Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
1. The court may dismiss the case on its own initiative after giving
the prosecution the right to be heard
2. Upon demurrer to evidence filed by the accused with or without
leave of court
The court may dismiss the case on its own initiative after
giving the prosecution the right to be heard
The effect of its filing is that if the court grants the demurrer,
the case will be dismissed
No
> At any time before entering the plea, the accused may
move to quash the complaint or information
1. It must be in writing
2. It must be signed by the accused or his counsel
3. It must specify its factual and legal grounds
> The general rule is no, the court cannot consider any ground
other than those stated in the motion to quash.
> The exception is the lack of jurisdiction over the offense
charged. If this is the ground for dismissing the case, it need not be
alleged in the motion to quash since it goes into the very
competence of the court to pass upon the case.
> It means that the accused argues that assuming that the
facts charged are true, the information should still be dismissed
based on the ground invoked by the defendant.
> Therefore, since the defendant assumes that the facts in
the information are true, only these facts should be taken into
account and the court resolves the motion to quash. Other facts,
such as matters of defenses, which are not in the information should
not be considered
> The exceptions to the rule are when the grounds invoked to
quash the information are extinction of criminal liability,
prescription, and former jeopardy. In these cases, additional facts
are allowed.
> No, denial of due process is not one of the grounds for a motion
to quash
> In the past, the answer would have been no since the SC ruled
in several cases then that the motion to quash on the ground of lack
of jurisdiction over the person of the accused must be based only
on this ground. If other grounds are included, there is waiver,
and the accused is deemed to have submitted himself to the
jurisdiction of the court.
> The new rule, based on the decisions of the SC on Section 20 of
Rule 14 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, the inclusion of other
grounds aside from lack of jurisdiction over the person of the
defendant in a motion to dismiss shall not be considered as a
voluntary appearance.
(d) Said accused does not appear to be the most guilty; and
(e) Said accused has not at any time been convicted of any offense
involving moral turpitude.
Evidence adduced in support of the discharge shall automatically
form part of the trial. If the court denies the motion for discharge of
the accused as state witness, his sworn statement shall be
inadmissible in evidence.
Provisional Dismissal
3) the court issues an order granting the motion and dismissing the
case provisionally; and
The raison d etre for the requirement of the express consent of the
accused to a provisional dismissal of a criminal case is to bar him
from subsequently asserting that the revival of the criminal case will
place him in double jeopardy for the same offense or for an offense
necessarily included therein. (People vs. Lacson)
Although the second paragraph of the new rule states that the order
of dismissal shall become permanent one year after the issuance
thereof without the case having been revived, the provision should
be construed to mean that the order of dismissal shall become
permanent one year after service of the order of dismissal on the
public prosecutor who has control of the prosecution without the
criminal case having been revived. The public prosecutor cannot be
expected to comply with the timeline unless he is served with a
copy of the order of dismissal. (People vs. Lacson)
The State may revive the case within the time-bar either by the: