Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Laguilles Notes - Prelims
Laguilles Notes - Prelims
Dumaual, 2018 (Sources: Riano, Laguilles Lectures, Assigned Cases, Herrera Notes, Hizon Notes, Legal
Websites) Page 1
Criminal Procedure (Justice Laguilles) 2018
thereof which results in technicalities Court, the city charter will prevail
tending to frustrate substantial justice because it’s a substantive law.
must always be avoided.
Regional Trial Court MTC
How are criminal actions1 instituted?2 1. Exclusive original 1. Exclusive original
jurisdiction in all criminal jurisdiction over all
- It depends whether or not the offense cases not within the violations of city or
exclusive jurisdiction of municipal
is one which requires a preliminary any court, tribunal or ordinances
investigation. body, except those now committed within
- PRELIMARY INVESTIGATION REQUIRED: falling under the exclusive their respective
Instituted by filing the complaint with and concurrent jurisdiction territorial jurisdiction;
of the Sandiganbayan;
the public officer for the purpose of 2. Exclusive original
conducting the requisite preliminary 2. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all
investigation. jurisdiction over all cases offenses punishable
decided by the MTC with imprisonment
- PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION NOT
within its territorial not exceeding 6
REQUIRED: (A) Filing the complaint or jurisdiction; years irrespective of
information directly with the Municipal the amount of fine,
Trial Court or Municipal Circuit Trial 3. Special jurisdiction to and regardless of
handle exclusively criminal other imposable or
Court (B) Filing the complaint with the
cases as designated by accessory penalties,
office of the prosecutor. the SC; including the civil
- SPECIAL RULE: In Manila and in other liability arising from
chartered cities, the rule is the 4. Jurisdiction over criminal such offenses
cases under special laws: irrespective of kind,
complaint shall be filed with the office nature, value or
of the prosecutor unless otherwise a. Written amount.
provided in their charters. defamation;
b. Comprehensive * The MTC does not
Can there be a direct filing in the RTC and Dangerous Drugs always have
Act of 2002; jurisdiction over
MTC of Manila and other chartered cities?
c. Violations of offenses punishable
intellectual with imprisonment
- (For RTC) No, because its jurisdiction property rights; exceeding 6 years if
covers offenses which require d. Jurisdiction in the jurisdiction is
preliminary investigation. Money laundering vested in either the
- (For MTC) No, because the complaint cases RTC or
Sandiganbayan.
shall be filed with the office of the
prosecutor unless otherwise provided
by their charters. What is a preliminary investigation?3
- In case of a conflict between a city
charter and a provision of the Rules of - Is an inquiry or proceeding to
determine whether there is sufficient
ground to engender a well-founded
1
The procedure by which a person accused of committing a
crime is charged, brought to trial, and judged.
2 3
Rule 110, Section 1 Rule 112, Section 1
Dumaual, 2018 (Sources: Riano, Laguilles Lectures, Assigned Cases, Herrera Notes, Hizon Notes, Legal
Websites) Page 2
Criminal Procedure (Justice Laguilles) 2018
belief that a crime has been - The interest of the private complainant
committed and the respondent is is limited to the civil liability.
probably guilty thereof, and should be
held for trial. Against who is a complaint filed?
8
An indictment is a formal accusation against an individual
suspected of committing a crime. Indictments are generally
only obtained for felony charges.
Dumaual, 2018 (Sources: Riano, Laguilles Lectures, Assigned Cases, Herrera Notes, Hizon Notes, Legal
Websites) Page 4
Criminal Procedure (Justice Laguilles) 2018
How do you state the name of the accused?9 - The complaint or information must
specify the qualifying and aggravating
- State the name and surname of the circumstances of the offense.
accused or any appellation or
nickname by which he has been or is Who must prosecute criminal actions?11
known.
- If his name cannot be ascertained, he - Public Prosecutor, since a criminal
must be described under a fictitious offense is an outrage against the state,
name. A description of the accused it necessarily follows that a
under a fictitious name must be representative of the State shall direct
and control the prosecution thereof.
accompanied by a statement that his
true name is unknown. What happens when the prosecutor assigned
- If his true name is later disclosed, his is not available?
true name shall be inserted in the
complaint or information in the records - The action may be prosecuted by: (a)
of the case. the offended party (b) any peace
- IF NATURAL PERSON: The preceding officer (c) public officer charged with
rules apply the enforcement of the law violated
- IF JURIDICAL PERSON: Sufficient to state
What are the powers of a public prosecutor?
its name or any name or designation
by which it is known or by which it may - Determine whether a prima facie case
be identified without the need of exists
averring that it is a juridical person. - Decide which of the conflicting
testimonies should be believed free
What are the rules in designating an
from the interference or control of the
offense?10 (NAC)
offended party
- The designation of the offense requires, - Subject only to the right against self-
as a rule, that the name given to the incrimination, determine which
offense by statute must be stated in witnesses to present in court
the complaint or information. If the
What are the reasons for authorizing a private
statute gives no designation to the
prosecutor to prosecute a criminal case?
offense, then reference must instead
be made to the section or 1 - The public prosecutor has a heavy
subsection punishing it. work schedule.
- To be included in the complete - There is lack of public prosecutors.
designation of the offense is an - Once so authorized, the private
averment of the acts or omissions prosecutor shall continue to prosecute
constituting the offense. the case up to the end of the trial
even in the absence of a public
9
Rule 110, Section 7
10 11
Rule 110, Section 8 Rule 110, Section 5
Dumaual, 2018 (Sources: Riano, Laguilles Lectures, Assigned Cases, Herrera Notes, Hizon Notes, Legal
Websites) Page 5
Criminal Procedure (Justice Laguilles) 2018
prosecutor unless the authority is - RATIONALE: A form of consideration for
revoked or otherwise withdrawn.12 the offended party and his/her family
who might prefer to suffer the outrage
What is the role of the OSG? in silence rather than go through with
- Regarded as the appellate counsel of the scandal of a public trial. (WEW)
the People of the Philippines - CRIMES STATED IN THE RULES OF COURT:
- If there is dismissal of a criminal case by Adultery, Concubinage, Seduction,
the trial court or if there is an acquittal Abduction, Acts of Lasciviousness,
of the accused, the OSG may bring an Defamation
appeal on the criminal aspect
What is the process in prosecuting private
representing the people. (XPN: Cases
crimes?
elevated to the Sandiganbayan)
- RATIONALE: The people of the A. Concubinage and Adultery
Philippines are the real parties to a - In crimes of Concubinage and
criminal case, therefore, only the OSG Adultery, it should be the offended
can represent them in criminal spouse who will file the complaint.
proceedings pending in the Court of - The action cannot be instituted
Appeals or the Supreme Court. against one party; it must be against
- An appeal of a criminal case not both guilty parties unless one of them is
represented by the OSG and not filed no longer alive.
in the name of the People of the - The offense may not be instituted if it is
Philippines is dismissible (except in the shown that the offended party has
aspect of civil liability). consented to the offense or has
pardoned the offenders. The consent
What are private crimes? or pardon may either be express or
- Felonies that cannot be prosecuted implied.
except upon sworn written complaint B. Seduction, Abduction and Acts of
filed by the aggrieved party is Lasciviousness
misleading because the state may - Shall not be prosecuted except upon
prosecute also. complaint filed by the offended party
- it is true that the institution of private or her parents, grandparents or
crimes is at the option of aggrieved guardian, nor in any case if the
party, but once that choice is made to offender has been expressly pardoned
manifest, the law will be applied in full by any of them.
force. - If the offended party dies before filing
- It’s the sworn written complaint that the complaint and she has no known
starts the prosecution. relatives, the State shall initiate the
criminal action in her behalf.
12
Rule 110, Section 5
Dumaual, 2018 (Sources: Riano, Laguilles Lectures, Assigned Cases, Herrera Notes, Hizon Notes, Legal
Websites) Page 6
Criminal Procedure (Justice Laguilles) 2018
- The state is the last entity who may file might confuse him in his defense is
the complaint in the absence of the prohibited.
persons mentioned. - Duplicity is a ground for a motion to
- Even if the offended party is a minor, quash.
she has the right to initiate the - An objection must be timely
prosecution independent from the interposed by the accused before trial.
persons mentioned, except when she - The court may convict the accused for
is deemed incompetent or as many offenses charged and proved
incapacitated. against him and impose on him a
C. Defamation penalty for each offense.16
- Only the offended party may initiate
the action Where is the venue of criminal actions?
D. Rape - Territory where (a) the offense was
- Pursuant to R.A. 8353, the crime of committed or (b) where any of its
rape was reclassified as a crime essential ingredients occurred.
against persons, hence prosecution - The courts cannot exercise jurisdiction
may now be commenced by state. over a person charged with an offense
What is duplicity?13 committed outside its limited territory.
Dumaual, 2018 (Sources: Riano, Laguilles Lectures, Assigned Cases, Herrera Notes, Hizon Notes, Legal
Websites) Page 8
Criminal Procedure (Justice Laguilles) 2018
What is an amendment? When is an amendment considered as formal
or substantial?
- It’s a correction of an error or an
omission in a complaint or an - A substantial amendment consists of a
information. recital of facts constituting a change
- Effected by adding or striking out an in the offense charged to the
allegation or the name of any party prejudice of a party because another
set of evidence is required to suit the
When can a party make an amendment to new charge or because it deprives an
the complaint or information? accused the opportunity to meet the
- If the amendment is made before the new offense. All other matters are
accused enters his plea, the complaint merely in form.
or information may be amended in
What is the test in determining if the
form or in substance without the need defendant is prejudiced by the amendment?
for leave of court.
- Whether a defense under the
When is leave of court required even if the information as it originally stood would
amendment is made before plea? be available after the amendment is
- When (a) the amendment made, and whether any evidence
downgrades the nature of the offense defendant might have would be
charged or (b) the amendment equally applicable to the information
excludes any accused from the in the one form as in the other. An
complaint or information amendment which does not change
- The above amendments also require a the nature of the crime alleged does
motion by the prosecutor with notice not affect the essence of the offense
to the offended party or cause surprise or deprive the
- The court is mandated to state its accused of an opportunity to meet
reasons in resolving the motion of the the new averment had each been
prosecutor and to furnish all parties held to be one of form and not of
copies of its order. substance.
Dumaual, 2018 (Sources: Riano, Laguilles Lectures, Assigned Cases, Herrera Notes, Hizon Notes, Legal
Websites) Page 9
Criminal Procedure (Justice Laguilles) 2018
3. Additional allegations which does not the objection of the
alter the prosecution’s theory of the accused, for if the
original would be
case so as to cause surprise to the withdrawn, the
accused and affect the form of accused could invoke
defense he has or will assume; double jeopardy.
4. One which does not adversely affect
any substantial right of the accused;
Assigned Cases:
5. An amendment that merely adds
specifications to eliminate vagueness 1. Judge Bonifacio vs RTC Makati
in the information and does not 2. Girlie Quisay
introduce new and material facts, and 3. People vs Jose Go
merely states with additional precision 4. People vs Edgardo Perez
something which is already contained 5. People vs AAA
in the original information and which 6. People vs Danilo Feliciano
adds nothing essential for conviction 7. Lito Corpuz vs People
for the crime charged. 8. People vs Raul Yamon
9. Dungo vs People
Substitution vs Amendment
10. Canceran vs People
Substitution Amendment 11. Siguerra Consignees
Involves substantial May involve either 12. Joel Mendez vs People
change from the formal or substantial 13. Leonardo vs Villalon
original charge changes
It must be with leave of Amendment before the Rule 111 – Prosecution of Civil Action
court as the original plea is entered can
information has to be be effected without Is there an implied institution of the civil
dismissed. leave of court.
action with the criminal action?
Substitution of the An amendment as to
information entails form will not require
another preliminary another preliminary - Yes. The civil action for the recovery of
investigation and plea investigation and the civil liability arising from the offense
to the new retaking of plea of the charged shall be deemed instituted
information. accused. with the criminal action.
Requires or An amended
presupposes that the information refers to - Every person who is criminally liable is
new information the same offense also civilly liable.
involves a different charged in the original -
offense which does information or to an
not include or is not offense which Rule 117 – Motion to Quash
necessarily included in necessarily includes or
the original charge; is necessarily included Motion to Quash - The mode by which an
hence the accused in the original charge,
cannot claim double hence substantial
accused assails the validity of a criminal
jeopardy amendments to the complaint or Information filed against him for
information after the insufficiency on its face in point of law, or for
plea has been taken
cannot be made over
Dumaual, 2018 (Sources: Riano, Laguilles Lectures, Assigned Cases, Herrera Notes, Hizon Notes, Legal
Websites) Page 10
Criminal Procedure (Justice Laguilles) 2018
defects which are apparent in the face of already entered
the Information (Antone vs Beronillo) his plea and is in
fact going
When is the time to file a motion to quash? through a trial
(Sec. 23, Rule 119)
1. May be made at any time before the Does not require May be filed by
accused enters his FIRST PLEA. (Section a prior leave of the accused
1) court for it to be either with leave
2. Generally not allowed in a summary filed or without leave
of court
procedure17, EXCEPT on the ground of
May be based on Would necessarily
lack of jurisdiction over the subject
matters found on be predicated
matter or failure to comply with the the FACE of the upon matters
barangay conciliation proceedings complaint or outside the
mentioned in Sec. 18 of the 1991 Rules information complaint or
on Summary Procedure information
When it is By jurisprudence,
What should be remembered regarding the granted, a deemed an
form and content of a motion to quash? (D-S- dismissal of the acquittal and
W) case will not would preclude
necessarily follow. the filing of
1. It should be in writing. another
2. It should be signed by the accused or information or
appeal by the
his counsel.
prosecution
3. It should distinctly specify the factual
and legal grounds of the motion. (Sec.
2, Rule 117, Rules of Court) What are the grounds for a motion to quash?
(Sec. 3, Rule 117, Rules of Court [ACE-MOP-
Motion to quash is not a demurrer to OFF])
evidence18
1. The facts charged do not constitute an
Motion to Quash Demurrer to
Evidence offense.
Filed before the Filed after the 2. The court trying the case has no
accused enters a prosecution rests jurisdiction over the offense charged.
plea its case; 3. The court trying has no jurisdiction over
presupposes that the person of the accused.
accused has 4. Officer who filed the information had
no authority to do so.
17 A summary proceeding is a court action in which the
5. The information does not substantially
formal procedures normally applicable to matters such
as conducting discovery are dispensed with. (US Legal) conform to the prescribed form.
18 It was an objection or exception by one of the parties
6. More than one offense is charged
in an action at law, to the effect that the evidence
which his adversary had produced was insufficient except when a single punishment for
in point of law (whether true or not) to make out his various offenses is prescribed by law
case or sustain the issue.
Dumaual, 2018 (Sources: Riano, Laguilles Lectures, Assigned Cases, Herrera Notes, Hizon Notes, Legal
Websites) Page 11
Criminal Procedure (Justice Laguilles) 2018
7. Criminal action or liability has been the beginning, there was actually
extinguished. no first marriage to speak of. Thus,
8. Contains averments19 that if were true, absent the first marriage, the facts
would constitute a legal excuse or alleged in the Information do not
justification. constitute the crime of bigamy.
9. The accused has been convicted or
acquitted of the offense charged, or Ruling Regarding Motion To Quash: The
the case against him was dismissed or issue on the declaration of nullity of the
otherwise terminated without his marriage between petitioner and
express consent. respondent only after the latter
contracted the subsequent marriage
ASSIGNED CASES: is, therefore, immaterial for the purpose
1. Myrna Antone vs. Leo Beronilla ( of establishing that the facts alleged in
December 8, 2010) GR: 183824 the information for Bigamy does not
constitute an offense. Following the
Doctrine: As reiterated in a long line of same rationale, neither may such
cases, Article 40 of the Family Code defense be interposed by the
has been established as a new respondent in his motion to quash by
provision expressly requiring judicial way of exception to the established
declaration of nullity of a prior rule that facts contrary to the
marriage for purposes of remarriage. allegations in the information are
Therefore, a person who contracts a matters of defense which may be
subsequent marriage absent a prior raised only during the presentation of
judicial declaration of nullity is guilty of evidence.
bigamy.
The court ruled in favor of Myrna
Facts Regarding Motion To Quash: Leo because Leo’s defense did not prosper
moved to quash the Information on on the ground that bigamy was
the ground that the facts charged do already consummated despite the
not constitute an offense because his judicial declaration on the nullity of
marriage with Myrna was declared null their marriage. Even if the declaration
and void as of April 2007 and became has a retroactive effect on the
final and executory on May 2007. marriage, it does not diminish the legal
Leo argues that since the marriage consequences such as the effects on
had been declared null and void from the child conceived prior the
declaration and in the case at hand, is
19 A positive affirmation, allegation, or declaration of
how Leo incurred criminal liability for
facts, especially in a pleading, as opposed to an bigamy when he contracted a second
argumentative statement or a statement based on marriage. (The first marriage was
induction or inference; generally this term is used in civil
proceedings, as opposed to allegation in criminal declared null and void by 2007, but
proceedings.
Dumaual, 2018 (Sources: Riano, Laguilles Lectures, Assigned Cases, Herrera Notes, Hizon Notes, Legal
Websites) Page 12
Criminal Procedure (Justice Laguilles) 2018
Leo contracted the second marriage duplicitous complaint or information
back in 1991.) under Rule 117 of the Rules on Criminal
Procedure and the accused may raise
2. People vs Ireneo Jugueta GR: 202124 the same in a motion to quash before
he enters his plea, otherwise, the
Facts Regarding Motion to Quash: The defect is deemed waived. However,
facts, as alleged in the Information in since appellant entered a plea of not
Criminal Case No. 7698-G, and as guilty during arraignment and failed to
proven during trial, show that move for the quashal of the
appellant is guilty of 2 counts of the Informations, he is deemed to have
crime of Murder and not Double waived his right to question the same.
Murder, as the killing of the victims was Section 9 of Rule 117 provides that
not the result of a single act but of "[t]he failure of the accused to assert
several acts of appellant and his any ground of a motion to quash
cohorts. In the same vein, appellant is before he pleads to the complaint or
also guilty of 4 counts of the crime of information, either because he did not
Attempted Murder and not Multiple file a motion to quash or failed to
Attempted Murder in Criminal Case allege the same in said motion, shall
No. 7702-G. It bears stressing that the be deemed a waiver of any objections
Informations in this case failed to except those based on the grounds
comply with the requirement in Section provided for in paragraphs (a), (b), (g),
13, Rule 110 of the Revised Rules of and (i) of Section 3 of this Rule." It is
Court that an information must charge also well-settled that when two or
only one offense. As a general rule, a more offenses are charged in a single
complaint or information must charge complaint or information but the
only one offense, otherwise, the same accused fails to object to it before
is defective. The reason for the rule is trial, the court may convict him of as
stated in People of the Philippines and many offenses as are charged and
AAA v. Court of Appeals, 21st Division, proved, and impose upon him the
Mindanao Station, et al., thus: The proper penalty for each offense.”
rationale behind this rule prohibiting
duplicitous complaints or informations 3. People vs. Aquilino Andrade
is to give the accused the necessary
knowledge of the charge against him Doctrine: It is clearly provided by the
and enable him to sufficiently prepare Rules of Criminal Procedure that if the
for his defense. The State should not motion to quash is based on an
heap upon the accused two or more alleged defect in the information
charges which might confuse him in his which can be cured by amendment,
defense. Non-compliance with this rule the court shall order the amendment
is a ground for quashing the to be made.
Dumaual, 2018 (Sources: Riano, Laguilles Lectures, Assigned Cases, Herrera Notes, Hizon Notes, Legal
Websites) Page 13
Criminal Procedure (Justice Laguilles) 2018
motion to quash is based on an
Facts Regarding Motion to Quash: alleged defect of the complaint or
Respondents filed a consolidated information which can be cured by
motion to dismiss on the ground that amendment, the court shall order that
the facts alleged in the information do an amendment be made.
not constitute a violation of Section 15,
RA 9165 which would warrant drug If it is based on the ground that the
testing and serve as basis for filing the facts charged do not constitute an
proper information in court. The RTC offense, the prosecution shall be given
Muntinlupa before the scheduled by the court an opportunity to correct
hearing date for pre-trial and trial the defect by amendment. The motion
granted the motion to dismiss finding shall be granted if the prosecution fails
no probable cause for the offense to make the amendment, or the
charged in the information. complaint or information still suffers
from the same defect despite the
Ruling Regarding Motion to Quash: amendment.
Considering that the RTC has already
found probable cause, it should have If the defect in the information is
denied the motion to quash and curable by amendment, the motion to
allowed the prosecution to present its quash shall be denied and the
evidence and wait for a demurrer to prosecution shall be ordered to file
evidence to be filed by respondents, if amended information. Generally, the
they opt to, or allowed the prosecution fact that the allegations in the
to amend the Information and in the information do not constitute an
meantime suspend the proceedings offense, or that the information does
until the amendment of the not conform substantially to the
Information without dismissing the prescribed form, are defects curable
case. by amendment. Corollary to this rule,
the court should give the prosecution
Section 4, Rule 117 of the Revised Rules an opportunity to amend the
of Criminal Procedure clearly states information.
that if the ground based upon is that
"the facts charged do not constitute 4. Jason Ivler vs. Hon. Maria Rowena
an offense," the prosecution shall be Modesto-San Pedro
given by the court an opportunity to
correct the defect by amendment, Facts In Relation To Motion to Quash:
thus: On September 7, 2004, Ivler pleaded
guilty to the charge in reckless
Section 4. Amendment of the imprudence resulting in slight physical
complaint or information. - If the injuries and was meted out the penalty
Dumaual, 2018 (Sources: Riano, Laguilles Lectures, Assigned Cases, Herrera Notes, Hizon Notes, Legal
Websites) Page 14
Criminal Procedure (Justice Laguilles) 2018
of public censure. Invoking this court of competent jurisdiction, upon a
conviction, Ivler moved to quash the valid complaint or information or other
Information of reckless imprudence formal charge sufficient in form and
resulting in homicide and damage to substance to sustain a conviction and
property for placing him in jeopardy of after the accused had pleaded to the
second punishment for the same charge, the conviction or acquittal of the
offense of reckless imprudence. accused or the dismissal of the case shall
be a bar to another prosecution for the
Ruling In Relation to Motion to Quash: offense charged, or for any attempt to
Reason and precedent both coincide commit the same or frustration thereof, or
in that once convicted or acquitted of for any offense which necessarily includes
a specific act of reckless imprudence, or is necessarily included in the offense
the accused may not be prosecuted charged in the former complaint or
again for that same act. For the information. However, the conviction of the
essence of the quasi offense of accused shall not be a bar to another
criminal negligence under article 365 prosecution for an offense which necessarily
of the Revised Penal Code lies in the includes the offense charged in the former
execution of an imprudent or complaint or information under any of the
negligent act that, if intentionally following instances:
done, would be punishable as a
felony. The law penalizes thus the (a) the graver offense developed due to
supervening facts arising from the same act
negligent or careless act, not the result
thereof. The gravity of the or omission constituting the former charge;
consequence is only taken into (b) the facts constituting the graver charge
account to determine the penalty; it became known or were discovered only after
does not qualify the substance of the a plea was entered in the former complaint
offense. And, as the careless act is or information; or
single, whether the injurious result
should affect one person or several (c) the plea of guilty to the lesser offense
persons, the offense (criminal was made without the consent of the
negligence) remains one and the prosecutor and of the offended party
same, and cannot be split into except as provided in section 1(f) of Rule
different crimes and prosecutions. 116.
Dumaual, 2018 (Sources: Riano, Laguilles Lectures, Assigned Cases, Herrera Notes, Hizon Notes, Legal
Websites) Page 15
Criminal Procedure (Justice Laguilles) 2018
What is jeopardy and what is the rule on What are the requisites for the first jeopardy to
Double Jeopardy? attach?
Dumaual, 2018 (Sources: Riano, Laguilles Lectures, Assigned Cases, Herrera Notes, Hizon Notes, Legal
Websites) Page 17
Criminal Procedure (Justice Laguilles) 2018
the RTC of Borongan, Eastern Samar, reinstatement of the case will place
Branch 2. There were several times him in double jeopardy.
when the prosecution moved to
postpone the hearing due to absence Ruling Relating to Motion to Quash and
of the complainant and her witnesses. Double Jeopardy: There is no merit to
Petitioner objected to the motion on petition. A permanent dismissal of a
the ground that his right to speedy trial criminal case may refer to the
was being violated by such termination of the case on the merits,
postponements. The trial court granted resulting in either the conviction or
the prosecutions motion and reset the acquittal of the accused; to the
hearing on May 31, 1999. It also dismissal of the case due to the
directed that the subpoenae to the prosecutions failure to prosecute; or to
complainant and her witnesses be the dismissal thereof on the ground of
coursed through the NBI which unreasonable delay in the
handled the investigation of the proceedings, in violation of the
case.During the hearing on May 31, accused right to speedy disposition or
1999, the prosecution requested for trial of the case against him. In
another postponement. Petitioner contrast, a provisional dismissal of a
moved for at least a temporary criminal case is a dismissal without
dismissal of the case. The prosecution prejudice to the reinstatement thereof
manifested that it would not object to before the order of dismissal becomes
a temporary dismissal. Thus, on the final or to the subsequent filing of a
same date, the trial court issued an new information for the offense within
order temporarily dismissing the case. the periods allowed under the Revised
On June 22, 1999, the prosecution filed Penal Code or the Revised Rules of
a Motion for Reinstatement and/or Court. The proscription against double
Revival of the case. The trial court set jeopardy presupposes that an
the hearing on the motion for accused has been previously charged
reinstatement on June 25, 1999. with an offense, and the case against
Petitioner opposed the motion him is terminated either by his acquittal
contending that the revival or or conviction, or dismissed in any other
reinstatement of the case will place manner without his consent. As a
him in double jeopardy. On September general rule, the following requisites
29, 1999, the Court issued a resolution must be present for double jeopardy
reinstating the said case and to attach: (1) a valid indictment, (2)
reiterating the issuance of a warrant of before a court of competent
arrest for petitioner. Petitioner filed a jurisdiction, (3) the arraignment of the
motion for reconsideration of said accused, (4) a valid plea entered by
resolution insisting that the him, and (5) the acquittal or
conviction of the accused, or the
Dumaual, 2018 (Sources: Riano, Laguilles Lectures, Assigned Cases, Herrera Notes, Hizon Notes, Legal
Websites) Page 18
Criminal Procedure (Justice Laguilles) 2018
dismissal or termination of the case Facts in Relation to Motion to Quash
against him without his express and Double Jeopardy: Mayor
consent. However, there are two Honorato Galvez of San Iidefonso and
exceptions to the foregoing rule, and his bodyguard Godofredo Diego were
double jeopardy may attach even if charged of murder and frustrated
the dismissal of the case was with the murder in the alleged shooting
consent of the accused: first, when transpired at San Iidefonso Bulacan
there is insufficiency of evidence to that took the life of Alex Vinculado
support the charge against him; and and seriously wounded Levi and
second, where there has been an Miguel Vinculado Jr. Cases were re-
unreasonable delay in the raffled to respondent Judge Tirso D.C.
proceedings, in violation of the right of Velasco and the trial court ruled that
the accused to a speedy trial. Diego was guilty of all the crimes but
Petitioner is not in danger of being Mayor Galvez was acquitted due to
twice put in jeopardy with the insufficiency of evidence. The
reinstatement of Criminal Case No. acquittal of Mayor Galvez is
10770 because as earlier stated, said challenged by the government and
case was provisionally dismissed by the they claim that such petition of review
trial court upon his motion. Thus, the will not transgress the constitutional
requirement that the dismissal of the right of the accused against double
case must be without the consent of jeopardy. The meaning of the phrase
the accused is not present in this case. “another trial” refers to a proceeding
Neither does the case fall under any of that rehears the case and receives
the aforecited exceptions. The evidence anew to establish the facts
prosecution had not yet presented of the case.
evidence at the time the case was
dismissed on May 31, 1999. Moreover, Ruling in relation to Motion to Quash
as previously explained, said dismissal and Double Jeopardy: Philippine
was temporary in nature, as the case jurisprudence has been consistent in its
was subject to reinstatement within application of the Double Jeopardy
thirty days from the date of dismissal. Clause such that it has viewed with
Hence, the Court finds no error on the suspicion, and not without good
part of the trial court in allowing the reason, applications for the
reinstatement of Criminal Case No. extraordinary writ questioning decisions
10770. acquitting an accused on ground of
grave abuse of discretion. The petition
7. People vs Hon. Tirso Velasco at hand which seeks to nullify the
(September 13, 2000) GR: 127444 decision of respondent judge
acquitting the accused Honorato
Galvez goes deeply into the trial
Dumaual, 2018 (Sources: Riano, Laguilles Lectures, Assigned Cases, Herrera Notes, Hizon Notes, Legal
Websites) Page 19
Criminal Procedure (Justice Laguilles) 2018
court's appreciation and evaluation in
esse of the evidence adduced by the
parties. A reading of the questioned
decision shows that respondent judge
considered the evidence received at
trial. These consisted among others of
the testimonies relative to the positions
of the victims vis--vis the accused and
the trajectory, location and nature of
the gunshot wounds, and the opinion
of the expert witness for the
prosecution. While the appreciation
thereof may have resulted in possible
lapses in evidence evaluation, it
nevertheless does not detract from the
fact that the evidence was considered
and passed upon. This consequently
exempts the act from the writs limiting
requirement of excess or lack of
jurisdiction. As such, it becomes an
improper object of and therefore non-
reviewable by certiorari. To reiterate,
errors of judgment are not to be
confused with errors in the exercise of
jurisdiction.
Dumaual, 2018 (Sources: Riano, Laguilles Lectures, Assigned Cases, Herrera Notes, Hizon Notes, Legal
Websites) Page 20