CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

Rule 110 PROSECUTION of Offenses

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

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

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

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

2. Complaint – sworn written statement charging a person with an

offense, subscribed by the offended party, any peace officer or other
public official charged with the enforcement of the law violated

Information – accusation in writing charging a person with an offense,

subscribed by the fiscal and filed with the court

3. Complaint and Information distinguished:

Complaint Information

A sworn statement Need not be sworn to

Subscribed by the offended party, Subscribed to by the fiscal

any peace officer or other officer
charged with the enforcement of
the law violated

May be filed either with the court Filed with the court
or in the fiscal’s office generally
to commence the preliminary
investigation of the charges made

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

1. Features stated in Art. 2, RPC

à Cognizable by proper court in which charge is first filed

1. Continuing crimes committed in different judicial regions

2. Offenses wherein any of the essential elements were committed in different
territorial jurisdictions
3. Offenses committed aboard a train, vehicle, aircraft or vessel (see R110,
§15)
i. Railroad, train, aircraft

(1) Territory or municipality where vehicle passed

(2) Place of departure

(3) Place of arrival

ii. Vessel

(1) First port of entry

(2) Thru which it passed during voyage

e. Libel and written defamation

5. Remedies of offended party when fiscal unreasonably refuses to file

an information or include a person therein as an accused

1. In case of grave abuse of discretion, action for mandamus

2. Lodge a new complaint against the offenders
3. Take up matter with the Secretary of Justice
4. Institute administrative charges against the erring fiscal
5. File criminal charges under Art. 208, RPC (prosecution of offenses)
6. File civil action under Art. 27, NCC for damages (PO refuses or neglects to
perform official duty)
7. Secure appointment of another fiscal
8. Institute another criminal action if no double jeopardy is involved
6. Writs of injunction or prohibition to restrain a criminal prosecution are
not available, EXCEPT

1. To afford adequate protection to constitutional rights of accused

2. Necessary for the orderly administration of justice or to avoid oppression or
multiplicity of actions
3. Pre-judicial question which is sub judice
4. Acts of the officer are without or in excess of authority
5. Prosecution is under an invalid law, ordinance or regulation
6. Double jeopardy is clearly apparent
7. Court has no jurisdiction over the case
8. Case of persecution rather than prosecution
9. Charges are manifestly false and motivated by lust for vengeance
10. Clearly no prima facie case against the accused and MTQ on that ground
had been denied
7. Institution of Criminal Actions:

a. In RTC:

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

conducting requisite preliminary investigation therein.

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

à By filing the complaint or information directly with said courts, or a

complaint with the fiscal’s office
c. In Metropolitan Trial Courts

à By filing the complaint ONLY with the office of the fiscal

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

prescription of the offense charged (Rule 110, §1)

d. Offenses subject to summary procedure

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

à The complaint or information shall be filed directly in court without

need of a prior preliminary examination or preliminary investigation.

à Zaldivia vs. Reyes – since a criminal case covered by the Rules of

Summary Procedure shall be deemed commenced only when it is filed in
court, then the running of the prescriptive period shall be halted on the
date the case is actually filed in court and not on any date before that.

à Reodica vs. CA – [clarifies Zaldivia above] Under Art. 91 of the RPC, the
period of prescription shall be interrupted by the filing of the complaint
or information. It does not distinguish whether the complaint is filed for
preliminary examination or investigation only, or for an action on the
merits. Thus, the filing of the complaint even with the fiscal’s office
should suspend the running of the Statute of Limitations. The ruling
in Zaldivia is not applicable to all cases subject to the Rules on Summary
Procedure, since that particular case involved a violation of an
ordinance. Therefore, the applicable law therein was not Art. 91 of the
RPC, but Act No. 3326 (“An Act to Establish Periods of Prescription for
Violations Penalized by Special Acts and Municipal Ordinances and to
Provide when Prescription Shall Begin to Run”), §2 of which provides that
period of prescription is suspended only when judicial proceedings are
instituted against the guilty party.

8. Contents of information

a. Name of the accused

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

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

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

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

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

violated)

à Only one offense charged, EXCEPT where law prescribes a single

punishment for various offenses.

à If facts do not completely allege all the elements of the crime charged,
the info may be quashed; however, the prosecution is allowed to amend
the info to include the necessary facts (People vs. Purisima)

c. Acts or omissions complained of constituting the offense

à Information need only allege facts, not include all the evidence which
may be used to prove such facts (Balitaan vs. CFI)

d. Name of offended party

e. Approximate time of commission

à Approximation of time is sufficient; amendment as to time is only a

formal amendment; no need to dismiss case (People vs. Molero)

à A significant discrepancy in the time alleged cannot be sustained since

such would allow the prosecution to prove an offense distantly removed
from the alleged date, thus substantially impairing the rights of the
accused to be informed of the charges against him (People vs. Reyes)

f. Place of commission

à Conviction may be had even if it appears that the crime was committed
not at the place alleged, provided that the place of actual commission
was within the court’s jurisdiction and accused was not surprised by the
variance between the proof and the information

à Qualifying and inherent aggravating circumstances need to be alleged

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

9. Amendment of information and Substitution of information,

distinguished

Amendment
Substitution

Involves either formal or Necessarily involves a substantial

substantial changes change

Without leave of court if before Needs leave of court as original

plea information has to be dismissed

Where only as to form, there is no Another preliminary investigation

need for another preliminary is entailed and accused has to
investigation and retaking of plea plead anew
of accused

Refers to the same offense Requires or presupposes that new

charged or which necessarily info involves a different offense
includes or is necessarily included which does not include or is not
in original charges, hence, included in the original charge,
substantial amendments to info hence, accused cannot claim
after plea taken cannot be made double jeopardy
over objections of accused for if
original info is withdrawn,
accused could invoke double
jeopardy

10. After plea, amendment only as to matters of form, provided

1. Leave of court is obtained; and

2. Amendment is not prejudicial to rights of accused
11. When amendment is only as to form

1. Neither affects or alters nature of offense charged

2. Charge does not deprive accused of a fair opportunity to present his defense
3. Does not involve a change in basic theory of prosecution
12. Exceptions to rule on venue

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

filed)
2. Continuing offenses
3. Piracy which is triable anywhere
4. Libel (residence; or where first published)
5. In exceptional cases, to ensure fair trial and impartial inquiry
13. Special cases (who may prosecute)

a. Adultery and concubinage

à Only offended spouse can be complainant

à Both guilty parties must be included in complaint

b. Crimes against chastity

à With consent of the offended party, offended spouse, grandparents,

guardian, or state as parens patriae, in that order

à Offended party, even if minor, has right to initiate the prosecution of

the case independently of parents, grandparents or guardian, unless she
is incompetent/incapable on grounds other than minority.

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

parents, grandparents or guardian may do so.

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

requirement–retraction renders the information void (People vs. Ocapan)

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

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

à Complainant must be offended party

à The offended party may intervene in the prosecution of the criminal

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

14. Procedure

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

the crime took place (territorial jurisdiction)
1. Amendment as a matter of right before plea
2. Amendment upon discretion of the court after plea
à Inclusion of other accused is only a formal amendment which would not
be prejudicial to the accused and should be allowed (People vs. CA)

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

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

à Fiscal determines direction of prosecution; complainant must ask fiscal

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

à Objection to the amendment of an information or complaint must be

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

15. Remedies

a. Motion to quash

à May be filed after arraignment but before plea on the grounds provided
by the rules (generally, a flaw in the info)

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

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

b. Motion to dismiss

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

16. Duplicity of Offense (in information or complaint)

à Defined as the joinder of separate and distinct offenses in one and the
same information/complaint

à Remedy: file a motion to quash; failure is equivalent to a waiver

à Exception: when existing laws prescribe a single punishment (complex

crimes)

Rule 111 Prosecution of Civil Action

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

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

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

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

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

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

1. Waiver
2. Reservation of right to institute separate action
3. Institution of civil action prior to criminal action
à NOTE: Under SC Circular 57-97, all criminal actions for violations of BP
Blg. 22 shall be deemed to necessarily include the corresponding civil
action, and no reservation to file such civil action separately shall be
allowed or recognized.

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

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

3. Civil action suspended when criminal action filed, EXCEPT

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

2. Prejudicial civil action
3. Civil case consolidated with criminal action
4. Civil action not one intended to enforce civil liability arising from the offense
(e.g., action for legal separation against a spouse who committed
concubinage)
4. Prejudicial question arises when

1. The civil action involves an issue similar or intimately related to the issue
raised in the criminal action
2. The resolution of such issue will determine whether the criminal action will
proceed or not
à Requisites for a prejudicial question:

1. The civil action involves an issue similar or intimately related to the issue
raised in the criminal action: and
2. The resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action
may proceed
à Petition for suspension of criminal action is to be filed at any time
before prosecution rests.

5. Remedies

a. Reservation of right to institute separate civil proceedings to recover

civil liability arising from crime

à Must be made before prosecution presents evidence

à Action instituted only after final judgment in criminal action

b. Petition to suspend the criminal action

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

action

à Filed at any time before the prosecution rests

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

à Final judgment in civil absolving defendant from civil liability not a bar
to criminal action

7. Filing fees:

1. Actual or compensatory damages – filing fees not required

2. Moral, temperate and exemplary – filing fees required
1. If alleged, fees must be paid by offended party upon filing of complaint or
information
1. If not alleged, filing fees considered a first lien on the judgment
Rule 112 Preliminary Investigation

1. Preliminary investigation – inquiry or proceeding to determine if there

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

à A preliminary investigation is only necessary for an information to be

filed with the RTC; complaints may be filed with the MTC without need of
an information, which is merely recommendatory (Tandoc vs. Resultan)
à Absence of a preliminary investigation is NOT a ground for a motion to
quash the information; an information filed without a preliminary
investigation is defective but not fatal; in its absence, the accused may
ask for one; it is the fiscal’s refusal to conduct a preliminary investigation
when the accused demands one which is a violation of the rights of the
accused (Doromal vs. Sandiganbayan). Court should not dismiss the info,
but hold the case in abeyance and either: (1) conduct its own
investigation; or (2) require the fiscal to hold a reinvestigation.

2. GENERAL RULE: The fiscal conducts the preliminary investigation

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

3. Right to Preliminary Investigation

à A personal right and may be waived

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

the plea

4. Who conducts Preliminary Investigation

1. Provincial or city fiscals and their assistants

2. Judges of MTC and MCTC
3. National and regional state prosecutors
4. Such other officers as may be authorized by law
5. Duly authorized legal officers of COMELEC
1. The Ombudsman
2. The PCGG, in cases of ill-gotten wealth
5. Procedure

a. If conducted prior to arrest

i. Complainant files complaint with

(a) Provincial or city fiscal

(b) Regional or state prosecutor

(c) MTC or MCTC judge, excluding MTC judge of Metro Manila or

chartered cities

(d) Other offices authorized by law

1. Investigating officer either dismisses complaint or asks by subpoena

complainant and respondent to submit affidavits and counter-affidavits
1. If the investigating officer finds prima facie evidence, he prepares an
information and a resolution
à i.e., if fiscal finds reasonable ground to believe that a crime has been
committed and accused is probably guilty thereof

à Prima facie evidence is that evidence which, standing alone,

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

iv. Otherwise, he recommends the dismissal of the complaint

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

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

à Flores vs. Sumaling – What differentiates the present rule from the
previous one is that while before, it was mandatory for the investigating
judge to issue a warrant for the arrest of the accused if he found
probable cause, the rule now is that the investigating judge’s power to
order the arrest of the accused is limited to instances in which there is a
necessity for placing him in custody “in order not to frustrate the ends of
justice.” It is therefore error for the investigating judge to order the
issuance of a warrant of arrest solely on his finding of probable cause,
without making any finding of a necessity to place the accused in
immediate custody to prevent a frustration of justice.

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

prosecutor
1. City fiscal or state prosecutor either dismisses the complaint or files
the information in court
à Decision prevails over decision of the MTC judge

vii. Records will not form records of the case proper

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

b. If conducted after warrantless arrest

1. If accused waives Art. 125, RPC and asks for a preliminary investigation, with
the assistance of counsel, then the procedure for one prior to arrest is
followed
1. Inquest conducted as follows
(a) Fiscal determines the validity of the arrest

(b) Fiscal determines existence of prima facie evidence based on the

statements of the complainant, arresting officer and witnesses

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

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

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

6. Remedies

a. Motion for preliminary investigation

à Filed when accused is arrested without warrant

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

b. Motion for preliminary investigation

à Filed within 5 days after accused learns an information against him has
been filed without a preliminary investigation

c. Motion for re-investigation

d. Appeal to DOJ

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

ground that his rights to due process of law were violated, ousting the
court of jurisdiction

e. Petition for prohibition

à Filed with appellate court to stop the criminal proceedings

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

à When prohibition proper to restrain criminal proceedings:

1. When strong-arm tactics are used for vindictive purposes (Salonga vs. Cruz-
Pano)
2. When the accused is deprived of his rights
3. When the statute on which the charge is based is null and void
4. When it will aid the administration of justice (Tatad vs. Sandiganbayan)
5. When multiplicity of suits will be avoided (Guingona vs. City Fiscal)
Rule 113 Arrest

1. Arrest – taking a person into custody in order that he may be bound to

answer for the commission of some offense, made by an actual restraint
of the person or by his submission to custody

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

à Not all persons detained are arrested; only those detained to answer
for an offense.

à “Invitations” are not arrests and are usually not unconstitutional, but
in some cases may be taken as commands (Babst vs. NBI); however, the
practice of issuing an “invitation” to a person who is investigated in
connection with an offense he is suspected to have committed is
considered as placing him under “custodial investigation.” (RA 7438)

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

is lifted

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

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

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

committed an offense

b. When an offense has just been committed and the person making the
arrest has personal knowledge that the person to be arrested committed
it
à Warrantless arrest anytime for a continuing offense like rebellion,
subversion (Umil vs. Ramos)

à The continuing crime, not the crime finally charged, needs only be the
cause of the arrest (Umil vs. Ramos)

c. When person to be arrested is an escaped detainee (either serving

sentence or with case pending)

1. When a person lawfully arrested escapes

2. Bondsman, for purpose of surrendering the accused
3. Accused attempts to leave country without court permission
4. Procedure

a. With warrant

1. Complainant files application with affidavits attached

2. Judge conducts ex parte preliminary examination to determine probable
cause
à In determining probable cause, judge must:

(1) Personally examine witness

(2) Witness must be under oath

(3) Examination must be reduced to writing (Luna vs. Plaza)

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

responsible officer (Lim vs. Felix)

iii. Judge issues warrant of arrest

à If without preliminary examination, considered irregular (Bagcal vs.

Villaraza)
iv. If peace officer is unable to serve warrant 10 days after issuance, he
must file a report and explanation with judge within 10 days

v. If warrant served

(1) Person informed that he is being arrested

(2) Informed of cause of his arrest

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

(4) Person physically restrained

à For private citizens making an arrest

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

(5) No violence or unnecessary force may be used

(6) Officer may summon assistance

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

vi. Person arrested is brought to nearest police station or jail

b. Without warrant:

1. Person is arrested
1. Person arrested may waive right to Art. 125, RPC and ask for
preliminary investigation or inquest
à Fiscal is not judicial authority contemplated under Art. 125 (Sayo vs.
Chief of Police)

1. Fiscal files info

5. Requisites for a warrant of arrest:
1. Probable cause
2. Signed by judge
3. Specifically naming or particularly and sufficiently describing person to be
arrested
à John Doe warrants are void for being general warrants (Pangandaman
vs. Cesar)

6. Remedies

a. Petition for writ of habeas corpus

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

detained

à Filed when a person is being illegally detained (without judicial

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

à Habeas corpus is not allowed when:

1. The person is in custody of an officer under process of law, and

2. The court had jurisdiction to issue the process (Luna vs. Plaza)
à If an arrest is improper, the remedy is a motion for quashal of the
warrant of arrest and/or a motion to quash the information, not habeas
corpus (Ilagan vs. Enrile)

à Habeas corpus is no longer available after an information has been

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

à Habeas corpus is proper when a person is being restrained

illegally, e.g., imprisoned past maximum penalty allowed by law
(Gumabon vs. Director of Prisons)
b. Quashal of warrant of arrest

à Filed with court which issued the warrant of arrest when the warrant
of arrest is fatally flawed

c. Motion to quash information

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

à Must be made in a “special appearance” before the court questioning

only its lack of jurisdiction over the person of the accused

à Otherwise, the voluntary appearance of the person arrested by filing a

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

à Any irregularity in the arrest is cured when the petitioner submits

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

7. V.V. Mendoza, “Rights to Counsel in Custodial Investigation”

à Evolution of rights of the accused under custodial investigation

1. All involuntary confession were inadmissible; accused had to prove

involuntariness
1. Involuntary confessions were inadmissible only if they were false
2. Revert to exclusionary rule: any involuntary confession is inadmissible
1. Miranda rule: the accused must be informed of his rights
1. To remain silent
2. Against self-incrimination
3. To counsel
4. Definition of custodial investigation questioned
1. It begins only after arrest
2. Police investigations prior to arrest are not covered
3. The rights may be waived, but the rights to be
informed of these rights, i.e., to warning, may
not be waived
4. Warning must not only be said, officer must make
sure the person arrested understands them
specifically
5. Present rules
1. Voluntary confessions are admissible
2. Test of voluntariness determined on a case-to-
case basis
3. Waiver of rights must not only be with counsel
but must be in writing
à Confessions made without assistance of counsel are inadmissible as
evidence to incriminate the accused, but they may be used to impeach
the credibility of the accused, or they may be treated as verbal admission
of the accused through the testimony of the witnesses (People vs. Molas)

Rule 114 Bail

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

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

1. Undertaking effective upon approval and remains in force at all stages until
promulgation of judgment, unless sooner cancelled
2. Accused shall appear before court when required
3. Failure to appear despite notice to him or the bondsman will waive his right
to be present and trial shall proceed in absentia
4. Bondsman shall surrender accused for execution of judgment
à Bail applies to all persons detained, not just to those charged with the
offense (Herras vs. Teehankee)

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

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

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

right, except those charged with capital offenses.

à Right to bail traditionally unavailable to military personnel facing court

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

à Bail should be available regardless of other circumstances or the merits

of the case, if the health or the life of the detainee is in danger (Dela
Rama vs. People’s Court)

à Excessive bail is tantamount to denial of bail, which is unconstitutional

(Dela Camara vs. Enage)

3. When bail is a matter of right

à Before or after conviction by MTC, MCTC, MJC

à Before conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by

death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment

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

pending)

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

 perpetua or life imprisonment
2. Provisional liberty under same circs. but during period to appeal subject to
consent of bondsman
3. In case he has applied for probation after final judgment, he may be allowed
temporary liberty under his bail or recognizance
5. Procedure

a. Offense charged is not capital:

i. Accused applies for bail

(1) Where information against him was filed or where case is pending

(2) Absent (1), in another branch of the same court within the province
or city where he is held

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

(4) Absent (3), with the MTC

1. Judge sets bail

1. Accused may move to reduce bail, and hearing will be set
2. Accused posts bail and deposits the same with the
Municipal/City/Provincial Treasurer or, if cash, with the Collector
of Internal Revenue
3. Accused is released
b. Offense charged is capital:

1. Accused petitions for bail

2. Judge sets hearing to determine whether evidence of guilt is strong
à Ex-parte hearing on bail is arbitrary and unacceptable (Herras vs.
Teehankee)

1. Prosecution presents evidence

1. Court may not force fiscal to produce evidence (Herras vs. Teehankee)
2. If evidence is strong, bail is denied
1. Otherwise, judge sets bail and procedure for non-capital offense
is followed
à In capital crimes, judge’s discretion is limited to determining strength
of evidence and does not cover determining whether bail should be
allowed (Herras vs. Teehankee)

à Evidence must be strong that the accused is guilty of the capital offense
charged, not just of any offense (Bernardez vs. Valera)

6. Bail bond – an obligation under seal given by accused with one or

more sureties and made payable to proper officer with the condition to
be void upon performance by the accused of such acts as he may legally
be required to perform

7. Recognizance

1. Obligation of record entered into before some court of magistrate duly

authorized to take it, with the condition to do some particular act, the
most usual condition in criminal cases being the appearance of the
accused for trial
2. Does not require signature of accused for trial
3. Does not require signature of accused to be valid
8. Prosecution witnesses may be required to post bail to ensure their
appearance at the trial, except:

1. Substitution of info (see R110, §14)

2. Court believes that material witness may not appear at the trial
9. When bail required under RA 6036 (violation of ordinance, light
felony, criminal offense – not higher that 6 month imprisonment and/or
P2000 fine, or both)
1. a. Caught in flagrante
2. Confessed to commission of offense unless repudiated (force and
intimidation)
3. Previously escaped, evaded sentence or jumped bail
4. Violation of Sec. 2 (fails to report to clerk of court periodically under his
recognizance)
5. Recidivist, habitual delinquent previously convicted for an offense to which
the law or ordinance attaches an equal or greater penalty or for 2 or
more offenses to which it attaches a lighter penalty
6. Committed offense while on parole or under conditional pardon
7. Previously pardoned by municipal or city mayor for violation of ordinance for
at least 2 times
10. Instances when accused may be released on recognizance:

1. Offense charged is a violation of an ordinance, a light felony or criminal

offense the imposable penalty to which does not exceed 6 months and or
P2000 fine
2. Person has been in custody for a period equal to or more than the minimum
of the imposable principal penalty, without application of the
Indeterminate Sentence Law or any modifying circumstance
3. Accused has applied for probation and before the same has been resolved,
but NO BAIL was filed or accused is incapable of filing one
4. Youthful offender held for physical and mental examination, trial or appeal,
if unable to furnish bail
11. Cancellation of bail

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

1. Accused surrenders back to custody

1. Accused dies
b. Automatic cancellation

1. Case is dismissed
1. Accused is acquitted
2. Accused is convicted and surrenders for execution of judgment
12. When bail cancelled or denied: after RTC imposes imprisonment
exceeding 6 years, but not more than 20 years, and:

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

aggravating circumstance of reiteration;
2. Provisionally escaped, evaded sentence, violated provisions of bail;
3. Committed offense while on probation, parole, or conditional pardon;
4. Probability of flight; or
5. Undue risk that during appeal, he may commit another crime
13. When bail is forfeited

a. Accused fails to appear before court when required

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

rendered against him

b. Bondsman fails to produce him within 30 days

c. Bondsman fails to satisfactorily explain to the court why accused did

not appear when first required to do so

à Sureties guarantee only appearance of the accused, not his conduct

(US vs. Bonoan)

à Sureties exonerated if appearance made impossible by an act of God,

the obligee or the law (US vs. Bonoan)

14. Provisional forfeiture

1. Within 30 days, produce the body or give reason for non-production AND
2. Explain satisfactorily the absence of the accused when first required to
appear
15. Remedies
1. Application for bail, when bail can be availed of as a matter of right
2. Petition for bail, when the offense charged is a capital offense
à For judge to set hearing for the determination of strength of evidence
of guilt

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

1. Financial ability of accused to give bail;

2. Nature and circumstances of offense;
3. Penalty of offense charged;
4. Character and reputation of accused;
5. Age and health of accused
6. Weight of evidence against accused
7. Probability of accused appearing for trial;
8. Forfeiture of other bonds;
9. Fact that accused was a fugitive from justice when arrested; and
10. Pendency of other cases in which the accused is under bond
17. Notes:

1. Posting bail waives the right to question any irregularity attending the arrest
of a person (Callanta vs. Villanueva). However, this does not result in
waiver of the inadmissibility of the articles seized incidentally to such
illegal arrest.
2. Accused waived the right to question any irregularity in the conduct of the
preliminary investigation when he failed to do so before entering his plea
(People vs. Dela Cerna)
3. Accused out on bail may be re-arrested if he attempts to depart from the
Philippines without prior court permission (warrantless arrest allowed).
Rule 115 Rights of Accused

1. Right of the accused under the Rules

a. To be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt

à In an appeal from a conviction, the accused shall again be presumed
innocent until and unless his conviction is affirmed (Castillo vs. Felix)

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

à The right must be substantially complied with; arraignment and later

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

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

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

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

1. To testify as witness on his own behalf, subject to cross-examination on

matters covered by direct examination; not to be prejudiced by his
silence
2. Not to be compelled to be a witness against himself
3. To confront and examine the witnesses against him, including the right to use
in evidence testimony of a witness
4. Who is deceased, out of or cannot with due diligence be found in the RP
1. Given in another proceeding
2. With the same parties
3. Same subject matter
4. Opportunity to cross-examine
à Prosecution has no privilege to withhold the identity of informers when
such informer was crucial in the operation itself; failure to present the
informer is a denial of the right to confront the witness which merits the
reversal of the conviction (People vs. Bagano)

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

behalf
h. To have a speedy, impartial and public trial

à Unreasonable postponements of trial amounts to a denial of the right

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

i. To have the right of appeal

2. Rights of the accused under the Constitution

a. To due process

b. Against self-incrimination

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

allowed (Villaflor vs. Summers)

à Being informed of rights means a meaningful transmission of

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

à Confessions obtained through coercion are inadmissible (People vs.

Opida)

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

custodial investigation (People vs. Ayson)

à During trial, the right against self-incrimination takes the following

form:

1. Accused may refuse to testify

2. If he testifies, he may refuse to answer those questions which may
incriminate him in ANOTHER offense
c. Against double jeopardy
d. To be heard by himself and counsel

3. Double jeopardy

1. First jeopardy must have attached prior to the first

2. First jeopardy attached and terminated
3. Valid complaint or information
1. Competent court with jurisdiction
2. Accused had pleaded
3. Action ended in conviction, acquittal or termination without the
consent of the accused
c. Offense charged in later case is:

1. Same as that in previous case

1. Necessarily includes or is included in the previous case
2. An attempt or frustration of the offense in previous case
1. An offense lesser than that charged to which the accused
pleaded guilty with the consent of the fiscal and the
offended party
4. Exceptions to double jeopardy

1. The offense was made graver by supervening events

2. The facts constituting the graver offense were only discovered after the filing
of the earlier information
à No double jeopardy if the new fact which justified the new charge
arose only after arraignment and conviction (People vs. City Court)

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

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

accused (Caes vs. IAC)

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

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

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

5. Remedies

1. Motion to quash
2. Motion to dismiss
à Both filed on the ground of violation of accused’s rights, thereby
ousting the court of jurisdiction

6. NOTES:

à Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 1

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

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

à Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 14

1. No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process
of law.
2. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until the
contrary is proved, and shall enjoy the right to be informed of the nature
and cause of the accusations against him, to have a speedy, impartial
and public trial, to meet the witnesses face to face, and to have
compulsory process to secure the attendance of witnesses and the
production of evidence in his behalf.
However, after arraignment, trial may proceed notwithstanding the
absence of the accused provided that he has been duly notified and that
his failure to appear is unjustifiable.
à Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 16

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

à Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 17

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

à Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 21

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

offense.

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

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