JURISDICTION

1. Over What offenses may the MTC exercise exclusive original

jurisdiction?
Over the following offenses:
a) All violations of city or municipal ordinances committed within its
territorial jurisdiction.
b) Over all offenses punishable with imprisonment not exceeding six
years irrespective of the amount of fine, and regardless of other
imposable accessory or other penalties including civil liability arising
from such offenses or predicated thereon irrespective of kind,
nature, value, or amount thereof. Provided, however, that in
offenses involving damage to property through criminal negligence,
it shall have exclusive original jurisdiction thereof. (Sec 32, BP 129
as amended by RA 7691)
2. In determining what court has jurisdiction over a criminal case,
is the amount of the fine material?
If the offense is punishable by imprisonment not exceeding six
(6) years he MTC has jurisdiction irrespective of the amount of the fine.
But where the only penalty repeat, only penalty provided by law
is fine the amount thereof shall determine the jurisdiction of the court.
Thus if the amount of fine imposable is not more than P4000, it is the
MTC that has jurisdiction; if it exceeds more than P4000, it is the RTC
that has jurisdiction. The RTC also has jurisdiction over offenses
committed by public officers and employees in relation to their duties
where the amount of fine does not exceed P6000.
And where the offenses involves damage to property through
criminal negligence the same is under the exclusive original jurisdiction
of the MTC irrespective of the amount of the fine imposable. (Ref: RA
No. 7691; SC Adm. Circular No. 09-94)
3. Libel is punishable by imprisonment of 6 months and 1 day to 4
years and 2 months. Do Municipal Trial Courts (and MeTCs)
have jurisdiction to try libel cases?
Despite the expanded jurisdiction conferred by RA No. 7691 to
Municipal Trial Courts, they do not have jurisdiction to try libel cases.

Administrative Circular No. 104-96 provides that libel cases shall be

tried by the Regional Trial Courts having Jurisdiction over them to the
exclusion of the Metropolitan Trial Courts. (Ref: PP. vs. MTC of Quezon
City, Br. 31, et al. GR No. 123263 Dec. 16, 1996)
4. What court has jurisdiction over violation of B.P. Blg. 22?
The MTC has original exclusive jurisdiction over all case involving
B.P Blg. 22 because the penalty imposable is imprisonment not
exceeding one year regardless of the amount of the check. (Ref: R.A.
No. 7691)
5. In private crimes, must the offended party sign the criminal
complaint so that the trial court should acquire jurisdiction
over the offense?
No. The signing of the complaint by the offended party is no longer
jurisdictional, but is merely a condition sine qua non for the exercise by
the proper authorities of their power to prosecute. Consequently, the
failure of the accused to raise said issue at the trial bars him from
raising it on appeal. (Ref: People vs. Leoparte, 192 SCRA 662)
RULE 110
PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES
1. How many criminal actions can be instituted?
Criminal actions may be instituted as follows:
a) For offenses requiring preliminary investigation by filing the
complaint with the proper officer for the purpose of conducting the
requisite preliminary investigation.
b) For all other offenses, by filing the complaint or information directly
with the MTC or the complaint with the office of the prosecutor. In
Manila and other chartered cities, the complaint shall be filed with
the office of the prosecutor, unless otherwise provided in their
charters. (Ref: Section 1)
2. Does the filing of a complaint with the prosecutors (or
Fiscals) office stop the running of the period of prescription of
offenses?

Yes. Section 1 of Rule 110 provides that the institution of the

criminal action shall interrupt the period of prescription of the offense
charged unless otherwise provided in special laws.
But as held in Zaldiva vs. Perez, 211 SCRA 277, July 2, 1992 if the
charge is a violation of a municipal ordinance, it is the filing thereof in
court (MTC) that stops the running of the prescriptive period. This is
because the law that is applicable is not Article 91 of the Revised penal
Code but Act No, 3326 as amended entitled An Act to Establish
Ordinances and to Provide When Prescription Shall Begin to Run.
Thus, if the offense is, say reckless imprudence resulting in slight
physical injuries, the applicable law is Article 91 of the Revised Penal
Code which provides, among other things, that the period of
prescription of the offense shall be interrupted by the filing of the
complaint or information. In other words the prescriptive period for
offenses penalized by the Revise Penal Code is interrupted by the filing
of the complaint either in the prosecutors office or in court. (Refs:
Francisco vs. CA, 122 SCRA 538 [1983]; Reodica vs. CA, GR No.
125066, July 8, 1996).
In Llenes vs. RTC Judge Dicdican, et al., GR No. 1222274, July 31,
1996 [260 SCRA 207, it was held that the filing of a complaint with the
Office of the Ombudsman against a government official interrupts the
period of prescription of the offense.
3. Section 2 of Rule 110 provides that the complaint or
information shall be xxx against all persons who appear to be
responsible for the offense involved. Is there an exception to
this?
Yes. Where a person, although among those responsible for the
offense is admitted to the Witness Protection Program under R.A. No.
6981 to be utilized as a state witness, he does not have to be included
as an accused in the information. (Ref: Webb vs. de leon, et al G.R. No.
121234, August 23, 1995)
4. What is a complaint? Information?
A complaint is a sworn written statement 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.
(Ref: Section 3)

An Information is an accusation in writing charging a person with

an offense subscribed by the prosecutor and filed with the court. (Ref:
Section 4)
5. What are the distinctions between complaint and information?
The following are distinctions between complaint and information:
a) A complaint is subscribed by the offended party, any peace officer,
or other public officer charged with the enforcement of the law
violated while an information is subscribed by the prosecutor;
b) A complaint is under oath, while an information need not be under
oath;
c) A complaint is filed with the court either for preliminary
investigation or for trial; An information is filed with the court for
trial.
6. What is the rule
circumstances?

regarding

qualifying

and

aggravating

The rule now requires the complaint or information to state and

specify the qualifying and aggravating circumstances of the offense
charged. (Refs: Section 8 and 9)
Qualifying and aggravating circumstances proven during the trial
but are not alleged in the complaint or information shall not be
considered by the court in the imposition of the penalty even if proven
at the trial. (Ref: People vs. Arrojado, G.R. No. 30492, January 31, 2001)
7. What is the doctrine of parens patriae as anunciated under
Section 5, Rule 110 of the Rules of Court (The Revised Rules of
Criminal Procedure)?
Parens Patriae
is the doctrine that vests upon parents,
grandparents, guardians, and the State the authority to initiate
criminal prosecution in cases of seduction, abduction, or acts of
lasciviousness in the event the offended party dies or becomes
incapacitated before she could file the complaint.
The doctrine of parens patriae, however does not cover adultery
and concubinage where only the offended spouse and no other is
authorized by law to initiate the criminal prosecution thereof. (Ref:
Pilapil vs. Somera, 174 SCRA 653)

8. May the complaint or information charge more than one

offense?
No. A complaint or information must charge only one offense
except when the law prescribes a single punishment for various
offenses. (Section 13, Rule 110)
9. What
are the
distinctions between
substitution of information (or complaint)?

amendment

and

The following are the distinctions:

a) The amendment may involve either formal or substantial changes,
while substitution necessarily involves substantial changes from the
original charge;
b) Amendment before plea has been entered can be effected without
leave of court, as a general rule; while substitution must always be
with leave of court as the original information has to be dismissed;
c) Where the amendment is only as to form, there is no need for
another preliminary investigation and retaking of the plea of the
accused, while in substitution of information, another preliminary
investigation is entailed and the accused has to plead anew to the
new information;
d) An amended information refers to the same offense charged in the
original information or to an offense which necessarily includes or is
included in the original charge hence substantial amendments to
the information after the plea has been taken cannot be made, for if
the original information would be withdrawn, the accused can
invoke double jeopardy. On the other hand substitution of
information presupposed that the new information involves a
different offense which does not include or is not necessarily
included in the original charge; hence accused cannot claim double
jeopardy.
In determining thereof whether there should be 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. (Teehankee Jr. vs. Madayag, et al. G.R. No. 103102, March 6,
1992)
10.
When may the complaint or information be amended
without leave of court? with leave of court?
A complaint or information may be amended in form or in
substance without leave of court, at any time before the accused
enters his plea.
After the plea and during the trial, formal amendment may only
be made with leave of court.
Before the plea, however, any amendment that downgrades the
nature of the offense charged in or excludes any accused from the
complaint or information can be made only upon motion by the
prosecutor, with notice to the offended party, and with leave of court.
(Ref: Section 14)
11.
If the accused has already been arraigned, may the
prosecution still amend the complaint or information to change
the date of the commission of the offense?
Yes, because the allegation of the date of the commission of the
offense is merely a matter of form Section 11, Rule 110 provides that it
is not necessary to state in the complaint or information the precise
date the offense was committed. The exception is when the date or
time is a material ingredient of the offense in which case the
amendment will be considered substantial and therefore, will not be
allowed after the accused has already been arraigned. (Ref: Gablonza
vs. CA, G.R. No. 140311, March 30, 2001)
12.
X is charged with serious physical injuries and the case is
filed with the MTC. Later, the prosecution sought to amend the
information to charge frustrated murder, alleging intent to kill.
The MTC judge denied the amendment and ordered the
prosecution to present its evidence. When the case was
submitted for decision, the judge found out that there really
was intent to kill. The judge then dismissed the case to give
way to the filing of an information for frustrated murder with
the RTC. Is the dismissal of the case correct?
The dismissal of the case is not correct. The MTC judge should
not have decided the case as originally filed. The information cannot

anymore be amended to charge frustrated murder because such

amendment will violate the right of the accused against double
jeopardy. (Ref: People vs. Mogel, 131 SCRA 296)
RULE 111
PROSECUTION OF CIVIL ACTION
1 When a criminal action is instituted, what civil action is
deemed instituted with the criminal action?
Only the civil action for the recovery of civil liability arising from
the offense charges shall be deemed instituted with the criminal
action. The civil action is deemed instituted, not merely impliedly
instituted, with the criminal action. But this rule on institution of the
civil action with the criminal action does not apply if the offended
party: (a) waives the civil action; (2) reserves the right to institute it
separately; or (3) institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action.
(Ref: Section 1)
Independent civil actions under Articles 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of
the Civil Code are not deemed or impliedly instituted with the criminal
action.
2 May the offended party institute a separate civil action even if
he has not reserved his right to do so?
If the civil action is one to enforce a civil liability arising from the
offense charged the offended party is required to reserve his right to
institute a separate civil action. But there are instances when
reservation is not allowed, and these are: (a) in criminal action for
violation of BP. 22 where the corresponding civil action is deemed
included and therefore, no reservation to file such civil action
separately shall be allowed; (b) in criminal action filed with the
Sandiganbayan where the criminal action deemed to necessarily carry
with it the filing of the civil action, and no right reserved the filing of
such civil action separately from the criminal action shall be
recognized. (Res: Section 1(b); Section 4, PD 1606, as amended by RA
No. 8249)
The reservation of the right to institute a separate civil action
shall be made before the prosecution starts presenting its evidence
and under circumstances affording the offended party a reasonable
opportunity to make such reservation.

But if the civil action is an independent civil action as provided

for in Articles 32, 33, 34, and 2176 of the Civil Code, the offended party
is not required to make such reservation. Moreover, an independent
civil action may proceed simultaneously and independently of the
criminal action. (Ref: Section 3)
3 An information was filed against X for violation of BP. 22
because the check in the amount of P100,000 issued by X was
dishonored by the drawee-bank. May y reserve his right to file
a separate civil action for the payment of the sum of P100,000?
No, Section 1(b0 Rule 111 of the Revised Rules of Criminal
Procedure provides, the criminal action for violation of Batas
Pambansa Blg. 22. shall be deemed to include the corresponding civil
action. No reservation to file such civil action separately shall be
allowed.
Under SC Circular No. 57-97 dated September 16, 1997 the
criminal action for violation of BP 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. The same
Circular states Where the civil action has heretofore been filed
separately and trial thereof has not yet commenced. It may be
consolidated with the criminal action upon application with the court
trying the latter case. If the application is granted the trial of both
actions shall proceed in accordance with the pertinent procedure
outlined in Section 2(a) of Rule 111 governing the proceedings in the
actions as thus consolidated.
4 On the basis of Ys complaint, an information for Estafa was
filed against X in the RTC of Baguio City, After his arraignment
X filed an answer with counterclaim where he asked the trial
court to dismiss the criminal action, together with the civil
action impliedly instituted with it and to order Y to pay him
moral damages, exemplary damages, attorneys fees and
litigation expenses. But on motion of the prosecution the trial
court ordered that the answer with counterclaim be expunged
from the records. Did the Trial Court act correctly?
Yes, because under Section 1, Rule 11 no counterclaim crossclaim or third-party complaint may be filed by the accused in the

criminal case, but any case of action which could have been the
subject thereof may be litigated in a separate civil action.
The old rules of criminal procedure did not contain a similar
provision prohibiting the filing of counterclaim, cross claim, third-party
complaint in criminal actions. But the rule was the same even then. So
it was that in Cabaero et al. vs. Cantos, G.R. No. 102942, April 18,
1997, the Supreme Court, in holding that the accused cannot set-up a
counterclaim, Cross-claim, or third-party complaint in the same
criminal case noted that while the rules on civil procedure expressly
recognized a defendants entitlement to plead his counterclaim and
offer evidence in support thereof the rules on criminal procedure which
authorize the implied institution of a civil action in criminal case are in
contrast, silent on this point and do not provide specific guidelines on
how such counterclaim shall be pursued.
5 What are the rules on the payment of filing fees in the
instances where the civil action is deemed instituted with the
criminal action?
a) When the amount of damages, other than actual, is alleged in the
complaint or information, then the corresponding filing fees shall be
paid by the offended party upon the filing thereof in court for trial.
b) When the offended party seeks to enforce civil liability against the
accused by way of moral, nominal, or exemplary damages without
specifying the amount thereof in the complaint the filing fees
therefore shall constitute a first lien on the judgment awarding such
damages. (Ref: Section 1)
In Manuel vs. Alleche Jr., G.R. No. 115683, July 26, 1996, citing
General vs. Claravall, 195 SCRA 623, it was held that when the
amount of damages is not alleged in the complaint or information,
the corresponding filing does not need to be paid and shall simply
constitute a first lien in the judgment, except in an award for actual
damages. This applies where the judgment awards a claim not
specified and/or nominal damages but has not specified any amount
at all leaving the quantification thereof entirely to the trial courts
discretion.
c) A criminal action for violation of BP 22 shall be deemed to include
the corresponding civil action. No reservation to file such civil action
shall be allowed. Upon the filing of the joint criminal action, the
offended party shall pay in full the filing fees based on the amount
of check involved, which shall be considered as the actual damages

claimed. Where the complaint or information also seeks to recover

the liquidated, moral, nominal, temperate, or exemplary damages,
the offended party shall pay the filing fees based on the amounts
therein. If the amounts are not so alleged but any of these damages
are subsequently awarded by the court the filing fees based on the
amount awarded shall constitute a first lien on the judgment. (Ref:
Section 1)
d) In criminal actions for Estafa, the offended party shall pay the filing
fee therefore if he fails to manifest within 15 days from the filing of
the information that the civil liability arising from the crime has
been or would be separately prosecuted. (Ref: Section 20(a), Rule
141)
6 The rule stated in Section 1 is that no filing fees shall be
required for actual damage. What are the exceptions?
The exceptions are:
a) In criminal actions for violation of BP 22
b) In criminal actions for estafa, if the offended party fails to manifest
within 15 days from the filing of the information that the civil
liability arising from the crime has been or would be separately
prosecuted.
7 Supposed the civil action was impliedly instituted in the
criminal action, and the accused after trial was convicted and
was ordered to pay damages to the offended party, and the
accused appealed, does the death of the accused while his
case is on appeal extinguish his civil liability?
OLD RULE: in the case of People vs. Sendaydiego, 81 SCRA 120, it was
held that the civil liability of an accused who dies while his case is
pending appeal survives him although the civil liability is exclusively
dependent on the criminal action already extinguished.
NEW RULE: The ruling in Sendeydiego has been abandoned. The rule
now is laid down into People vs. Bayotas, G.R. No. 102007, September
2, 1994 (EN Banc) reiterated in Fonacier vs. Sandiganbayan, 238 SCRA
655. Thus:
a) Death of an accused pending appeal of his conviction extinguished
his criminal liability as well as civil liability based solely thereon. As
opined by Justice Regalado, the death of the accused prior to final
judgment terminates his criminal liability and his civil liability

directly arising from and based solely on the offense committed, i.e.
civil liability ex delicto in senso strictiore.
b) Corollarily, the claim for civil liability survives notwithstanding the
death of accused, if the same may also be predicated on a source of
obligation other than delict. Article 1157 of the Civil Code
enumerates these other sources of obligation from which the civil
liability may arise as a result of the same act or omission: (a) law,
(b) contracts, (c) quasi-contracts, (d) xxx, (e) quasi-delicts.
c) Where the civil liability survives as explained in No. (b) above, an
action for recovery therefore may be pursued but only by way of
filing a separate civil action and subject to Section 1, Rule 111. This
separate civil action may be enforced either against the
executor/administrator or the estate of the accused depending on
the source of obligation upon which the same is based as explained
above.
d) Finally, the private offended party need not fear a forfeiture of his
right to file this separate civil action by prescription in cases where
during the prosecution of the criminal action and prior to its
extinction, the private offended party instituted together therewith
the civil action. In such a case the statute of limitation on the civil
liability is deemed interrupted during the pendency of the criminal
case, conformably with the provisions of Article 1155 of the Civil
Code; that should avoid any apprehension on a possible privation of
right by prescription.
Section 4 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure already mentions the
effect of the death of the accused on his civil liability as follows:
a) If the accused dies after arraignment and during the pendency of the
criminal action, his death shall extinguish the civil liability arising from
the delict (or crime).
b) If he dies before arraignment, the case shall be discussed without any
prejudice to any civil action the offended party may file against the
estate of the deceased. [RUAs opinion; the civil action adverted to
here refers to a civil action not arising from the delict (or crime),
because civil action arising from delict (or crime) is likewise
extinguished if the accused dies before arraignment.]
Note that independency with action and civil actions to enforce civil
liability arising from other sources of obligation i.e. law, contracts,
quasi-contracts, or quasi-delicts, are not affected by death of the
accused, and such civil actions may be continued against the estate or

the legal representative of the deceased accused after proper

substitution.
8 What are the elements of a prejudicial question?
The following are the elements of a prejudicial question:
a) The previously instituted civil action involves an issue similar or
intimately related to the issue raised in the subsequent criminal
action; and
b) The resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal
action may proceed. (Ref: Section 7)
The rule regarding prejudicial question does not apply where one
case is administrative and the other is civil. (Ocampo vs.
Buenaventura, 55 SCRA 267 [1974])
9 The rule is that a criminal action may be suspended by reason
of the pendency of a prejudicial question in a civil action.
Where and when may the petition for the suspension of
criminal action be filed?
The petition for suspension of the criminal action based upon the
pendency of a prejudicial question may be filed in the office of the
prosecutor or the court conducting the preliminary investigation. But
when the criminal action has already been filed in court for trial the
petition for suspension shall be filed in the same court and in the same
criminal action at any time before the prosecution rest. (Ref: Section 6)

RULE 112
PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION
1 What is preliminary investigation?
Preliminary investigation is an inquiry or proceeding to determine
whether there is sufficient ground to engender a well-founded belief
that a crime punishable by imprisonment of at least 4 years 2 months
and 1 day, without regard to the fine, has been committed and the
respondent is probably guilty thereof and should be held for trial.

Only offenses where the penalty prescribed by law is at least 4

years 2 months and 1 day (4:2:1) without regard to the fine require
preliminary investigation. (Ref: Section 1)
2 May the right to preliminary investigation be waived? How?
3 Is absence or lack of preliminary investigation a ground for a
motion to quash?
4 X was charged with murder in an information filed in court. No
preliminary investigation was conducted prior to the filing of
the information. At this arraignment, he pleaded not guilty, the
case was set for trial. Before the commencement of the trial, X
filed
a
motion
demanding
his
right
to
preliminary
investigation. The trial court denied his motion. After trial X
was convicted. He appealed. Among the errors he assigned are
the lack of preliminary investigation and the trial courts
denial of his motion. Is he trial court correct in denying Xs
motion for preliminary investigation?
5 May preliminary investigation be conducted ex parte?
6 A complaint for homicide was filed with the MTC of Rosario, La
Union for preliminary investigation. After going over the
statements of witnesses, the judge was convinced that the
crime committed was murder not homicide. He then amended
the designation of the offense from homicide to murder. Does
the judge have hat authority?
7 Complaint for illegal fishing with the use of explosives was
filed against A, B, C, and D with the MTC for preliminary
investigation. The penalty for illegal fishing with the use of
explosives is 20 years to life imprisonment under Section 38,
PD 704 as amended. The MTC judge amended the complaint by
deleting the allegation that the accused used explosives in
the commission of the crime. This the MTC judge did so as to
bring the case within his jurisdiction. The accused were then
arraigned for illegal fishing only, and after they all pleaded
guilty, the judge sentenced each of them to pay a fine of
P1000. Did the judge act correctly?
8 Under Section 7 of Rule 112, an accused validly arrested
without warrant for an offense which requires preliminary
investigation and charged in court without preliminary
investigation having been first conducted may ask for a
preliminary investigation within five days from the time he

learns of the filing of the information against him. What is the

nature of the five-day period?
9 The Constitution provides that no warrant shall issue except
upon probable cause to be determined personally by the judge
after examination under oath or affirmation of the complaint
and his witnesses. May the RTC judge, in issuing the warrant of
arrest rely on the fiscals certification of the probable cause?
10 In issuing the warrant of arrest, is the RTC judge required to
personally examine the complaint and his witnesses by
searching questions and answers?
11 What may the RTC Judge do after personally evaluating the
resolution and supporting evidence submitted by the
prosecutor?
12 What about the MTC Judge, may he also issue warrant of
arrest?
13 Suppose the MTC Judge, after conducting preliminary
investigation, finds that a probable cause exists, may he still
refuse to issue a warrant of arrest?
14 What are the instances where warrant of arrest shall not issue
because it is not necessary?
15 When may the MTC Judge issue summons instead of warrant of
arrest?
16 Is a petition for habeas corpus the remedy against a warrant of
arrest that was improperly issued?
RULE 113
ARREST
1 What is arrest?