investigation of the charges made

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

4. Cases where civil courts of equal rank are vested with concurrent
jurisdiction:

Rule 110 PROSECUTION of Offenses

1. Features stated in Art. 2, RPC

1. General Rule: MTC and RTC courts gain jurisdiction over the
offense upon the filing of complaint by a complainant or an
information by the prosecuting officer

Cognizable by proper court in which charge is first filed

1. Continuing crimes committed in different judicial regions

Court gains jurisdiction over the person of the accused upon arrest
or surrender; such jurisdiction once gained cannot be lost even if
accused escapes (Gimenez vs. Nazareno)

2. Offenses wherein any of the essential elements were committed

in different territorial jurisdictions

Jurisdiction of the court over the offense is determined at the time

of the institution of the action and is retained even if the penalty for
the offense is later lowered or raised (People vs. Lagon)

3. Offenses committed aboard a train, vehicle, aircraft or vessel

(see R110, 15)
i.
(1)
(2)
(3)

2. Complaint sworn written statement charging a person with an

offense, subscribed by the offended party, any peace officer or other
public official charged with the enforcement of the law violated
Information accusation in writing charging a person with an offense,
subscribed by the fiscal and filed with the court
3.

ii. Vessel
(1) First port of entry
(2) Thru which it passed during voyage

Complaint and Information distinguished:

Complaint
A sworn statement
Subscribed by the offended party, any
peace officer or other officer charged
with the enforcement of the law
violated
May be filed either with the court or in
the fiscals office generally to
commence the preliminary

Railroad, train, aircraft

Territory or municipality where vehicle passed
Place of departure
Place of arrival

e. Libel and written defamation

Information
Need not be sworn to
Subscribed to by the fiscal

5. Remedies of offended party when fiscal unreasonably refuses to

file an information or include a person therein as an accused
1. In case of grave abuse of discretion, action for mandamus
2. Lodge a new complaint against the offenders

Filed with the court

3. Take up matter with the Secretary of Justice

1

4. Institute administrative charges against the erring fiscal

7.

Institution of Criminal Actions:

5. File criminal charges under Art. 208, RPC (prosecution of

offenses)

a.

In RTC:

By filing a complaint with the appropriate officer for the purpose of

conducting requisite preliminary investigation therein.

6. File civil action under Art. 27, NCC for damages (PO refuses or
neglects to perform official duty)

b. In Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts:

7. Secure appointment of another fiscal
By filing the complaint or information directly with said courts, or a
complaint with the fiscals office

8. Institute another criminal action if no double jeopardy is

involved

c. In Metropolitan Trial Courts

6. Writs of injunction or prohibition to restrain a criminal prosecution
are not available, EXCEPT

By filing the complaint ONLY with the office of the fiscal

1. To afford adequate protection to constitutional rights of accused

In all 3 above cases, such institution shall interrupt the period of

prescription of the offense charged (Rule 110, 1)

2. Necessary for the orderly administration of justice or to avoid

oppression or multiplicity of actions

d. Offenses subject to summary procedure

3. Pre-judicial question which is sub judice

[i.e. (1) violation of traffic laws; (2) violation of rental laws; (3)
violation of municipal or city ordinances; and (4) criminal cases where
the penalty does not exceed 6 months or fine of P1000 or both,
irrespective of other imposable penalties and civil liabilities]

4. Acts of the officer are without or in excess of authority

5. Prosecution is under an invalid law, ordinance or regulation

The complaint or information shall be filed directly in court without

need of a prior preliminary examination or preliminary investigation.

6. Double jeopardy is clearly apparent

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 prescriptive period shall be halted on
the date the case is actually filed in court and not on any date before
that.

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

Reodica vs. CA [clarifies Zaldivia above] Under Art. 91 of the RPC,

the period of prescription shall be interrupted by the filing of the
complaint or information. It does not distinguish whether the

10.Clearly no prima facie case against the accused and MTQ on

that ground had been denied
2

complaint is filed for preliminary examination or investigation only, or

for an action on the merits. Thus, the filing of the complaint even
with the fiscals office should suspend the running of the Statute of
Limitations. The ruling in Zaldivia is not applicable to all cases subject
to the Rules on Summary Procedure, since that particular case
involved a violation of an ordinance. Therefore, the applicable law
therein was not Art. 91 of the RPC, but Act No. 3326 (An Act to
Establish Periods of Prescription for Violations Penalized by Special
Acts and Municipal Ordinances and to Provide when Prescription Shall
Begin to Run), 2 of which provides that period of prescription is
suspended only when judicial proceedings are instituted against the
guilty party.

Information need only allege facts, not include all the evidence
which may be used to prove such facts (Balitaan vs. CFI)
d. Name of offended party
e. Approximate time of commission
Approximation of time is sufficient; amendment as to time is only a
formal amendment; no need to dismiss case (People vs. Molero)
A significant discrepancy in the time alleged cannot be sustained
since such would allow the prosecution to prove an offense distantly
removed from the alleged date, thus substantially impairing the rights
of the accused to be informed of the charges against him (People vs.
Reyes)

8. Contents of information
a. Name of the accused

f.

Information may be amended as to the name of the accused, but

such amendment cannot be questioned for the first time on appeal
(People vs. Guevarra)

Place of commission

Conviction may be had even if it appears that the crime was

committed not at the place alleged, provided that the place of actual
commission was within the courts jurisdiction and accused was not
surprised by the variance between the proof and the information

Error of name of the offended party: if material to the case, it

necessarily affects the identification of the act charged. Conviction for
robbery cannot be sustained if there is a variance between the
allegation and the proof as to the ownership of the property stolen.

Qualifying and inherent aggravating circumstances need to be

alleged as they are integral parts of the crime. If proved, but not
alleged, become only generic aggravating circumstances.

b. Designation of offense by statute (or of section/subsection of

statute violated)

9. Amendment of information and Substitution of information,

distinguished

Only one offense charged, EXCEPT where law prescribes a single

punishment for various offenses.

Amendment
Substitution

If facts do not completely allege all the elements of the crime

charged, the info may be quashed; however, the prosecution is
allowed to amend the info to include the necessary facts (People vs.
Purisima)

Involves either formal or substantial

changes
Without leave of court if before plea

c. Acts or omissions complained of constituting the offense

3

Necessarily involves a substantial

change
Needs leave of court as original
information has to be dismissed

4. Libel (residence; or where first published)

Where only as to form, there is no need Another preliminary investigation is
for another preliminary investigation
entailed and accused has to plead
5. In exceptional cases, to ensure fair trial and impartial inquiry
and retaking of plea of accused
anew
Refers to the same offense charged or Requires or presupposes that new info
13. Special cases (who may prosecute)
which necessarily includes or is
involves a different offense which does
necessarily included in original
not include or is not included in the
a. Adultery and concubinage
charges, hence, substantial
original charge, hence, accused cannot
amendments to info after plea taken
claim double jeopardy
Only offended spouse can be complainant
cannot be made over objections of
accused for if original info is
withdrawn, accused could invoke
Both guilty parties must be included in complaint
double jeopardy
b. Crimes against chastity
10. After plea, amendment only as to matters of form, provided
With consent of the offended party, offended spouse, grandparents,
guardian, or state as parens patriae, in that order
1. Leave of court is obtained; and
Offended party, even if minor, has right to initiate the prosecution
of the case independently of parents, grandparents or guardian,
unless she is incompetent/incapable on grounds other than minority.

2. Amendment is not prejudicial to rights of accused

11. When amendment is only as to form

If offended party who is a minor fails to file the complaint, her

parents, grandparents or guardian may do so.

1. Neither affects or alters nature of offense charged

2. Charge does not deprive accused of a fair opportunity to
present his defense

In crimes against chastity, the consent of the victim is a

jurisdictional requirementretraction renders the information void
(People vs. Ocapan)

3. Does not involve a change in basic theory of prosecution

If complexed with a public crime, the provincial fiscal may sign the
complaint on his own

12. Exceptions to rule on venue

1. Felonies in Art. 2, RPC (cognizable by proper court in which
charge is first filed)

c. Defamation (consisting of imputation of offenses in [a] or [b])

2. Continuing offenses

Complainant must be offended party

3. Piracy which is triable anywhere

The offended party may intervene in the prosecution of the criminal

case because of her interest in it (Banal vs. Tadeo)
4

14. Procedure

May be filed after plea but before judgment on most of grounds for
motion to quash

1. Complaint filed in MTC or info filed in RTC where an essential

ingredient of the crime took place (territorial jurisdiction)

16. Duplicity of Offense (in information or complaint)

1. Amendment as a matter of right before plea

Defined as the joinder of separate and distinct offenses in one and

the same information/complaint

2. Amendment upon discretion of the court after plea

Remedy: file a motion to quash; failure is equivalent to a waiver
Inclusion of other accused is only a formal amendment which would
not be prejudicial to the accused and should be allowed (People vs.
CA)

Exception: when existing laws prescribe a single punishment

(complex crimes)

d. After plea and before judgment, if it appears there was a mistake

in charging proper offense, court shall dismiss original info upon the
filing of a corrected one, provided that the accused will not be placed
in double jeopardy (substitution)

Rule 111 Prosecution of Civil Action

Fiscal determines direction of prosecution; complainant must ask

fiscal if he wants to dismiss the case; the motion to dismiss must be
addressed to the court which has discretion over the disposition of the
case (Republic vs. Sunga)

Article 32 is a valid cause of a civil action for damages against

public officers who impair the Constitutional rights of citizens (Aberca
vs. Ver)

1. General Rule: The injured party may file a civil action independent
of the criminal proceeding to recover damages from the offender.

Even if the private prosecutor participates in the prosecution, if he

is not given the chance to prove damages, the offended party is not
barred from filing a separate civil action

Objection to the amendment of an information or complaint must be

raised at the time the amendment is made; otherwise, deemed to
have consented thereto.

2. Civil action for recovery of civil liability impliedly instituted,

EXCEPT

15. Remedies
a. Motion to quash

1. Waiver

May be filed after arraignment but before plea on the grounds

provided by the rules (generally, a flaw in the info)

2. Reservation of right to institute separate action

3. Institution of civil action prior to criminal action

If duplicity of offense charged is not raised in trial through a motion

to quash info, the right to question it is waived (People vs. Ocapan)
b. Motion to dismiss
5

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

BP Blg. 22 shall be deemed to necessarily include the corresponding
civil action, and no reservation to file such civil action separately shall
be allowed or recognized.

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

San Ildefonso Lines vs. CA past pronouncements of the SC that the

requirement in Rule 111 that a reservation be made prior to the
institution of an independent civil action is an unauthorized
amendment to substantive law is now no longer controlling. Far from
altering substantive rights, the primary purpose of the reservation
requirement is to avoid multiplicity of suits, to prevent delays, to clear
congested dockets, to simplify the work of the trial court, and in short,
the attainment of justice with the least expense and vexation to
parties-litigants.

Petition for suspension of criminal action is to be filed at any time

before prosecution rests.
5. Remedies
a. Reservation of right to institute separate civil proceedings to
recover civil liability arising from crime
Must be made before prosecution presents evidence

3. Civil action suspended when criminal action filed, EXCEPT

Action instituted only after final judgment in criminal action

1. Independent civil action (Arts. 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of NCC)

b. Petition to suspend the criminal action

2. Prejudicial civil action

May be filed upon existence of a prejudicial question in a pending

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)

Filed at any time before the prosecution rests

6. Extinction of penal action does not carry with it extinction of the
civil unless the extinction proceeds from a declaration in a final
judgment that the fact from which the civil might arise did not exist.

4. Prejudicial question arises when

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

Final judgment in civil absolving defendant from civil liability not a

bar to criminal action

2. The resolution of such issue will determine whether the criminal

action will proceed or not

7.

Filing fees:
1. Actual or compensatory damages filing fees not required

Requisites for a prejudicial question:

2. Moral, temperate and exemplary filing fees required

6

1. If alleged, fees must be paid by offended party upon filing of

complaint or information

4.

Who conducts Preliminary Investigation

1. Provincial or city fiscals and their assistants

1. If not alleged, filing fees considered a first lien on the

judgment

2. Judges of MTC and MCTC

Rule 112 Preliminary Investigation

3. National and regional state prosecutors

1. Preliminary investigation inquiry or proceeding to determine if

there is sufficient ground to engender a well-founded belief that a
crime cognizable by the RTC has been committed, and that the
respondent is probably guilty thereof, and should be held for trial

4. Such other officers as may be authorized by law

5. Duly authorized legal officers of COMELEC
1. The Ombudsman

A preliminary investigation is only necessary for an information to

be filed with the RTC; complaints may be filed with the MTC without
need of an information, which is merely recommendatory (Tandoc vs.
Resultan)

2. The PCGG, in cases of ill-gotten wealth

5. Procedure

Absence of a preliminary investigation is NOT a ground for a motion

to quash the information; an information filed without a preliminary
investigation is defective but not fatal; in its absence, the accused
may ask for one; it is the fiscals refusal to conduct a preliminary
investigation when the accused demands one which is a violation of
the rights of the accused (Doromal vs. Sandiganbayan). Court should
not dismiss the info, but hold the case in abeyance and either: (1)
conduct its own investigation; or (2) require the fiscal to hold a
reinvestigation.

a. If conducted prior to arrest

i.

Complainant files complaint with

(a) Provincial or city fiscal

(b) Regional or state prosecutor
(c) MTC or MCTC judge, excluding MTC judge of Metro Manila or
chartered cities

2. GENERAL RULE: The fiscal conducts the preliminary investigation

before filing an information with the RTC, EXCEPT where the accused is
lawfully arrested without a warrant and an inquest is conducted.

(d) Other offices authorized by law

1. Investigating officer either dismisses complaint or asks by
subpoena complainant and respondent to submit affidavits and
counter-affidavits

3. Right to Preliminary Investigation

A personal right and may be waived

1. If the investigating officer finds prima facie evidence, he

prepares an information and a resolution

Waived by failure to invoke the right prior to or at least at the time

of the plea
7

 i.e., if fiscal finds reasonable ground to believe that a crime has

been committed and accused is probably guilty thereof

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

Prima facie evidence is that evidence which, standing alone,

unexplained and uncontradicted, would be enough to merit a
conviction of the accused

1. Inquest conducted as follows

(a) Fiscal determines the validity of the arrest

iv. Otherwise, he recommends the dismissal of the complaint

(b) Fiscal determines existence of prima facie evidence based on the
statements of the complainant, arresting officer and witnesses

If the investigating officer is an MTC judge, and he finds that

probable cause exists and that there is a need to place the accused
under custody, then he may issue a warrant of arrest

(c) Fiscal either dismisses the complaint and orders the immediate
release of the accused, OR prepares and files an information

Flores vs. Sumaling What differentiates the present rule from the
previous one is that while before, it was mandatory for the
investigating judge to issue a warrant for the arrest of the accused if
he found probable cause, the rule now is that the investigating judges
power to order the arrest of the accused is limited to instances in
which there is a necessity for placing him 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 making any finding of a necessity to place
the accused in immediate custody to prevent a frustration of justice.

While fiscal has quasi-judicial discretion whether or not to file an

information, once it is filed with the court, the court acquires
jurisdiction giving it discretion over the disposition of the case and the
Sec. of Justice should refrain from entertaining petitions for review or
appeals from the decision of fiscal (Crespo vs. Mogul; Velasquez vs.
Undersecretary of Justice)
NOTE: Information may be filed by offended party, peace officer or
fiscal without preliminary investigation.

1. Investigating officer forwards records to the city fiscal or chief

state prosecutor

6. Remedies
a. Motion for preliminary investigation

1. City fiscal or state prosecutor either dismisses the

complaint or files the information in court

Filed when accused is arrested without warrant

Decision prevails over decision of the MTC judge

Must be with assistance of counsel and after waiving Art. 125, RPC

vii. Records will not form records of the case proper

b. Motion for preliminary investigation

Court on its own or on motion may order production of record

Filed within 5 days after accused learns an information against him

has been filed without a preliminary investigation

b. If conducted after warrantless arrest

c. Motion for re-investigation

8

d. Appeal to DOJ

Invitations are not arrests and are usually not unconstitutional,

but in some cases may be taken as commands (Babst vs. NBI);
however, the practice of issuing an invitation to a person who is
investigated in connection with an offense he is suspected to have
committed is considered as placing him under custodial
investigation. (RA 7438)

Filed upon denial of his motion for a preliminary investigation, on

the ground that his rights to due process of law were violated, ousting
the court of jurisdiction
e. Petition for prohibition
Filed with appellate court to stop the criminal proceedings

Warrants of arrest remain valid until arrest is effected, or the warrant

is lifted

Ordinarily, injunction will not lie but may be granted in certain cases

Arrest may be made at any time of the day or night

When prohibition proper to restrain criminal proceedings:

3. Warrantless arrests by a peace officer or a private person

1. When strong-arm tactics are used for vindictive purposes

(Salonga vs. Cruz-Pano)

a. When person to be arrested is committing, attempting or has

committed an offense

2. When the accused is deprived of his rights

3. When the statute on which the charge is based is null and void

b. When an offense has just been committed and the person making
the arrest has personal knowledge that the person to be arrested
committed it

4. When it will aid the administration of justice (Tatad vs.

Sandiganbayan)

Warrantless arrest anytime for a continuing offense like rebellion,

subversion (Umil vs. Ramos)

5. When multiplicity of suits will be avoided (Guingona vs. City

Fiscal)

The continuing crime, not the crime finally charged, needs only be
the cause of the arrest (Umil vs. Ramos)
c. When person to be arrested is an escaped detainee (either serving
sentence or with case pending)

Rule 113 Arrest

1. Arrest taking a person into custody in order that he may be
bound to answer for the commission of some offense, made by an
actual restraint of the person or by his submission to custody
2.

1. When a person lawfully arrested escapes

2. Bondsman, for purpose of surrendering the accused

General Rule: No person may be arrested without a warrant.

3. Accused attempts to leave country without court permission

Not all persons detained are arrested; only those detained to

answer for an offense.

4. Procedure
9

a. With warrant

May not do so except to do some service to humanity or justice

1. Complainant files application with affidavits attached

(5) No violence or unnecessary force may be used

2. Judge conducts ex parte preliminary examination to determine

probable cause

(6) Officer may summon assistance

(7) Person who escapes after arrest may be immediately pursued

In determining probable cause, judge must:

vi.

Person arrested is brought to nearest police station or jail

(1) Personally examine witness

b. Without warrant:
(2) Witness must be under oath
1. Person is arrested
(3) Examination must be reduced to writing (Luna vs. Plaza)
1. Person arrested may waive right to Art. 125, RPC and ask
for preliminary investigation or inquest

In determining probable cause, the judge may rely on findings by

responsible officer (Lim vs. Felix)

Fiscal is not judicial authority contemplated under Art. 125 (Sayo

vs. Chief of Police)

iii. Judge issues warrant of arrest

If without preliminary examination, considered irregular (Bagcal vs.
Villaraza)

1. Fiscal files info

5.

Requisites for a warrant of arrest:

iv. If peace officer is unable to serve warrant 10 days after issuance,

he must file a report and explanation with judge within 10 days

1. Probable cause

v. If warrant served

2. Signed by judge

(1) Person informed that he is being arrested

3. Specifically naming or particularly and sufficiently describing

person to be arrested

(2) Informed of cause of his arrest

John Doe warrants are void for being general warrants
(Pangandaman vs. Cesar)

(3) Officer may break door or window if admission to building is

refused

6. Remedies
(4) Person physically restrained
a. Petition for writ of habeas corpus
For private citizens making an arrest
10

 Filed with any court, to effect immediate release of the person

detained

Otherwise, the voluntary appearance of the person arrested by

filing a motion before the court would be deemed a submission to the
authority of the court, thus granting it whatever jurisdiction it lacked
over the person

Filed when a person is being illegally detained (without judicial

process), or was illegally arrested (void warrant or unlawful
warrantless arrest, or warrantless arrest beyond period with no
information filed)

Any irregularity in the arrest is cured when the petitioner submits

himself to the jurisdiction of the court, e.g., by filing for bail (Bagcal
vs. Villaraza)

Habeas corpus is not allowed when:

7. V.V. Mendoza, Rights to Counsel in Custodial Investigation
1. The person is in custody of an officer under process of law, and
Evolution of rights of the accused under custodial investigation
2. The court had jurisdiction to issue the process (Luna vs. Plaza)
1. All involuntary confession were inadmissible; accused had to
prove involuntariness

If an arrest is improper, the remedy is a motion for quashal of the

warrant of arrest and/or a motion to quash the information, not
habeas corpus (Ilagan vs. Enrile)

1. Involuntary confessions were inadmissible only if they

were false

Habeas corpus is no longer available after an information has been

filed, the information being the judicial process required by law (Ilagan
vs. Enrile)

2. Revert to exclusionary rule: any involuntary confession is

inadmissible

Habeas corpus is proper when a person is being restrained illegally,

e.g., imprisoned past maximum penalty allowed by law (Gumabon vs.
Director of Prisons)

1. Miranda rule: the accused must be informed of his

rights
1. To remain silent

b. Quashal of warrant of arrest

2. Against self-incrimination
Filed with court which issued the warrant of arrest when the warrant
of arrest is fatally flawed

3. To counsel

c. Motion to quash information

4. Definition of custodial investigation

questioned

Filed with court when information against the person arrested has
been filed

1. It begins only after arrest

Must be made in a special appearance before the court

questioning only its lack of jurisdiction over the person of the accused

2. Police investigations prior to arrest

are not covered
11

3. The rights may be waived, but the

rights to be informed of these rights,
i.e., to warning, may not be waived

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

4. Warning must not only be said, officer

must make sure the person arrested
understands them specifically

Bail applies to all persons detained, not just to those charged with
the offense (Herras vs. Teehankee)

5. Present rules

Court has power to prohibit person out on bail from leaving the
country (Manotoc, Jr. vs. CA)

1. Voluntary confessions are

admissible

Bail implies delivery of the accused to the sureties who, though not
holding him prisoner, may seize him and imprison him until they can
deliver him to court (US vs. Bonoan)

2. Test of voluntariness
determined on a case-to-case
basis

2. General Rule: All persons are entitled to bail as a matter of right,

except those charged with capital offenses.

3. Waiver of rights must not only

be with counsel but must be in
writing

Right to bail traditionally unavailable to military personnel facing

court martial, who are not in the same class as civilians (Comendador
vs. de Villa)

Confessions made without assistance of counsel are inadmissible as

evidence to incriminate the accused, but they may be used to
impeach the credibility of the accused, or they may be treated as
verbal admission of the accused through the testimony of the
witnesses (People vs. Molas)

Bail should be available regardless of other circumstances or the

merits of the case, if the health or the life of the detainee is in danger
(Dela Rama vs. Peoples Court)

Rule 114 Bail

Excessive bail is tantamount to denial of bail, which is

unconstitutional (Dela Camara vs. Enage)

1. Bail security given for the release of a person in custody of law,

furnished by him or a bondsman, conditioned upon his appearance
before any court as required under the following conditions:

3. When bail is a matter of right

Before or after conviction by MTC, MCTC, MJC

1. Undertaking effective upon approval and remains in force at all

stages until promulgation of judgment, unless sooner cancelled

Before conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by death,

reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment

2. Accused shall appear before court when required

4. When bail is discretionary (application filed with court where case

is pending)
12

1. Upon conviction by RTC of an offense not punishable by death,

reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment

1. Accused petitions for bail

2. Judge sets hearing to determine whether evidence of guilt is
strong

2. Provisional liberty under same circs. but during period to appeal

subject to consent of bondsman

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

Teehankee)

3. In case he has applied for probation after final judgment, he

may be allowed temporary liberty under his bail or
recognizance

1. Prosecution presents evidence

5. Procedure
a.

1. Court may not force fiscal to produce evidence (Herras

vs. Teehankee)

Offense charged is not capital:

2. If evidence is strong, bail is denied

i.

Accused applies for bail

1. Otherwise, judge sets bail and procedure for noncapital offense is followed

(1) Where information against him was filed or where case is pending
(2) Absent (1), in another branch of the same court within the
province or city where he is held

In capital crimes, judges discretion is limited to determining

strength of evidence and does not cover determining whether bail
should be allowed (Herras vs. Teehankee)

(3) If arrested in another province, city or municipality, file with the

RTC

Evidence must be strong that the accused is guilty of the capital

offense charged, not just of any offense (Bernardez vs. Valera)

(4) Absent (3), with the MTC

6. Bail bond an obligation under seal given by accused with one
or more sureties and made payable to proper officer with the condition
to be void upon performance by the accused of such acts as he may
legally be required to perform

1. Judge sets bail

1. Accused may move to reduce bail, and hearing will be set

7. Recognizance

2. Accused posts bail and deposits the same with the

Municipal/City/Provincial Treasurer or, if cash, with the
Collector of Internal Revenue

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

3. Accused is released
b. Offense charged is capital:

2. Does not require signature of accused for trial

13

3. Does not require signature of accused to be valid

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

8. Prosecution witnesses may be required to post bail to ensure their

appearance at the trial, except:

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

1. Substitution of info (see R110, 14)

2. Court believes that material witness may not appear at the trial

4. Youthful offender held for physical and mental examination, trial

or appeal, if unable to furnish bail

9. When bail required under RA 6036 (violation of ordinance, light

felony, criminal offense not higher that 6 month imprisonment
and/or P2000 fine, or both)
1. a.

11. Cancellation of bail

Caught in flagrante

a. Upon application with the court and due notice to the fiscal

2. Confessed to commission of offense unless repudiated (force

and intimidation)

1. Accused surrenders back to custody

1. Accused dies

3. Previously escaped, evaded sentence or jumped bail

b. Automatic cancellation

4. Violation of Sec. 2 (fails to report to clerk of court periodically

under his recognizance)

1. Case is dismissed
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

1. Accused is acquitted
2. Accused is convicted and surrenders for execution of
judgment

6. Committed offense while on parole or under conditional pardon

12. When bail cancelled or denied: after RTC imposes imprisonment
exceeding 6 years, but not more than 20 years, and:

7. Previously pardoned by municipal or city mayor for violation of

ordinance for at least 2 times

1. Accused is a recidivist, quasi-recidivist, habitual delinquent or

guilty of the aggravating circumstance of reiteration;

10. Instances when accused may be released on recognizance:

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. Provisionally escaped, evaded sentence, violated provisions of

bail;
14

3. Committed offense while on probation, parole, or conditional

pardon;

2. Petition for bail, when the offense charged is a capital offense

4. Probability of flight; or

For judge to set hearing for the determination of strength of

evidence of guilt

5. Undue risk that during appeal, he may commit another crime

16. Circumstances to be considered in fixing amount of bail:

13. When bail is forfeited

1. Financial ability of accused to give bail;

a. Accused fails to appear before court when required

2. Nature and circumstances of offense;

30 days for bondsman to show cause why judgment should not be

rendered against him

3. Penalty of offense charged;

4. Character and reputation of accused;

b. Bondsman fails to produce him within 30 days

5. Age and health of accused
c. Bondsman fails to satisfactorily explain to the court why accused
did not appear when first required to do so

6. Weight of evidence against accused

Sureties guarantee only appearance of the accused, not his conduct

(US vs. Bonoan)

7. Probability of accused appearing for trial;

8. Forfeiture of other bonds;

Sureties exonerated if appearance made impossible by an act of

God, the obligee or the law (US vs. Bonoan)

9. Fact that accused was a fugitive from justice when arrested;

and

14. Provisional forfeiture

10.Pendency of other cases in which the accused is under bond

1. Within 30 days, produce the body or give reason for nonproduction AND

17. Notes:

2. Explain satisfactorily the absence of the accused when first

required to appear

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.

15. Remedies
1. Application for bail, when bail can be availed of as a matter of
right

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)
15

3. Accused out on bail may be re-arrested if he attempts to depart

from the Philippines without prior court permission (warrantless
arrest allowed).

4. Who is deceased, out of or cannot with due diligence be found

in the RP
1. Given in another proceeding

Rule 115 Rights of Accused

2. With the same parties
1. Right of the accused under the Rules
3. Same subject matter
a. To be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable
doubt

4. Opportunity to cross-examine

In an appeal from a conviction, the accused shall again be

presumed innocent until and unless his conviction is affirmed (Castillo
vs. Felix)

Prosecution has no privilege to withhold the identity of informers

when such informer was crucial in the operation itself; failure to
present the informer is a denial of the right to confront the witness
which merits the reversal of the conviction (People vs. Bagano)

b. To be informed of the nature and cause of charges

g. To have compulsory process to secure witnesses and evidence in
his behalf

The right must be substantially complied with; arraignment and

later proceedings must be in a language the accused understands
(People vs. Crisologo)

h. To have a speedy, impartial and public trial

c. To be present at every stage of proceedings, subject to waiver by

bail

Unreasonable postponements of trial amounts to a denial of the

right to a speedy trial, entitling the accused to mandamus to compel
dismissal of the case, or to habeas corpus if he is detained

If an accused escapes, he waives this right and merits a trial in

absentia; the accused forfeits his rights to be notified of proceedings
in the future and to adduce evidence in his behalf (People vs. Salas)

i.

To have the right of appeal

2. Rights of the accused under the Constitution

1. To testify as witness on his own behalf, subject to crossexamination on matters covered by direct examination; not to
be prejudiced by his silence

a. To due process
b. Against self-incrimination

2. Not to be compelled to be a witness against himself

Right is limited to testimonies; ocular inspection of the body may be

allowed (Villaflor vs. Summers)

3. To confront and examine the witnesses against him, including

the right to use in evidence testimony of a witness

16

 Being informed of rights means a meaningful transmission of

information, without which confession made by the accused is
inadmissible (People vs. Nicandro)

1. Same as that in previous case

1. Necessarily includes or is included in the previous case

Confessions obtained through coercion are inadmissible (People vs.

Opida)

2. An attempt or frustration of the offense in previous case

1. An offense lesser than that charged to which the
accused pleaded guilty with the consent of the
fiscal and the offended party

Right against self-incrimination and to counsel do not apply during

custodial investigation (People vs. Ayson)
During trial, the right against self-incrimination takes the following
form:

4. Exceptions to double jeopardy

1. The offense was made graver by supervening events

1. Accused may refuse to testify

2. The facts constituting the graver offense were only discovered

after the filing of the earlier information

2. If he testifies, he may refuse to answer those questions which

may incriminate him in ANOTHER offense

No double jeopardy if the new fact which justified the new charge
arose only after arraignment and conviction (People vs. City Court)

c. Against double jeopardy

d. To be heard by himself and counsel

No double jeopardy where the trial was a sham since there was no
competent court (Galman vs. Sandiganbayan)

3. Double jeopardy
No double jeopardy if first case was dismissed with consent of the
accused (Caes vs. IAC)

1. First jeopardy must have attached prior to the first

2. First jeopardy attached and terminated

There is double jeopardy if a person is charged twice under different

penal statutes for the same acts (People vs. Relova)

3. Valid complaint or information

1. Competent court with jurisdiction

c. Plea of guilty to a lesser offense without the consent of the fiscal

and the offended party

2. Accused had pleaded

5. Remedies
1. Motion to quash

3. Action ended in conviction, acquittal or termination

without the consent of the accused

2. Motion to dismiss
c.

Offense charged in later case is:

17

 Both filed on the ground of violation of accuseds rights, thereby

ousting the court of jurisdiction

No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for the same

offense.

6. NOTES:

If an act is punished by a law or ordinance, conviction or acquittal

under either shall constitute a bar to another prosecution for the same
act.

Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 1

Rule 116 Arraignment and Plea

No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due

process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of
the laws.

1. Procedure

Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 14

1. Court informs accused of his right to counsel and asks him if he

wants one

1. No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without

due process of law.

2. Court appoints counsel de oficio if accused has none

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.

If no such member of the available, any person who is a resident of

the province, of good repute for probity and ability to defend accused
c. Court gives counsel time to confer with accused at least an hour
before arraignment
Period allowed for counsel de oficio to confer with accused must be
substantially complied with; if not, case may be remanded for rearraignment (People vs. Gonzaga)

However, after arraignment, trial may proceed notwithstanding the

absence of the accused provided that he has been duly notified and
that his failure to appear is unjustifiable.

1. Accused given a copy of the information, which is read to him in

a language he understands

Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 16

2. Accused is asked whether he pleads guilty or not guilty

All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition of their cases
before all judicial, quasi-judicial, or administrative bodies.

3. Accused files a motion to quash or makes plea

Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 17

4. Accused personally makes his plea

No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.

5. Plea is entered into record

Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 21

18

6. If accused makes plea of not guilty, counsel has at least 2 days

to prepare for trial

e. Guilty to a capital offense

Court conducts searching inquiry to determine if accused was aware
of the charges, of his plea, and its consequences

People vs. Agbayani the right for 2 days to prepare must be

expressly demanded. Only when so demanded does denial thereof
constitute reversible error and ground for new trial. Further, such
right may be waived, expressly or impliedly.

Court requires prosecution to present evidence to prove guilt of

accused and determine his degree of culpability, and accused may still
establish presence of mitigating circumstances in his favor

NOTE, HOWEVER, under SC Circular 38-98 (implementing Speedy

Trial Act of 1997), accused must be given at least 15 days to prepare
for trial, which shall commence within 30 days from receipt of Pre-Trial
Order.
j.

f.

Guilty to a non-capital offense

Court receives evidence from the parties to determine penalty to

impose

Case proceeds to pre-trial, trial or hearing, depending on the plea

Plea of guilty not necessarily followed by conviction. Upon receipt of

exculpatory evidence (if accused pleaded guilty), trial court should
consider the plea withdrawn and in its place, order the plea of not
guilty

Statement in the judgment that the accused was arraigned and

pleaded is sufficient; the manner of statement of such fact is
immaterial (People vs. Cariaga)
2. Kinds of plea
1. No plea a plea of not guilty shall be entered

Plea of guilty waives only defects which may be taken advantage of

by motion to quash or by plea in abatement; cannot cure jurisdictional
defects.

2. Conditional plea of guilt a plea of not guilty shall be entered

3. Effects

3. Not guilty case proceeds to trial or pre-trial

a. Entry of plea will waive

4. Guilty to a lesser offense if fiscal and offended party consents,

conviction under offense charged for purposes of double
jeopardy

1. Right to question illegality of the arrest

2. Right to question any irregularity in the preliminary
investigation

5. Info may be amended

3. Right to file a motion to quash
1. Case goes to trial
b. Improvident plea of guilty may be changed to not guilty any time
before judgment is rendered

2. 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
19

c. A plea of not guilty may not be changed to guilty, as doing so

would only spare the prosecution of presenting evidence and still
result in the conviction of the accused.

General Rule: Before entering plea; all grounds not raised deemed
waived
Exception: The following grounds may be used in MTQ even after plea

4. Remedies
1. No offense charged
a. Motion for specification
2. Lack of jurisdiction over the offense charged
May be filed any time before plea, even after a MTQ
3. Extinction of the offense or of the penalty
Filed when the information is insufficient in form or is generally
worded, that a Bill of Particulars is necessary to clarify the acts for
which the accused is being charged

4. Double jeopardy
3. Grounds

b. Motion to quash

a. Information does not conform to prescribed form

May be filed at anytime before plea is entered

For the info to charge a complex crime, it is not necessary that it be

defined by law, only that it alleges that one offense was necessary to
commit the other (People vs. Alagao)

Based on grounds provided by the rules

c. Motion to suspend arraignment

b. Court has no jurisdiction

Filed when the accused seems mentally unsound or if there is a
prejudicial question in a pending civil case

1. No territorial jurisdiction

d. Motion to withdraw an improvident plea of guilt

2. No jurisdiction over offense charged may be raised at any

time; no waiver considered even upon failure to move to quash
on such ground

May be filed at any time before judgment of conviction becomes

final, when it can be shown that the accused was not aware of the
significance of pleading guilty to the charges

3. No jurisdiction over person of the accused

Rule 117 Motion to Quash

The court gained jurisdiction over the person of the accused when
he voluntarily appeared for the pre-suspension hearing (Layosa vs.
Rodriguez)

1.
Motion to quash a hypothetical admission that even if all the
facts alleged were true, the accused still cannot be convicted due to
other reasons

c. Accused would be put in double jeopardy

2. When to file Motion to Quash

Bars another prosecution

20

 No waiver

g. Information contains allegations which, if true, would be a legal

excuse or justification

No double jeopardy if first case was dismissed with the consent of

the accused (Que vs. Cosico), unless ground for dismissal is: (a) denial
of right to speedy trial; or (b) insufficiency of evidence.

h. Officer who filed the information had no authority

Presentation of evidence cannot cure an invalid information (People
vs. Asuncion)

If the first case was dismissed due to a deficient information, then

there was no valid information and there could be no double jeopardy
(Caniza vs. People)

NOTE: Court will consider no other grounds other than those raised,
EXCEPT lack of jurisdiction over offense charged.

Cudia vs CA it should be the Provincial Prosecutor of Pampanga,

not the City Prosecutor, who should prepare informations for offenses
committed within Pampanga but outside Angeles City. An information
must be prepared and presented by the prosecuting attorney or
someone authorized by law. If not, the court does not acquire
jurisdiction. Although failure to file a motion to quash the information
is a waiver of all objections to it insofar as formal objections to
pleadings are concerned, questions relating to want of jurisdiction may
be raised at any stage of the proceedings. Moreover, since the
complaint or information was insufficient because it was so defective
in form or substance that conviction upon it could not have been
sustained, its dismissal without the consent of the accused cannot be
pleaded as prior jeopardy, and will not be a bar to a second
prosecution.

4. Requisites of Double jeopardy

a. Valid information or complaint, sufficient in form and substance
b. Before court of competent jurisdiction
Doctrine of Jurisdiction by Estoppel: depends upon whether the
lower court actually had jurisdiction or not. If it had no jurisdiction, but
the case was tried and decided upon the theory that it had
jurisdiction, the parties are not barred on appeal, from assailing such
jurisdiction, for the same must exist as a matter of law, and may not
be conferred by consent of the parties or by estoppel. However, if the
lower court had jurisdiction, and the case was heard and decided upon
a given theory, such, for instance, as that the court had no
jurisdiction, the party who induced it to adopt such theory will not be
permitted, on appeal, to assume an inconsistent position that the
lower court had jurisdiction. Here, the principle of estoppel applies.
The rule that jurisdiction is conferred by law, and does not depend
upon the will of the parties, has no bearing thereon.

d. More than one offense was charged, EXCEPT where law prescribes
single punishment for various offenses
e. Facts alleged do not constitute an offense
May be raised at any time

c. Accused had pleaded

No waiver

d. Conviction, acquittal, or dismissal or termination of case without

consent of accused

For charge to be complete, it is necessary to state that it was

exempted from any amnesty existing at the time
f.

e. Bar to offense charged, attempt to commit the same or

necessarily includes or is necessarily included

Criminal action or liability has been extinguished

21

 Conviction for physical injuries through reckless imprudence

constitutes double jeopardy to the charge of damage to property
through reckless imprudence.

3. Extinction of the offense or of the penalty

4. Double jeopardy

5. Procedure

Rule 118 Pre-Trial

1. MTQ filed

1. Plea bargaining process whereby the accused and the

prosecution in a criminal case work out a mutually satisfactory
disposition of the case subject to court approval. It usually involves
the defendants pleading guilty to a lesser offense or to only some of
the counts of a multi-count indictment in return for a lighter sentence
than that for the greater charge.

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:

Under Speedy Trial Act of 1997, in all criminal cases cognizable by

the MTC, MCTC, MeTC, RTC and Sandiganbayan, pretrial is mandatory.

1. Double jeopardy OR

Under SC Circular 38-98, implementing the Speedy Trial Act of

1997, an accused may plea guilty to a lesser offense only if said
offense is necessarily included in the offense charged.

2. Extinction of criminal liability

6. Remedies

2. Stipulation of facts

1. Motion to dismiss if certain grounds were not raised or denied

in a MTQ

Facts which both parties and respective counsels agree on as

evidenced by their signatures; these facts need not be proved by
evidence in trial

2. Trial
If there was really no basis for the info, then such could be proved
in the trial

Stipulation is inadmissible if unsigned by either accused or counsel;

a later memo of confirmation, signed only by counsel, cannot cure
defect (Fule vs. CA)

Upon denial of a MTQ, the proper remedy is to go on trial and later

to appeal, if necessary; mandamus or certiorari will only be granted if
there is not other plain, simple and adequate remedy

3. Pre-trial order binds the parties, limits the trial to matters not yet
disposed of, and controls the course of action during the trial

7. Failure to move to quash or to allege any ground therefor deemed

a waiver of such grounds, except:

4. Procedure

1. Failure to charge an offense

1. Judge must calendar pre-trial

2. Lack of jurisdiction over the offense charged

2. Either party may waive the pre-trial

22

3. If court appoints counsel de oficio, counsel has at least 2 days

to prepare

HOWEVER, under SC Circular 38-98, accused must be given at least

15 days to prepare for trial, which shall commence within 30 days
from receipt of Pre-Trial Order.

4. In the pre-trial conference

1. Accused may move that his witnesses be examined
5. Plea bargaining
2. Defense witnesses examined by any judge or lawyer
6. Stipulation of facts
3. Prosecution witnesses, if they would be unable to attend trial,
may be examined by the judge handling the case

7. Marking of evidence (does not imply conceding to its

admissibility or credibility)
8. Waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence

4. Trial continues from day to day, unless postponed for a just

cause

9. Other matters which will promote a fair and expeditious trial

5. Prosecution presents evidence

e. Judge issues pre-trial order

Presentation

Rule 119 Trial

Testimonies: direct examination

1. In trial, the defense tries

Cross-examination
Re-cross

1. To assail the admissibility of evidence which prove the elements

of the offense charged

Offer
2. To assail the credibility of such evidence
1. Accused may move for discharge
3. To prove another version, possibly admitting certain evidence of
the prosecution and adding other evidence to cast reasonable
doubt

2. Prosecution rests
3. Defense may, with or without leave of court, file a demurrer to
evidence

Even in summary procedure, the judge cannot base his decision

simply on affidavits; he must give the defendant the chance to crossexamine (Combate vs. San Jose)

4. Defense presents evidence

2. Procedure

5. Defense rests

a. Parties notified of date of trial 2 days before trial date (R119, 1)

6. Prosecution presents rebuttal evidence

23

7. Defense presents rebuttal evidence

3. Witness can be had at the time to which the trial has been
deferred

8. Trial is closed; case is submitted for judgment

4. No similar evidence could be obtained
3. When mistake made in charging proper offense
7. Requisites to discharge of an accused as State Witness
1. If Accused cannot be convicted of offense charged or offense
necessarily included therein

1. Testimony of accused absolutely needed

2. Accused detained, not discharged

2. No other direct evidence available EXCEPT his testimony

3. Original case dismissed upon filing of proper information

3. Testimony can be corroborated on material points

Example: Charged with theft. At trial, appears that offense is

estafa. The prosecution can ask for the dismissal of the info in order
to file a new one for estafa. No Double Jeopardy because no valid info
in the first case.

4. Accused does not appear to be most guilty

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

4. Application for examination of witnesses for accused before trial

Discharge of accused, when not all the requisites were met, cannot
be revoked as long as he testified according to what was expected of
him (People vs. Aninon)

1. Sick or infirm; unable to attend trial

2. Resides more than 100 km. from means of trial; no means to
attend

8. Remedies
a. Motion for separate trials

5.

Application (prosecution)
Filed by the fiscal to try several accused separately
1. Sick or infirm
Granted at the courts discretion
2. Has to leave the RP with indefinite date of returning
May also be ordered by the court motu proprio

6. Requisites for postponement due to absence of a witness

b. Motion to consolidate
1. Witness is really material and appears to the court to be so
Upon the courts discretion, separate charges may be tried in one
single case if the offenses charged arise form the same facts or form
part of a series of similar offenses

2. Party who applies for postponement has not been guilty of

neglect
24

 Court allowed consolidation of rape cases substantially committed

in the same manner (People vs. David)

1. If the demurrer was made with leave of court, defense gets to

present evidence

c. Motion for continuance filed to postpone trial for just cause

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

d. Motion to exclude public

Excluding parties, counsels and court personnel

Case may also be dismissed motu proprio

May also be ordered by court motu proprio

g. Motion to reopen

e. Motion for discharge

Filed after the case is submitted for judgment but before judgment
is actually rendered

Filed before the prosecution rests

To allow either side to present additional evidence, if such could not

be found before

Hearing to determine existence of requisites for discharge

Granted on discretion of the judge

Prosecution will present evidence and the sworn statement of the

proposed state witness

The accused cannot move to reopen the case to allow him to

adduce evidence in his behalf when his failure to adduce them during
the trial was his own fault (People vs. Cruz)

Evidence adduced in this said hearing automatically form part of

trial; however, if court denies motion for discharge, his sworn
statement shall be inadmissible in evidence.

Rule 120 Judgment

Discharge of the accused has the effect of acquittal, unless accused

fails or refuses to testify against his co-accused in accordance with his
statement (which formed the basis for his discharge)
f.

1. Judgment adjudication by the court that the accused is guilty or

not guilty of the offense charged, and the imposition of the proper
penalty and civil liability provided by law on the accused

Demurrer to evidence

2. General Rule: If the accused is found not guilty, he will be

acquitted and the acquittal immediately becomes final and executory.
If the accused is found guilty, penalty and civil liability will be imposed
on him.

May be made after the prosecution rests its case

If the court finds the prosecutions evidence insufficient, the case
will be dismissed

3. Accused may be convicted of

Otherwise, if demurrer denied

1. The offense charged

25

2. A lesser offense necessarily included in the offense charged

2. If judgment is of acquittal

Accused cannot be convicted for an offense graver than that

charged (People vs. Guevarra)

3. It becomes final and executory

4. It bars subsequent prosecution for the same offense

4. Contents
c. If judgment is of conviction, remedy is to file:
1. Written in official language
1. Motion for reconsideration
2. Personally prepared and signed by the judge
2. Motion for new trial
3. Contains facts proved
3. Notice of appeal
4. Contains law upon which judgment is based
Or else, judgment becomes final and is entered in the book of
Judgments

In case of conviction, judgment must state:

1. Legal qualification of offense and aggravating and mitigating
circumstances

6.

When judgment in a criminal case becomes final:

1. After lapse of period for perfecting an appeal; or

2. Level of participation
2. When sentence partially or totally satisfied or served; or
3. Penalty imposed
3. Accused has expressly waived in writing his right to appeal,
EXCEPT in cases of automatic review where death penalty is
imposed

4. Civil liability for damages, unless right to separate civil action

has been reserved
In case of acquittal, judgment must state:

4. Accused has applied for probation

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

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

1. Before judgment had been final (otherwise double jeopardy);

2. Basis of liability
2. Before appeal had been perfected; or
5. Procedure
3. To correct clerical errors in the judgment
1. Judge reads judgment in presence of accused
8. Remedies
26

a. Appeal

4. Old judgment may be set aside and a new one rendered

Filed within 15 days of promulgation of judgment

10. Notes:

Period is interrupted by filing of a motion for new trial or

reconsideration

Suspension of sentence for youthful offenders after conviction,

minor is committed to custody and care of DSWD or any training
institution until reaches 21 years of age, or a shorter period

On motion of accused or at its own instance with consent of the

accused

Probation disposition under which a defendant after conviction

and sentences, is released subject to conditions imposed by the court
and to the supervision of a probation officer

b. Motion for reconsideration

Notice should be given to the fiscal

Parole the conditional release of an offender from a penal or

correctional institution after he has served the minimum period of his
prison sentence under the continued custody of the state and under
conditions that permit his reincarceration if he violated the conditions
of his release

c. Motion for new trial

Rule 121 New Trial or Reconsideration

Notice should be given to the fiscal

1. Reopening of the case

Filed when there are errors of law or fact in the judgment

Shall require no further proceedings

1. Made by the court before judgment is rendered in the exercise

of sound discretion

Filed on the following grounds:

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

2. Does not require consent of accused

3. May be made at the instance of either party who can thereafter
present additional evidence

ii. New evidence has been found which could not have been found
before and which could change the judgment

2. Motion for new trial

9. Procedure for new trial

1. Hearing shall be set and held

1. Filed after judgment is rendered but before the finality thereof

2. All evidence not alleged to be in error shall stand

2. At the instance or with the consent of the accused

3. New evidence will be introduced

3. The prosecution can move only for the reconsideration of the

judgment but cannot present additional evidence
27

3.

Motion for New Trial is denied if:

In reopening, no judgment has yet been rendered, although the

hearing may have already been closed

1. Only impeaching evidence is sought to be introduced as the

court had already passed upon issue of credibility

7. Motion for Reconsideration

2. Only corroborative evidence is offered

Grounds are errors of law or fact in judgment, which require no

further proceedings.

3. Prisoner admits commission of crime with which accused is

charged (facility with which such confession can be obtained
and fabricated)

8. Effects of Granting Motion for New Trial or Reconsideration

a. Based on error of law or irregularities during trial:

4. Alleged new evidence is inherently improbable and could easily

be concocted

Proceedings and evidence not affected by irregularities stand, and

those affected are set aside. Court may allow introduction of new
evidence

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

b. Based on newly discovered evidence:

Evidence already taken shall stand; new evidence taken with the old

4. New Trial vs. Reconsideration

Rule 122 Appeal

Motion for recon is based on the grounds of errors of law in the

judgment is court is not asked to reopen the case for further
proceedings, but to reconsider its findings or conclusions of law and
make them conformable to the law applicable to the case on the
judgment the court has to render anew.

1. Procedure
a. Filed with RTC, if original case was with MTC
Notice served to lower court and to adverse party

5. New Trial vs. Modification of Judgment

b. Filed with the CA or SC, if original case was with RTC

In New Trial, irregularities are expunged from the record and/or new
evidence is introduced. In modification of judgment, no new hearings
or proceedings of any kind or change in the record or evidence. A
simple modification is made on the basis of what is on the record.

i. With CA: notice of appeal with court, and with copy on adverse
party
If CA is of opinion that penalty should be reclusion perpetua or
higher, it shall render judgment imposing said penalty, but refrain
from entering judgment and then certify the case and the entire
record thereof to the SC for review (R124, 13)

6. New Trial vs. Reopening of the Case

New trial presupposes that existence of a judgment to be set aside
upon the granting of a new trial
28

 CA may reverse, affirm, or modify judgment of RTC, or remand case

for new trial or re-trial, or dismiss the case

3. When appeal by prosecution from order of dismissal of criminal

case will not result in double jeopardy

If RTC decided case in appellate jurisdiction: Petition for Review

1. Dismissal made upon motion or with express consent of the

accused

ii. With SC: notice of appeal where penalty imposed is life

imprisonment, or lesser penalty involving offenses committed on the
same occasion, or arising out of same occurrence where graver
penalty of death is available but life imprisonment is imposed; all
other cases, by petition for review on certiorari

2. Dismissal is not an acquittal 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

If death penalty, automatic review

iii. Withdrawal of appeal

4. When serving sentence, remedy is to petition for habeas corpus

May be made at any time before judgment on the appeal is
rendered

1. Filed when the law under which the accused was convicted is
repealed or declared unconstitutional

Lower court judgment becomes final

2. When a later judgment is rendered acquitting others for similar
circumstances

Case remanded for execution of judgment

Otherwise, equal protection is violated

Once notice of appeal is filed, cannot be validly withdrawn to give

way for a Motion for Recon or a Motion for New Trial, since the filing of
the notice perfected the appeal, and the trial court loses its power to
modify or set aside the judgment. The only valid withdrawal of an
appeal is where the accused decides to serve his sentence.

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)

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

NOTE: When dismissal is capricious, certiorari lies and no double

jeopardy since validity and not correctness of dismissal is being
challenged.

2. Civil appeal by offended party shall not affect criminal aspect of

judgment

Rule 126 Search and Seizure

3. Execution of judgment on appellant will be stayed upon

perfection of appeal

1. Search warrant an order in writing issued in the name of the

People of the Philippines, signed by a judge and directed to a peace
29

officer, commanding him to search for personal property described

therein and bring it before the court

3. Person clearly shows the intent to relinquish such right

Cannot be issued to look for evidence (Uy Khetin vs. Villareal)

No waiver against unreasonable search and seizure when one

compromises the criminal proceedings (Alvarez vs. CFI)

Seizing objects to be used as evidence is equivalent to forcing one

to be a witness against himself (Uy Khetin vs. Villareal)

There is no waiver of right when evidence of coercion is present

(Roan vs. Gonzales)

For a warrant to be valid, it must meet the requirements set by law

(Burgos vs. Chief of Staff)

3. Requisites of a valid search warrant

a. Issued upon probable cause

Tapping conversations is equivalent to a search and seizure (US vs.

Katz)

Probable cause such facts and circumstances which would lead a

reasonably prudent man to believe that a crime has been committed
and the thing to be searched for and seized is in the place to be
searched

2. General Rule: No search or seizure can be conducted unless it is

authorized by a search warrant. Evidence gathered from an illegal
search and seizure is inadmissible.

b. Probable cause is personally determined by the issuing judge

Warrantless searches are illegal, unreasonable and unconstitutional
(Alvarez vs. CFI)

Hence, signed by him

It is not the police action which is impermissible, but the procedure

and unreasonable character by which it is exercised (Guazon vs. de
Villa)

By any RTC, to be served anywhere in the country, for an offense

which occurred anywhere in the country (Malaloan vs. CA)
c. Issuing judge personally examined, in the form of searching
questions, the appellant and his witness and took down their written
depositions

Court gains jurisdiction over items seized by a valid search warrant

and returned to it, and such is not an unconstitutional deprivation of
property (Villanueva vs. Querubin)

d. Search warrant particularly describes or identifies the property to

be seized

Evidence from an illegal search may be used as evidence, if no

objection is raised (Stonehill vs. Diokno)

Property which men may lawfully possess may not be the object of
a search warrant (Uy Khetin vs. Villareal)

Right against unreasonable search and seizure may be waived, but

for the waiver to be effective:
1. The right must exist

Nature of goods may allow description to be general or not too

technical (Alvarez vs. CFI)

2. Person must be aware of the right

e. Particularly describes the place to be searched

30

f.

It shall issue only for one specific offense

When complainants knowledge is hearsay, affidavits of witnesses

are necessary (Alvarez vs. CFI)

Otherwise, cannot be said to have issued upon probable cause

(Asian Surety vs. Herrera)

b. Judge conducts ex parte preliminary examination of complainant

and witnesses under oath to determine probable cause

Absence of specific offense makes impossible determination of

probable cause (Stonehill vs. Diokno)

Judge must ask probing questions, not just repeat facts in the
affidavit (Roan vs. Gonzales)

g. Was not issued for more than 10 days prior to a search made
pursuant thereto (search warrant becomes void after 10 days)

c. Judge issues search warrant good for 10 days

h. Indicates time, if to be served at night

d. Peace officer in presence of occupant, members of the family OR 2

witnesses of sufficient age and discretion residing in the same locality

4. When a search warrant may be said to particularly describe the

thing to be seized

Search may last for more than a day as long as it is part of the
same search for the same purpose and of the same place (Uy Khetin
vs. Villareal)

1. Description is as specific as circumstances allow

e. Peace officer leaves receipt with occupant at place searched

2. Expresses a conclusion of fact by which the warrant officer may

be guided

f. Peace officer files return of search warrant and inventory, and

surrenders items seized to receiving court (not necessarily court which
issued the warrant)

3. Things described are limited to those which bear a direct

relation to the offense for which the warrant is issued

Items seized illegally must remain in custodia legis pending

resolution of the case (Roan vs. Gonzales)

5. Procedure
a. Complainant files application, attaches affidavits

6. Remedies from an unlawful search

Oath requires that the person taking it personally knows the facts of
the case (People vs. Sy Juco)

1. MTQ the warrant

2. Motion to suppress as evidence the objects illegally taken

Affidavits submitted must state that the premises is occupied by the

person against whom the warrant is issued, that the objects to be
seized are fruits or means of committing a crime, and that they belong
to the same person, thus, not affecting third persons (People vs. Sy
Juco)

3. Return of property illegally seized

7. When a search may be validly conducted without a warrant
1. Without consent of person searched
31

2. When the search is incident to a lawful arrest

1. Properties used in the commission of the crime

3. Personal knowledge of the arresting person (Posadas vs. CA)

2. Fruits or proceeds thereof

4. Limited to:

3. Property which may furnish the arrestee with a weapon against

the arresting person

(1) Immediate time of arrest

4. Property which may be used as evidence at the trial
(2) Immediate vicinity of the arrest
9. NOTES:
(3) Weapons and things which may be used as proof of offense
charged (Nolasco vs. Pano)

Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 2

iii. Subject in an offense which is mala prohibita cannot be summarily

seized (Roan vs. Gonzales)

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, papers, houses

and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever
nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant
or warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable cause to be
determined personally by the judge after examination under oath or
affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and
particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or
things to be seized.

iv. May extend beyond arrestee to include premises and surrounding

under his immediate control
1. Border searches (customs, mail and airport)
2. Vessels and aircrafts for violation of Tariff and Customs Code,
EXCEPT dwelling houses

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.

3. Plain view
4. Moving vehicle

2. Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding

section shall be inadmissible for any purpose in the proceeding.

5. Hot pursuit
6. Stop-and-frisk, reasonable check-points

Rule 127 Provisional Remedies in Criminal Cases

7. Private searches with no state action (People vs. Marti)

1. Attachment as provisional remedy in criminal cases

8. Inspection of building and premises for enforcement of fire,

sanitary and building regulations

1. Accused is about to abscond from RP

8. Person making the arrest may take from the arrestee

32

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

1. Qualifying and aggravating circumstances is now required to be

alleged in the complaint or information.
The failure to specifically allege either circumstance, even if proved,
cannot be taken into account.

3. Accused has concealed, removed or disposed of his property, or

is about to do so

1. Rape is removed from the list of private offenses since it is now

classified as a crime against persons under R.A. 8353.

4. Accused resides outside the RP

2. Any amendment before plea, which

Salient changes in the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure

1. Downgrades the nature of the offense charged in the

complaint or information OR

Rule 110 Prosecution of Offenses

2. Excludes any accused from the complaint or information

1. The institution of allcriminal actions, including cases governed
by the Rule on Summary Procedure, shall now be the same.

can only be made upon motion by the prosecutor, with

1. Preliminary investigation is now required for an offense

punishable by imprisonment of at least 4 years, 2 months
and 1 day.

1. Notice to the offended party AND

ii. With leave of court

Except lawful warrantless arrests provided for under Section 7.

The court shall state its reasons in resolving the motion and copies
of its order shall be furnished all parties, especially the offended party.

Thus, preliminary investigation is required for all offenses cognizable

by the RTC and for some cases cognizable by the MTC.

This amendment is intended to prevent the prosecution from

abusing the process of amendment before plea by dropping any of the
accused from the information or reducing the offense charged,
whether the accused had been arraigned or not and whether it was
due to a reinvestigation of the fiscal or a review by the Secretary of
Justice (Crespo vs. Mogul).

3. The institution of the criminal action shall interrupt the running of

the prescriptive period of the offense except for offenses punishable
by special laws.
This is in accordance with the ruling in Zaldivia vs. Reyes, which
stated that the Rules of Court cannot amend special laws, and under
Act no. 3326**, the prescriptive period for violation of special laws and
municipal ordinances was interrupted only upon the filing of the
complaint or information in court.

Rule 111 Prosecution of Civil Action

33

1. Only the civil liability arising from the offense charged is deemed
instituted (not merely impliedly) with the criminal unless the
offended party:

Thus, even if a counterclaim or cross-claim of the accused arises

out of or is connected with the transaction or occurrence which is the
subject matter of the offended partys claim, it is NOT compulsory.

1. Waives the civil action

5. The extinction of the civil liability refers exclusively to civil liability

arising from crime;

2. Reserves his right to institute it separately OR

Whereas, the civil liability for the same act considered as quasidelict only and not as a crime is not extinguished even by a
declaration in the criminal case that the criminal act charged has not
happened or has not been committed by the accused.

3. Institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action.

2. The independent civil actions under Articles 32, 33, 34 and 2176
are no longer deemed or impliedly instituted with the criminal action
or considered as waived

Both actions may proceed separately, the only limitation is the

prohibition to recover damages twice based on the same act or
omission.

Even if there is no reservation.

They may proceed independently of the criminal action and

shall require only a preponderance of evidence.

6. Except for civil actions provided for in Articles 32, 33, 34 and 2176
of the Civil Code, the civil action which has been reserved cannot be
instituted until final judgment has been rendered in the criminal
action.

3. The reservation applies only to the civil liability arising from the
offense charged.

The action contemplated herein is a civil action arising from a

crime if reserved or filed separately and if a criminal case is filed, it
has to be suspended.

The employer may not longer be held civilly liable for quasidelict in the criminal action as ruled in Maniago vs. Court of Appeals
since quasi-delict is not deemed instituted with the criminal.

During the pendency of the criminal action, the period of

prescription of the civil action which cannot be instituted separately or
whose proceeding has been suspended shall not run.

If at all, the only civil liability of the employer in the criminal

action would be his subsidiary liability under the Revised Penal Code.
4. The present rule has also done away with third-party complaints
and counterclaims in criminal actions. These claims must have to be
ventilated in a separate civil action.

7. The death of the accused after arraignment and during the

pendency of the criminal action shall extinguish the civil liability
arising from the delict.

This rule would only apply if any of the civil actions under
section 3 is consolidated with the criminal action, otherwise, since the
34

actions under section 3 are purely civil actions, the effects of death of
a party are to be governed by the Rules on Civil Procedure.

1. The respondent cannot be subpoenaed OR

2. The respondent, if subpoenaed, does not submit a
counter-affidavit within the 10-day period.

8. A prejudicial question is limited to a previously instituted civil

action in order to minimize possible abuses by the subsequent filing
of a civil action as an after thought for the purpose of suspending the
criminal action.

3. The clarificatory hearing shall only to limited to facts and

issues which the investigating officer believes need to be
clarified.

Rule 112 Preliminary Investigation

1. Preliminary investigation now includes offenses punishable by

at least 4 years, 2 months and 1 day, even if the same is
cognizable by the Municipal Trial Court.

The clarificatory hearing shall be held within 10 days from:

1. The submission of the counter-affidavit and other documents,
OR
2. The expiration of the period for their submission.

2. The complaint should be accompanied by affidavits of the

complainant and his witnesses as well as other supporting
papers relied upon by the complainant to establish probable
cause.

3. A motion to dismiss is now a prohibited pleading during

preliminary investigation.

4. The respondent is now required to submit counter-affidavits and

other supporting documents relied upon by him for his defense.

The hearing officer shall determine whether there is sufficient

ground to hold the respondent for trial upon the evidence adduced,
within 10 days.

The clarificatory hearing shall be terminated within 5 days.

1. After the clarificatory hearing:

5. The respondent now has the right to examine the evidence

submitted by the complainant of which he may not have been
furnished and to obtain copies thereof at his expense.

The investigation shall be deemed concluded AND

1. Whether the recommendation of the investigating officer is to

file or dismiss the case, he shall, within 5 days from his
resolution, forward the records to:

If the records are voluminous, the complainant may be required

to identify those which he intends to present to support his charge and
these shall be made available for examination, copying or
photographing by respondent at his expense.

1. The provincial or city prosecutor or chief state prosecutor

2. The ombudsman or his deputy, for offenses cognizable by
the Sandiganbayan in the exercise of its original
jurisdiction

1. The prosecutor is required to resolve the complaint based on

the evidence presented by the complainant, in the event that:
35


Who shall taken appropriate action within 10 days from receipt
and immediately inform the parties of said action.

1. During preliminary investigation

Searching questions and answers is mandatory.

1. A party has the right to appeal to the Secretary of Justice and

require that the parties be notified of the recommendation of
the action to be taken therefrom.

1. In exercise of its original jurisdiction, distinguish:

1. Cases which require Preliminary Investigation even if it
falls within its original jurisdiction

2. The judge must determine the existence of probable cause

within 10 days from the filing of the information.

After searching questions and answers, determine probable cause

and necessity of placing accused in custody in order not to frustrate
the ends of justice.

If the accused has already been arrested, the judge must determine
within 10 days the existence of probable cause and issue an order of
commitment.

1. Cases investigated by MTC but remanded by the prosecutor

The judge may disregard the prosecutors report and require the
submission of additional evidence to determine the existence of
provable case. If he still finds no probable cause, he shall dismiss the
case.

The necessity rule inapplicable

iii. No warrants:
(1) If one already issued OR

1. Two types of offenses may be filed in the Municipal Trial Court

for preliminary investigation:

(2) The complaint or information filed under Section 7 (order of

detention must be issued) OR

1. A case is cognizable by the RTC may be filed with the

MTC for preliminary investigation.

(3) Offenses punishable by fine.

2. Even if it is cognizable by the MTC because it is an

offense where the penalty prescribed by law is at least 4
years, 2 months and 1 day without regard to the fine.

1. Cases which do not require preliminary investigation

1. Evaluate evidence OR

The MTC is authorized in either case to issue a warrant of arrest

if there is necessity of placing the respondent under immediate
custody, in order not to frustrate the ends of justice.

ii. Conduct searching questions or answers or require additional

evidence.

1. Outline on Issuance of Warrants of Arrest by Municipal Trial

Judge

1. No warrants

36

1. If the judge is satisfied that there is no necessity for

placing the accused under custody (issues summons
instead)

The request for preliminary investigation must be made before plea,

otherwise the right to ask for a preliminary investigation shall be
deemed waived.

ii. Cases under the Revised Rules on Summary Procedure (no

warrants except for failure to appear)

1. The court must evaluate the resolution of the investigating

prosecutor and the supporting evidence adduced during the
preliminary investigation, and such evidence must be included
in filing the information.

iii. Rule on necessity

2. Issuance of warrants of arrest by the MTC for actions filed in the

exercise of its original jurisdiction provides for two distinct
situations: Case may be filed

It is only in the issuance of warrants of arrest during preliminary

investigation and in cases which do not require preliminary
investigation, that the Municipal Trial Judge is called upon to apply the
principle of necessity. The principle does not apply to cases remanded
by the Prosecutor.

1. Directly in the MTC OR

2. By the prosecutor in Metro Manila or other chartered
cities.

1. In case a person is arrested without a warrant, a complaint or

information may only be filed after an inquest conducted in
accordance with existing rules.

3. If complaint is filed with the prosecutor for offenses which

do not require a preliminary investigation, the procedure
is as follows:

Provided that in the absence or unavailability of an inquest

prosecutor, the complaint may be filed by the offended party or a
peace officer directly with the proper court on the basis of the affidavit
of the offended party or arresting officer or person.

1. The complaint shall state the known address of the

respondent
2. Accompanied by:

1. Before the filing of a complaint or information, the person

arrested without a warrant may ask for a preliminary
investigation by a proper officer, but he must sign a waiver of
the provisions of Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code.

1. Affidavits of the complainant and his witness

AND

The waiver may be made only in the presence of his counsel

pursuant to R.A. no. 7438.

2. Other supporting documents relied upon by

the complainant to establish probable cause

In case the case has been filed in court without a preliminary

investigation, the accused may, within 5 days from the time he learns
of its filing, ask for a preliminary investigation with the same right to
adduce evidence in his defense.

3. Affidavits must be sworn before any

prosecutor, state prosecutor or government
official authorized to administer oath, or a
notary public (in their absence or
unavailability)
37

4. The prosecutor, et. al., must certify that he

personally examined the affiants and that he
is satisfied that they voluntarily executed
and understood their affidavits.

his case is pending, or has escaped while being

transferred from one confinement to another.
4. 1(b) removed the requirement that an offense must have
in fact been committed and clarified that probable cause
to believe based on personal knowledge of facts and
circumstances that the person to be arrested has
committed it would be sufficient to justify a warrantless
arrest for an offense that has just been committed.

5. The prosecutor shall take appropriate action

based on the affidavits and other supporting
documents submitted by the complainant
within 10 days from its filing.

He may either dismiss the case or file it in court

5. Indubitable existence of a crime is not necessary to

justify a warrantless arrest and that personal knowledge
of facts in arrests without warrant must be based upon
probable cause, which means an actual belief or
reasonable grounds of suspicion.

1. If complaint is filed directly with the MTC for an offense

punishable by less than 4 years, 6 months and 1 day, the
procedure is similar to (18).

The grounds of suspicion are reasonable when, in the absence of

actual belief of the arresting officers, the suspicion that the person to
be arrested is probably guilty of committing the offense, is based on
actual facts, i.e., supported by circumstances sufficiently strong in
themselves to create the probable cause of guilt of the person to be
arrested.

The judge should then personally examine in writing and under

oath the complainant.
1. No warrant of arrest shall issue for cases covered by the
Revised Rules on Summary Procedure.
Rule 113 Arrest

A reasonable suspicion therefore must be founded on probable

cause, coupled with good faith on the part of the peace officers
making the arrest.

1. Instances of valid warrantless arrests:

1. When, in his presence, the person to be arrested has
committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to
commit an offense;

Rule 114 Bail

1. Bail is a matter of right

2. When an offense has just been committed and he has

probable cause to believe based on personal knowledge
of facts or circumstances that the person to be arrested
has committed it; AND

1. Before or after conviction by the MTC AND

2. Before conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable
by death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment

3. When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has

escaped from a penal establishment or place where he is
serving final judgment or is temporarily confined while
38

3. 2.
Bail is a matter of discretion after conviction by the
RTC of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion
perpetua or life imprisonment.

6. When the presence of the accused is required by the court or

these Rules, his bondsmen shall be notified to produce him before the
court on a given date and time.

4. Photos taken recently means photos taken within the

last six months.

7. An application for bail by the accused shall NOT be considered as

a waiver of his right to challenge the legality of his arrest or the
absence of a preliminary investigation.

5. The application for bail may be filed and acted upon by

the trial court despite the filing of a notice of appeal,
provided it has not transmitted the original record to the
appellate court.

Provided such objections are raised before plea.

Rule 116 Arraignment and Plea

However, if the decision of the trial court convicting the accused

changed the nature of the offense from non-bailable to bailable, the
application for bail can only be filed with and resolved by the appellate
court.

1. When the accused pleads guilty but presents exculpatory

evidence, his plea shall be deemed withdrawn and a plea of not
guilty shall be entered for him.

This refers to a situation where an accused pleads guilty but

invokes the mitigating circumstance of incomplete self-defense under
Article 13, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code as amended.

This provision modified the ruling in Obosa vs. Court of Appeals in

the sense that except for decisions which changed the nature of an
offense from bailable to non-bailable cases, the trial court may still act
on the application of bail even if a notice of appeal have been filed.

If the accused, after being allowed to present evidence, however

adduces proof, not only to establish incomplete self-defense, but that
he acted with complete legal justification, his earlier plea of guilty
shall be deemed withdrawn and a plea of not guilty shall be entered
for him.

Even if there is no notice of appeal if the decision of the trial court

convicting the accused changed the nature of the offense from nonbailable to bailable, the application for bail can only be filed with and
resolved by the appellate court.

1. While R.A. No. 8493 or the Speedy Trial Act provides that the
accused shall be arraigned within 30 days from the time a court
acquires jurisdiction over his person, Rule 116, 1(e) provides
for a shorter time within which an accused who is under
preventive detention should be arraigned.

5. Bail may be filed with:

1. The court where the case is pending OR
2. Another judge of the same court within the province or city

Where an accused is detained, his case should be raffled within 3

days from the filing of the information or complaint against him, and
the judge to whom his case is raffled shall have him arraigned within
10 days from receipt by the judge of the records of the case.

In the absence or unavailability of the judge thereof.

39

 The pre-trial conference shall be held within 10 days after the

arraignment.

arraigned without delay and his trial should commence within 3 days
from the arraignment and that no postponement of the initial hearing
should be granted except on the ground of illness on the part of the
accused or other grounds beyond the control of the court.

1. The consent of both the prosecutor and the offended party is

required before an accused may be allowed by the court to
plead guilty to a lesser offense.

1. Republic Act no. 7610 or the Child Abuse Act

The conviction for the lower offense would not give rise to
double jeopardy if the plead of guilty for the lower offense was without
the consent of the offended party.

The trial of cases falling under said law shall be commenced within
3 days from arraignment.
1. Dangerous Drugs Law

1. The presence of the offended party is now required at the

arraignment and also to discuss the matter of accuseds civil
liability.

2. Cases falling under the SC Admin Order No. 104-96, i.e.,

heinous crimes, violations of the Intellectual Property Rights
Law

In case the offended party fails to appear despite due notice,

the trial court may allow the accused to plead guilty to a lower offense
with solely the conformity of the trial prosecutor.

These cases must be tried continuously until terminated within 60

days from commencement of the trial and to be decided within 30
days from the submission of the case.

1. The arraignment shall be held within 30 days from the date the
court acquires jurisdiction over the person of the accused.

1.

Unless a shorter period is provided by special law or Supreme Court

circular.

A plea of guilty to a lesser offense may be allowed only if the

lesser offense is necessarily included in the offense charged.

Consent of the prosecutor and offended party must be obtained.

The time of the pendency of a motion to quash or for a bill of

particulars or other causes justifying suspension of the arraignment
shall be excluded in computing the period.

1. A counsel de oficio who is appointed to defend the accused at

the arraignment is given a reasonable time to consult with the
accused as to his plea before proceeding with the arraignment.
Rule 117 Motion to Quash

1. Certain laws and SC Circulars provide for a shorter time within

which the accused should be arraigned:

1. Grounds for motion to quash a complaint or information:

1. Republic Act no. 4908

1. The facts charged do not constitute an offense

In criminal cases where the complainant is about to depart form the

Philippines with no definite date of return, the accused should be

2. The court has no jurisdiction over the offense charged

40

3. The court has no jurisdiction over the person of the

accused

4. A case may not be provisionally dismissed without:

1. The express consent of the accused AND

4. The officer who filed the information had no authority to

do so

2. Notice to the offended party

5. It does not conform substantially to the prescribed form

3. The provisional dismissal of offenses punishable by

imprisonment not exceeding 6 years shall become
final after 1 year from the issuance of the order
without the case being revived.

6. More than one offense is charged

Except when a single punishment for various offenses is prescribed
by law.

4. The provisional dismissal of offenses punishable by

imprisonment exceeding 6 years shall become
permanent 2 years from the issuance of the order
without the case having been revived.

1. The criminal action or liability has been extinguished

2. It contains averments which, if true, would constitute a legal
excuse or justification AND

Rule 118 Pre-Trial

1. In all criminal cases cognizable by the (1) Sandiganbayan, (2)
Regional Trial Court, (3) Metropolitan Trial Courts, (4) Municipal Trial
Court in Cities, (5) Municipal Trial Court and (6) Municipal Circuit Trial
Court

3. The accused has been previously convicted or acquitted of the

offense charged, or the case against him was dismissed or
otherwise terminated without his express consent.
4. Conviction of an accused shall not be a bar to another
prosecution for an offense which necessarily includes the
offense charged in the former complaint or information under
the following instances:

The court shall order a pre-trial conference (this must be held within
30 days from the date the court acquires jurisdiction over the person
of the accused, unless a shorter period is provided for in special laws
or circulars of the Supreme Court)

1. The graver offense developed due to supervening facts

arising from the same act or omission constituting the
former charge

2. The following shall be considered during the pre-trial conference:

2. The facts constituting the graver charge became known

or were discovered only after a plea was entered in the
former complaint or information OR

1. Plea bargaining

3. The plea of guilty to the lesser offense was made without

the consent of the prosecutor and of the offended party
except as provided in 1(f) of Rule 116.

3. Marking for identification of evidence of the parties

2. Stipulation of facts

4. Waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence

41

5. Modification of the order of trial if the accused admits the

charge but interposes a lawful defense; AND

1. Criminal cases covered by the Rule on Summary Procedure or

where the penalty prescribed by law does not exceed 6 months
imprisonment, or a fine of P1,000 or both, irrespective of other
imposable penalties

6. Such matters as will promote a fair and expeditious trial of the

criminal and civil aspects of the case

Governed by Rule 123

3. All agreements or admissions made or entered during the pre-trial
conference shall be:

2. R.A. No. 4908, An Act Requiring Judges of Courts to Speedily Try

Criminal Cases Wherein the Offended Party is a Person About to
Depart from the Philippines with No Definite Date of Return

1. Reduced to writing and

Requires such cases to take precedence over all other cases before
our courts except election and habeas corpus cases

2. Signed by the accused and counsel

Otherwise, they cannot be used against the accused.

The trial in these cases shall commence within 3 days from the date
the accused is arraigned and no postponement of the initial hearing
shall be granted except on the ground of illness on the part of the
accused, or other grounds beyond the control of the accused

The agreements covering the matters referred to in section 1 of this

Rule shall be approved by the court.
4. If the counsel for the accused or the prosecutor does not appear at
the pre-trial conference and does not offer an acceptable excuse for
his lack of cooperation

3. Speedy Trial of Child Abuse cases

The trial of child abuse cases shall take precedence over all other
cases before our courts except election and habeas corpus cases

The court may impose proper sanction or penalties.

The trial in these cases shall commence within 3 days from the date
the accused is arraigned and no postponement of the initial hearing
shall be granted except on account of the illness of the accused or
other grounds beyond his control (Sec. 21, Rules and Regulations on
the Reporting and Investigation of Child Abuse cases issued pursuant
to Sec. 32 of R.A. No. 1610, The Child Abuse Act)

Rule 119 Trial

1. After a plea of not guilty is entered
The accused shall have at least 15 days to prepare for trial
2. The trial shall commence within 30 days from receipt of the pretrial order.

4. Violations of the Dangerous Drugs Law

5. Under Administrative Order No. 104-96

3. Other laws, rules and regulations prescribe speedy trial for a

shorter period for other offenses:

4. Trial once commenced

42

 Shall continue from day to day as far as practicable until terminated

5. Delay resulting from order of inhibition, or proceedings relating

to change of venue of cases or transfer from other courts;

May be postponed for a reasonable period of time for good cause

6. Delay resulting from a finding of the existence of a prejudicial

question; and

5. After consultation with the prosecutor and defense counsel

7. Delay reasonably attributable to any period, not to exceed 30

days, during which any proceeding concerning the accused is
actually under advisement.

The court shall set the case for continuous trial on a weekly or other
short term trial calendar at the earliest possible time so as to ensure
speedy trial

b. Any period of delay resulting from the absence or unavailability of

an essential witness. (An essential witness shall be considered absent
when his whereabouts are unknown or his whereabouts cannot be
determined by due diligence. He shall be considered unavailable
whenever his whereabouts are known but his presence for trial cannot
be obtained by due diligence.)

6. In no case shall the entire trial period exceed 180 days from the
first day of trial, except as otherwise authorized by the Supreme
Court.
7. The time limitations provided under this section and the preceding
section shall not apply where special laws or circulars of the Supreme
Court provide for a shorter period of trial.

1. Any period of delay resulting from the mental incompetence or

physical inability of the accused to stand trial.

8. The following periods of delay shall be excluded in computing the

time within which trial must commence:

2. If the information is dismissed upon motion of the prosecution

and thereafter a charge is filed against the accused for the
same offense

a. Any period of delay resulting from other proceedings concerning

the accused, including but not limited to the following:

Any period of delay from the date the charge was dismissed to the
date the time limitation would commence to run as to the subsequent
charge had there been no previous charge

1. Delay resulting from an examination of the physical and mental

condition of the accused;
2. Delay resulting from proceedings with respect to other criminal
charges against the accused;

1. A reasonable period of delay when the accused is joined for trial

with a co-accused over whom the court has not acquired
jurisdiction; or, as to whom the time for trial has not run and no
motion for separate trial has been granted.

3. Delay resulting from extraordinary remedies against

interlocutory orders;

2. Any period of delay resulting from a continuance granted by

any court motu proprio, or on motion of either the accused or
his counsel, or the prosecution, if the court granted the
continuance on the basis of its findings set forth in the order

4. Delay resulting from pre-trial proceedings; provided, that the

delay does not exceed 30 days;
43

that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh

the best interest of the public and the accused in a speedy trial.

The trial shall commence within 30 days from notice of the order
(provided that if the period becomes impractical due to unavailability
of witnesses and other factors, the court may extend it but not to
exceed 180 days from notice of said order for a new trial

9. The following factors, among others, shall be considered by a

court in determining whether to grant continuance under section 3(f)
of this Rule.

13. Notwithstanding the provisions of section 1(g), Rule 116 and the
preceding section 1, for the first twelve-calendar-month period
following its effectivity on September 15, 1998

1. Whether or not the failure to grant a continuance in the

proceeding would likely make a continuation of such proceeding
impossible or result in a miscarriage of justice; and

The time limit with respect to the period from arraignment to trial
imposed by said provision shall be 180 days. For the second twelvemonth period, the time limit shall be 120 days, and for the third
twelve-month period, the time limit shall be 80 days.

2. Whether or not the case taken as a whole is so novel, unusual

and complex, due to the number of accused or the nature of the
prosecution, or that it is unreasonable to expect adequate
preparation within the periods of time established therein

14. If the public attorney assigned to defend a person charged with a

crime knows that the latter is preventively detained, either because
he

10.
No continuance under section 3(f) of this Rule shall be granted
because of
1. Congestion of the courts calendar or

1. Is charged with a bailable crime but has no means to post bail,

or

2. Lack of diligent preparation or

2. Is charged with a non-bailable crime, or

3. Failure to obtain available witnesses on the part of the

prosecutor

3. Is serving a term of imprisonment in any penal institution

11. The general rule is that motions for postponement are granted
only upon meritorious grounds and no party has the right to assume
that his motion will be granted. The grant or denial of a motion for
postponement is addressed to the sound discretion of the court.
Unless grave abuse of discretion is shown, such discretion will not be
interfered with either by mandamus or appeal.

It shall be his duty to do the following:

1. Shall promptly undertake to obtain the presence of the prisoner
for trial or cause a notice to be served on the person having
custody of the prisoner requiring such person to so advise the
prisoner of his right to demand trial.
2. Upon receipt of that notice, the custodian of the prisoner shall
promptly advise the prisoner of the charge and of his right to
demand trial. If at anytime thereafter the prisoner informs his

12. If the accused is to be tried again pursuant to an order for a new

trial
44

custodian that he demands such trial, the latter shall cause

notice to that effect to be sent promptly to the public attorney.

exceeding 30 days. The punishment provided for by this section

shall be without prejudice to any appropriate criminal action or
other sanction authorized under these Rules.

3. Upon receipt of such notice, the public attorney shall promptly

seek to obtain the presence of the prisoner for trial.

16. If the accused is not brought to trial within the time limit required
by section 1(g), Rule 116 and section 1, as extended by section 6 of
this Rule

4. When the custodian of the prisoner receives from the public

attorney a properly supported request for the availability of the
prisoner for purposes of trial, the prisoner shall be made
available accordingly.

The information may be dismissed on motion of the accused on the

ground of denial of his right to speedy trial

15. In any case in which private counsel for the accused, the public
attorney, or the prosecutor:

17. The accused shall have the burden of proving the motion but the
prosecution shall have the burden of going forward with the evidence
to establish the exclusion of time under section 3 of this Rule.

1. Knowingly allows the case to be set for trial without disclosing

that a necessary witness would be unavailable for trial;

18. The dismissal shall be subject to the rules on double jeopardy.

2. Files a motion solely for delay which he knows is totally frivolous

and without merit;

19. No provision of law on speedy trial and no rule implementing the

same shall be interpreted as a bar to any charge of denial of the right
to speedy trial guaranteed by section 14(2) , Article III, of the 1987
Constitution.

3. Makes a statement for the purpose of obtaining continuance

which he knows to be false and which is material tot he
granting of a continuance; or

20. After the prosecution rests its case

The court may dismiss the action on the ground of insufficiency of
evidence

4. Willfully fails to proceed to trial without justification consistent

with the provisions hereof
The court may punish such counsel, attorney, or prosecutor, as
follows:

1. On its own initiative after giving the prosecution the opportunity

to be heard or

1. By imposing on a counsel privately retained in connection with

the defense of an accused, a fine not exceeding P20,000.

2. Upon demurrer to evidence filed by the accused with or without

leave of court

2. By imposing on any appointed counsel de oficio, public

attorney, or prosecutor a fine not exceeding P5,000; and

21. If the court denies the demurrer to evidence filed with leave of
court

3. By denying any defense counsel or prosecutor the right to

practice before the court trying the case for a period not

The accused may adduce evidence in his defense

45

22. When the demurrer to evidence is filed without leave of court

28. At any time before finality of the judgment of conviction

The judge may, motu proprio or upon motion, with hearing in either
case, reopen the proceedings to avoid a miscarriage of justice

The accused waive the right to present evidence and submits the
case for judgment on the basis of the evidence for the prosecution

The proceedings shall be terminated within 30 days from the order

granting it.

23. The motion for leave of court to file demurrer to evidence

Shall specifically state its grounds and shall be filed within a nonextendible period of 5 days after the prosecution rests its case

Rule 120 Judgment

1. Judgment

Prosecution may oppose the motion within a non-extendible period

of 5 days from its receipt

Adjudication by the court that the accused is guilty or not guilty of

the offense charged and the imposition on him of the proper penalty
and civil liability, if any

24. If leave of court is granted

The accused shall file the demurrer to evidence within a nonextendible period of 10 days from notice

Must
1. Be written in the official language

Prosecution may oppose the demurrer to evidence within a similar

period from its receipt

2. Personally and directly prepared by the judge and signed by

him and

25. The order denying the motion for leave of court to file demurrer to
evidence or the demurrer itself

3. Contain clearly and distinctly a statement of the facts and the

law upon which it is based

Shall not be reviewable by appeal or by certiorari before judgment

2. If the judgment is of conviction

26. The present rule liberally deviates from the rigid structures of Rule
119 of the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure denying the accused the
chance to present evidence by considering a defendants motion to
dismiss a waiver of his right to present evidence.

It shall state
1. The legal qualification of the offense constituted by the acts
committed by the accused and the aggravating or mitigating
circumstances which attended its commission

27. The current rule allows the accused in a criminal case to present
evidence even after a motion to dismiss provided the demurrer was
made within the express consent of the court.

2. The participation of the accused in the offense, whether as

principal, accomplice, or accessory
46

3. The penalty imposed upon the accused and

appeal; provided, that if the decision of the trial court convicting the
accused changed the nature of the offense from non-bailable to
bailable, the application for bail can only be filed and resolved by the
appellate court.

4. The civil liability or damages caused by his wrongful act or

omission to be recovered from the accused by the offended
party, if there is any, unless the enforcement of the civil liability
by a separate civil action has been reserved or waived

9. The proper clerk of court shall give notice to the accused

personally or through his bondsman or warden and counsel, requiring
him to be present at the promulgation of the decision.

3. In case the judgment is of acquittal

It shall state whether the evidence of the prosecution absolutely

failed to prove the guilt of the accused or merely failed to prove his
guilt beyond reasonable doubt ( in either case, the judgment shall
determine if the act or omission from which the civil liability might
arise did not exist)

10. If the accused was tried in absentia because he

1. Jumped bail or
2. Escaped from prison

4. The judgment is promulgated by reading it in the presence of the

accused and any judge of the court in which it was rendered.

The notice to him shall be served at his last known address.

5. If the conviction is for a light offense

11. In case the accused fails to appear at the scheduled date of

promulgation of judgment despite notice

The judgment may be pronounced in the presence of his counsel or

representative

The promulgation shall be made by recording the judgment in the

criminal docket and serving him a copy thereof at his last known
address or thru his counsel

6. When the judge is absent or outside the province or city

12. If the judgment is for conviction and the failure of the accused to
appear was without justifiable cause, he shall

The judgment may be promulgated by the clerk of court

7. If the accused is confined or detained in another province or city

1. Lose the remedies available in these Rules against the

judgment and

The judgment may be promulgated by the executive judge of the

Regional Trial Court having jurisdiction over the place of confinement
or detention upon request of the court which rendered the judgment

2. The court shall order his arrest

13. However, within 15 days from promulgation of judgment

8. The court promulgating the judgment shall have authority to

accept the notice of appeal and to approve the bail bond pending
47

 The accused may surrender and file a motion for leave of court to
avail of these remedies

Rule 126 Search and Seizure

1. An application for search warrant shall be filed with the following:

He shall state the reasons for his absence at the scheduled

promulgation and if he proves that his absence was for a justifiable
cause, he shall be allowed to avail of said remedies within 15 days
from notice

1. Any court within whose territorial jurisdiction a crime was

committed.
2. For compelling reasons stated in the application, any court
within the judicial region where the crime was committed if the
place of the commission of the crime is known, or any court
within the judicial region where the warrant shall be enforced.

14. Under the former rule, even if the accused fails to appear without
justifiable cause, he shall be allowed to appeal within 15 days from
notice of the decision to him or his counsel.

2. If the criminal action has already been filed

15. Under the new rule, if the judgment is of conviction and the failure
of the accused to appear was without justifiable cause, he shall lose
not only his right to appeal but also other legal remedies against the
judgment as well and the court shall order his arrest.

The application shall only be made in the court where the criminal
action is pending
3. Section 2, Rule 126 is new. It fixes the venue in the filing of
applications for the issuance of a search warrant.

Rule 124 Procedure in the Court of Appeals

1. The provisions of Rules 42, 44 to 46 and 48 to 56 relating
to procedure in the Court of Appeals and in the Supreme
Court in original and appealed cases

Section 2 modifies the Malaloan guidelines (Malaloan vs. CA) which

allow any judge to issue a search warrant prior to the filing of a
criminal action, and even if one had already been filed, any judge for
compelling reasons may still issue a search warrant.

Shall be applied to criminal cases insofar as they are

applicable and not inconsistent with the provisions of this
Rule
2. The provisions of Rule 47 of the Rules of Court (Annulment of
Judgments of Final Judgment and Resolutions) are no longer applicable
in criminal cases. The appropriate remedy for lack of jurisdiction or
extrinsic fraud being either:

4. The officer must forthwith deliver the property seized to the judge
who issued the warrant, together with a true inventory thereof duly
verified under oath.
5. 10 days after issuance of the search warrant

The issuing judge shall ascertain if the return has been made,
and if none, shall summon the person to whom the warrant was issued
and require him to explain why no return was made

1. Certiorari under Rule 65 or

2. Habeas corpus under Rule 102
48

6. If the return has been made

The motion may be filed in and resolved by the court that issued
the search warrant (if such court failed to resolve the motion and a
criminal case is subsequently filed in another court, the motion shall
be resolved by the latter court

The judge shall

1. Ascertain whether section 11 of this Rule has been complied
with and

10. Section 14 is intended to resolve what is perceived as conflicting

decisions on where to file a motion to quash a search warrant or to
suppress evidence seized by virtue thereof.

2. Require that the property seized be delivered to him

7. The return on the search warrant shall be filed and kept by the
custodian of the log book on search warrants who shall enter therein
the date of the return, the result, and other actions of the judge.

* The following pages are culled from Justice Oscar Herreras book on
the relevant amendments in the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure
and from Justice Jose Ferias article in the Lawyers Review (February,
2001) on the Notable Amendments in Revised Rules of Criminal
Procedure.

A violation of this section shall constitute contempt of court.

8. A motion to quash a search warrant and/or to suppress evidence
obtained thereby

** An Act To Establish Periods of Prescription for Violations Penalized

By Special Laws and Municipal Ordinances and to Provide When
Prescription Shall Begin To Run.

May be filed in and acted upon only by the court where the action
has been instituted
9. If no criminal action has been instituted

49

50