Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 19

Principle of Adherence of Jurisdiction or Continuing Jurisdiction (T)

Once a court acquired jurisdiction over a controversy, it shall continue


to exercise such jurisdiction until the final determination of the case and it is
not affected by the subsequent legislation vesting jurisdiction over such
proceeding in another tribunal. Except, When the statute expressly so
provides or is intended to operate to pending actions.
-
Principle of adherence of jurisdiction or continuing jurisdiction
1. The jurisdiction of the court is referred to as "continuing" in view of the
general principle that once a court has acquired jurisdiction, that jurisdiction
continues until the court has done all that it can do in the exercise of that
jurisdiction (20 Am. Jur. 2d, Courts, § 147, 1965). The jurisdiction once
vested, cannot be withdrawn or defeated by a subsequent valid amendment
of the information (People v. Chupeco, L-19568, March 31, 1964). It cannot
also be lost by a new law amending the rules of jurisdiction (Rilloraza v.
Arciaga, L-23848, October 31,1967).
For instance, in Flores v. Sumaljag, 290 SCRA 568, the court was held not
to have lost jurisdiction over the case involving a public official by the mere
fact that the said official
ceased to be in office during the pendency of the case. The court retains its
jurisdiction either to pronounce the respondent official innocent of the
charges or declare him guilty thereof.
2. Once a court acquires jurisdiction over a controversy, it shall continue to
exercise such jurisdiction until the final determination of the case and it is not
affected by the subsequent legislation vesting jurisdiction over such
proceedings in another tribunal. A recognized exception to this rule is when
the statute expressly so provides, or is construed to the effect that it is
intended to operate upon actions pending before its enactment. However,
when no such retroactive effect is provided for, statutes altering the
jurisdiction of a court cannot be applied to cases already pending prior to
their enactment (People v. Cawaling, 293 SCRA 267; Azarcon v.
Sandiganbayan, 268 SCRA 647; Palana v. People, 534 SCRA 296).

Page 1 of 19
As a result of the above rule, once a complaint or information is filed in court,
any disposition of the case such as its dismissal or continuance rests on the
sound discretion of the court (Jalandoni v. Drilon, 327 SCRA 107; Domondon
v. Sandiganbayan, 328 SCRA 292) and even if the prosecution files a motion
to withdraw the information, the court may grant or deny the same in the
faithful exercise of judicial prerogative (Pilapil v. Garchitorena, 299 SCRA
343).
The Court has been steadfast in declaring that when a court has already
obtained and is exercising jurisdiction over a controversy, its jurisdiction to
proceed to the final determination of the case is not affected by new
legislation placing jurisdiction over such proceedings in another tribunal
unless the statute expressly provides, or is construed to the effect that it is
intended to operate on actions pending before its enactment (Palana v.
People, 534 SCRA 296, September 28, 2007).

Page 2 of 19
COMPLAINT, DEFINED. (T)
A sworn written statement, in the name of the People of the Philippines,
charging a person with an offense, subscribed by the offended party, any
peace officer or other public officer charged with the enforcement of the law
violated.
A complaint must
be sworn hence,
under oath.

INFORMATION, DEFINED.
An accusation in writing, charging a person with an offense,subscribed by
the prosecutor and filed with the court. Requires no Oath

Distinctions between a complaint and an information (Bar 1999)


1. A complaint must be "sworn" hence, under oath. By the clear terms of Sec.
3 of Rule 110, it is a "sworn written statement."
An information requires no oath. Sec. 4 of Rule 110 merely requires that it
be an accusation "in writing." This is because the prosecutor filing the
information is acting under the oath of his office (Estudillo v. Baloma, 426
SCRA 83).
2. A complaint or information is subscribed by (a) the offended party, (b) any
peace officer, (c) or other public officer charged with the enforcement of the
law violated (Sec. 3, Rule 110, Rules of Court). On the other hand, an
information is subscribed by the prosecutor (Sec. 4, Rule 110, Rules of
Court).

Page 3 of 19
Jurisdiction
Power and authority of the courts to hear, try and decide a case. It is
also the power to enforce the determination, as the judgment or decree is
the end for which jurisdiction is exercised, and it is only through the judgment
and its execution that the power of the courts is made efficacious and its
jurisdiction complete.

Page 4 of 19
Effect of institution of a criminal action (T)
It interrupts the running of the period of prescription of the offense charged.
(Sec. 1, Rule 110)
Art. 91 of the RPC, in declaring that the prescriptive period “shall be
interrupted by the filing of the complaint or information,” does not distinguish
whether the complaint is filed for preliminary examination or investigation
only or for an action on the merits. Thus, in Francisco v. CA, No. L-45674,
May 30, 1983 and People v. Cuaresma, G.R. No. L-67787, April 18, 1989,
this Court held that the filing of the complaint even with the fiscal’s office
suspends the running of the statute of limitations. (Reodica v. CA, G.R. No.
125066, July 8, 1998)
XPN: Prescriptive periods of violations of special laws and municipal
ordinances governed by Act 3326 (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) shall only
be interrupted by the filing of a complaint or information in court.

Page 5 of 19
An offense is deemed to be committed in relation to the public office
upon showing of any of the following: (T)
1. When such office is an element of the crime charged; or
2. When the offense charged is intimately connected with the charge of the
official functions of the accused.

In summary, an offense is deemed to be committed in relation to the public


office of the accused when, (a) such office is an element of the crime
charged, or (b) when the offense charged is intimately connected with the
discharge of the official functions of the accused.
Even if the position is not an essential ingredient of the offense charged, if
the information avers the intimate connec- tion between the office and the
offense, this would bring the
offense within the definition of an offense "committed in relation to the public
office."
Where the information averred facts showing that the accused took
advantage of his official functions as municipal mayor when he aimed his
gun and threatened to kill a councilor during a public hearing, clearly the
crime charged is intimately connected with the discharge of official functions
(Alarilla v. Sandiganbayan, 338 SCRA 485).

Page 6 of 19
A person is in custody of the law
when he has been either arrested or otherwise deprived of his freedom or
when he has voluntarily submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the court by
surrendering to the proper authoritites. (Dinapol v. Baldado AM No 92-898,
August 5, 1993)
Jurisdiction over the Person of the Accused –
authority of the court over the person charged; it may be acquired by
apprehension, or by consent of the accused or by waiver of objections such
as entering his plea.

Being in the custody of the law is not necessarily being under the jurisdiction
of the court. "One can be under the custody of the law but not yet subject to
the jurisdiction of the court over his person, such as when a person arrested
by virtue of a warrant files a motion before arraignment to quash the warrant.
On the other hand one can be subject to the jurisdiction of the court over his
person, and yet not be in the custody of the law, as when an accused
escapes custody after his trial has commenced. Being in the custody of the
law signifies restraint on the person, who is thereby deprived of his own will
and liberty, binding him to become obedient to the will of the law. Custody of
the law is literally custody over the body of the accused. It includes, but is
not limited to, detention" (Miranda v. Tuliao, G.R. No. 158763, March 31,
2006).

Page 7 of 19
Jurisdiction over the Person of the Accused –
authority of the court over the person charged; it may be acquired by
apprehension, or by consent of the accused or by waiver of objections such
as entering his plea.
may be acquired by consent of accused or waiver of objections;
acquired by: arrest or voluntary appearance or submission of the accused to
the jurisdiction of the court
Objection can be made through special appearance which is precisely to
avoid court’s jurisdiction
if he fails to make his objection in time, he will be deemed to have waived it

Criminal Jurisdiction Over The Person of the Accused (Bar 2008)


1. It was held that jurisdiction over the person of the accused is acquired
upon his arrest or apprehension, with or without a warrant, or his voluntary
appearance or submission to the jurisdiction of the court (Valdepehas v.
People, 16 SCRA 871; Gimenez v. Nazareno, 160 SCRA 4).

Page 8 of 19
Amendment vs. Substitution (Bar 2001, 2002)
Amendment
May involve either formal or substantial changes.
Substitution
Involves substantial change from the original charge.
Amendment
before the plea is entered can be effected without leave of court.
Substitution
It must be with leave of court as the original information has to be dismissed.
Amendment
An amendment as to form will not require another preliminary investigation
and retaking of plea of the accused.
Substitution
Substitution of the information entails another preliminary investigation and
plea to the new information.
Amendment
An amended information refers to the same offense charged in the original
information or to an offense which necessarily includes or is necessarily
included in the original charge, hence substantial amendments to the
information after the plea has been taken cannot be made over the objection
of the accused, for if the original would be withdrawn, the accused could
invoke double jeopardy.
Substitution
Requires or presupposes that the new information involves a different
offense which does not include or is not necessarily included in the original
charge; hence the accused cannot claim double jeopardy.

Page 9 of 19
Distinction between substitution and amendment (Bar 1994)
The pronouncements in Pacoy v. Cajigal, G.R. No. 157472, September 28,
2007 citing Teehankee v. Madayag, G.R. No. 103102, March 6, 1992, 207
SCRA 134, which distinguish
between amendment and substitution under Sec. 14 of Rule 110, are
illuminating:
"The first paragraph provides the rules for amendment of the
information or complaint, while the second paragraph refers to the
substitution of the information or complaint.
It may accordingly be posited that both amendment and substitution of
the information may be made before or after the defendant pleads, but
they differ in the following respects:
1. Amendment may involve either formal or substantial changes, while
substitution necessarily involves a substantial change from the
original charge;
2. Amendment before plea has been entered can be effected without
leave of court, but substitution of information must be with leave of
court as the original information has to be dismissed;
3. Where the amendment is only as to form, there is no need for another
preliminary investigation and the retaking of the plea of the accused;
in substitution of information, another preliminary investigation is
entailed and the accused has to plead anew to the new information;
and
4. An amended information refers to the same offense charged in the
original information or to an offense which necessarily includes or is
necessarily included in the original charge, hence substantial
amendments to the information after the plea has been taken cannot
be made over the objection of the accused, for if the original
information would be withdrawn, the accused could invoke double
jeopardy. On the other hand, substitution requires or presupposes that
the new information involves a different offense which does not include
or is not necessarily included in the original charge, hence the accused
cannot claim double jeopardy.

Page 10 of 19
In determining, therefore, whether there should be an amendment
under the first paragraph of Section 14, Rule 110, or a substitution of
information under the
second paragraph thereof, the rule is that where the second
information involves the same offense, or an offense which necessarily
includes or is necessarily included in the first information, an
amendment of the information is sufficient; otherwise, where the new
information charges an offense which is distinct and different from that
initially charged, a substitution is in order.
There is identity between the two offenses when the evidence to
support a conviction for one offense would be sufficient to warrant a
conviction for the other, or when the second offense is exactly the
same as the first, or when the second offense is an attempt to commit
or a frustration of, or when it necessarily includes or is necessarily
included in, the offense charged in the first information. In this
connection, an offense may be said to necessarily include another
when some of the essential elements or ingredients of the former, as
this is alleged in the information, constitute the latter. And, vice-versa,
an offense may be said to be necessarily included in another when the
essential ingredients of the former constitute or form a part of those
constituting the latter."

Page 11 of 19
Party who may legally file a complaint for adultery or concubinage
Only the offended spouse may file a complaint for adultery or concubinage.
(Sec. 5, Rule 110)
NOTE: The offended spouse cannot institute a criminal action for adultery
without including the guilty parties if both are alive; or if the offended party
has consented to the offense or pardoned the offenders. (Sec. 5, Rule 110)
If the complainant has already been divorced, he can no longer file the
complaint. This is considered as lack of status. (Pilapil v. Somera, G.R. No.
80116, June 30, 1989)
Parties who may file a complaint for seduction, abduction or acts of
lasciviousness
1. The offended party;
2. Parents of the offended party;
3. Grandparents of the offended party; or
4. Guardian of the offended party. (Sec. 5, Rule 110)

NOTE: Such crimes cannot be prosecuted if the offender has been expressly
pardoned by any of the abovementioned parties. (Sec. 5, Rule 110)
Instances when the State may initiate the action for seduction,
abduction or acts of lasciviousness in behalf of the offended party
1. When the offended party dies or becomes incapacitated before a
complaint is filed; or
2. The offended party has no known parents, grandparents or guardian.
(Sec. 5, Rule 110)

NOTE: This is pursuant to the doctrine of parens patriae.

Page 12 of 19
Intervention of the offended party in criminal action (T)
GR: The offended party has the right to intervene by counsel in the
prosecution of the criminal action where the civil action for the recovery of
civil liability is instituted in the criminal action pursuant to Rule 111. (Sec. 16,
Rule 110)
XPNs:
1. From the nature of the crime and the law defining or punishing it, no civil
liability arises in favor of the offended party, e.g. sedition, rebellion, treason
(crimes against national security);
2. The offended party waived the right to civil indemnity; or
3. The offended party had already instituted separate action.

Q: What is the rule on intervention of the offended party in the criminal


action?
A:
GR: Offended party has the right to intervene by counsel in the prosecution
of the criminal action, where the civil action for the recovery of civil liability is
instituted in the criminal action pursuant to Rule 111.
XPNs:
1. Where from the nature of the crime and the law defining and punishing it,
NO civil liability arises in favor of the offended party; and
2. Where the offended party has waived his right to civil indemnity OR has
expressly reserved his right to institute a civil action OR has already instituted
said action.
3. Where the offended party has expressly reserved his right to institute a
separate civil action; OR
4. Where the offended party has already instituted said action

Page 13 of 19
RULE ON IMPLIED INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ACTION WITH CRIMINAL
ACTION
Q: Does the institution of a criminal action include the civil action as
well?
A:
GR: When a criminal action is instituted, the civil action for the recovery of
civil liability arising from the offense shall be deemed instituted with the
criminal action (Section 1a, Rule 111)
XPNs: When the offended party:
1. WAIVES the civil action;
2. RESERVES his right to institute a separate civil action; or
3. INSTITUTES A CIVIL ACTION PRIOR to the criminal action (Sec. 1, Rule
111).

Page 14 of 19
JURISDICTION OF CRIMINAL COURTS
Municipal Trial Court, Municipal Circuit Trial Court, and Metropolitan
Trial Court (MTC)
Except in cases falling within the exclusive jurisdiction of the RTC and of the
Sandiganbayan:
1. Exclusive original jurisdiction over all violations of city or municipal
ordinances committed within their respective territorial jurisdiction [Sec.
32(1), B.P. 129 as amended by R.A. 7691];
2. Exclusive original jurisdiction over all offenses punishable with
imprisonment not exceeding 6 years irrespective of the amount of fine, and
regardless of other imposable or accessory penalties [Sec. 32(2), B.P. 129
as amended by R.A. 7691];
3. Exclusive original jurisdiction over offenses involving damage to property
through criminal negligence [Sec. 32(2), B.P. 129 as amended by R.A. 7691];
4. Summary procedure in certain cases; and
NOTE: The MTCs shall have jurisdiction over the following cases falling
within their jurisdiction:
a. Violations of traffic laws, rules and regulations:
b. Violations of the rental law;
c. B.P. 22 cases
d. Violations of municipal and city ordinances;
e. All other criminal cases where the penalty prescribed by law for the offense
charged is imprisonment not exceeding 6 months, or a fine not exceeding
P1, 000.00, or both; and
f. Offenses involving damage to property through criminal negligence where
the imposable penalty does not exceed P10, 000.00. [Sec 1 (b), The 1991
Rules on Summary Procedure]
5. Special jurisdiction to decide on applications for bail in the absence of all
RTC judges in a province or city. (Sec 35, B.P. 129 as amended by R.A.
7691)

Page 15 of 19
Regional Trial Court (RTC)
1. Exclusive original jurisdiction in all criminal cases not within the exclusive
jurisdiction of any court, tribunal or body, except those now falling under the
exclusive and concurrent jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan (Sec 20, B.P.
129, as amended by R.A. 7691);
2. Original jurisdiction in the issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition,
mandamus, quo warranto, habeas corpus, and injunction, enforceable in any
part of their respective regions [Sec 21(1), B.P. 129, as amended by R.A.
7691];
3. Appellate jurisdiction over all cases decided by the MTC within its territorial
jurisdiction (Sec. 22, B.P. 129, as amended by R.A. 7691);
4. Special jurisdiction of certain branches to handle exclusively criminal
cases as may be determined by the Supreme Court (Sec. 23, B.P. 129, as
amended by R.A. 7691); and
5. Jurisdiction over criminal cases under specific laws such as:

a. Criminal and civil aspects of written defamation (Art. 360, RPC);


b. Designated special courts over cases in violation of the Comprehensive
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 (Sec 90, R.A. 9165);
c. Violation of intellectual property rights (A.M. No. 03-03-03-SC); and
d. All cases on money laundering. (Sec. 5, R.A. 9160)

Page 16 of 19
Q: In what cases does the RPC have an extraterritorial application?
A: Against those who:
1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship
2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippine
Islands or obligations and securities issued by the Government of the
Philippine Islands
3. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into these
islands of the obligations and securities mentioned in the preceding number
4. While being public officers or employees, should commit an offense in
the exercise of their functions; or
5. Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law
of nations. (Art. 2, RPC)

Page 17 of 19
Sufficiency of the complaint or information (Bar 1994; 2001)
1. A complaint or an information is deemed sufficient if it contains the
following:
(a) The name of the accused; if the offense is committed by more than one
person, all of them shall be included in the complaint or information; o
The designation of the offense given by statute;
The acts or omissions complained of as constituting the offense;
The name of the offended party;
The approximate date of the commission of the offense; and
The place where the offense was committed (Sec. 6, Rule 110, Rules of
Court; People v. Canares, G.R. No. 174065, February 18,2009).

2. A complaint or information is sufficient if it states the name of the accused,


the designation of the offense by the statute, the acts or omissions
complained of as constituting the offense, the name of the offended party,
the approximate date of the commission of the offense and the place where
the offense was committed (Malto v. People, G.R. No. 164733, September
21, 2007; People v. Canares, G.R. No. 174065, February 18, 2009; People
v. Teodoro, G.R. No. 172372, December 4, 2009; People v. Garcia, G.R. No.
159450, March 30, 2011).

Test for sufficiency of the complaint or information


1. The test is whether the crime is described in intelligible terms with such
particularity as to apprise the accused, with reasonable certainty, of
the offense charged (Lazarte, Jr. v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 180122,
March 13,2009) because the purpose of the requirement for the
information's validity and sufficiency is to enable the accused to
suitably prepare for his defense, since he is presumed to have no
independent knowledge of the facts that constitute the offense (People
v. Cinco, G.R. No. 186460, December 4,2009).

Page 18 of 19
Prohibited pleadings, motions and petitions in summary procedure
(Bar 2004); civil and criminal cases
1. Motion to quash the complaint or information except if the ground is lack
of jurisdiction over the subject matter or failure to comply with the barangay
conciliation proceedings;

Page 19 of 19

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi