CIVIL PROCEDURE I. General Principles A. Concept of Remedial Law B. Substantive Law as Distinguished from Remedial Law C.

Rule-making Power of the Supreme Court 1. Limitations on the rule-making power of the Supreme Court 2. Power of the Supreme Court to amend and suspend procedural rules D. Nature of Philippine Courts 1. Meaning of a court 2. Court as distinguished from a judge 3. Classification of Philippine courts 4. Courts of original and appellate jurisdiction 5. Courts of general and special jurisdiction 6. Constitutional and statutory courts 7. Courts of law and equity 8. Principle of judicial hierarchy 9. Doctrine of non-interference or doctrine of judicial stability II. Jurisdiction A. Jurisdiction over the parties 1. How jurisdiction over the plaintiff is acquired 2. How jurisdiction over the defendant is acquired B. Jurisdiction over the subject matter 1. Meaning of jurisdiction over the subject matter 2. Jurisdiction versus the exercise of jurisdiction 3. Error of jurisdiction as distinguished from error of judgment 4. How jurisdiction is conferred and determined 5. Doctrine of primary jurisdiction 6. Doctrine of adherence of jurisdiction 7. Objections to jurisdiction over the subject matter 8. Effect of estoppel on objections to jurisdiction C. Jurisdiction over the issues D. Jurisdiction over the res or property in litigation E. Jurisdiction of Courts 1. Supreme Court 2. Court of Appeals 3. Court of Tax Appeals 4. Sandiganbayan (RA 8249) 5. Regional Trial Courts 6. Family Courts 7. Metropolitan Trial Courts/Municipal Trial Courts 8. Shariah Courts F. Jurisdiction over small claims, cases covered by the rules on Summary Procedure and Barangay Conciliation G. Jurisdiction versus Venue H. Totality Rule CASES: 1. Raymundo vs. CA, 213 SCRA 457 2. Salon and Estesves vs. Figuracion, 19 SCRA 146

3. Agustin vs. Bacalan, 135 SCRA 340 4. Suarez vs. CA, 186 SCRA 339 5. People vs. Lagon, 185 SCRA 442 6. Orda vs. CA, 192 SCRA 768 7. Vital Gozon vs. CA, 212 SCRA 235 8. Rivera vs. Florendo, 144 SCRA 643 9. SEC vs. CA, 201 SCRA 124 10. Primero vs. CA, 156 SCRA 435 11. Pepsi Cola Distributors of the Philippines vs. Gal-lang, 201 SCRA 695 12. Sandoval vs. Caeba, 190 SCRA 77 13. Palinaga vs. Cortes, 202 SCRA 245 14. Quiloa vs. General Court Martial, 206 SCRA 821 15. G.R. No. 163602, September 7, 2011, SPOUSES MANILA vs. SPOUSES DANIEL MANZO 16. G.R. No. 174497 October 12, 2009 HEIRS OF GENEROSO SEBE AURELIA CENSERO SEBE and LYDIA SEBE vs. HEIRS OF VERONICO SEVILLA and TECHNOLOGY AND LIVELIHOOD RESOURCE CENTER, 17. G.R. No. 163021, April 27, 2007 PATRICIO A. VILLENA vs. PATRICIO S. PAYOYO, Respondent. III. Civil Procedure Rule 2 Bayang vs. CA, 148 SCRA 98 Industrial Finance Corporation vs. Apostol 177 SCRA 521 Bachrach Motor Company vs. Icarnagal, 68 Phil 287 Cabrera vs. Ilano, 8 SCRA 543 Hodges vs. CA, 184 SCRA 281 Sun Insurance Office vs. Asuncion, 170 SCRA 274 Maaersk-Tabacalera Shipping Aency vs. CA, 187 SCRA 646 Original Development and Construction Corporation vs. CA, 202 SCRA 763 CATALINA B. CHU et. al., vs. SPOUSES FERNANDO C. CUNANAN and TRINIDAD N. CUNANAN, et, al, G.R. No. 156185 September 12, 2011 Rule 3 Hang Lung Bank vs. Saulog, 201 SCRA 137 Commissioner of Customs vs. KMK Gani, 182 SCRA 591 Merrill Lynch Futures vs. CA, 211 SCRA 824 Juasing Hardware vs. Mendoza, 115 SCRA 783 Chiang Kai Shek School vs. CA, 172 SCRA 389 Ralla vs. RAlla, 199 SCRA 495 Flores vs. Mallare-Philipps ,144 SCRA 377 Mina vs. Pacson, 8 SCRA 774 Caseas vs. Rosales, 19 SCRA 462 Paredes vs. Moya, 61 SCRA 526 Melgar vs. Buenviaje, 179 SCRA 196 Torrijos vs. CA, 67 SCRA 394 Rule 4 Clavecilla Radio System vs. Antillon, et. al., 19 SCRA 379 Young Auto Supply Co. vs. Court of Appeals, 223 SCRA 670 Lizares Inc. vs. Caluag, 4 SCRA 746 Capati vs. Ocampo, 113 SCRA 794 Dacoycoy vs. IAC, 195 SCRA 641 Philippine Intl. Trading Corp vs. M.V Zileena, 215 SCRA 309 Rule 5

Bayubay vs. Court of Appeals, 224 SCRA 557 Rule 6 Gojo vs. Goyala, 35 SCRA 557 Ballecer vs. Bernardo, 18 SCRA 291 Calo vs. Ajax, 131 Phil 90 Valdez vs. Paras, 105 Phil 698 Rule 7 Chavez vs. Sandiganbayan, 193 SCRA 282 Alinsug vs. RTC, 225 SCRA 553 Estoesta vs. CA, 191 SCRA 303 Cortez vs. CA, 83 SCRA 31 Telan vs. CA, 202 SCRA 534 Rule 8 Imperial Textiles vs. CA, 183 SCRA 584 Toribio vs. Bidin, 134 SCRA 162 Central Surety vs. CN Hodges, 38 SCRA 159 Bough vs. Cantiveros and hanopol, 40 Phil 209 Capitol Motors vs. Yabut, 32 SCRA 1 Rule 9 Ferrer vs. Ericta, 84 SCRA 705 Director of Lands vs. CA, 209 SCRA 457 Garcia vs. Mathis, 100 SCRA 250 Calo vs. Ajax, 22 SCRA 996 Pascua vs. Florendo, 136 SCRA 208 Rule 10 Rosario and Untalan vs. Carandang, 96 Phil 845 Gotico vs. Leyte Chinese Chamber of Commerce, 136 SCRA 218 Guiang vs. Nadayag, 214 SCRA 355

I. FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS REMEDIAL LAW is that branch of law which prescribes the method of enforcing rights or obtaining redress for their invasion [Bustos vs. Lucero, 81 Phil. 640]. It is also known as Adjective Law. SUBSTANTIVE LAW is one which creates, defines, and regulates rights. PROCEDURE is the method of conducting a judicial proceeding. It includes whatever is embraced in the technical terms, pleadings, practice, and evidence. It is the means by which the power or authority of a court to hear and decide a class of cases is put to action [Manila Railroad vs. Atty. General, 20 Phil. 523]. JURISDICTION is the power to hear and decide cases [Herrera vs. Baretto & Joaquin, 25 Phil. 245]. It is the power with which courts are invested with the power of administering justice, that is, for hearing and deciding cases. In order for the court to have authority to dispose of a case on the merits, it must acquire jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties [Republic Planters Bank vs. Molina, 166 SCRA 39]. JURISDICTION The authority to hear and determine a case A matter of substantive law Establishes a relation between the court and the subject matter Fixed by law and cannot be conferred by the parties VENUE The place where the case is to be heard or tried A matter of procedural law Establishes a relation between plaintiff and defendant, or petitioner and respondent May be conferred by the act or agreement of the parties

PRINCIPLE OF THE EXERCISE OF EQUITY JURISDICTION is a situation where the court is called upon to decide a particular situation and release the parties from their correlative obligations but if it would result in adverse consequences to the parties and the public, the court would go beyond its power to avoid negative consequences in the release of the parties [Agne vs. Director of Lands, 181 SCRA 793; Naga Telephone Co. vs. CA, 48 SCAD 539]. ELEMENTS OF JURISDICTION: (1) Jurisdiction over the subject (2) Jurisdiction over the parties (3) Jurisdiction over the res matter or nature of the case It is conferred by law (BP 129), Jurisdiction over the person of It is acquired by the seizure of and does not depend on the the plaintiff is acquired by the the thing under legal process objection or the acts or filing of the initiatory pleading, whereby it is brought into actual omissions of the parties or like a complaint. custody of law, or it may result anyone of them [Republic vs. from the institution of a legal Sangalang, 159 SCRA 515]. Jurisdiction over the person of proceeding wherein the power of the defendant is acquired by the the court over the thing is It is not waivable, except in proper service of summons, or recognized and made cases of estoppel to question or by his voluntary appearance in effective [Banco-Espaol Filipino raise jurisdiction[Tijam vs. court and his submission to the vs. Palanca, 37 Phil. 291]. Sibonghanoy, 23 SCRA 29]. authority of the court[Paramount It is determined upon the Industries vs. Luna, 148 SCRA allegations made in the 564]. complaint, irrespective of whether the plaintiff is entitled or not, to recover upon the claim asserted therein, a matter resolved only after and as a result of the trial.

ELEMENTS OF CRIMINAL JURISDICTION: (1) Territorial jurisdiction (2) Jurisdiction over the subject (3) Jurisdiction over the person matter of the accused It is determined by the It is determined by the It is acquired by the voluntary geographical area over which a allegations of the complaint or appearance or surrender of the court presides, and the fact that information in accordance with accused or by his arrest [Choc the crime was committed, or any the law in force at the time of the vs. Vera, 64 Phil. 1066]. of its essential ingredients took institution of the action, not at place within said area [US vs. the time of its commission [US Jueves, 23 Phil. 100]. vs. Mallari, 24 Phil. 366]. INSTANCES WHEN A COURT MAY LOSE JURISDICTION EVEN IF IT HAS BEEN ATTACHED TO IT: 1 When a subsequent law provides a prohibition for the continued exercise of jurisdiction[Rilloraza vs. Arciaga, 21 SCRA 717]. 2 Where the law penalizing an act which is punishable is repealed by a subsequent law. The reason is that, the State loses the power to prosecute when the law is repealed, hence, the court has no more power to decide [People vs. Pastor, 77 Phil. 1000]. 3 When accused is deprived of his constitutional right such as where the court fails to provide counsel for the accused who is unable to obtain one and does not intelligently waive his constitutional right [Chavez vs. CA, 24 SCRA 663]. 4 When the proceeding s in the court acquiring jurisdiction is terminated, abandoned or declared void [Seven vs. Pichay, 108 Phil. 419]. 5 When the statute expressly provides, or is construed to the effect that it intended to operate as to actions pending before its enactment [Bengzon vs. Inciong, 91 SCRA 284]. 6 Once appeal has been perfected [Alma vs. Abbas, 18 SCRA 836]. 7 When the law is curative [Garcia vs. Martinez, 90 SCRA 331]. DOCTRINE OF JUDICIAL STABILITY: Should one branch be permitted to equally assert, assume, or retain jurisdiction over a case in controversy over which another coordinate or coequal branch has already assumed jurisdiction, then that would be sanctioning undue interference by one branch over another. With that, judicial stability would be meaningless precept in a well-ordered administration of justice[Parcon vs. CA, 111 SCRA 262]. JURISDICTION OF METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS: Exclusive original jurisdiction over all violations of city or municipal ordinances committed within their respective territorial jurisdiction; and Exclusive original jurisdiction over all offenses punishable with imprisonment not exceeding six (6) years irrespective of the amount of fine, and regardless of other imposable accessory or other penalties, including the civil liability arising from such offenses or predicated thereon, irrespective of the kind, nature, value or amount therof; provided, however, that in offenses involving damage to property through criminal negligence, they shall have exclusive original jurisdiction thereof. [Sec. 2, RA 7691]. JURISDICTION OF REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS (RTC): In all civil actions in which the subject of the litigation is incapable of pecuniary estimation; In all civil actions which involve the title to, or possession of, real property, or any interest therein, where the assessed value of the property involved exceeds P20,000, or for civil actions in Metro Manila where such value exceeds P50,000 except actions for forcible entry into and unlawful detainer of lands or buildings, original jurisdiction over which is conferred upon the MeTC, MTC, and MCTC;

In all actions in admiralty and maritime jurisdiction where the demand or claim exceeds P200,00, or in Metro Manila where such demand or claim exceeds P400,00; In all matters of probate, both testate and intestate, where the gross value of the estate exceeds P200,00 or probate mattes in Metro Manila where such value exceeds P400,000; In all actions involving the contract of marriage and marital relations; In all cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, person or body exercising juridicial or quasi-judicial functions; In all civil actions and civil proceedings falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction of a Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court and of the Court of Agrarian Relations as now provided by law; and In all other cases in which the demand, exclusive of interest and damages of whatever kind, attorneys fees, litigation expenses, and cost or the value of the property in controversy exceeds P200,000, or in such other cases in Metro Manila where the demand, exclusive of the abovementioned items exceeds P400,000. JURISDICTION OF COURT OF APPEALS (CA): Original jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, habeas corpus, and quo warranto, and auxiliary writs or processes, whether or not in aid of its appellate jurisdiction; Exclusive original jurisdiction over actions for annulment of judgments of RTCs; Exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all final judgments, decisions, resolutions, orders, or awards of RTCs and quasi-judicial agencies, instrumentalities, boards, or omissions, except those falling within the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in accordance with the Constitution, the provisions of the Judiciary Act of 1948; The CA shall have the power to receive evidence and perform any and all acts necessary to resolve factual issues raised in (a) cases falling within its original jurisdiction, such as actions for annulment of judgments of RTCs, (b) cases falling within its appellate jurisdiction where a motion for new trial based only on newly discovered evidence is granted by it. JURISDICTION OF THE SUPREME COURT (SC): Cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and other petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, and habeas corpus. All cases involving the constitutionality of a treaty, international or executive agreement, or law, which shall be heard by the SC en banc, and all other cases which under the Rules of Court are required to be heard en banc, including those involving the constitutionality, application, or operation of presidential decrees, proclamations, orders, instructions, ordinances, and other regulations, shall be decided with the concurrence of the majority of the Members who actually took part in the deliberation on the issues in the case and voted thereon; Cases on matters heard by a division shall be decided or resolved with the concurrence of a majority of the Members who actually took part in the deliberations on the issues in the case and voted thereon, and in no case, without the concurrence of at least three of such Members. The Supreme Court has the power to: (a) exercise original jurisdiction over cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and over petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, and habeas corpus; (b) review, revise, reverse, modify, of affirm on appeal or certiorari, as the law or the Rules of Court may provide, final judgments and orders of lower courts in: (1) all cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, international or executive agreement, law presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance, or regulations is in question; (2) all cases involving the legality of any tax, impost, assessment, or toll, or any penalty imposed in relation thereto; (3) all cases in which the jurisdiction of any lower court is in issue; (4) all criminal cases in which the penalty imposed in reclusive perpetua or higher; (5) all cases in which only an error or question of law is involved.

CLASSES OF JURISDICTION: General power to adjudicate all controversies except those expressly withheld from the plenary powers of the court. Special or Limited restricts the courts jurisdiction only to particular cases and subject to such limitations as may be provided by the governing law. Original power of the court to take judicial cognizance of a case instituted for judicial action for the first time under conditions provided by law. Appellate authority of a court higher in rank to re-examine the final order or judgment of a lower court which tried the case now elevated for judicial review. Exclusive power to adjudicate a case or proceeding to the exclusion of all other courts at that stage. Concurrence/Confluent/Coordinate power conferred upon different courts, whether of the same or different ranks, to take cognizance at the same stage of the same case in the same or different judicial territories.

WHAT IS THE CONCEPT OF JURE REGALIA? (REGALIAN DOCTRINE)

> Generally, under this concept, private title to land must be traced to some grant, express or implied, from the Spanish Crown or its successors, the American Colonial Government, and thereafter, the Philippine Republic > In a broad sense, the term refers to royal rights, or those rights to which the King has by virtue of his prerogatives > The theory of jure regalia was therefore nothing more than a natural fruit of conquest

CONNECTED TO THIS IS THE STATES POWER OF DOMINUUM

> Capacity of the state to own or acquire propertyfoundation for the early Spanish decree embracing the feudal theory of jura regalia > This concept was first introduced through the Laws of the Indies and the Royal Cedulas > The Philippines passed to Spain by virtue of discovery and conquest. Consequently, all lands became the exclusive patrimony and dominion of the Spanish Crown. > The Law of the Indies was followed by the Ley Hipotecaria or the Mortgage Law of 1893. This law provided for the systematic registration of titles and deeds as well as possessory claims > The Maura Law: was partly an amendment and was the last Spanish land law promulgated in the Philippines, which required the adjustment or registration of all agricultural lands, otherwise the lands shall revert to the State

TAKE NOTE THAT THE REGALIAN DOCTRINE IS ENSHRINED IN OUR PRESENT AND PAST CONSTITUTIONS THE 1987 CONSTITUTION PROVIDES UNDER NATIONAL ECONOMY AND PATRIMONY THE FOLLOWING
> Section 2. All lands of the public domain, waters, minerals, coal, petroleum, and other mineral oils, all forces of potential energy, fisheries, forests or timber, wildlife, flora and fauna, and other natural resources are owned by the State. With the exception of agricultural lands, all other natural resources shall not be alienated. The exploration, development, and utilization of natural resources shall be under the full control and supervision of the State. The State may directly undertake such activities, or it may enter into co-production, joint venture, or production-sharing agreements with Filipino citizens, or corporations or associations at least sixty per centum of whose capital is owned by such citizens. Such agreements may be for a period not exceeding twenty-five years, renewable for not more than twenty-five years, and under such terms and conditions as may be provided by law. In cases of water rights for irrigation, water supply fisheries, or industrial uses other than the development of water power, beneficial use may be the measure and limit of the grant. > The abovementioned provision provides that except for agricultural lands for public domain which alone may be alienated, forest or timber, and mineral lands, as well as all other natural resources must remain with the State, the exploration, development and utilization of which shall be subject to its full control and supervision albeit allowing it to enter into coproduction, joint venture or production-sharing agreements, or into agreements with foreign-owned corporations involving technical or financial assistance for large-scale exploration, development, and utilization

THE 1987 PROVISION HAD ITS ROOTS IN THE 1935 CONSTITUTION

WHICH PROVIDES > Section 1. All agricultural timber, and mineral lands of the public domain, waters, minerals, coal, petroleum, and other mineral oils, all forces of potential energy and other natural resources of the Philippines belong to the State, and their disposition, exploitation, development, or utilization shall be limited to citizens of the Philippines or to corporations or

associations at least sixty per centum of the capital of which is owned by such citizens, subject to any existing right, grant, lease, or concession at the time of the inauguration of the Government established under this Constitution. Natural resources, with the exception of public agricultural land, shall not be alienated, and no license, concession, or lease for the exploitation, development, or utilization of any of the natural resources shall be granted for a period exceeding twentyfive years, renewable for another twenty-five years, except as to water rights for irrigation, water supply, fisheries, or industrial uses other than the development of water power, in which cases beneficial use may be the measure and limit of the grant.

THE 1973 CONSTITUTION REITERATED THE REGALIAN DOCTRINE

AS FOLLOWS > Section 8. All lands of public domain, waters, minerals, coal, petroleum and other mineral oils, all forces of potential energy, fisheries, wildlife, and other natural resources of the Philippines belong to the State. With the exception of agricultural, industrial or commercial, residential, or resettlement lands of the public domain, natural resources shall not be alienated, and no license, concession, or lease for the exploration, or utilization of any of the natural resources shall be granted for a period exceeding twentyfive years, except as to water rights for irrigation, water supply, fisheries, or industrial uses other than development of water power, in which cases, beneficial use may by the measure and the limit of the grant.

THE REGALIAN DOCTRINE DOESN'T NEGATE NATIVE TITLE. THIS IS IN PURSUANCE TO WHAT HAS BEEN HELD IN CRUZ V. SECRETARY OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
> Petitioners challenged the constitutionality of Indigenous Peoples Rights Act on the ground that it amounts to an unlawful deprivation of the States ownership over lands of the public domain and all other natural resources therein, by recognizing the right of ownership of ICC or IPs to their ancestral domains and ancestral lands on the basis of native title. > As the votes were equally divided, the necessary majority wasnt obtained and petition was dismissed and the laws validity was upheld > Justice Kapunan: Regalian theory doesnt negate the native title to lands held in private ownership since time immemorial, adverting to the landmark case of CARINO V. LOCAL GOVERNMENT, where the US SC through Holmes held: xxx the land has been held by individuals under a claim of private ownership, it will be presumed to have been held in the same way from before the Spanish conquest, and never to have been public land. > Existence of native titie to land, or ownership of land by Filipinos by virtue of possession under a claim of ownership since time immemorial and independent of any grant from the Spanish crown as an exception to the theory of jure regalia > Justice Puno: Carino case firmly established a concept of private land title that existed irrespective of any royal grant from the State and was based on the strong mandate extended to the Islands via the Philippine Bill of 1902. The IPRA recognizes the existence of ICCs/IPs as a distinct sector in the society. It grants this people the ownership and possession of their ancestral domains and ancestral lands and defines the extent of these lands and domains > Justice Vitug: Carino cannot override the collective will of the people expressed in the Constitution. > Justice Panganiban: all Filipinos, whether indigenous or not, are subject to the Constitution, and that no one is exempt from its allencompassing provisions

RULE 125 - PROCEDURE IN THE SUPREME COURT

Section 1. Uniform Procedure. Unless otherwise provided by the Constitution or by law, the procedure in the Supreme Court in original and in appealed cases shall be the same as in the Court of Appeals.

HOW MANY VOTES ARE NEEDED?

> The rule is that the majority is needed to decide a case en banc > An exception is that when all are not present, majority of all those present/who constitute a quorum and actually participated in the deliberations. o There must be a quorum o Majority of those who participated and voted shouldnt be less than 5 > Division of 7: majority not less than 5; division of 5: majority not less than 3; division of 3: unanimous decision, if the unanimous decision couldnt be obtained, 2 justices must be temporarily assigned to the division by raffle Sec. 2. Review of decisions of the Court of Appeals. The procedure for the review by the Supreme Court of decisions in criminal cases rendered by the Court of Appeals shall be the same as in civil cases. Sec. 3. Decision if opinion is equally divided. When the Supreme Court en banc is equally divided in opinion or the necessary majority cannot be had on whether to acquit the appellant, the case shall again be deliberated upon and if no decision is reached after re-deliberation, the judgment of conviction of lower court shall be reversed and the accused acquitted.

WHY SHOULD THE JUDGMENT RESULT IN ACQUITTAL IF NO DECISION IS REACHED AFTER RE-DELIBERATION?
> Because of the presumption of innocence where all doubts should be resolved in favor of the accused and the principle that when inculpatory facts are susceptible of 2 or more interpretations, the ambiguity must be decided in favor of the accused.

RULE 124 - PROCEDURE IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

Section 1. Title of the case. In all criminal cases appealed to the Court of Appeals, the party appealing the case shall be called the "appellant" and the adverse party the "appellee," but the title of the case shall remain as it was in the court of origin. Sec. 2. Appointment of counsel de officio for the accused. If it appears from the record of the case as transmitted that (a) the accused is confined in prison, (b) is without counsel de parte on appeal, or (c) has signed the notice of appeal himself, ask the clerk of court of the Court of Appeals shall designate a counsel de officio. An appellant who is not confined in prison may, upon request, be assigned a counsel de officio within ten (10) days from receipt of the notice to file brief and he establishes his right thereto. Sec. 3. When brief for appellant to be filed. Within thirty (30) days from receipt by the appellant or his counsel of the notice from the clerk of court of the Court of Appeals that the evidence, oral and documentary, is already attached to the record, the appellant shall file seven (7) copies of his brief with the clerk of court which shall be accompanied by proof of service of two (2) copies thereof upon the appellee. Sec. 4. When brief for appellee to be filed; reply brief of the appellant. Within thirty (30) days from receipt of the brief of the appellant, the appellee shall file seven (7) copies of the brief of the appellee with the clerk of court which shall be accompanied by proof of service of two (2) copies thereof upon the appellant. Within twenty (20) days from receipt of the brief of the appellee, the appellant may file a reply brief traversing matters raised in the former but not covered in the brief of the appellant. Sec. 5. Extension of time for filing briefs. Extension of time for the filing of briefs will not be allowed except for good and sufficient cause and only if the motion for extension is filed before the expiration of the time sought to be extended. Sec. 6. Form of briefs. Briefs shall either be printed, encoded or typewritten in double space on legal size good quality unglazed paper, 330 mm. in length by 216 mm. in width. Sec. 7. Contents of brief. The briefs in criminal cases shall have the same contents as provided in sections 13 and 14 of Rule 44. A certified true copy of the decision or final order appealed from shall be appended to the brief of the appellant. Sec. 8. Dismissal of appeal for abandonment or failure to prosecute. The Court of Appeals may, upon motion of the appellee or motu proprio and with notice to the appellant in either case, dismiss the appeal if the appellant fails to file his brief within the time prescribed by this Rule, except where the appellant is represented by a counsel de officio. The Court of Appeals may also, upon motion of the appellee or motu proprio, dismiss the appeal if the appellant escapes from prison or confinement, jumps bail or flees to a foreign country during the pendency of the appeal.

WHEN CAN THE COURT OF APPEALS DISMISS AN APPEAL?

1. The Court of Appeals may, upon motion of the appellee or motu proprio and with notice to the appellant in either case, dismiss the appeal if the appellant fails to file his brief within the time prescribed by this Rule, except where the appellant is represented by a counsel de officio. 2. The Court of Appeals may also, upon motion of the appellee or motu proprio, dismiss the appeal if the appellant escapes from prison or confinement 3. The Court of Appeals may also, upon motion of the appellee or motu proprio, dismiss the appeal if the appellant jumps bail 4. The Court of Appeals may also, upon motion of the appellee or motu proprio, dismiss the appeal if the appellant flees to a foreign country during the pendency of the appeal 5. The Court of Appeals may also, motu propio dismiss the appeal if the appellant fails to prosecute 6. The Court of Appeals may also, motu propio dismiss the appeal if the appellant abandons his appeal Sec. 9. Prompt disposition of appeals. Appeals of accused who are under detention shall be given precedence in their disposition over other appeals. The Court of Appeals shall hear and decide the

appeal at the earliest practicable time with due regard to the rights of the parties. The accused need not be present in court during the hearing of the appeal. Sec. 10. Judgment not to be reversed or modified except for substantial error. No judgment shall be reversed or modified unless the Court of Appeals, after an examination of the record and of the evidence adduced by the parties, is of the opinion that terror was committed which injuriously affected the substantial rights of the appellant.

WHEN CAN JUDGMENT BE REVERSED OR MODIFIED?

It can only be reversed or modified when there has been substantial errors Sec. 11. Scope of judgment. The Court of Appeals may reverse, affirm or modify the judgment and increase or reduce the penalty imposed by the trial court, remand the case to the Regional Trial Court for new trial or retrial, or dismiss the case.

WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF APPEALS?

1. 2. 3. 4. Reverse, affirm, or modify the judgment Increase or reduce the penalty imposed by the trial court Remand the case to the RTC for new trial or retrial Dismiss the case

WHY CANNOT THE CA REVISE THE JUDGMENT OF THE LOWER COURT?

The power to revise is not given because it is changing the manner of the penning of the judgment of the trial judge It is violative of the rule that the judge must write the decision personally

MUST ALL BE ALLEGED IN THE APPEAL IN ORDER TO REVIEW THE CASE IN ITS ENTIRETY?
No. An appeal in criminal proceedings throws the whole case open for review. It is the duty of the appellate court to correct such errors as might be found in the appealed judgment, whether they are assigned or not. Sec. 12. Power to receive evidence. The Court of Appeals shall have the power to try cases and conduct hearings, receive evidence and perform any and all acts necessary to resolve factual issues raised in cases (a) falling within its original jurisdiction, (b) involving claims for damages arising from provisional remedies, or (c) where the court grants a new trial based only on the ground of newly-discovered evidence.

CAN THE COURT OF APPEALS ACCEPT EVIDENCE DURING AN APPEAL?

Generally, an appellate court doesnt accept new evidence during an appeal. Its decision is based on the records and other documents forwarded to it by the lower courts It can accept evidence though in the resolution of contentious factual issues, which are raised in cases: 1. Falling within its original jurisdiction 2. Involving claim for damages arising from provisional remedies 3. Where the court grants a new trial based on the ground of newly-discovered evidence Sec. 13. Quorum of the court; certification or appeal of cases to Supreme Court. Three (3) Justices of the Court of Appeals shall constitute a quorum for the sessions of a division. The unanimous vote of the three (3) Justices of a division shall be necessary for the pronouncement of a judgment or final resolution, which shall be reached in consultation before the writing of the opinion by a member of the division. In the event that the three (3) Justices can not reach a unanimous vote, the Presiding Justice shall direct the raffle committee of the Court to designate two (2) additional Justices to sit temporarily with them, forming a special division of five (5) members and the concurrence of a majority of such division shall be necessary for the pronouncement of a judgment or final resolution. The designation of such additional Justices shall be made strictly by raffle and rotation among all other Justices of the Court of Appeals. Whenever the Court of Appeals find that the penalty of death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment should be imposed in a case, the court, after discussion of the evidence and the law involved, shall render judgment imposing the penalty of death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment as the circumstance warrant. However, it shall refrain from entering the judgment and

forthwith certify the case and elevate the entire record thereof to the Supreme Court for review.

HOW DOES THE CA DECIDE THE CASE?

Three (3) Justices of the Court of Appeals shall constitute a quorum for the sessions of a division. The unanimous vote of the three (3) Justices of a division shall be necessary for the pronouncement of a judgment or final resolution, which shall be reached in consultation before the writing of the opinion by a member of the division. In the event that the three (3) Justices can not reach a unanimous vote, the Presiding Justice shall direct the raffle committee of the Court to designate two (2) additional Justices to sit temporarily with them, forming a special division of five (5) members and the concurrence of a majority of such division shall be necessary for the pronouncement of a judgment or final resolution. The designation of such additional Justices shall be made strictly by raffle and rotation among all other Justices of the Court of Appeals. NB: There is tyranny of the minority. In case one of the three justices in a division disagrees, he wins even if it is 2 against 1. A.M. No. 00-5-03-SC RE: AMENDMENTS TO THE REVISED RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE TO GOVERN DEATH PENALTY CASES RESOLUTION Acting on the recommendation of the Committee on Revision of the Rules of Court submitting for this Court's consideration and approval the Proposed Amendments to the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure To Govern Death Penalty Cases, the Court Resolved to APPROVE the same. The amendments shall take effect on October 15, 2004 following its publication in a newspaper of general circulation not later than September 30, 2004. September 28, 2004. Davide, Jr., C.J., Puno, Panganiban, Quisumbing, Ynares-Santiago, Sandoval-Gutierrez, Carpio, Austria-Martinez, Corona, Carpio-Morales, Callejo, Sr., and Tinga, JJ., concur. Azcuna and Chico-Nazario, JJ., on leave.

AMENDED RULES TO GOVERN REVIEW OF DEATH PENALTY CASES

Rule 122, Sections 3 and 10, and Rule 124, Sections 12 and 13, of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, are amended as follows: Rule 122 Sec. 3. How appeal taken.(a) The appeal to the Regional Trial Court, or to the Court of Appeals in cases decided by the Regional Trial Court in the exercise of its original jurisdiction, shall be by notice of appeal filed with the court which rendered the judgment or final order appealed from and by serving a copy thereof upon the adverse party. (b) The appeal to the Court of Appeals in cases decided by the Regional Trial Court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction shall be by petition for review under Rule 42. (c) The appeal in cases where the penalty imposed by the Regional Trial Court is reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment or where a lesser penalty is imposed for offenses committed on the same occasion or which arose out of the same occurrence that gave rise to the more, serious offense for which the penalty of death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment is imposed, shall be by notice of appeal to the Court of Appeals in accordance with paragraph (a) of this Rule. (d) No notice of appeal is necessary in cases where the Regional Trial Court imposed the death penalty. The Court of Appeals shall automatically review the judgment as provided in Section 10 of this Rule. (3a) xxx Sec. 10. Transmission of records in case of death penalty. In all cases where the death penalty is imposed by the trial court, the records shall be forwarded to the Court of Appeals for automatic review and judgment within twenty days but not earlier than fifteen days from the promulgation of the judgment or notice of denial of a motion for new trial or reconsideration. The transcript shall also be forwarded within ten days after the filing thereof by the stenographic reporter. (10a) xxx Rule 124

Sec. 12. Power to receive evidence.The Court of Appeals shall have the power to try cases and conduct hearings, receive evidence and perform all acts necessary to resolve factual issues raised in cases falling within its original and appellate jurisdiction, including the power to grant and conduct new trials or further proceedings. Trials or hearings in the Court of Appeals must be continuous and must be completed within three months, unless extended by the Chief Justice. 12(a) Sec. 13. Certification or appeal of case to the Supreme Court.(a) Whenever the Court of Appeals finds that the penalty of death should be imposed, the court shall render judgment but refrain from making an entry of judgment and forthwith certify the case and elevate its entire record to the Supreme Court for review. (b) Where the judgment also imposes a lesser penalty for offenses committed on the same occasion or which arose out of the same occurrence that gave rise to the more severe offense for which the penalty of death is imposed, and the accused appeals, the appeal shall be included in the case certified for review to, the Supreme Court. (c) In cases where the Court of Appeals imposes reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment or a lesser penalty, it shall render and enter judgment imposing such penalty. The judgment may be appealed to the Supreme Court by notice of appeal filed with the Court of Appeals.

WHAT IS THE PROCEDURE WHEN THE CA FINDS THAT THE PENALTY TO BE IMPOSED IS DEATH, RECLUSION PERPETUA, OR LIFE IMPRISONMENT?
Whenever the Court of Appeals finds that the penalty of death should be imposed, the court shall render judgment but refrain from making an entry of judgment and forthwith certify the case and elevate its entire record to the Supreme Court for review. Where the judgment also imposes a lesser penalty for offenses committed on the same occasion or which arose out of the same occurrence that gave rise to the more severe offense for which the penalty of death is imposed, and the accused appeals, the appeal shall be included in the case certified for review to, the Supreme Court. In cases where the Court of Appeals imposes reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment or a lesser penalty, it shall render and enter judgment imposing such penalty. The judgment may be appealed to the Supreme Court by notice of appeal filed with the Court of Appeals.

WHAT IF THE DECISION APPEALED TO THE CA IS PURELY QUESTIONS OF LAW?

The CA may certify it to the SC directly Sec. 14. Motion for new trial. At any time after the appeal from the lower court has been perfected and before the judgment of the Court of Appeals convicting the appellant becomes final, the latter may move for a new trial on the ground of newly-discovered evidence material to his defense. The motion shall conform with the provisions of section 4, Rule 121.

CAN THE CA CONDUCT A NEW TRIAL?

Yes, the ground for new trial is based on newly-discovered evidence and the motion shall conform with the provisions of Section 4, Rule 121

WHAT IS NEWLY-DISCOVERED EVIDENCE?

This is material evidence that can change the outcome of the judgment when admitted

WHEN SHOULD THE NEWLY-DISCOVERED EVIDENCE BE DISCOVERED?

The evidence must be discovered after the perfection of appeal, but before the CA renders its judgment, because after the perfection of the appeal, the trial court loses its jurisdiction. On the other hand, prior perfection of an appeal, the party discovering the new evidence may file a motion for new trial with the trial court anyway. INSTEAD OF FILING A MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL, CAN A PARTY FILE A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION INSTEAD? No since a motion for reconsideration only covers errors of facts or laws and not newly-discovered evidence, which pertains exclusively as a ground for new trial

WHY IS THE PERIOD FOR FILING A MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL FROM A DECISION OF THE RTC DIFFERENT FROM THAT OF THE CA?
For the reason that at some point in time, the case must end. Sec. 15. Where new trial conducted. When a new trial is granted, the Court of Appeals may conduct the hearing and receive evidence as provided in section 12 of this Rule or refer the trial to the court of origin. Sec. 16. Reconsideration. A motion for reconsideration shall be filed within fifteen (15) days from notice of the decision or final order of the Court of Appeals with copies thereof served upon the adverse party, setting forth the grounds in support thereof. The mittimus shall be stayed during the pendency of the motion for reconsideration. No party shall be allowed a second motion for reconsideration of a judgment or final order.

WHEN SHOULD A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION BE FILED?

A motion for reconsideration shall be filed within fifteen (15) days from notice of the decision or final order of the Court of Appeals with copies thereof served upon the adverse party, setting forth the grounds in support thereof. The mittimus shall be stayed during the pendency of the motion for reconsideration. No party shall be allowed a second motion for reconsideration of a judgment or final order.

WHAT IS THE MEANING OF MITTIMUS?

It is the process issued by the court after conviction to carry out the final judgment such as commanding a prison warden to hold the accused in accordance with the terms of the judgment ec. 17. Judgment transmitted and filed in trial court. When the entry of judgment of the Court of Appeals is issued, a certified true copy of the judgment shall be attached to the original record which shall be remanded to the clerk of the court from which the appeal was taken.

WHAT SHOULD BE DONE AFTER THE JUDGMENT OF THE CA HAS BECOME FINAL?
When the judgment of the CA becomes final, a certified true copy of the judgment shall be attached to the original record which shall be remanded to the clerk of the court from which the appeal was taken. Sec. 18. Application of certain rules in civil procedure to criminal cases. The provisions of Rules 42, 44 to 46 and 48 to 56 relating to procedure in the Court of Appeals and in the Supreme Court in original and appealed civil cases shall be applied to criminal cases insofar as they are applicable and not inconsistent with the provision of this Rule.