Professional Documents
Culture Documents
SYSTEM OF CRIMPROC:
accusatorial/adversary which contending
parties battle it out and the court renders
judgment
LIBERAL INTERPRETATION OF THE
RULES: ROC 6(1) rules are liberally
construed in order to promote their
objective of securing just, speedy and
inexpensive disposition of every action
and proceeding.
although
the
appeal
was
erroneous,
the
appeal
involved
a
possibility of a person deprive of liberty
due to procedural lapses is great, a
relaxation of the rule is warranted.
Where the
RPC) :
on
ii. Forge
or
counterfeit
any
coin/currency
or OBLIGATIONS
AND
SECURITIES
OF
THE
PHILIPPINES;
iii. Liable with acts connected with the
INTRODUCTION
TO
THE
PHILIPPINES of those obligations
and securities mentioned above;
iv. who is a public officer and commits
an OFFENSE IN THE EXERCISE OF
THEIR FUNCTION;
v. who commits a CRIME AGAINST
NATIONAL SECURITY AND LAW OF
THE NATIONS:
(Security) treason,
(Nations) Piracy.
conspircay,
etc;
Page 1 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
Page | 2
PRINCIPLE OF CONTINUING JURISDICTION:
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.
1.
3.
JURISDICTION
PERSON ACCUSED
OVER
THE
ii.
a. Jurisdiction
over
the
plaintiff
or
petitioner: This is acquired by the filing of
the
complaint,
petition
or
initiatory
pleading before the court by the plaintiff or
petitioner.
b. Jurisdiction over the defendant or
respondent: This
is
acquired
by
the
voluntary appearance or submission by the
defendant or respondent to the court or by
coercive process issued by the court to him,
generally by the service of summons.
c. Jurisdiction over the subject matter: This
is conferred by law and, unlike jurisdiction
over the parties, cannot be conferred on the
court by the voluntary act or agreement of
the parties.
d. Jurisdiction over the issues of the case:
This is determined and conferred by the
pleadings filed in the case by the parties, or
by their agreement in a pre-trial order or
stipulation, or, at times by their implied
consent as by the failure of a party to
object to evidence on an issue not covered
by the pleadings, as provided in Sec. 5, Rule
10.
e. Jurisdiction over the res (or the property
or thing which is the subject of the
litigation). This is acquired by the actual or
constructive seizure by the court of the
thing in question, thus placing it in custodia
legis, as in attachment or garnishment; or
by provision of law which recognizes in the
court the power to deal with the property or
subject
matter
within
its
territorial
jurisdiction,
as
in
land
registration
proceedings or suits involving civil status or
real property in the Philippines of a nonresident defendant.
A defendant on a case cannot ask for any
relief in a court without submitting itself to its
jurisdiction, the warrant of arrest is deemed
proper.
Commission within
territorial jurisdiction of the court.
(De joya v. Marquez)
Page 2 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
Page | 3
court at any stage of the proceeding or
even on appeal
ER:
Raising lack of jurisdiction
does not apply when the Doctrine
of estoppel by laches applies.
(Tijam v. Sibinghanoy 22 s 29)
EER: estoppel by laches does not lie on
the state because the government is
never estopped by the error and mistake
on the part of its agents.
3. ADHERENCE OF JURISDICTION
ER: when a statute changing
jurisdiction of the court ( RA 7975)
the
A.
3. Offenses
punishable
for
imprisonment
BELOW
6
yrs.
regardless of fines (BP 129, section
32 as amended by RA 7691);
4. Offense involving
damage to
properties (BP 129, section 32 as
amended by RA 7691);
5. That in case only fines are
involved, those only below P
4,000.00 but not limited to
damage on property (BP 129,
section 32 as amended by RA
7691);
JURISDITION OF RTC IN CRIM CASES:
Page 3 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
refers
to
transaction
Page | 4
10. KNOWINGLY approving or
granting any LICENSE, PERMIT,
PRIVILEGE or BENEFIT to any
person NOT QUALIFIED or its
mere rep or dummy
11.
A.
DIVULGING
confidential
information
acquired on account of official
position
to
UNAUTHORIZED
PERSON
B.
RELEASING
confidential
information in ADVANCE of its
authorize release date
8. FINANCIAL or PECUNIARY
INTEREST in any business,
contract or transaction which
the public officer INTERVENES
or TAKES PART:
QA: in his official capacity; or
QB:
is prohibited by the
Constitution
9. Public officer who is a
member of a board, panel or
group
having
PERSONAL
INTEREST IN ANY TRANSACTION
REQUIRING THEIR APPROVAL
PRESUMPTION
OF
PERSONAL INTEREST: when
a public officer approves
manifestly
unlawful,
inequitable
or
irregular
transactions
Page 4 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
RPC.
203
who
are
public
officers: any person who is a public
officer by
1. Direct provision of law;
2. Popular election;
3. Appointment by competent
authority;
4. Taking part in the PERFORMANCE
OF PUBLIC FUNCTION in the
Government
R: A public officer embraces
every public servant from the
highest to the lowest. (Maniego
v. Pp)
ER: Appointment of as a
LABORER
in
the
government is not a public
officer. (Ibid.)
EER: Nevertheless, still a public
officer
when
there
is
TEMPORARY performance of
Page | 5
II. CITY Mayor, Vice-mayor, Members of
the Sangguniang
Panglungsod, City
Treasurer, Assessor, Engineer and other
Department Heads;
D.
coup detat)
VII.
OMB
prosecutor;
prosecutor
and
special
is
in
ELEMENTS THEREOF:
I.
Intimately
connected
with
the
respective offices of the accused and
was perpetuated while they were in
the performance, through irregular or
improper, of their official functions
II. Accused had NO personal motive to
commit it;
III.
Accused
would
have
not
committed it had they not held their
public office and merely following
the instruction of their superior
officer.
I.
PROVINCIAL
Governor,
Vice-Gov,
Members
of
the
Sangguniang
Panlalawigan,
provincial
Treasurer,
Assessor, Engineer and other Provincial
Department Head;
Page 5 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
charges the
as a co-
Page | 6
principal, accomplice or accessory of a
public officer or employee who has been
charged
with
a
crime
within
its
jurisdiction SDB will have jurisdiction.
(Azarcon v. SDB)
In sum, before the Sandiganbayan
may lawfully try a private individual under PD
1606, the following requisites must be
satisfied: (1) he must be charged with a
public officer/employee, and (2) he must
be tried jointly. (Bondoc v. SDB)
In a situation where the public officer/
employee under the SDB has already been
submitted for decision and the co-principal or
accessory which is a private individual was not
therein included, the SDB cannot be
divested from its jurisdiction even if the
law provides that they must be tried
jointly. Settled is the rule that courts should
not give a statute a meaning that would lead
to absurdities. (Ibid.)
RULE 110
PROSECUTION OF OFFENSE
RULE 110(1) Institution of criminal
actions;
How
to
interrupt
prescriptive period thereof.
(A) For Offenses requiring PI:
pursuant to Rule 112 section 1 hereof, by
R1: Generally offenses requiring PI involves penalty of
imprisonment for MORE THAN 4 yrs 2 mos. (4yrs2mos1day)
1. FILING a complaint
2.
OFFICER
Filed
through
the
PROPER
for offenses
involving penalty of imprisonment for 4 yrs 2 mos. OR
LESS
(c)
In
MANILA
and
OTHER
CHARTERED CITIES, Filing the complaint
with the OFFICE OF THE PROSECUTOR
UNLESS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THEIR
CHARTER
R: Filing of the complaint interrupts the
running of the prescriptive period
ER: UNLESSS otherwise provided
by special laws
R: REASON BEHIND THE DISTINCTION:
THE FILING OF THE COMPLAINT IN ORDER TO
TOLL THE RUNNING OF THE PRESCRIPTIVE
PERIOD
REFERS
TO
A
JUDICIAL
PROCEEDING. A JUDICIAL PROCEEDING
CONTEMPLATES
AN
ADVERSARIAL
PROCEEDING.
(NO) The filing of complaint to the
prosecutor
for
purposes
PI
CANNOT
INTERRUPT THE PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD as this
is not a judicial proceeding. The same rule
applies to summary proceeding. Act 3326
provides that it should be proceeding
instituted against the guilty party thus
referred to judicial proceeding. (Zaldivia Case)
(YES) The court held that the filing of the
complaint directly to the MTC is a judicial
proceeding thus TOLL THE RUNNING OF A
PRESCRIPTION PERIOD. (Zaldivia Case)
(YES) The complaint/information filed
directly to the office of the ombudsman
TOLLS THE RUNNING OF THE PRESCRIPTIVE
PERIOD, thus the latter being at par with the
proper court having judicial proceeding.
(Llenes Case)
(YES)
Still
considered
a
judicial
proceeding when the complaint was filed
directly to MTC but has no jurisdiction and
immediately dismissed the case. (Arambulo
Case)
(YES) Settled is the rule that what
controls is not the designation of the
Page 6 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
Page | 7
offense the allegations contained in the
complaint or information. There is no
extinction of the offense because the filing of
original complaint [acts of lasciviousness]
although erroneous [should have been unjust
vexation] toll the running of the prescriptive
period
of
the
subsequently
amended
complaint. (Pp v. Marvilla)
RULE 110(2)
information
The
complaint
or
REQUISITES:
1. In writing
2. In the name of the People in the
Philippines
R1: THE DETERMINATION OF WHO TO CHARGE IS
VESTED TO THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR. The law
makes it his legal duty to file charges againstwhom
evidence may show that a person is responsible for
an offense. Thus it is discretionary on his part
whether evidences justify reasonable belief
that a person committed an offense. (Socrates
Case)
the
are
and
the
3. It must be subscribed:
a. Offended party
b. Any peace officer
c. Public officer charged with
the enforcement of the law
violated
1. Accusation in writing
2. Charging a person with an offense
3. Subscribed by the prosecutor
THE RULE DOES NOT REQUIRE AN
INFORMATION TO BE UNDER OATH. The
prosecutor is charged with the special duty to
file
information
and
under
special
responsibility of his oath of office.
(Estudillo Case) Hence, there is oath of office
already
unfounded
Page 7 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
Page | 8
(Salazar Case)
DUTY OF THE PROSECUTIG OFFICER: After a complaint
and information filed by the prosecutor, the latter file a
motion to dismiss because there is no probable cause, The
prosecutor is duty bound by law to proceed and
prosecute the criminal action in the best of his ability and
let the court decide the merits of the case. (Sta. Rosa
Mining Case)
WHEN
PRIVATE
PROSECUTOR
PROSECUTES UP TO THE END OF
TRIAL:
1. When there is AUTHORIZATION,
Even in the absence of the
public prosecutor; and
2. Said authority NOT revoked or
withdrawn
RULES IN THE INSTITUTION OF
CRIMINAL ACTION IN GENERAL IN
MTC/MCTC
(Q:) WHERE THE PROSECUTOR IS NOT
AVAILABLE, the following may prosecute:
a. Offended Party
b. Any peace officer
c. Public officer charged with the
enforcement of the law violated
RULES IN THE INSTITUTION OF
CRIMINAL ACTION INVOLVING C A S
AA
2. IN SEDUCTION, ABDUCTION
ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS:
AND
Page 8 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
Page | 9
RULE
110(6)
Sufficiency
complaint or information.
LAW
following
Offended party
Parents/guardian
Ascendant/collateral relatives within 3 rd degree
consanguinity
Officer/worker of a licensed child caring
institution
Officer/worker of DSWD
@ least 3 responsible citizens
of
REQUISITE:
1.
3. Acts/commission complained of as
constituting the offense. Provided further in
RULE 110(8)
Generally, where the information
fails to provides the elements/qualification
constituting the crime, there is a presumption
from the allegations that the act was unlawful.
There is no defect when an OFFENSE WAS
GIVEN BY THE STATUE as provided therein
and the ELEMENT/S MAY BE INFERRED
FROM THE ALLEGATION. (Avecilla Case)
However, in CONSPIRACY, it must be
alleged, not just inferred in the information.
(Quitlong Case) conspired confederated
acting in conspiracy
However, in LIBEL/DEFAMATION, the
defamatory words verbatim must be set out in
the information but a defect on this regard may
be cured by presentation of evidence. Failure
to object waived the right to raise the
defect of the information. (Vasquez Case)
However, in RECIDIVISM as an
aggravating circumstance, it is necessary to
allege it in the information and to attach
certified true copies of the sentence. (Dacillo
case)
Page 9 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 10
Provided
5.
Approximate
date
of
commission of the offense.
the
Provided
2.
Aver
the
acts/omissions
constituting
the
offense
(CONTROLLING)
ALLEGATIONS OF CONCLUSION OF FACT
NOT ALLOWED: it must state the specific
acts/omission complained of as constituting the
offense. The allegation did try and attempt to
rape is not sufficient and in violation of the right
of the accused to be informed. (Pp v. Dimaano)
ALLEGATIONS OF CONCLUSION OF LAW NOT
ALLOWED: Where the information charges an
alternative charge stating sexual abuse by
raping or committing acts of lasciviousness not
sufficient and in violation of the right of the
accused to be informed. (Pp v. Dela Cruz)
AS TO DATE OF COMMISSION:
R1: information is NOT defective when the
time or place is NOT AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT
of the crime charged. In Rape case (Pp v.
Lucas)
R2: It becomes defective, when the time or
place is an ESSENTIAL ELEMENT of the crime
charged. In BP 22 case where the time of the
issuance of the check is an essential element
of the crime. (Alonte v. Pp)
Variance in the check control number,
the identity of the check being the first
element in BP22. (Dico v. CA)
3.
Specify
its
qualifying
and
aggravating circumstance. PURSUANT TO
THE RIGHT OF ACCUSED TO BE INFORMED (RULE 115 par. B)
Qualifying
and
Aggravating
Circumstance must be ALLEGE in the
information
so
that
the
court
will
appreciate it as prescribed by Rule 110 (8)
and (9). In this case, recidivism must be alleged
and certified true copies thereof must be
attached in the information. (Pp v. Sayaboc)
Page 10 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 11
and not objected by the accused will
not be appreciated. To do otherwise
would be contrary to public policy of the
rights of the accused to be informed.
(Pp v. Antildo)
The
fact
of
relationship
(qualifying/aggravating circumstance) stated in
the
preamble
and
minority
(qualifying/aggravating circumstance) stated in
the accusatory paragraph does not impair the
validity
of
the
information.
THUS
THE
PARAGRAPH INSIDE THE INFORMATION IS AN
INTEGRAL PART AND SERVES AS ONE WHOLE
DOCUMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF INFORMING
THE ACCUSED OF THE CHARGE ADEQUATELY AS
IN THIS CASE. (Pp v. Villanueva overturning the
decision of Pp v. Bali-Balita)
GR: Defect of the complaint or information with regard to
qualifying and aggravating circumstance of the offense may
be CURED AND WAIVABLE PROVIDED it is (1) inferred in the
allegation and (2) there is presentation of evidence in the
judicial proceeding.
ER: NOT Cured nor waived when offenses involves
either (1) Conspiracy (2) Defamation (3) recidivism
OR BODY)
3.
(People v. Lucas)
Page 11 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
of
the
P a g e | 12
Name and
offended party
surname
of
the
AS TO DATE OF COMMISSION:
b.
2.
(Rocabarte Case)
REMEDY:
1.
2.
a. Its name
b. Any name of which is known or
identified
c. No necessity to aver that it is
organized in accordance with
law
RULE 110(12)
offended party
Name
of
the
Page 12 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 13
GR:
A
complaint/information
CHARGED ONLY ONE OFFENSE
must
g.
RULE 110(14)
substitution
Amendment
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
or
something
already
contained
in
the
original information
to
eliminate
vagueness. (Added in
Matalam
v.
SDB,
referring to Poblete v.
Sandoval)
Whether it does not
charge
another
offense different or
distinct
from
that
charged in the original
one. (Added in Matalam
v. SDB, referring to
Poblete v. Sandoval)
Page 13 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 14
OF
INFORMATION
REQUISITE:
1. Done with WITH LEAVE OF COURT,
CASES
WHERE
THERE
IS
FORMAL
AMENDMENT AFTER ARRAIGNEMENT:
1.
new
information
charging
the
proper offense may be filed
PROVIDED there is no Double
Jeopardy
(SUBSTITUTION
PREJUDICE
WHEN
THERE
IS
SUBSTANTIAL
AMENDMENT: After arraignment, the crime
charged in the original information is
amended which is prejudicial to the
accused:
1. From homicide to murder as it upgrades
the offense charged. (Buhat v. CA)
INFORMATION)
2. It does NOT
ACCUSED
OF
THE
Page 14 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 15
AMENDMENT
Either formal or
substantial
As to the
amendment
involved
As to the leave of
court
Can be amended
W/O leave of
court
As to necessity
of another PI
and
Arraignment
As to offense
involved
No need
SAME OFFENSE
CHARGED OR
OFFENSE which
necessarily
includes in the
original charge.
(Galvez v. CA)
SUBSTITUTION
Necessary that its
substantial
change from the
original charge
It must be done
WITH leave of
court because the
original
complaint/informat
ion
must
be
dismissed
There is
necessity
Presuppose that
new information
INVOLVES A
DIFFERENT
OFFENSE
otherwise the
accused can
invoke double
jeopardy because
he has entered his
plea.
offense
was
committed
(LOCAL OFFENSE)
b. Any
the
essential ingredients of
offense
occurred
(TRANSITORY/CONTINUING
OFFENSE)
some acts material and essential to the crime and
requisite to its consummation occurs on one
province and some in another. (Pp v. Grospe)
When an offense is violation of BP 22, the venue
or jurisdiction of offense is to determine where the
see Calme v.
CA
Page 15 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 16
offended party; and (see Rule 111, sec. 2 last
par.)
2.
3.
The
party
must
have
the
legal
rights
A
substantial
interest in the
subject matter of
the action
That such interest
is actual NOT a
mere expectancy,
subordinate
or
consequential.
Page 16 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 17
offended
party
actually
or
actively
intervene in the criminal proceeding.
(Sarmiento v. CA)
RULE 111
2. Under
circumstance
affording the offended
party
reasonable
opportunity to make
the reservation.
The
death
of
the
accused
necessarily calls for the dismissal of the
criminal case regardless of the institution
of the civil case with it. Consequently the
civil liability ex-delicto is also extinguished
BUT other civil liability which hinges from
other sources of obligation in art. 1157
may be prosecuted in a separate civil
action. (ABS CBN case)
Appearance of a private prosecutor per
se is not an implied election that whether the
offended party instituted or not the civil aspect
in the criminal action. The determination that
it is deemed instituted is whether the
offended
party
actually
or
actively
intervene in the criminal proceeding.
(Sarmiento v. CA)
Page 17 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 18
1.
1.
Accused
CANNOT
abovementioned
pleading
criminal case
file
in
1.
the
the
2.
RULE 65(1)
from
other
(Casupanan v. Laroya)
Page 18 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 19
(A)
EFFECTS
when
a
criminal
action(first filed) was filed AHEAD of the
civil action:
1.
Separate
civil
action
CANNOT BE INSTITUTED UNTIL
there is final judgement in the
criminal action
2. (SUSPENSION) The running of the
prescriptive period of the civil
action is suspended DURING THE
PENDENCY OF CRIMINAL ACTION.
(BARRED)
REQUISITE:
1. Civil
action
has
been
filed
separately
2. Trial of the civil action has not yet
commence
3. Application (Offended party Rule 111,Sec.2)
for consolidation with the court
trying the criminal case
REQUISITE OF
CONSOLIDATION:
1. Civil action has been filed
separately
2. Trial of the civil action has
not yet commence
3. Application for consolidation
with the court trying the
criminal case
Rule 111, Sec. 1(B) last par.
2.
(Hyatt Case)
An appearance of a private
prosecutor in a criminal action in Estafa
and BP 22 is not prohibited to do otherwise
is to deprived the private complainant the
right to protect his interest in such case.
(Rodriguez Case)
Page 19 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 20
Art. 34
4.
Art. 2176
EFFECTS:
1.
Civil
action
PROCEEDS
INDEPENDENTLY of the criminal action;
Independent civil action provided
under RULE 111(3) MAY BE CONSOLIDATED
PROVIDED there is no final judgment criminal
action as prescribed by the rules. (Cojuanco
Jr., v. CA)
2.
Proceeding
requires
PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE
RULE
111(3)
when
there
is
INDEPENDENT CIVIL ACTION; Effects
thereof; Limitation thereof: RATIO
Criminal action is requires proof beyond reasonable doubt
while civil action requires preponderance of evidence
(Bordador v. Luz)
1.
2.
Art. 32
Art. 33
only
Page 20 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
1.
2.
P a g e | 21
A.
When
death
occurs
AFTER
arraignment and DURING the pendency
of criminal action
EFFECT:
1. Civil liability arising from crime or
ex-delicto is extinguished
2. Other Civil actions arising from
other sources of obligation may be
continued
The statute of limitation
on the civil liability is deemed
interrupted during the pendency of
the criminal case. (Pp v. Abungan)
B.
When
arraignment
death
occurs
AFTER
EFFECT:
1. Criminal case shall be dismissed
2. Offended party may file proper civil
action against the estate of the
accused.
PROCEDURE:
I.
PROVIDED,
there
is
substitution in behalf of the
accused,
the
offended
party may continue against
the following accused:
(a) Estate
(b) Legal representative
(c)Heirs of accused who may
be
a
substitute
w/o
appointment of exe/admin.
IN CASE OF MINOR
HEIRS,
the
court
may
appoint guardian ad litem
thereof.
II. The court to order appearance
or substitution within 30 days
from notice.
RULE
111(6)
Petition
for
Suspension of criminal action by
reason of prejudicial question
APPLICABILTY: A CRIMINAL CASE MAY
BE SUSPENDED to give way for the
determination of a civil case which
involves an issue of a prejudicial
question.
WHERE TO FILE
SUSPENSION:
PETITION
FOR
( as of
Elements
prejudicial question: RATIONALE: To
two conflicting decisions. (Tuanda v. SDB)
GR: In PQ, Criminal action takes precedence
over civil action RULE 111(7)
ER: Still there is PQ even if Civil action was
filed ahead under the following:
1.
2.
3.
4.
of
avoid
P a g e | 22
Aside from the separate civil
action provided in RULE
111(3)
OTHER
CIVIL
ACTION ME BY ALLOWED
SO LONG AS THE CIVIL
LIABILITY
DOES
NOT
ARISE
FROM
THE
ACT/OMISSION
COMPLAINED OF.
In this case support and
payment for damages in
legal
separation
for
concubinage is allowed
since the recovery is not
base of the offense but by
virtue of legal consequences
of
legal
separation.
(Gandionico v. Penaranda)
(Adiak v. IAC 146 s 505)
WHEN PQ EXIST:
1. The previously instituted CIVIL
ACTION involves an issue similar or
intimately related to the issue raised in
the subsequent CRIMINAL ACTION; Take
not that the amendment contemplates that a civil action is
filed ahead of a criminal action.
R1: Prejudicial question may ONLY BE
SUSPENDED and not dismissed. In addition, it
can only be invoked UPON PETITION and not in
the instance of the judge or investigating
officer. (Yap v. Paras _ PASI v. Lichauco)
R2: Although actions involved are not civil and
criminal action, THE COURT UPON PETITION OF
ANY OF THE PARTY AND IN THE INTEREST OF
GOOD ORDER, suspend action on one case
pending final outcome of another case closely
related or linked to the first. (City of Pasig v.
COMELECE, also Quimbao v. Osorio)
RULE 112
PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION
RULE 112(1) PI defined; When PI is
required:
Preliminary investigation an inquiry
or proceeding to determine whether
there is sufficient ground to engender
a well founded belief that:
AFFIRMATIVE CASES:
For allegedly giving false testimony in a civil action a
criminal action thereof was thereafter filed while the civil case
was still pending. Thus the criminal action must be
suspended. (Ark Travel v. Presiding Judge)
Civil case Nullity of TCT; Criminal case Squatting;
Issue is ownership. (APA v. Fernandez)
NEGATIVE CASES:
IN BIGAMY CASE, the subsequent action for
declaration of nullity of marriage of the accused is
immaterial and cannot be a ground for PQ because the issue
is not interrelated at all. For bigamy to prosper requires that
Page 22 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 23
PI as a component part of due
process, therefore a STATUTORY AND
SUBSTANTIVE RIGHT accorded to the
accused.
In the absence of PI, the court should hold
in abeyance the proceedings and order
the public prosecutor to conduct PI.
(Villaflor Case)
PI AS AN EXECUTINVE FUNCTION: PI as
an executive function exclusively for
the prosecutor vested with discretion
in the discharge of this function. (Hegerty
Case)
RIGHTS OF ACCUSED DURING PI:
i.
ii.
(Ladiana Case)
PI REQUIRED WHEN
1. Before the filing of the complaint or
information in COURT; and
PI does not require a presence of
counsel in behalf of the accused. To do
otherwise would make a mockery to justice
when counsel thereof does not attend such
inorder that the statute of limitation sets in. IN
EFFECT, PI IS NOT CONSIDERED A PART
OF THE TRIAL BUT A PREPARATORY
ACTION TO JUDICIAL PROCEEDING, THUS
RECORD OF THE FORMER DOES NOT
FORM PART OF THE LATTER. (Narca Case)
PI as not part of the judicial
proceeding the dismissal of the charges is
not equivalent to judicial pronouncement
of acquittal. (301s475)
WHEN TO OBJECT; WAIVABLE: in the
absence of PI, objection must be made
before entry of plea otherwise waived
and when there is refusal by the court,
remedy is for certiorari (RULE 65).
(Romualdez Case)
However
absence
of
which
neither impair the validity of the
information nor affect jurisdiction of
the court nor constitute a ground for
quashal. The minimum evidence required
in PI is showing that more likely than not
a crime was committed. (Serapio Case)
2.
For
offenses
where
penalty
prescribe
by
law
at
least
4yrs2mos&1day w/o regard to fine.
An amendment as to form towards
the information in effect increasing the range
penalty does not necessarily requires a PI
(b) National
Prosecutor
and
Regional
State
Page 23 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 24
however
is
to
the
shall RESOLVE
based
on
the
the
Page 24 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 25
112(4) RESOLUTION
investigating prosecutor and
REVIEW
R1: Resolution
2. In object evidence:
ii.
Reasonable
ground
to
believe that crime was
committed and accused is
probably guilty thereof
I.
COUNTER-AFFIDAVITS
of
himself
and
witnesses
(subscribed and sworn to and
certified)
II. Other supporting documents
relied upon defense
of
its
iv.
Accused
given
an
opportunity
submitting
controverting evidence
3. FORWARD THE RECORD of the
case, within 5 days from
Page 25 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 26
1.
If
investigating
prosecutor
recommended
DISMISSAL
BUT
DISAPPROVED by their superior/deputy:
EFFECT:
the
superior/deputy
may
(a)
himself,
information or
file
the
1. Recommend dismissal
2. Forward the record of the case,
within 5 days from resolution to his
superior who may either be:
(a) Provincial/City prosecutor
(b) Chief State prosecutor
(c) Ombudsman/ his deputies in
Page 26 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 27
But ONCE AN INFORMATION IS FILED
IN COURT, any disposition of the case of
the accused rest within the exclusive
jurisdiction and discretion of the trial
court. The trial court should make an
independent assessment of the merits of the
case. (Santos v. Orda)
1.
Judges
shall
PERSONALLY
EVALUATE(compared to Rule 112, sec. 8) the
resolution of the prosecutor and its
supporting evidences (NOT the complainants and
witnesses Webb v. De leone) . This is in reference to the
determination of JUDICIAL DETERMINATION OF PROBABLE
CAUSE or probable cause for the issuance of warrant of arrest
The Constitution commands the judge to
personally determine probable cause in the
issuance of warrant or arrest. (Abdula v. Guiani)
JUDICIAL PROBABLE CAUSE is the existence
of such fact and circumstances that would lead
a reasonably discreet and prudent person to
believe that an offense has been committed by
the person sought to be arrested. The judge
merely
determines
probability
and
not
certainty. (Pp v. CA, Jan. 21, 1991)
filing
of
the
for
Page 27 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 28
an
offense
As to the purpose
EXECUTIVE
DETERMINATION
OF PROBABLE
CAUSE
JUDICIAL
DETERMINATION
OF PROBABLE
CAUSE
WON
there
is
reasonable ground
to
believe
the
accused is guilty
of
the
offense
charged
and
should be held
for trial.
WON warrant of
arrest should be
issued against the
accused or is there
necessity
for
placing him under
immediate
custody in order
not to frustrate
the ends of justice
(Pp v. CA ibid.)
*** QUASIJUDICIAL
AUTHORITY where
the court has no
jurisdiction to
intervene. G.R.
No. 197293
April 21, 2014
citing People v.
Castillo and Mejia
is
the
filed
EFFECT:
1. Shall SIGN A WAIVER
under RPC art. 125 (arbitrary
detention) with the presence
of counsel
2. Can APPLY FOR BAIL
3. PI to be terminated 15
days
from
inception
thereof
(B) AFTER the
information is filed
complaint
or
inquest proceeding)
RULE
112(6) EFFECTS
when
accused LAWFULLY ARRESTED W/O
WARRANT
involving
an offense
requiring PI: INQUEST PROCEEDING THEREIN
EFFECT:
1. ASK FOR PI within 5 days
after learning of such
filing (NON-EXTINDIBLE Pp v. CA
March 23, 1995)
otherwise
WAIVED
2. RIGHT
TO
ADDUCE
EVIDENCE during PI and
before
arraignment
otherwise WAIVED
1.
(INQUEST
PROCEEDING)
A
COMPLAINT/INFORMATION CAN BE FILED
W/O PI.
REQUISITE: when there is
1. There must be LAWFUL ARREST
W/O WARRANT;
2. The arrest must involve an
OFFENSE REQUIRING PI;
3. A Complaint/information must be
FILED by:
Page 28 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 29
1. affidavits
and
counteraffidavits of parties and their
witnesses
2. Supporting evidences
3. Resolution of the case (this may be
on the investigating officer and his superior)
REQUISITE OF PRODUCTION
THEREOF:
a. NECESSARY OR INCIDENTAL to the
resolution of the case; OR
b. INTRODUCED AS EVIDENCE by the
requesting party
RULE 112(8) Procedure for criminal
action NOT requiring a PI NOR
covered by the Rule on summary
procedure
APPLICATION:
Cases
where
the
mposable penalty is within 6mos and
1day TO 4yrs. and 2mos. (Otherwise PI is
required and Rule 112. Sec 3 referring to the Procedure in
the PI governs)
MIDTERM
RULE 113 ARREST
RULE 113(1) Definition of arrest the
taking of person into custody
Purpose: In order that he may be bound
to answer for the commission of an
offense
A Commissioner of immigration to issue a
valid arrest on aliens deported requires a final
order of deportation otherwise the arrest
is void.(Dela Rosa Case)
Page 29 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 30
STEPS:
3.
(Albior Case)
IN
IN
FLAGRANTE
DE
Page 30 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 31
II.
Base
on
personal
knowledge of facts/circumstance
that a person to be arrested has
committed it
CASES where there is personal
knowledge
in
freshly
committed
warrantless arrest:
i. Police were already investigating
the offense committed 12 hours
earlier that a certain pajero were
gunned down. Informant tipped the
pajeros whereabouts. The police
went there and saw the pajero with
the accused having possession of the
key thereof. (Pp v. Sinoc)
ii.
3
hours
after
investigation
witnesses of the killing PROVIDED
THE IDENTITY of the culprit to the
police
conducting
the
investigation. (Gerente Case)
EMPHISIS
ON
"ARRESTING
OFFICER'S
PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE"; WARRANTLESS
ARRES WHEN INVALID: : Relied solely on
witness who did not actually saw the killing
and made unlawful search of the house
then arrest. Their knowledge of facts and
circumstances from which they inferred that
ESCAPEE from:
(a) Penal establishment
(b) Temporary confinement
while case pending
(c) Being transferred from one
confinement to another
WHO EXECUTE: (a) Police officer (b)
Peace officer (c) private person
PROCEDURE AFTER ARREST:
1. Deliver him to the nearest police
station or jail
2. Inquest proceeding (ROC 112.6)
Page 31 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 32
OTHER INSTANCE OF WARRANTLESS ARREST
UNDER THE RULES: When person lawfully
arrested
A. When there is Arrest after escape or
rescue (ROC 113.13)
B. for purposes of surrendering the accused
who is out on bail (ROC 114.23)
C. release on bail and attempts to depart
from the Philippines w/o permission of the
court where the case is pending (ROC
114.23)
officer
announce
is
his
refused
Page 32 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 33
1.
2.
3.
4.
Corporate security
Property bond
Cash Deposit
Recognizance
In conviction on appeal,
the bail or provisional liberty can
be used only during the 15 day
period to appeal and not during the
entire period of appeal. In addition
consent of the bondsmen is
necessary.
(Magguddatu
Case
citing AM No. 12-94)
2.
2.
OBLIGATION OF ACCUSED: to
appear before the court when required
by the court or ROC
Instances when presence of accused required
Page 33 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
1.
P a g e | 34
2.
3.
REQUISITES:
1. AFTER conviction by the RTC
particularly
strong
A. A
Recidivist,
habitual
delinquent, reiteration
B. An
Escapee
from
legal
confinement
Page 34 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 35
BY
APPELLATE
whether
Page 35 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 36
Appearance of counsel for private
complainant may appear and intervene
alone in the application for bail. There is neither
prohibition nor need of special authority provided
by the ROC. Even on appeal, the offended party
may question the granting of bail because the
complainant or OFFENDED PARTY HAS SUFFICIENT
PERSONALITY AND VALID GRIEVANCE. (Dela
Vicrtoria, Hapa Case)
Principal factor
Principal factor
Page 36 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 37
A judge under the ROC must not
received the cash bond and will be subject to
administrative liability. (Tormis Case)
refers to an
obligation of record, entered into before a court with the
condition to do some particular act, being the appearance of
the accused on trial.
2.
3.
4.
(Jovellanos Case)
RULE
114(16)
Bail
when
not
required: When he has been in custody
for a period
Page 37 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 38
1. Bail forfeited
submit
of
REQ:
Page 38 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 39
bond is subject to fine and cost. (Esteban v.
Alhambra; Pp v. Caparas)
1. ACQUITTAL of accused
2. DISMISSAL of the case
3. EXECUTION of judgement of
conviction
Other
instance
of
automatic
cancellation of bond is when performance is
rendered impossible by the act of God, obligee
or government or the act of law. (Phil. Phoenix
Case)
in
release
on
Page 39 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 40
to
VALIDITY
OF
PRIMA
FACIE
PRESUMPTION OF GUILT PROVISIONS:
The legislature has the power to provide that
proof of certain facts can constitute prima
facie evidence of guilt PROVIDED
1. There is a rational connection between
the fact proved and the fact presumed ;
and
EQUIPOISE
RULE
APPLICABLE
IN
CRIMINAL CASE: refers to the evidence at
issue whereby there is doubt on which side the
evidence preponderates, the party having the
burden of proof loses.
In view thereof, when an inculpatory facts and
circumstances are capable of two or more
explanation, one is the innocence and other is
guilt of the accused, the prosecution will lose
its case. (Dado v. Pp)
AS TO MODES/MANNER OF COMMISSION;
ALLEGATIONS
OF
CONCLUSION
OF
FACT
NOT
ALLOWED: it must state the
Page 40 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 41
SPECIFIC ACTS/OMISSION complained
of as constituting the offense. The
allegation did try and attempt to
rape is not sufficient and in violation
of the right of the accused to be
informed. (Pp v. Dimaano)
ER: nevertheless,
APPEARANCE IS
NECESSARY:
ALLEGATIONS
OF
CONCLUSION
OF
LAW
NOT
ALLOWED: Where the information
charges an alternative charge stating
sexual
abuse
by
raping
or
committing acts of lasciviousness
not sufficient and in violation of the
right of the accused to be informed.
(Pp v. Dela Cruz)
THERE IS NO COMPLEX
CRIME
IN
A
SEPARATE
INFORMATION
CHARGING
A
DIFFERENT OFFENSE: although
tried jointly and arose out of one
incident. Otherwise it constitutes a
grave violation of the right of accused
to be informed. (Pp v. Legazpi)
i. Specifically ORDERD
by the court for
purposes of
identification;
Non-appearance herein is not a
cause for arrest when the accused
UNQAULIFIEDLY ADMITS IN OPEN COURT
AFTER ARRAIGNMENT that he is the person
named as defendant in the case on trial.
(Carredo v. Pp)
ii. During
ARRAIGNMENT;
iii. During
PROMULGATION OF
JUDGMENT
PROMULGATION IN ABSENTIA: The
contention that she was not notified even if
there is prior notice of change of address is
bereft of merit. Where the whereabouts of
the accused are unknown, the RECORDING
OF JUDGMENT IN THE CRIMINAL DOCKET
SATISFIES THE REQUIREMENT OF NOTIFYING
the accused of the decision wherever he
may be. (Pascau v. CA in contrast with
Parada v. Veneracion involves TRIAL in
Absentia)
AS TO DATE OF COMMISSION:
R1: information is NOT defective when the
time or place is NOT AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT
of the crime charged. In Rape case (Pp v.
Lucas)
R2: It becomes defective, when the time or
place is an ESSENTIAL ELEMENT of the crime
charged. In BP 22 case where the time of the
issuance of the check is an essential element
of the crime. (Alonte v. Pp)
OF
IN
Page 41 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 42
Mere opportunity and not actual crossexamination is the essence of the right to
confrontation. Accused lost such opportunity
when he sought the deferment of his crossexamination of the witness, and he only has
himself to blame in forever losing that right
by reason of the witness demise. (Pp v.
Narca)
Right to TESTIFY
I. WITNESS IS EITHER:
a. deceased;
c. Unavailable or otherwise
unable to testify
i. Judicial OR admin
proceeding; and
Right
to
to secure the
opportunity to cross-examine (2) allow the judge to observe
deportment and appearance of witness while testifying. (Pp v.
Ortiz)
Page 42 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 43
TESTIFY AT TRIAL: Pursuant RULE 112 section 3 which
expressly provides that the adverse party in a clarificatory
hearing has no right cross examined the witness. In addition,
RULE 115 par. F further provides that the adverse party must
have cross-examined the witness in judicial or administrative
proceeding. As such testimony offered as evidence herein
must be rendered inadmissible being hearsay evidence. (See
Paderannga v. Dillon EN BANC)
However, Actual cross-examination of the witness with
presence of the accused or his attorney will be taken as
evidence. (De Leone v. Pp)
[ACCORDING TO ATTY. VALLES, De Leon v. Pp is overturned by
Paderannga v. Dillon. VERIFY ________________________]
The
procedure
of
arraignment and plea must be
STRICTLY FOLLOWED. Thus the copy
of the information with the list of
witnesses must have been provided
to the accused. (Gamas v. Oco)
II.
III.
Page 43 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 44
(plea
bargaining)
III. if desired but is unable to employ one, the
court must assigned ATTY DE OFICIO TO
DEFEND HIM;
IV. if desired an atty of his own choice, grant
him REASONABLE TIME therefore. (Gamas v.
Oco)
THE
FOLLOWING
SHALL
BE
EXCLUDED IN COMPUTING THE 30
DAYS:
Page 44 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 45
petition for review of the SOJ questioning the
resolution of the prosecutor as provided under
RULE 116 (11) but limited not to exceed 60 days.
(How Case)
REQ:
1. Plea made (a) DURING arraignment or
(b) AFTER arraignment but BEFORE trial,
or (c) after the prosecution had rest;
(At pre-trial)We held that the rules allow such
A PLEA ONLY WHEN THE PROSECUTION DOES
NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO ESTABLISH
THE GUILT OF THE CRIME CHARGED. In his
concurring opinion in People v. Parohinog (G.R.
No. L-47462, February 28, 1980, 96 SCRA 373,
377), then Justice Antonio Barredo explained
clearly and tersely the rationale or the law:
x x x ( Plea bargaining A)fter the
prosecution had already rested, the only
basis on which the fiscal and the court could
rightfully act in allowing the appellant to change
his former plea of not guilty to murder to guilty
to the lesser crime of homicide could be nothing
more nothing less than the evidence already in
the record. The reason for this being that Section
4 of Rule 118 (now Section 2, Rule 116) under
which a PLEA FOR A LESSER OFFENSE IS
ALLOWED WAS NOT AND COULD NOT HAVE
BEEN INTENDED AS A PROCEDURE FOR
COMPROMISE,
MUCH
LESS
BARGAINING.
(http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/ma
rch2008/163972-77.htm
see
also
Pp
v.
Valderama)
The effect on plea of guilty to a lesser offenses
of one accused CANNOT EXONERATE HIS COACCUSED. (Pp v. Patrolla, Jr.,)
RULE
116(5)
Withdrawal
of
improvident (meaning without foresight) plea
of guilty: at ANY TIME BEFORE
JUDGEMENT of conviction becomes final
Page 45 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 46
(there
must be a waiver made voluntarily, knowingly and
intelligently)
(court grant
COUNSEL)
RULE
116(10)
Production
or
inspection of material evidence in
possession of prosecution:
PURPOSE:
To
prevent
suppression or alteration
surprise,
P a g e | 47
COURT
RESOLUTION:
prosecution
order
the
copying or photographing:
i.
ii.
B. Existence of PQ
C. Petition for review for resolution of the
prosecutor pending at DOJ or office of the
President BUT limited not to exceed 60
days from filing
The pendency of resolution of the DOJ
for a long time of 1 year is not a bar for the
court to continue criminal proceeding.
Page 47 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 48
and
JURISDICTION
OVER THE
OFFENSE
(SUBJECT
MATTER)
As
basis
to
JURISDICTIO
N OVER THE
PERSON
Conferred by
Constitution or
Law
By virtue of
arrest or
voluntary
submission
Entire proceeding
Void, cannot be
No effect if
the accused
As to
effect of
Page 48 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 49
defect
and
waiver
waived
an aggravating circumstance, it is
necessary to allege it in the information
and to attach certified true copies of the
sentence. (Dacillo case)
failed to
challenge it
4.
The
officer
who
filed
information had no authority
the
REQUISITE:
1.
(a) The name of the
accused
(b) When committed by
more than one person, all of
their
names
shall
be
stated. Provided further in RULE 110(7)
2. Designation of the offense
given by the statute. Provided further in
RULE 110(8)
5. Approximate date of
commission of the offense.
further in RULE 110(11)
3. Acts/commission complained
of as constituting the offense.
Provided further in RULE 110(8)
Generally,
where
the
information fails to provides the
elements/qualification
constituting
the crime, there is a presumption from
the allegations that the act was unlawful.
There is no defect when an OFFENSE
WAS GIVEN BY THE STATUE as
provided therein and the ELEMENT/S
MAY
BE
INFERRED
FROM
THE
ALLEGATION. (Avecilla Case)
However, in CONSPIRACY, it
must be alleged, not just inferred in the
information.
(Quitlong
Case)
conspired confederated acting in
conspiracy
However,
in
LIBEL/DEFAMATION, the defamatory
words verbatim must be set out in the
information but a defect on this regard
may be cured by presentation of
evidence. Failure to object waived the
right to raise the defect of the
information. (Vasquez Case)
However, in RECIDIVISM as
the
Provided
Page 49 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 50
RULE 110(13) Duplicity of
offense; In general; Exception
thereof:
GR: A complaint/information must
CHARGED ONLY ONE OFFENSE
In one information, accused was
charged with a several and separate multiple
murder and double attempted murder. it clearly
consist of duplicity of offenses and therefore
Quashable [remedy]. HOWEVER, FAILURE TO
MAKE A TIMELY OBJECTION [before arraignment]
CONSTITUTES A WAIVER OF THE ACCUSED. (Pp v
Nardo, see also Dimayacyac v. CA)
Page 50 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 51
A. Information
or
complaint
is
defective and can be cured by
amendment; or
B. The Facts charge allege in the
information or complaint do not
constitute an offense
REQUIREMENT OF PI: Before or After a plea,
a substantial amendment in an information
ENTITLES AN ACCUSED TO ANOTHER PI.
UNLESS, the amended information contains a
charge related to or included in the original
information. (Matalam v. SDB)
fails
to
make
THERE
IS
NO
VALID
TERMINATION, among others, when there is
EXPRESS CONSENT of the accused such as a
Motion to quash sustained by the court.
(Dimayacyac v. CA)
3. Second jeopardy must be for the (a)
same offense of for the (b) same act.
RULE
RULE 118
A.
Court
may
ORDER
complaint/info filed (referring
PRE-TRIAL
new
to
without
prejudice to refilling)
Page 51 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 52
EFFECT OF NON-COMPLIANCE: It
cannot be used against the accused.
2. Stipulation of facts;
This is to expedite trial by dispensing with the
presentation of evidence admitted by the
accused. This procedure has long been
recognized and constitutes JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS,
hence binding upon parties. (Pp v. Hernandez)
RULE
118(3)
Effect
of
nonappearance at pre-trial conference:
Court imposed proper sanctions and
penalties provided there is no offer of
acceptable excuse.
The presence of complainant, witnesses and
accused is not required in the pre-trial conference
unless directed by the court under RA 8493. (Pp v.
Tac-an)
REQUISITE:
Page 52 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 53
unavailability
of
FINALS
RULE 119
TRIAL
(New provisions by virtue of AC no. 38-98 Speedy
trial Act)
6. Prejudicial question
PERIODS
TO
RULE
119
(4)
FACTORS
FOR
GRANTING CONTINUANCE (EITHER OF
THE AFFIRMATIVE TEST)
A.
whether
continuation
proceeding is impossible
of
such
5. Change of venue
Page 53 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 54
arraignmen
t
RULE 119 (7) PAO duties advice
accused of his right to demand trial
RULE 119 (8) Sanction for attorney
when:
1. Knowingly allow case to proceed
without the necessary witness
RULE 119 (6) EXTENDED TIME LIMIT within 80 days from arraignment
STAGES OF
PROCEEDIN
GS
Arraignme
nt
Pre-trial
Trial
WHEN IT
MUST BE
HELD OR
CONDUCTE
D
Within 30
days from
the date the
court
acquires
jurisdiction
over the
person
after
arraignmen
t and within
30
DAYS
from
the
date
the
court
acquires
jurisdiction
over
the
person
of
the
accused.
R: within 30
days from
receipt of
pre-trial
order
EXTENDED
PERIOD:
within 80
days from
PERTINENT
PROVISIONS
(refer to table)
RULE 119,
SEC. 1
RULE 119,
SEC. 6
P a g e | 55
R: the right to present evidence is reserve to
the state no less than the accused. As such
even if both parties has rested its case
(Buyser Case)
(Sacay Case)
R: reverse trial, among others, presupposes that the
accused claimed self-defense. There is no reverse
trial when accused rebutted that the victim shot
himself accidentally.
(Gutierrez Case)
RULE
119
(12)
APPLICATION
CONDITIONAL
EXAMINATION
OF
DEFENSE WITNESS FOR BEFORE
TRIAL (DEPOSITION TAKING) conditional
examination of witness in behalf of the
accuse
REQ: The accused
1. Has been held to answer for an offense
2. File a motion with the court
the
witness
(Sacay Case)
that
Referring to
the motion of conditional examination and NOT THE ISSUANCE
OF SUBPOENA since the prosecution has ample opportunity to
examine it once presented in court. (Adorio v. Bersamin)
R:
The
deposition
must
be
MATERIALLY
INDEPENDENT AND NOT CORROBORATIVE. (Jaylo
Case)
OF
OF
EFFECT:
1. Court order directing a witness to
be examined at a specific time,
place and date
2. Copy of the order served towards
the prosecution 3 day thereof
DEPOSITION OFFICER: successively
1. Judge
2. If not practicable, member of the
bar designated thereof
3. Inferior court to be designated in
the order
RULE 119 (14) BAIL TO SECURE
APPEARANCE OF MATERIAL WITNESS
(REFERRING TO HOSTILE WITNESS)
REQ:
1. Statement under oath of material
witness and the latter will not
testify when required
2. Motion filed by a proper party
REMEDY:
1. Order witness to post bail
Page 55 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 56
attend
the
same
C.
Other
similar
circumstance
that make him
unavailable or
prevented
from attending
RULE
119
(15)
CONDITIONAL
EXAMINATION OF WITNESS FOR THE
PROSECUTION (DEPOSITION)
Fact of witness (GROUNDS)
a. TOO sick or infirm to
appear at trial as directed
by the court
b. Leaving the Philippines
with no definite date of
returning
DEPOSITION OFFICER judge of the
court where case is pending
EFFECT OF FAILURE/REFUSAL OF THE
ACCUSED TO ATTEND EXAMINATION
AFTER
REASONABLE
NOTICE
SERVED:
1. Waiver of the accused;
2. Statements taken herein admitted in
BEHALF or AGAINST the accused.
As
deposition
officer
Grounds
to
CONDITIONAL
EXAMINATION
OF WITNESS
FOR THE
DEFENSE
DEPOSITION
OFFICER:
successively
1. Judge
2. If not
practicable,
member of the
bar designated
thereof
3.
Inferior
court to be
designated in
the order
CONDITIONAL
EXAMINATION
OF WITNESS
FOR THE
PROSECUTION
DEPOSITION
OFFICER:
Judge only
A. Upon
reasonable
ground there is
inability to
attend trial
due to
sickness or
infirmities
B. Resides 100
klm from place
of trial and no
means
to
A. TOO sick or
infirm
to
appear at trial
as directed by
the court
B. Leaving the
Philippines
with
no
definite date of
returning
TRIAL
FOR
by
Page 56 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
TO
BE
P a g e | 57
OF
THE
MADE
CHARGING
THE
OFFENSE AND WHERE THERE
DISCHAGED OF STATE WITNESS.
REQ:
EFFECTS:
A. When GRANTED, Evidence derive from
discharge automatically forms part of the
trial
B. When DENIED, sworn
inadmissible as evidence
statement
MISTAKE
PROPER
HAS
BEEN
Page 57 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 58
certiorari.
unlike RULE
119 involves consolidation of 2 or more
cases
consolidation of criminal and civil case
As to requisite of consolidation
KINDS:
A. Demurrer to evidence WITH leave of
court
PROCEDURE:
1. Motion of leave of court to file
demurrer:
2. court
will
render
judgment based on the
evidence of prosecution
3. order not reviewable
by appeal or certiorari.
Page 58 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 59
ER: HOWEVER, THE GRANT OF DEMURRER
TO EVIDENCE ALTHOUGH WITH THE EXPRESS
CONSENT OF THE ACCUSED CONSTITUTES
AN EXCEPTION TO THE RULE. (Pp v. SDB Feb.
4, 2002)
CIVIL ASPECT: With regard to the civil aspect,
where the demurrer to evidence was granted, the
right of accused to present evidence on the civil
aspect of the case should follow in accordance
with due process of law. (Salazar Case)
AND FORM:
As
to
grounds,
reopening as a
reception of additional evidence is based
on the paramount interest of justice
resting entirely on the sound discretion of
the court whereas motion for new trial is base
(Bellaflor Case)
As to the merits, acquittal is based on the
merits showing evidence is not sufficient to
prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt unlike
dismissal not base on the merits and base on
lack of jurisdiction or irregular information. (439
S 390)
Act
providing
transportation and other allowance
for indigents
4. RA
6035
Act
requiring
stenographer free services on
indigents and low income litigants
RULE 120
JUDGMENT
RULE
120
JUDGMENT
(2)
CONTENTS
OF
RULE
120
(1)
JUDGEMENT;
DEFINITION- adjudication that the
accused is guilty or not and the
Evidence
of
the
prosecution
absolutely or merely failed to
prove guilt
Page 59 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 60
RATIONALE: The losing party must be
given an opportunity to analyze the decision and
if permitted consider the error thereof. (Lizada
Case)
RULE
120
(3)
EFFECT
WHEN
COMPLAINT OR INFORMATON IS
DUPLICITOUS:
GR: the accused may file a motion to
quash BEFORE trial
WHEN FAILURE:
1. Waived the defect
2. Conviction of several offenses charged
and proven. (see Pp v. Tira)
3. Impose on him the penalty for each
offense
RULE 120 (4) JUDGMENT IN CASE OF
VARIANCE BETWEEN ALLEGATION
AND PROOF
REQ:
ER:
Page 60 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
WHEN
JUDGMENT
DESPIT
ABSENE
OF
P a g e | 61
for
C. Q: If accused confined or
detained in another province or city
executive judge of the RTC
therein upon request
a. personally
RULE
120
(7)
WHEN
THERE
MODIFICATION OF JUDGMENT; WHEN
JUDGMENT BECOMES FINAL (rule only
recognized that there may be modification of judgment
through post judgment remedies)
filed
motion
for
Page 61 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 62
the dismissals of, criminal cases. Thus, in People
v. Louel Uy,[10] the Court has held:
Like any other rule, however, the above said rule
is not absolute. By way of exception, a judgment
of acquittal in a criminal case may be assailed in
a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the
Rules of Court upon clear showing by the
petitioner that the lower court, in acquitting the
accused, committed not merely reversible
errors of judgmentbut also grave abuse of
discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction or a denial of due process, thus
rendering the assailed judgment void.
xxxxx
An error of judgment is one in which the court
may commit in the exercise of its jurisdiction. An
error of jurisdiction is one where the act
complained of was issued by the court without
or in excess of jurisdiction, or with grave abuse
of discretion which is tantamount to lack or in
excess of jurisdiction and which error is
correctible only by the extraordinary writ of
certiorari. Certiorari will not be issued to
cure errors [of judgement] by the trial
court in its appreciation of the evidence of
the parties, and its conclusions anchored
on the said findings and its conclusions of
law.
TRIAL
OR
REQ:
1. Judgment of conviction
2. Motion EITHER (a) accused (b) Court
motu propio W/ CONSENT of accused
Motion of the prosecution is not allowed. This
aims to protect the accused from being put anew to
defend him of the penalties overlooked by the
prosecutor. Moreover even in MNT the consent of
accused is necessary
(Viernes Case)
xxxxxx
(People v .Asis)
B. Judgment of CONVICTION:
(a) After the lapse of period for
perfecting an appeal EXCEPT CA
automatic review in death penalty
RULE 121
P a g e | 63
REQ:
i. Evidence must
discovered after trial
have
been
2.
RULE
121
(3)
GROUNDS
FOR
RECONSIDERATION (a) ERROR OF
LAW (b) ERROR OF FACT (in contrast w/ the
grounds for MNT) both requires no further
proceeding
MFR and Modification of sentence TREATED AS
PETITION FOR HABEAS CORPUS, when the accused
seeks the retroactive application which is beneficial to
him. (Villa v. CA)
Proposed
new
evidence
of
passport which is immaterial, the accused
positively identified by the witness. (Li Ka
Kim Case)
REQ:
1. In writing
Page 63 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 64
FOR
BOTH
MNT/MFR:
Original
judgment set aside or vacated and new
judgment rendered accordingly
EFFECTS: Consequently the effect of post
judgment remedy except appeal is to Modify
or set aside original judgment. The mere
grant of the MNT operates to vacate original
judgment. It as if no trial had been heard
before. (Pp v. Astudillo; Obugan v. Pp citing
RULE 121, Sec.6)
ALL
PROCEEDINGS
AND
EVIDENCE AFFECTED THEREOF
SET ASIDE AND TAKE ANEW
2. Allow introduction of additional
evidence in the interest of
justice
RULE 122
APPEAL
SC
CA SC
(referring
imprisonment)
to
sentences
of
death
or
TO
MTC
RTC
NOTICE OF
APPEAL (RULE
40)
RTC
CA
NOTICE OF
APPEAL (RULE
Page 64 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
MODE
life
P a g e | 65
20 years to 40 years imprisonment. (Macalat
Case)
41)
RTC for
cases
where:
CA
(a) death,
reclusion
perpetua or
life
imprisonm
ent is
imposed;
or
AN APPEAL TO THE CA
WHERE
DEATH,
RECLUSION
PERPETUA
OR LIFE IMPRISONMENT
IS ALLOWED: while the
fundamental law requires a
mandatory review by the
SC, nowhere, however, has
it
proscribed
an
intermediate
review.
Where life and liberty are
at stake, all possible
avenues to determine his
guilt or innocence must be
accorded to accused. All
ROC insofar as they
provide
for
direct
appeals from RTC to SC
where penalty imposed
is
death,
reclusion
perpetua
or
life
imprisonment
to
be
deemed
modified
accordingly.
(b)
where
lesser penalty
is imposed
BUT involving
offenses
committed in
the same
occasion or
occurrence
giving rise to
serious offense
which the
penalty is
reclusion
perpetua or
death
(Pp v. Mateo)
THIS INCLUDES
PURE QUESTIONS OF LAW.
Neither does the CA divest
SC
of
its
ultimate
jurisdiction
over
such
question. (Tan v. Pp)
RTC for
cases
where the
death is
imposed
AUTOMATIC
REVIEW
SC
AUTOMATIC
REVIEW
Appeal in the CA as
modified by Pp v. Mateo
and AM no. 005-03-SC)
FROM
TO
MODE
RTC
CA
PETITION
FOR
REVIEW (RULE 42)
SC
APPELLATE JURIS
CA
PETITION
REVIEW
CERTIORARI
FOR
ON
Page 65 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 66
RULE
122(8)
DUTIES
OF
STENOGRAPHER WHEN APPEAL IS
FILED:
1. Upon filing the notice of appeal,
TRANSCRIBE the notes of the proceeding
for the accused and the People of the
Philippines;
2. Certify the correctness of the notes
and furnish copies therewith without
unnecessary delay
3. if death penalty is
imposed, the
abovementioned duties must be done in
30 days non-extendible.
ER:
Unless
FAVORABLE
APPLICABLE to them
AND
copies
of
WITHDRAWAL
OF
Page 66 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 67
V.
RULE 123
PROCEDURE IN THE MTC
RULE 123(1) UNIFORM PROCEDURE:
R: Procedure to be observed in the MTC
shall be the same as that of the RTC
ER: Different procedure is either:
A. Specifically provided to either of
said courts;
B. In criminal cases governed by
Summary Rule. Referral to Barangay
conciliation is required otherwise dismissed without
prejudice to revival thereof. (Sec. 18)
CASES SUBJECT TO SUMMARY PROCEDURE: The
MetTC, MTC and MCTC involving cases such as but
not limited to:
I. Violations of TRAFFIC laws
II. Violations of RENTAL laws
III. Violation of ORDINANCE
IV. ALL OTHER CRIMINAL OFFENSES involving a
penalty of not more than (below) 6mos.
Imprisonment, fine of P1,000 or both
RULE 124
PROCEDURE IN THE CA
RULE 124(1) TERMS
APPEALS TO THE CA:
TO
USE
IN
Page 67 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 68
124(6)
FORM
OF
BRIEF:
(TECHNICAL)
1. Rule 56 section 5
RULE
124(11)
JUDGMENT:
1.
REVERSE,
AFFIRM
or
judgment of the trial court;
RULE
124(8)
GROUNDS
FOR
DISMISSAL
OF
APPEAL
for
abandonment
or
failure
to
prosecute: at the instance of the court
or motion of appelle,
1. Failure to file appellants brief within
30 days from receipt of notice UNLESS
represented b counsel de oficio;
2. During pendency of appeal, Appellant
(a) escapes from imprisonment (b) jump
bail or (c) flees to a foreign country.
MODIFY
RULE
124(10)
REQUISITE
FOR
REVERSION OR MODIFICATION OF
THE LOWER COURTS DECISION:
record
OF
the
SCOPE
2. Received evidence
1. Examination of
evidence adduced;
CAs
and
Page 68 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 69
A. Conduct
evidence; or
hearing
and
received
COURSE OF ACTION:
RULE 125
PROCEDURE IN THE SC
RULE 125(1) UNIFORM PROCEDURE:
Procedure to be observed in SC in
original and appealed case shall be the
same as that of the CA UNLESS
OTHERWISE provided by the Constitution
or law.
RULE
125(2) PROCEDURES FOR
REVIEW OF DECISIONS FROM CA IN
CRIMINAL CASE: procedure shall be the
same as in civil case.
RULE 125(3) PROCEDURES WHEN
OPINION IS EQUALLY DIVIDED: in relation
to automatic review of the SC as modified by Pp v. Mateo and
AM no. 005-03-SC
RULE 126
SEARC AND SEIZURE
RULE 126 (1) DEFINITION
1. Its an order in writing
2. Issued in the name of the Rep. of the
Philippines
3. Signed by the judge
PRINCIPLE BEHIND SEARCH WARRANT: this
case involves seizure of furniture design patents
in violation of RPC unfair competition.
1. (NATURE) merely a process issued by the
court in the exercise of its ANCILLIARY
JURISDICTION in contrast with a criminal action
which it may entertain pursuant to its original
jurisdiction.
2. (ONLY A JUDGE CAN ISSUES SEARCH
WARRANT) the authority to issue search
warrant is INHERENT IN ALL COURTS and may be
effected outside their territorial jurisdiction. (Roy
v. Taypan)
P a g e | 70
I.
Determine
by
the
judge
WHEN APPLIED:
1.
RULE
126
(4)
REQUISITES
OF
ISSUING A SEARCH WARRANT (GENERAL
WARRANT defect on particularization or VOID WARRANT
lacks essential requisites)
refers to
the existence of facts and circumstances which would lead a
PERSONAL
KNOWLDEGE
IN
THE
APPLICATION OF SEARCH WARRANT IS
REQUIRED:
In Uy v. BIR, although the name was
wrong, nevertheless the warrant remains valid
because they already conducted surveillance
and test buy operation before the search was
implemented.
This case is different; the Peace officer came
to know that the person subject to be search
was in another name because of the Brgy.
Official told them to. To make it worse said
Brgy. Official was not presented in court.
Therefore the warrant was issued based on
hearsay evidence which negates personal
knowledge. (Pp v. Del Norte)
Page 70 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 71
ONLY be done by the JUDGE and the WARRANT
ITSELF. It cannot be left to the discretion of the police
officer conducting the search. (Pp v. CA, June 26,
1998)
RATIONALE;PREVENTION THEREOF: There
is no particularity in a search of a 55 hectare
compound which in effect vest power of the
directed peace officer UNBRIDLED AUTHORITY
TO SEARCH THE PLACE WHICH IS CONTRARY
TO LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY. (Asuncion Case)
Instance of MINOR DEFECT but the search
warrant remains valid AS LONG AS THE PEACE
OFFICERS ASCERTAINED AND IDENTIFY THE
PLACE INTENDED TO BE SEARCHED:
As when there is typo error in the
caption and body where there is different city
stated. (Uy v. BIR)
As when there was inconsistency on
the apartment description but the name of the
door for the place subject to search warrant
was apparent. (Salanguit Case)
Defect or mistake in the name of
the owner of the place subject to search
is valid PROVIDED the place to be search
is properly described. This is because
warrant was issued NOT FOR THE SEARCH OF
PERSONS owing the premise but ONLY A
SEARCH OF THE PREMISE occupied by them.
(Uy v. BIR) in contrast with Pp v. Del Norte
being a search of person
BEFORE
1. Personal examination of
(i) Complainant
(ii)
produce
Page 71 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
Witnesses
the
complainant
P a g e | 72
(ii) Writing
(iii) under oath
(iv) Facts persosnally known to
them (OTHERWISE HEARSAY)
PERSONAL
KNOWLDEGE
IN
THE
APPLICATION OF SEARCH WARRANT IS
REQUIRED:
In Uy v. BIR, although the name was
wrong, nevertheless the warrant remains valid
because they already conducted surveillance
and test buy operation before the search was
implemented.
This case is different; the Peace officer came
to know that the person subject to be search
was in another name because of the Brgy.
Official told them to. To make it worse said
Brgy. Official was not presented in court.
Therefore the warrant was issued based on
hearsay evidence which negates personal
knowledge. (Pp v. Del Norte)
Absence hereof
taints the search warrant with illegality for failure to
conform with the essential requisites. (Pp v. Mamaril)
(ii) Affidavits.
SEARCH WARRANT
ARREST WARRANT
As to their basis
Reliance on
records and
affidavits
Personal
knowledge base
on probable cause
As to precedence
of the institution of
criminal action
Search warrant
may be applied
AHEAD of the
institution of
criminal action
Arrest warrant
issued AFTER the
institution of
criminal action
finding probable
cause thereof.
As to duration
10 days reckon at
issuance
(RULE
126 sec. 10)
Life time
NOTICE
of
his
1st:
A. Lawful occupant
B. Any member of his family
Page 72 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 73
The above mentioned persons in the order
presented should ACTUALLY WITNESSED THE
SEARCH of the premises by accompanying the
police while the search was being done. (Pp v. Del
Castillo)
WARRANT:
EFFECT
COMPLIANCE HEREIN:
THE
PROPERTY
SEIZED
SHOULD
BE
DELIVERED IMMEDIATELY TO THE COURT: This
is to prevent speculation to the probability of
tampering with the evidence UNLESS there is prior
approval by the court which issued the search
warrant where the retention by the police officer of
the property seized is necessary. (Pp v. Del Castillo;
Tenorio v. CA)
2. The receipt be
LAWFUL
present
NON-
(a)
Given
to
the
OCCUPANT which was
thereof
OF
Page 73 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer
P a g e | 74
I.
II.
Dangerous WEAPONS
ANYTHING which may have
been use or constitute proof in
the commission of offense
ADDITIONAL
REQUISITE
IN
IN
FLAGRANTE DE LICTU: (Pp v. Chua)
SEARCH
AND
circumstances.
Sees
the
offense,
although at a distance
OR
hears
the
disturbance
created
thereby and proceeds
at once to the scene
thereor. (Pp v. Evaristo)
EXCEPTION TO WARRANTLESS
SIEZURE: (Pp v. Gonzales)
EMERGENCY
and
7.
EXIGENT
(Jurisprudence)
RULE 127
PROVISIONAL REMEDIES IN
CRIMINAL CASE
RULE
127(1)
INSTANCE
WHERE
PROVREM
AVAILABLE
IN
CIVIL
ACTION MAY BE AVAILED OF IN A
CRIMINAL CASE:
P a g e | 75
RULE
127(2)
GROUNDS
FOR
ATTACHMENT: provided under Rule
127(1) herein, the property of the
accused may be held as a security for
the satisfaction of any judgment that
may be recovered from him:
Page 75 of 75
Ramon A. Taghoy II
Criminal Procedure Reviewer