition for revi ew on certiorari If death penalty, automati c review iii. Withdrawal of appeal May be made at any time b

efore judgment on the appea l is rendered Lower court judgment bec omes final Case remanded for executi on of judgment Once notice of appeal is fil ed, cannot be validly withdra wn to give way for a Motion f or Recon or a Motion for New Trial, since the filing of the

notice perfected the appeal, and the trial court loses its p ower to modify or set aside t he judgment. The only valid withdrawal of an appeal is w here the accused decides to s erve his sentence. 2. Effect of appeal by any of several accused
1. Shall not affect those who did not appeal, EXCEPT if favorable and applicable to

them 2. Civil appeal by offended party shall not affect criminal aspect of judgment 3. Execution of judgment on appellant will be stayed upon perfection of appeal

3. When appeal by prosecuti on from order of dismissal of criminal case will not result i n double jeopardy
1. Dismissal made upon

motion or with express consent of the accused 2. Dismissal is not an acqui ttal nor based upon consideration of the evidence or merits of the case 3. Question to be passed upon by the appellate court is purely legal so that if the dismissal is found incorrect, the case has to be remanded to the court of origin to determine the guilt or

innocence of the accused

4. When serving sentence, re medy is to petition for habea s corpus

1. Filed when the law under which the accused was convicted is repealed or declared unconstitutional 2. When a later judgment is rendered acquitting others for similar circumstances

Otherwise, equal protectio

n is violated
1. When penalty is lowered and convict has already served more than the maximum period of the new penalty

Habeas corpus is available when a person is imprisoned beyond the maximum penalty imposed by law (Gumabon vs . Dir. of Prisons) NOTE: When dismissal is capr

icious, certiorari lies and no double jeopardy since validit y and not correctness of dism issal is being challenged. Rule 126 Search and Seizur e 1. Search warrant an order in writing issued in the name of the People of the Philippi nes, signed by a judge and di rected to a peace officer, co mmanding him to search for

personal property described t herein and bring it before th e court Cannot be issued to look fo r evidence (Uy Khetin vs. Vill areal) Seizing objects to be used as evidence is equivalent to f orcing one to be a witness ag ainst himself (Uy Khetin vs. V illareal) For a warrant to be valid, i

t must meet the requirement s set by law (Burgos vs. Chief of Staff) Tapping conversations is eq uivalent to a search and seiz ure (US vs. Katz) 2. General Rule: No search or seizure can be conducted un less it is authorized by a sear ch warrant. Evidence gathere d from an illegal search and s eizure is inadmissible.

 Warrantless searches are ill egal, unreasonable and unco nstitutional (Alvarez vs. CFI) It is not the police action which is impermissible, but t he procedure and unreasonab le character by which it is ex ercised (Guazon vs. de Villa) Court gains jurisdiction ove r items seized by a valid sear ch warrant and returned to it , and such is not an unconstit

utional deprivation of proper ty (Villanueva vs. Querubin) Evidence from an illegal se arch may be used as evidenc e, if no objection is raised (S tonehill vs. Diokno) Right against unreasonable search and seizure may be w aived, but for the waiver to b e effective:
1. The right must exist 2. Person must be aware of

the right 3. Person clearly shows the intent to relinquish such right

No waiver against unreason able search and seizure when one compromises the crimin al proceedings (Alvarez vs. C FI) There is no waiver of right when evidence of coercion is present (Roan vs. Gonzales) 3. Requisites of a valid searc

h warrant a. Issued upon probable cau se Probable cause such facts and circumstances which wo uld lead a reasonably pruden t man to believe that a crime has been committed and the thing to be searched for and seized is in the place to be se arched

b. Probable cause is persona lly determined by the issuing judge Hence, signed by him By any RTC, to be served a nywhere in the country, for a n offense which occurred any where in the country (Malalo an vs. CA) c. Issuing judge personally e xamined, in the form of sear

ching questions, the appellan t and his witness and took do wn their written depositions d. Search warrant particular ly describes or identifies the property to be seized Property which men may la wfully possess may not be th e object of a search warrant (Uy Khetin vs. Villareal) Nature of goods may allow

description to be general or n ot too technical (Alvarez vs. CFI) e. Particularly describes the place to be searched f. It shall issue only for one specific offense Otherwise, cannot be said to have issued upon probable cause (Asian Surety vs. Herr era)

 Absence of specific offense makes impossible determina tion of probable cause (Stone hill vs. Diokno) g. Was not issued for more t han 10 days prior to a search made pursuant thereto (searc h warrant becomes void after 10 days) h. Indicates time, if to be se rved at night

4. When a search warrant m ay be said to particularly des cribe the thing to be seized
1. Description is as specific as circumstances allow 2. Expresses a conclusion of fact by which the warrant officer may be guided 3. Things described are limited to those which bear a direct relation to the offense for which the warrant is issued

5. Procedure a. Complainant files applica tion, attaches affidavits Oath requires that the pers on taking it personally knows the facts of the case (People vs. Sy Juco) Affidavits submitted must s tate that the premises is occ upied by the person against whom the warrant is issued, t

hat the objects to be seized are fruits or means of commi tting a crime, and that they belong to the same person, t hus, not affecting third perso ns (People vs. Sy Juco) When complainants knowl edge is hearsay, affidavits of witnesses are necessary (Alva rez vs. CFI) b. Judge conducts ex part e preliminary examination of

complainant and witnesses u nder oath to determine prob able cause Judge must ask probing qu estions, not just repeat facts in the affidavit (Roan vs. Gon zales) c. Judge issues search warra nt good for 10 days d. Peace officer in presence of occupant, members of th

e family OR 2 witnesses of su fficient age and discretion re siding in the same locality Search may last for more t han a day as long as it is part of the same search for the s ame purpose and of the same place (Uy Khetin vs. Villarea l) e. Peace officer leaves recei pt with occupant at place sea

rched f. Peace officer files return of search warrant and invent ory, and surrenders items sei zed to receiving court (not n ecessarily court which issued the warrant) Items seized illegally must remain in custodia legis pend ing resolution of the case (Ro an vs. Gonzales)

6. Remedies from an unlawf ul search

1. MTQ the warrant 2. Motion to suppress as evidence the objects illegally taken 3. Return of property illegally seized

7. When a search may be val idly conducted without a war rant

1. Without consent of person

searched 2. When the search is incident to a lawful arrest 3. Personal knowledge of the arresting person (Posadas vs. CA) 4. Limited to:

(1) Immediate time of arrest (2) Immediate vicinity of the arrest (3) Weapons and things whic h may be used as proof of off

ense charged (Nolasco vs. Pa no) iii. Subject in an offense wh ich is mala prohibita cannot be summarily seized (Roan vs . Gonzales) iv. May extend beyond arrest ee to include premises and su rrounding under his immediat e control
1. Border searches (customs, mail and airport)

2. Vessels and aircrafts for violation of Tariff and Customs Code, EXCEPT dwelling houses 3. Plain view 4. Moving vehicle 5. Hot pursuit 6. Stop-and-frisk, reasonable check-points 7. Private searches with no state action (People vs. Marti) 8. Inspection of building and premises for enforcement of

fire, sanitary and building regulations

8. Person making the arrest may take from the arrestee

1. Properties used in the commission of the crime 2. Fruits or proceeds thereof 3. Property which may furnish the arrestee with a weapon against the arresting person 4. Property which may be used as evidence at the trial

9. NOTES: Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 2 The right of the people to be secure in their persons, pape rs, houses and effects against unreasonable searches and s eizures of whatever nature a nd for any purpose shall be in violable, and no search warra nt or warrant of arrest shall i

ssue except upon probable ca use to be determined person ally by the judge after exami nation under oath or affirmat ion of the complainant and t he witnesses he may produce , and particularly describing t he place to be searched and the persons or things to be se ized. Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 3

1. The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable except upon lawful order of the court, or when public safety or order requires otherwise as prescribed by law. 2. Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding section shall be inadmissible for any purpose in the proceeding.

Rule 127 Provisional Remed ies in Criminal Cases 1. Attachment as provisional remedy in criminal cases
1. Accused is about to abscond from RP 2. Criminal action is based on a claim for money or property embezzled or fraudulently misapplied or converted to the use of the accused who is a public

officer, or any officer of a corporation, or an attorney, factor, broker, agent or clerk in a fiduciary capacity, in willful violation of duty 3. Accused has concealed, removed or disposed of his property, or is about to do so 4. Accused resides outside the RP

Reference:

Remedial Law (Criminal Pro cedure) Memory Aid Ateneo Central Bar Operatio ns 2001