Criminal

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
III. JURISDICTION – IN PARTICULAR

III.A. EXPANDED EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION OF METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS/MUNICIPAL
TRIAL COURTS
Jurisdiction
1. Over offenses punishable with imprisonment not exceeding 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 kind, nature, value, or
amount thereof (Exclusive Original Jurisdiction)
a. Except in cases falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction of the RTC and
Sandiganbayan) (BP 129, Sec. 32)
b. Provided that in offenses involving damage to property through criminal negligence,
they shall have exclusive original jurisdiction thereof (BP 129, Sec. 32)
2. Where the only penalty provided for law is a fine, over offenses punishable with a fine of not
more than Php 4,000
3. Offenses involving damages to property through criminal negligence
4. Special jurisdiction to decide on applications for bail in criminal cases in the absence of all the
regional trial judges in a province or city
5. Under PD 1606, as amended by RA 8249, the criminal cases of
a. Government officials and employees
b. Where the imposable penalty is imprisonment of 6 years or less or fine is Php 4,000;
c. Officer charged does not fall under the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan or whose
salary is below grade 27 and not among those enumerated in Sec. 4, PD 1606, as
amended
6. Summary procedure in the following cases (Revised Rules of Summary Procedure, BP 129, Sec.
36)
a. BP Blg. 22 cases (Bouncing Checks Law)
b. Violations of municipal or city ordinances committed with their respective territorial
jurisdiction (exclusive original jurisdiction), except in cases falling within the exclusive
original jurisdiction of the RTC and Sandiganbayan) (BP 129, Sec. 32)
c. All other criminal cases where the penalty prescribed by law for the offense charged is
imprisonment not exceeding 6 months, or a fine not exceed Php 1,000, or both,
irrespective of other impossible penalties, accessory or otherwise, or of the civil liability
arising therefrom; or in offenses involving damage to property through criminal
negligence where the imposable fine does not exceed Php 10,000
d. Violations of traffic laws, rules and regulations
e. Violation of rental law
7. Exclusive jurisdiction for crimes punishable by desierro (People v. Eduarte)
8. In the absence of all the Regional Trial Judges in a province or city, any Metropolitan Trial Judge,
Municipal Trial Judge, Municipal Circuit Trial Judge may hear and decide petitions for a writ of
habeas corpus or applications for bail in criminal cases in the province or city where the absent
Regional Trial Judges sit (BP 129, Sec. 35).
Summary Procedure (Revised Rules on Summary Procedure)

1. How Commenced (Sec. 11)
a. The filing of criminal cases falling within the scope of this Rule shall be either by complaint or by information: Provided, however, that in
Metropolitan Manila and in Chartered Cities. such cases shall be commenced only by information, except when the offense cannot be
prosecuted de oficio.
b. The complaint or information shall be accompanied by the affidavits of the compliant and of his witnesses in such number of copies as
there are accused plus two (2) copies for the court's files. If this requirement is not complied with within five (5) days from date of filing,
the care may be dismissed.
1
Jibber Jabber, Mema Doctor
2. Duty of Court (Sec. 12)
a. If commenced by compliant – On the basis of the compliant and the affidavits and other evidence accompanying the same, the court may
dismiss the case outright for being patently without basis or merit and order the release of the amused if in custody.
b. If commenced by information – When the case is commenced by information, or is not dismissed pursuant to the next preceding
paragraph, the court shall issue an order which, together with copies of the affidavits and other evidence submitted by the prosecution,
shall require the accused to submit his counter-affidavit and the affidavits of his witnesses as well as any evidence in his behalf, serving
copies thereof on the complainant or prosecutor not later than ten (10) days from receipt of said order. The prosecution may file reply
affidavits within ten (10) days after receipt of the counter-affidavits of the defense.
3. Arraignment and Trial (Sec. 13)
a. Should the court, upon a consideration of the complaint or information and the affidavits submitted by both parties, find no cause or
ground to hold the accused for trial, it shall order the dismissal of the case; otherwise, the court shall set the case for arraignment and trial.
b. If the accused is in custody for the crime charged, he shall be immediately arraigned and if he enters a plea of guilty, he shall forthwith be
sentenced.
4. Preliminary Conference (Sec. 14)
a. Before conducting the trial, the court shall call the parties to a preliminary conference during which a stipulation of facts may be entered
into, or the propriety of allowing the accused to enter a plea of guilty to a lesser offense may be considered, or such other matters may be
taken up to clarify the issues and to ensure a speedy disposition of the case.
b. However, no admission by the accused shall be used against him unless reduced to writing and signed by the accused and his counsel. A
refusal or failure to stipulate shall not prejudice the accused.
5. Procedure of Trial (Sec. 15)
a. At the trial, the affidavits submitted by the parties shall constitute the direct testimonies of the witnesses who executed the same.
i. Witnesses who testified may be subjected to cross-examination, redirect or re-cross examination.
ii. Should the affiant fail to testify, his affidavit shall not be considered as competent evidence for the party presenting the
affidavit, but the adverse party may utilize the same for any admissible purpose.
b. Except in rebuttal or surrebuttal, no witness shall be allowed to testify unless his affidavit was previously submitted to the court in
accordance with Section 12 hereof.
c. However, should a party desire to present additional affidavits or counter-affidavits as part of his direct evidence, he shall so manifest
during the preliminary conference, stating the purpose thereof.
i. If allowed by the court, the additional affidavits of the prosecution or the counter-affidavits of the defense shall be submitted
to the court and served on the adverse party not later than three (3) days after the termination of the preliminary conference.
ii. If the additional affidavits are presented by the prosecution, the accused may file his counter-affidavits and serve the same on
the prosecution within three (3) days from such service.
6. Arrest of accused (Sec. 16)
a. The court shall not order the arrest of the accused except for failure to appear whenever required.
b. Release of the person arrested shall either be on bail or on recognizance by a responsible citizen acceptable to the court.
7. Judgment - Where a trial has been conducted, the court shall promulgate the judgment not later than thirty (30) days after the termination of trial (Sec.
17)
8. Prohibited pleadings and motions – The following pleadings, motions or petitions shall not be allowed in the cases covered by this Rule (Sec. 19):
a. Motion to dismiss the complaint or to quash the complaint or information except on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the subject
matter, or failure to comply with the preceding section;
b. Motion for a bill of particulars;
c. Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of a judgment, or for opening of trial;
d. Petition for relief from judgment;
e. Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, affidavits or any other paper;
f. Memoranda;
g. Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition against any interlocutory order issued by the court;
h. Motion to declare the defendant in default; chanrobles virtual law library
i. Dilatory motions for postponement;
j. Reply;
k. Third party complaints;
l. Interventions.
Cases
Figueroa v. People (GR 147406, July 14, 2008)
Figueroa attacked the RTC’s jurisdiction over the case of the crime of reckless imprudence resulting in
homicide after Figueroa actively participated in the proceedings, without ever mentioning the issue on
jurisdiction. The court held that reckless imprudence resulting in homicide is under the jurisdiction of
the MTC because it was punishable by prision correccional and that judgement rendered without
jurisdiction over subject matter is null and void, hence estoppel by laches will not apply.
Comelec v. Judge Aguirre (GR 171208, September 7, 2007)
Comelec filed an election offense before the RTC against Genovia, Leonisa when she casted a vote for
Emely Genovia violating the Omnibus Election Code. The RTC dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction.
The Court held that the RTC had jurisdiction because Sec. 32, BP 129 does not cover criminal cases,
when it falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the regional trial or Sandiganbayan. Sec. 268 of the OEC
gives exclusive original jurisdiction to RTC.
III.B. KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY

General Rule on Amicable Settlements
2
1. The lupon of each barangay shall have authority to bring together the parties actually residing in the same city or municipality for amicable settlement
of all disputes
2. The court in which non-criminal cases not falling within the authority of the lupon under this Code are filed may, at any time before trial, motu proprio
refer the case to the lupon concerned for amicable settlement.
Exception
1. Where one party is the government, or any subdivision or instrumentality thereof;
2. Where one party is a public officer or employee, and the dispute relates to the performance of his official functions;
3. Offenses punishable by imprisonment exceeding one (1) year or a fine exceeding Five thousand pesos (P5,000.00);
4. Offenses where there is no private offended party;
5. Where the dispute involves real properties located in different cities or municipalities unless the parties thereto agree to submit their differences to
amicable settlement by an appropriate lupon;
6. Disputes involving parties who actually reside in barangays of different cities or municipalities, except where such barangay units adjoin each other and
the parties thereto agree to submit their differences to amicable settlement by an appropriate lupon;
7. Such other classes of disputes which the President may determine in the interest of justice or upon the recommendation of the Secretary of Justice.
8. Any complaint by or against corporations, partnership or juridical entities, since only individuals shall be parties to Barangay conciliation proceedings
either as complainants or respondents (Sec. 1, Rule VI, Katarungang Pambarangay Rules);
9. Where the dispute arises from the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) (Sec. 46 & 47, R.A. 6657);
10. Labor disputes or controversies arising from employer-employee relations (Montoya vs. Escayo, et al., 171 SCRA 442; Art. 226, Labor Code, as
amended, which grants original and exclusive jurisdiction over conciliation and mediation of disputes, grievances or problems to certain offices of the
Department of Labor and Employment);
11. Actions to annul judgment upon a compromise which may be filed directly in court (See Sanchez vs. Tupaz, 158 SCRA 459).
General Rule on filing to a court or government office
1. A confrontation between the parties before the lupon chairman or the pangkat ng tagapagkasundo is needed before a Complaint, petition, action or
proceeding may be filed or instituted directly in court or any other government office for adjudication.
2. The parties thereto may still go the court either
a. When the lupon secretary or pangkat secretary as attested to by the lupon or pangkat chairman certifies that no conciliation or settlement
has been reached
b. When the parties repudiated the settlement (LGC, Sec. 412a)
Exception
1. Criminal cases where accused is under police custody or detention (see Sec. 412 (b) (1), Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law);
2. Petitions for habeas corpus by a person illegally deprived of his rightful custody over another or a person illegally deprived or on acting in his behalf;
3. Actions coupled with provisional remedies such as preliminary injunction, attachment, delivery of personal property and support during the pendency
of the action; and
4. Actions which may be barred by the Statute of Limitations.
Requirement before filing - Under the provisions of R.A. 7160 on Katarungang Pambarangay conciliation, as implemented by the Katarungang Pambarangay Rules
and Regulations promulgated by the Secretary of Justice, the certification for filing a complaint in court or any government office shall be issued by Barangay
authorities only upon compliance with the following requirements:
1. Issued by the Lupon Secretary and attested by the Lupon Chairman (Punong Barangay), certifying that a confrontation of the parties has taken place
and that a conciliation settlement has been reached, but the same has been subsequently repudiated (Sec. 412, Revised Katarungang Pambarangay
Law; Sec. 2[h], Rule III, Katarungang Pambarangay Rules);
2. Issued by the Pangkat Secretary and attested by the Pangkat Chairman, certifying that:
a. a confrontation of the parties took place but no conciliation/settlement has been reached (Sec. 4[f], Rule III, Katarungang Pambarangay
Rules; or
b. that no personal confrontation took place before the Pangkat through no fault of the complainant (Sec. 4[f], Rule III, Katarungang
Pambarangay Rules).
3. Issued by the Punong Barangay, as requested by the proper party on the ground of failure of settlement where the dispute involves members of the
same indigenous cultural community, which shall be settled in accordance with the customs and traditions of that particular cultural community, or
where one or more of the parties to the aforesaid dispute belong to the minority and the parties mutually agreed to submit their dispute to the
indigenous system of amicable settlement, and there has been no settlement as certified by the datu or tribal leader or elder to the Punong Barangay of
place of settlement (Secs. 1,4 & 5, Rule IX, Katarungang Pambarangay Rules); and
4. If mediation or conciliation efforts before the Punong Barangay proved unsuccessful, there having been no agreement to arbitrate (Sec. 410 [b],
Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law; Sec. 1, c. (1), Rule III, Katarungang Pambarangay Rules), or where the respondent fails to appear at the
mediation proceeding before the Punong Barangay (3rd par. Sec. 8, a, Rule VI, Katarungang Pambarangay Rules), the Punong Barangay shall not cause
the issuance at this stage of a certification to file action, because it is now mandatory for him to constitute the Pangkat before whom mediation,
conciliation, or arbitration proceedings shall be held.
III.C. JURISDICTION OF REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
Jurisdiction
1. Over all criminal cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court, tribunal or body, except
those now falling under the exclusive and concurrent jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan (BP 129,
Sec. 20)
2. In the issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, habeas corpus and
injunction which may be enforced in any part of their respective regions (original jurisdiction)
(BP 129, Sec. 21)
3. In actions affecting ambassadors and other public ministers and consuls (original jurisdiction)
(BP 129, Sec. 21)
4. In areas where there are no family courts, the cases falling under the jurisdiction of family courts
as adjudicated by the RTC
3
5. The Supreme Court may designate certain branches of the Regional Trial Courts to handle
exclusively criminal cases, juvenile and domestic relations cases, agrarian cases, urban land
reform cases which do not fall under the jurisdiction of quasi-judicial bodies and agencies,
and/or such other special cases as the Supreme Court may determine in the interest of a speedy
and efficient administration of justice (BP 129, Sec. 23)
a. Agrarian cases when the Supreme Court designates the RTC to have special jurisdiction
(original and exclusive jurisdiction)
b. Dangerous Drug cases when the Supreme Court designates the RTC to have special
jurisdiction (exclusive jurisdiction)
c. Whenever a Regional Trial Court takes cognizance of juvenile and domestic relation
cases and/or agrarian cases, the special rules of procedure applicable under present
laws to such cases shall continue to be applied, unless subsequently amended by law or
by rules of court promulgated by the Supreme Court (BP 129, Sec. 24).
6. Over offenses punishable with imprisonment exceeding 6 years
7. Where the only penalty provided for by law is a fine, over offenses punishable with a fine more
than Php 4,000
8. Appellate jurisdiction over all cases decided by Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts,
and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts in their respective territorial jurisdictions
9. Over criminal cases under specific laws such as
a. Libel (RPC Art. 360, People v. Eduarte)
b. Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 (RA 9165), except where the offenders are
under 16 and there are Family Courts in the province
c. Violations of Intellectual Property Rights
10. Under PD 1606, as amended by RA 8249, the criminal cases of
a. Government officials and employees
b. Where the imposable penalty is imprisonment of more than 6 years or fine is more than
Php 4,000
c. Officer charged does not fall under the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan or whose
salary is below grade 27 and not among those enumerated in Sec. 4, PD 1606, as
amended
11. Election offenses
12. Court Martial Cases except when the offense is service-oriented, it will then be tried by court
martial, provided the president may in the interest of justice, order or direct at any time before
arraignment that any such crimes or offenses be tried by the proper civil courts (RA 7055, Sec. 1)
13. Offenses cognizable by the Sandiganbayan where the information:
a. Does not allege any damage to the government or any bribery
b. Alleged damage to the government or bribery arising from the same or closely related
transactions or acts in an amount not exceeding Php 1 million (RA 10660, Sec. 4)
14. Violations of the Anti-Money Laundering Law (RA 9160) EXCEPT when committed by public
officers or private persons who are in conspiracy with public officers
Cases
Tan v. Bausch & Lamb (GR 148420, Dec. 15, 2005)
An information was filed against Tan for Unfair Competition before the RTC. A motion to transfer the
case to a special court for violations of intellectual property rights was done. Tan filed a motion to quash
the information on the ground that the penalty was within the jurisdiction of the MTC in Cebu. The court
held that the RTC had jurisdiction based on Sec. 23, BP 129. Furthermore, the Supreme Court had the
power to designate certain branches of the RTC to exclusively handle special cases and such a transfer
will not affect any substantive rights.
4
Samson v. Daway (GR 160054-55, July 21, 2004)
Samson was charged with Unfair Competition. He filed a motion to suspend arraignment and other
proceedings which was denied. He then filed a motion to quash information and motion for
reconsideration of the denial of his motion to suspend, challenging the jurisdiction of the RTC because
the penalty did not exceed 6 years and hence, should be under MTC. The Court held that the jurisdiction
should be in the RTC because RA 8293 provides that the jurisdiction should be under the CFI which is
now called the RTC.
III.D. JURISDICTION OF FAMILY COURTS

Jurisdiction
1. Exclusive Original Jurisdiction (RA 8369)
a. Criminal cases where one or more of the accused is below eighteen (18) years of age but
not less than nine (9) years of age or where one or more of the victims is a minor at the
time of the commission of the offense: Provided, That if the minor is found guilty, the
court shall promulgate sentence and ascertain any civil liability which the accused may
have incurred.
i. The sentence, however, shall be suspended without need of application
pursuant to Ptesidential Decree No. 603, otherwise known as the "Child and
Youth Welfare Code";
ii. A child fifteen (15) years of age or under at the time of the commission of the
offense shall be exempt from criminal liability. However, the child shall be
subjected to an intervention program pursuant to Section 20 of this Act (RA
9344, as amended by RA 10630, Sec. 6)
iii. A child above fifteen (15) years but below eighteen (18) years of age shall
likewise be exempt from criminal liability and be subjected to an intervention
program, unless he/she has acted with discernment, in which case, such child
shall be subjected to the appropriate proceedings in accordance with this Act
(RA 9344, as amended by RA 10630, Sec. 6)
b. Petitions for guardianship, custody of children, habeas corpus in relation to the latter;
c. Petitions for adoption of children and the revocation thereof;
d. Complaints for annulment of marriage, declaration of nullity of marriage and those
relating to marital status and property relations of husband and wife or those living
together under different status and agreements, and petitions for dissolution of
conjugal partnership of gains;
e. Petitions for support and/or acknowledgment;
f. Summary judicial proceedings brought under the provisions of Executive Order No. 209,
otherwise known as the "Family Code of the Philippines";
g. Petitions for declaration of status of children as abandoned, dependent o neglected
children, petitions for voluntary or involuntary commitment of children; the suspension,
termination, or restoration of parental authority and other cases cognizable under
Presidential Decree No. 603, Executive Order No. 56, (Series of 1986), and other related
laws;
h. Petitions for the constitution of the family home;
i. Cases against minors cognizable under the Dangerous Drugs Act, as amended;
j. Violations of Republic Act No. 7610, otherwise known as the "Special Protection of
Children Against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act," as amended by
Republic Act No. 7658; and
i. Child Prostitution and Other Sexual Abuse
5
ii. Child Trafficking
iii. Obscene Publications and Indecent Shows
iv. Acts of Neglect, Abuse, Cruelty or Exploitation and Other Conditions Prejudicial
to the Child’s Development
v. Sanctions of Establishments or Enterprises which Promote, Facilitate or Conduct
Activities Constituting Child, Prostitution and Other Sexual Abuse, Child
Trafficking, Obscene Publications and Indecent Shows and Other Acts of Abuse
vi. Working Children
vii. Discrimination of Children of Indigenous Cultural Communities
k. Cases of domestic violence against (Anti-Violence Against Woman and Their Children Act
of 2004, RA 9262):
i. Women - which are acts of gender based violence that results, or are likely to
result in physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women; and other
forms of physical abuse such as battering or threats and coercion which violate a
woman's personhood, integrity and freedom movement; and
ii. Children - which include the commission of all forms of abuse, neglect, cruelty,
exploitation, violence, and discrimination and all other conditions prejudicial to
their development.
Cases
People v. Judga Yadao (GR 152144-54, Nov. 13, 2012)
The Ombudsman filed charged of murder against police offers for the murder of suspected members of
the Kuratong Baleleng Gang which turned out to be minors. The prosecution filed for the re-raffling to a
Family Court because of the presence of minors. The Court held that it should not be raffled to a family
court because the two victims are dead so the case does not require the special attention and
protections of a family court.
III.E. ORIGINAL AND EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION OF THE SANDIGANBAYAN
Jurisdiction (PD 1606, as amended by RA 8249, RA 10660)
1. Violations of
a. Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019)
b. An Act Declaring Forfeiture in favor of the State any property found to have been
unlawfully acquired by Public Officer or Employee (RA 1379)
c. Crimes mentioned in RPC, Title VII, Sec. 2 (Direct Bribery, Art. 210, Indirect Bribery, Art.
211, Corruption of Public Officials, Art. 212)
2. Where one or more of the accused are officers whether permanent, acting or interim capacity at
the time of the commission of the offenses (includes when the officers are only an accomplice or
an accessory)
a. Officials of the Executive branch, occupying salary grade 27 and higher of the
Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989 (RA 6758), specifically including:
i. Provincial governors, vice governors, members of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan
and Provincial treasurers, assessors, engineers and other Provincial department
heads
ii. City mayors, vice-mayors, members of the Sangguniang Panlungsod, City
treasurers, assessors, engineers and other City department heads
iii. Officials of the diplomatic service occupying the position of consul and higher
iv. Philippine army and air force colonels, naval captains, and all officers of higher
rank
v. Officers of the PNP, occupying the position of provincial director and those
holding the rank of senior superintendent or higher
6
vi. City and Provincial prosecutors and their assistants, and officials and
prosecutors in the office of the Ombudsman and Special Prosecutors
vii. Presidents/directors/trustees/managers of GOCCs, state universities or
educational institutions/foundations
 Head of the legal departments of the AFP-RSBS is included (People v.
Bello)
Note: Those enumerated are subject to the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan regardless of salary grade
(Inding v. Sandiganbayan)
b. Members of Congress and officials thereof classified as grade 27 and up
c. Members of the Judiciary without prejudice to Constitutional provisions
d. Chairmen and members of Constitutional Commissions without prejudice to
Constitutional provisions
e. All other national and local officials classified as grade 27 and higher under the
Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989
3. Other offenses or felonies whether simple or complexed with other crimes committed by public
officials and employees mentioned in Sec. 4a, PD 1606, as amended by RA 7975, in relation to
their office
a. In Relation to Public Office General Rule: An offense is deemed to be committed in
relation to the public office of the accused when: (a) such office is an element of the
crime charged, or (b) when the offense charged is intimately connected with the
discharge of the official functions of the accused
i. The test is whether the information alleges an intimate connection between the
offense charged and the office (Crisostomo v. Sandiganbayan)
ii. The relation has to be such that, in the legal sense, the offense cannot exist
without the office.
iii. If the public office is a constituent element of the crime charged as provided for
by the statute, there is no need for the information to state the specific factual
allegations of the intimacy between the office and the crime charged, or that
the accused committed the crime in the performance of his duties.
b. Exception
i. Election Offenses (RTC)
ii. Court martial cases
4. Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection with EO 1, 2, 14, 14-A of 1986
a. Presidential Commission on Good Government
b. Regarding the funds, moneys, assets, and properties illegally acquired or
misappropriated by former President Ferdinand Marcos, Mrs. Imelda Romualdez
Marcos, their close relatives, subordinates business associates, dummies, agents or
nominees
5. The Sandiganbayan shall exercise exclusive appellate jurisdiction over final judgments,
resolutions or orders of regional trial courts whether in the exercise of their own original
jurisdiction or of their appellate jurisdiction as herein provided.
6. Violations of the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards (RA 6713)
7. Violations of the Plunder Law (RA 7080)
8. Violations of the Anti-Money Laundering Law (RA 9160) when committed by public officers or
private persons whoa re in conspiracy with public officers
Other Courts
1. That the Regional Trial Court shall have exclusive original jurisdiction where the information:
a. does not allege any damage to the government or any bribery; or
7
b. alleges damage to the government or bribery arising from the same or closely related
transactions or acts in an amount not exceeding One million pesos (P1,000,000.00).
2. In cases where none of the accused are occupying positions corresponding to Salary Grade ’27’
or higher, as prescribed in the said Republic Act No. 6758, or military and PNP officers
mentioned above, exclusive original jurisdiction thereof shall be vested in the proper regional
trial court, metropolitan trial court, municipal trial court, and municipal circuit trial court, as the
case may be, pursuant to their respective jurisdictions as provided in Batas Pambansa Blg. 129,
as amended.
Cases
Llorente Jr. v. Sandiganbayan (GR 122297-98, January 19, 2000)
Mayor Llorente Jr. was charged for violations of RA 3019, as amended for seizing materials from
Diamante without a warrant and issuing a receipt and with grave abuse of authority, refused to issue a
Mayor’s permit to the ice plant and saw mill, without sufficient justification. Llorente Jr. filed a special
civic action for certiorari assailing the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan. The Court held that the
Sandiganbayan had jurisdiction because Llorente Jr. being a municipal mayor had a salary Grade of 27 as
provided in Local Government Code and the Index of Occupational Services, Position Titles and Salary
Grades, and violations of RA 3019 are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan.
Sanchez v. Demetriou (GR 111771-77, Nov. 9, 1993)
Mayor Sanchez was charged with rape with homicide in RTC. Sanchez filed a motion to quash on the
grounds of (1) being denied the right to present evidence at the preliminary investigation (2) only the
Ombudsman had the competence to conduct the investigation (3) illegal warrantless arrest, hence no
jurisdiction over him, (4), being charged with seven homicides from the death of only two people (5)
discriminatory information for not involving other people (6) for lack of jurisdiction due to being a public
officer, hence should be in the Sandiganbayan. The Court held that it does not fall under the jurisdiction
of the Sandiganbayan because it had no relation to the office of the petitioner. It is not an essential
element of the crime, the offense can stand independently of the office, and the information did not
allege the connection of the crime and the office. Furthermore, the Court also held that jurisdiction was
acquired over his person because he raised other grounds other than solely on the jurisdiction of his
person hence he is deemed to have waived that objection and have submitted his person to the court.
People v. Go (GR 168539, March 25, 2014)
Go was charged in violation of RA 3019 with Enrile, a public officer for entering into a contract grossly
and manifestly disadvantageous for the government. Go prays that the Sandiganbayan has no
jurisdiction over his person and subject matter. The Court held that the Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction
over his person because of his voluntary appearance and posting bail and has also jurisdiction over the
subject matter because private individuals who are charged as co-principals, accomplices or accessories
with said public officers are also included.
Revised Internal Rules of the Sandiganbayan

1. Creation of Special Division – The Sandiganbayan en banc may request or recommend to the Supreme Court the creation of a Special Division to try
cases where compelling reasons and the interest of justice so require (Rule III, Sec. 3)
2. Motions
a. Motion Day
i. Except for motions which may be acted upon ex parte, all motions shall be scheduled for hearing on a Friday, or if that day is a
non-working holiday, on the next working day. However, a Division may designate for justifiable reason any other motion day
provided that the parties shall be duly notified thereof (Rule VII, Sec. 1).
ii. In all litigated motions, the movant shall file proof of service to the adverse party, pursuant to Section 13 of Rule 13 of the
1997 Rules of Civil Procedure; otherwise, the Sandiganbayan may not give due course thereto (Rule VII, Sec. 1).
iii. Motions requiring immediate action may be acted upon on shorter notice (Rule VII, Sec. 1).
iv. In appealed cases, the provision of Sec. 3, Rule 49 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, on Motions shall apply (Rule VII, Sec.
1).
b. Period to comment and to resolve (Rule VII, Sec. 4)
i. In case of meritorious motions, the comment of the adverse party shall be filed within a period of ten (10) calendar days from
notice or receipt of the order of the Sandiganbayan to file the same, and it shall resolve the motion within a period of thirty
(30) calendar days from the expiration of the ten (10)-day period, with or without comment.
8
ii.At its discretion, the Sandiganbayan may set the motion for hearing within a period of ten (10) calendar days from the
expiration of the ten (10)-day period to file comment, in which case the same shall be submitted for resolution after the
termination of the hearing, and shall be resolved within a non-extendible period of ten (10) calendar days thereafter.
iii. Reply and memorandum shall not be allowed.
3. Rendition of Judgment or Final Order
a. Procedure in Deciding Cases (Rule IX, Sec. 1)
i. The conclusion of a regular or Special Division of the Sandiganbayan in case submitted to it for decision shall be reached in
consultation among the members thereof before the case is assigned to one of them for the writing of the opinion of the
Division
ii. A certification to this effect signed by the Presiding Justice shall be issued and a copy thereof attached to the record of the
case and served upon the parties.
iii. Any member who took no part, dissented or abstained from a decision or resolution must state the reason therefor.
b. Votes Required to Decide (Rule IX, Sec. 2) – The unanimous vote of three (3) Justices in a Division shall be necessary for the rendition of a
judgment or final order. In the event a unanimous vote is not obtained, the Presiding Justice shall designate by raffle, on rotation basis,
two (2) Justices from all the other members of the Sandiganbayan to sit temporarily with them, forming a Special Division of five (5)
Justices, and the vote of a majority of such Special Division shall be necessary for the rendition of a judgment or final order.
c. Judgment in Joint Trials (Rule IX, Sec. 3) – In a joint trial involving more than one case, the Division may render a joint or separate
judgment when appropriate.
i. In case there are more than one (1) accused, the Division may also render judgment, for or against one or more of the
accused, when proper.
ii. In either case, where the required unanimous vote is not secured, a Special Division of five (5) Justices shall be constituted to
resolve the remaining case or the criminal or civil liability of the remaining accused.
iii. In such a case, a vote of the majority shall be required.
d. Voting Requirement for Cases Arising from Offenses Committed after the Effectivity of RA 10660 (Rule IX, Sec. 4) – The above
notwithstanding, for cases arising from offenses after the effectivity of RA 10660, the concurrence of a majority of the members of the
Division shall be necessary to render judgment or final order
e. Promulgation of Judgment (Rule IX, Sec. 5)
i. A judgment in a criminal case by a Division shall be promulgated within ninety (90) days for those rendered in the exercise of
its original jurisdiction, and twelve (12) months for those rendered in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction, from the time
the case was submitted for decision, in accordance with Section 6, Rule 120 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure
ii. The Division which rendered the judgment may request in writing another Division conducting hearings outside of its principal
office, to promulgate the judgment and resolve all incidents during the promulgation therein, and such promulgation and any
order issued relative thereto shall be valid and binding as if done by the Division which rendered the decision.
iii. In civil cases, the decision shall be rendered in accordance with Rule 36 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure
f. Execution of Judgment (Rule IX, Sec. 6)
i. Immediately after the judgment has become final and executory, if the accused is not detained, the Sandiganbayan shall issue
a Warrant of Arrest and order the bondsperson to produce the accused within ten (10) calendar days.
ii. If the bondsperson fails to produce the accused as ordered, the Sandiganbayan shall forfeit the bond and order the
bondsperson to show cause why judgment shall not be rendered against the bond.
iii. If the bondsperson fails to justify its failure to produce the accused, judgment shall be rendered against the bond.
iv. Upon the arrest, production by the bondsperson or voluntary surrender of the accused, or if the accused is already detained,
mittimus shall issue to commit the accused for service of sentence.
v. Insofar as civil liability, if any, is concerned, the same shall be executed in accordance with Rule 39 of the 1997 Rules of Civil
Procedure.
4. Period to File Motion for New Trial or Reconsideration (Rule X, Sec. 1) – A motion for new trial or reconsideration of a decision or final order shall be
filed within fifteen (15) calendar days from promulgation of the judgment or from notice of the final order or judgment. The motion shall be decided
within thirty (30) calendar days from the date of submission for resolution.
5. Review of Judgments and Final Orders (Rule XI, Sec. 1)
a. In General
i. The appeal to the Supreme Court in criminal cases decided by the Sandiganbayan in the exercise of its original jurisdiction
shall be by notice of appeal filed with the Sandiganbayan and by serving a copy thereof upon the adverse party.
ii. The appeal to the Supreme Court in criminal cases decided by the Sandiganbayan in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction,
and in civil cases shall be by petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.
b. Automatic Appeal
i. Whenever the Sandiganbayan in the exercise of its original jurisdiction imposes the death penalty, the records of the case,
together with the transcript of stenographic notes, shall be forwarded within five (5) days after the fifteenth (15 th) day
following the promulgation of the judgment or notice of denial of a Motion for New Trial or Reconsideration to the Supreme
Court for automatic review and judgment.
Ombudsman (RA 6770)
1. Office of the Ombudsman – The Office of the Ombudsman shall include the Office of the Overall Deputy, the Office of the Deputy for Luzon, the Office
of the Deputy for the Visayas, the Office of the Deputy for Mindanao, the Office of the Deputy for the Armed Forces, and the Office of the Special
Prosecutor. The President may appoint other Deputies as the necessity for it may arise, as recommended by the Ombudsman (Sec. 3).
2. Qualifications – The Ombudsman and his Deputies, including the Special Prosecutor, shall be natural-born citizens of the Philippines, at least forty (40)
years old, of recognized probity and independence, members of the Philippine Bar, and must not have been candidates for any elective national or local
office in the immediately preceding election whether regular or special. The Ombudsman must have, for ten (10) years or more, been a judge or
engaged in the practice of law in the Philippines (Sec. 5).
3. Term of Office – The Ombudsman and his Deputies, including the Special Prosecutor, shall serve for a term of seven (7) years without reappointment
(Sec. 7).
4. Restrictions (Sec. 14)
a. No writ of injunction shall be issued by any court to delay an investigation being conducted by the Ombudsman under this Act, unless there
is a prima facie evidence that the subject matter of the investigation is outside the jurisdiction of the Office of the Ombudsman.
b. No court shall hear any appeal or application for remedy against the decision or findings of the Ombudsman, except the Supreme Court, on
pure question of law.
5. Powers, Functions and Duties - The Office of the Ombudsman shall have the following powers, functions and duties (Sec. 15):
9
a. Investigate and prosecute on its own or on complaint by any person, any act or omission of any public officer or employee, office or
agency, when such act or omission appears to be illegal, unjust, improper or inefficient.t has primary jurisdiction over cases cognizable by
the Sandiganbayan and, in the exercise of this primary jurisdiction, it may take over, at any stage, from any investigatory agency of
Government, the investigation of such cases;
b. Direct, upon complaint or at its own instance, any officer or employee of the Government, or of any subdivision, agency or instrumentality
thereof, as well as any government-owned or controlled corporations with original charter, to perform and expedite any act or duty
required by law, or to stop, prevent, and correct any abuse or impropriety in the performance of duties;
c. Direct the officer concerned to take appropriate action against a public officer or employee at fault or who neglect to perform an act or
discharge a duty required by law, and recommend his removal, suspension, demotion, fine, censure, or prosecution, and ensure
compliance therewith; or enforce its disciplinary authority as provided in Section 21 of this Act: provided, that the refusal by any officer
without just cause to comply with an order of the Ombudsman to remove, suspend, demote, fine, censure, or prosecute an officer or
employee who is at fault or who neglects to perform an act or discharge a duty required by law shall be a ground for disciplinary action
against said officer;
d. Direct the officer concerned, in any appropriate case, and subject to such limitations as it may provide in its rules of procedure, to furnish it
with copies of documents relating to contracts or transactions entered into by his office involving the disbursement or use of public funds
or properties, and report any irregularity to the Commission on Audit for appropriate action;
e. Request any government agency for assistance and information necessary in the discharge of its responsibilities, and to examine, if
necessary, pertinent records and documents;
f. Publicize matters covered by its investigation of the matters mentioned in paragraphs (1), (2), (3) and (4) hereof, when circumstances so
warrant and with due prudence: provided, that the Ombudsman under its rules and regulations may determine what cases may not be
made public: provided, further, that any publicity issued by the Ombudsman shall be balanced, fair and true;
g. Determine the causes of inefficiency, red tape, mismanagement, fraud, and corruption in the Government, and make recommendations
for their elimination and the observance of high standards of ethics and efficiency;
h. Administer oaths, issue subpoena and subpoena duces tecum, and take testimony in any investigation or inquiry, including the power to
examine and have access to bank accounts and records;
i. Punish for contempt in accordance with the Rules of Court and under the same procedure and with the same penalties provided therein;
j. Delegate to the Deputies, or its investigators or representatives such authority or duty as shall ensure the effective exercise or
performance of the powers, functions, and duties herein or hereinafter provided;
k. Investigate and initiate the proper action for the recovery of ill-gotten and/or unexplained wealth amassed after February 25, 1986 and the
prosecution of the parties involved therein.
l. The Ombudsman shall give priority to complaints filed against high ranking government officials and/or those occupying supervisory
positions, complaints involving grave offenses as well as complaints involving large sums of money and/or properties.
6. Administrative Complaints – The Ombudsman shall act on all complaints relating, but not limited to acts or omissions which (Sec. 19):
a. Are contrary to law or regulation;
b. Are unreasonable, unfair, oppressive or discriminatory;
c. Are inconsistent with the general course of an agency's functions, though in accordance with law;
d. Proceed from a mistake of law or an arbitrary ascertainment of facts;
e. Are in the exercise of discretionary powers but for an improper purpose; or
f. Are otherwise irregular, immoral or devoid of justification.
7. Exceptions – The Office of the Ombudsman may not conduct the necessary investigation of any administrative act or omission complained of if it
believes that (Sec. 20):
a. The complainant has an adequate remedy in another judicial or quasi-judicial body;
b. The complaint pertains to a matter outside the jurisdiction of the Office of the Ombudsman;
c. The complaint is trivial, frivolous, vexatious or made in bad faith;
d. The complainant has no sufficient personal interest in the subject matter of the grievance; or
e. The complaint was filed after one (1) year from the occurrence of the act or omission complained of.
8. Official Subject to Disciplinary Authority; Exceptions – The Office of the Ombudsman shall have disciplinary authority over all elective and appointive
officials of the Government and its subdivisions, instrumentalities and agencies, including Members of the Cabinet, local government, government-
owned or controlled corporations and their subsidiaries, except over officials who may be removed only by impeachment or over Members of
Congress, and the Judiciary (Sec. 21).
9. Investigatory Power (Sec. 22)
a. The Office of the Ombudsman shall have the power to investigate any serious misconduct in office allegedly committed by officials
removable by impeachment, for the purpose of filing a verified complaint for impeachment, if warranted.
b. In all cases of conspiracy between an officer or employee of the government and a private person, the Ombudsman and his Deputies shall
have jurisdiction to include such private person in the investigation and proceed against such private person as the evidence may warrant.
c. The officer or employee and the private person shall be tried jointly and shall be subject to the same penalties and liabilities.
10. Formal Investigation (Sec. 23)
a. Administrative investigations conducted by the Office of the Ombudsman shall be in accordance with its rules of procedure and consistent
with due process.
b. At its option, the Office of the Ombudsman may refer certain complaints to the proper disciplinary authority for the institution of
appropriate administrative proceedings against erring public officers or employees, which shall be determined within the period prescribed
in the civil service law.
i. Any delay without just cause in acting on any referral made by the Office of the Ombudsman shall be a ground for
administrative action against the officers or employees to whom such referrals are addressed and shall constitute a graft
offense punishable by a fine of not exceeding Five thousand pesos (P5,000.00).
c. In any investigation under this Act the Ombudsman may:
i. enter and inspect the premises of any office, agency, commission or tribunal;
ii. examine and have access to any book, record, file, document or paper; and
iii. hold private hearings with both the complaining individual and the official concerned.
11. Preventive Suspension (Sec. 24)
a. The Ombudsman or his Deputy may preventively suspend any officer or employee under his authority pending an investigation, if in his
judgment the evidence of guilt is strong, and (a) the charge against such officer or employee involves dishonesty, oppression or grave
misconduct or neglect in the performance of duty; (b) the charges would warrant removal from the service; or (c) the respondent's
continued stay in office may prejudice the case filed against him.
10
b. The preventive suspension shall continue until the case is terminated by the Office of the Ombudsman but not more than six (6) months,
without pay, except when the delay in the disposition of the case by the Office of the Ombudsman is due to the fault, negligence or
petition of the respondent, in which case the period of such delay shall not be counted in computing the period of suspension herein
provided.
12. Penalties (Sec. 25)
a. In administrative proceedings under Presidential Decree No. 807, the penalties and rules provided therein shall be applied.
b. In other administrative proceedings, the penalty ranging from suspension without pay for one (1) year to dismissal with forfeiture of
benefits or a fine ranging from Five thousand pesos (P5,000.00) to twice the amount malversed, illegally taken or lost, or both at the
discretion of the Ombudsman, taking into consideration circumstances that mitigate or aggravate the liability of the officer or employee
found guilty of the complaint or charges.
13. Inquiries (Sec. 26)
a. The Office of the Ombudsman shall inquire into acts or omissions of a public officer, employee, office or agency which, from the reports or
complaints it has received, the Ombudsman or his Deputies consider to be:
i. contrary to law or regulation;
ii. unreasonable, unfair, oppressive, irregular or inconsistent with the general course of the operations and functions of a public
officer, employee, office or agency;
iii. an error in the application or interpretation of law, rules or regulations, or a gross or palpable error in the appreciation of
facts;
iv. based on improper motives or corrupt considerations;
v. unclear or inadequately explained when reasons should have been revealed; or
vi. inefficient performed or otherwise objectionable.
b. The Officer of the Ombudsman shall receive complaints from any source in whatever form concerning an official act or omission.
i. It shall act on the complaint immediately and if it finds the same entirely baseless, it shall dismiss the same and inform the
complainant of such dismissal citing the reasons therefor.
ii. If it finds a reasonable ground to investigate further, it shall first furnish the respondent public officer or employee with a
summary of the complaint and require him to submit a written answer within seventy-two (72) hours from receipt thereof. If
the answer is found satisfactory, it shall dismiss the case.
c. When the complaint consists in delay or refusal to perform a duty required by law, or when urgent action is necessary to protect or
preserve the rights of the complainant, the Office of the Ombudsman shall take steps or measures and issue such orders directing the
officer, employee, office or agency concerned to:
i. expedite the performance of duty;
ii. cease or desist from the performance of a prejudicial act;
iii. correct the omission;
iv. explain fully the administrative act in question; or
v. take any other steps as may be necessary under the circumstances to protect and preserve the rights of the complainant.
d. Any delay or refusal to comply with the referral or directive of the Ombudsman or any of his Deputies, shall constitute a ground for
administrative disciplinary action against the officer or employee to whom it was addressed.
14. Effectivity and Finality of Decisions (Sec. 27)
a. All provisionary orders of the Office of the Ombudsman are immediately effective and executory.
b. A motion for reconsideration of any order, directive or decision of the Office of the Ombudsman must be filed within five (5) days after
receipt of written notice and shall be entertained only on any of the following grounds:
i. New evidence has been discovered which materially affects the order, directive or decision;
ii. Errors of law or irregularities have been committed prejudicial to the interest of the movant. The motion for reconsideration
shall be resolved within three (3) days from filing: provided, that only one motion for reconsideration shall be entertained.
c. Findings of fact by the Officer of the Ombudsman when supported by substantial evidence are conclusive.
d. Any order, directive or decision imposing the penalty of public censure or reprimand, suspension of not more than one (1) month's salary
shall be final and unappealable.
e. In all administrative disciplinary cases, orders, directives, or decisions of the Office of the Ombudsman may be appealed to the Supreme
Court by filing a petition for certiorari within ten (10) days from receipt of the written notice of the order, directive or decision or denial of
the motion for reconsideration in accordance with Rule 45 of the Rules of Court.
f. The above rules may be amended or modified by the Office of the Ombudsman as the interest of justice may require.
15. Change of Unjust Laws – If the Ombudsman believes that a law or regulation is unfair or unjust, he shall recommend to the President and to Congress
the necessary changes therein or the repeal thereof (Sec. 29).
16. Designation of Investigators and Prosecutors (Sec. 31)
a. The Ombudsman may utilize the personnel of his office and/or designate or deputize any fiscal, state prosecutor or lawyer in the
government service to act as special investigator or prosecutor to assist in the investigation and prosecution of certain cases.
b. Those designated or deputized to assist him herein provided shall be under his supervision and control.
c. The Ombudsman and his investigators and prosecutors, whether regular members of his staff or designated by him as herein provided,
shall have authority to administer oaths, to issue subpoena and subpoena duces tecum, to summon and compel witnesses to appear and
testify under oath before them and/or bring books, documents and other things under their control, and to secure the attendance or
presence of any absent or recalcitrant witness through application before the Sandiganbayan or before any inferior or superior court
having jurisdiction of the place where the witness or evidence is found.
17. Duty to Render Assistance to the Office of the Ombudsman – Any officer or employee of any department, bureau or office, subdivision, agency or
instrumentality of the Government, including government-owned or controlled corporations and local governments, when required by the
Ombudsman, his Deputy or the Special Prosecutor shall render assistance to the Office of the Ombudsman (Sec. 33).
Cases
Office of the Ombudsman v. Rodriguez (2010)
Ombudsman and Sangguniang Bayan received separate complaints against Rodriguez. Rodriguez filed a
motion to dismiss on the ground of litis pendentia and forum shopping because the sanggunaing bayan
had already acquired jurisdiction over his person. The Court held that the Sandiganbayan concurrent
jurisdiction with the Sangguniang bayan over administrative cases against elective barangay officials as
11
provided in Sec. 15 of RA 6770. In administrative cases with concurrent jurisdiction, the body where the
complaint is filed first acquires jurisdiction. In this case, it was the ombudsman. The Ombudsman’s
exercise of jurisdiction is to the exclusion of the Sangguniang Bayan exercising concurrent jurisdiction
(Primary Jurisdiction Doctrine). Furthermore, forum shopping is only applicable to judicial cases, not to
administrative cases.
Castro v. Deloria (163586, January 27, 2009)
Castro, Revenue Officer of the BIR was charged with Malversation of Public Funds. Castro filed a Motion
to Quash claiming lack of jurisdiction of the Ombudsman to conduct a preliminary investigation and file
an information because the prosecutorial powers of the Ombudsman is limited to cases cognizable by
the Sandiganbayan in light of the Uy doctrine. The Court held that the Ombudsman has powers to
conduct a preliminary investigation and file an information because it is not limited to cases within the
jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan and it has already set aside the Uy doctrine. Although Sec. 15 of RA
6770 grants the Ombudsman primary jurisdiction over cases cognizable by the Sandiganbayan, it does
not exclude from its jurisdiction of cases involving public officers and employees by other courts. The
resolution on Uy would not amount to ex post facto law because a judicial interpretation of a statute
constitutes part of that law as of the date of its original passage and it does not create a new law.
III.F. COURT OF TAX APPEALS
Court of Tax Appeals (RA 9503)
1. There is hereby created a Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) which shall be of the same level as the
Court of Appeals, possessing all the inherent powers of a Court of Justice, and shall consist of a
Presiding Justice and eight (8) Associate Justices.
2. The Presiding Justice and Associate Justices shall hold office during good behavior, until they
reach the age of seventy (70), or become incapacitated to discharge the duties of their office,
unless sooner removed for the same causes and in the same manner provided by law for
members of the judiciary of equivalent rank.
3. Five (5) Justices shall constitute a quorum for sessions en banc and two (2) Justices for sessions
of a Division. Provided, That when the required quorum cannot be constituted due to any
vacancy, disqualification, inhibition, disability, or any other lawful cause, the Presiding Justice
shall designate any Justice of other Divisions of the Court to sit temporarily therein.
4. The affirmative votes of five (5) members of the Court en banc shall be necessary to reverse a
decision of a Division but a simple majority of the Justices present necessary to promulgate a
resolution or decision in all other cases or two (2) members of a Division, as the case may be,
shall be necessary for the rendition of a decision or resolution in the Division Level.
Jurisdiction (RA 9282)
1. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction to review by appeal, as herein provided
a. Decisions of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue in cases involving disputed
assessments, refunds of internal revenue taxes, fees or other charges, penalties in
relation thereto, or other matters arising under the National Internal Revenue or other
laws administered by the Bureau of Internal Revenue;
b. Inaction by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue in cases involving disputed
assessments, refunds of internal revenue taxes, fees or other charges, penalties in
relations thereto, or other matters arising under the National Internal Revenue Code or
other laws administered by the Bureau of Internal Revenue, where the National Internal
Revenue Code provides a specific period of action, in which case the inaction shall be
deemed a denial;
c. Decisions, orders or resolutions of the Regional Trial Courts in local tax cases originally
decided or resolved by them in the exercise of their original or appellate jurisdiction;
12
d. Decisions of the Commissioner of Customs in cases involving liability for customs duties,
fees or other money charges, seizure, detention or release of property affected, fines,
forfeitures or other penalties in relation thereto, or other matters arising under the
Customs Law or other laws administered by the Bureau of Customs;
e. Decisions of the Central Board of Assessment Appeals in the exercise of its appellate
jurisdiction over cases involving the assessment and taxation of real property originally
decided by the provincial or city board of assessment appeals;
f. Decisions of the Secretary of Finance on customs cases elevated to him automatically
for review from decisions of the Commissioner of Customs which are adverse to the
Government under Section 2315 of the Tariff and Customs Code;
g. Decisions of the Secretary of Trade and Industry, in the case of nonagricultural product,
commodity or article, and the Secretary of Agriculture in the case of agricultural
product, commodity or article, involving dumping and countervailing duties under
Section 301 and 302, respectively, of the Tariff and Customs Code, and safeguard
measures under Republic Act No. 8800, where either party may appeal the decision to
impose or not to impose said duties.
2. Exclusive original jurisdiction over all criminal offenses arising from violations of the National
Internal Revenue Code or Tariff and Customs Code and other laws administered by the BIR or
the Bureau of Customs
a. Provided, however, That offenses or felonies mentioned in this paragraph where the
principal amount of taxes and fees, exclusive of charges and penalties, claimed is less
than One million pesos (P1,000,000.00) or where there is no specified amount claimed
shall be tried by the regular Courts and the jurisdiction of the CTA shall be appellate.
b. Any provision of law or the Rules of Court to the contrary notwithstanding, the criminal
action and the corresponding civil action for the recovery of civil liability for taxes and
penalties shall at all times be simultaneously instituted with, and jointly determined in
the same proceeding by the CTA, the filing of the criminal action being deemed to
necessarily carry with it the filing of the civil action, and no right to reserve the filling of
such civil action separately from the criminal action will be recognized.
3. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction in criminal offenses:
a. Over appeals from the judgments, resolutions or orders of the Regional Trial Courts in
tax cases originally decided by them, in their respected territorial jurisdiction.
b. Over petitions for review of the judgments, resolutions or orders of the Regional Trial
Courts in the exercise of their appellate jurisdiction over tax cases originally decided by
the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts in
their respective jurisdiction.
4. Exclusive original jurisdiction in tax collection cases involving final and executory assessments
for taxes, fees, charges and penalties: Provided, however, That collection cases where the
principal amount of taxes and fees, exclusive of charges and penalties, claimed is less than One
million pesos (P1,000,000.00) shall be tried by the proper Municipal Trial Court, Metropolitan
Trial Court and Regional Trial Court.
5. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction in tax collection cases:
a. Over appeals from the judgments, resolutions or orders of the Regional Trial Courts in
tax collection cases originally decided by them, in their respective territorial jurisdiction.
b. Over petitions for review of the judgments, resolutions or orders of the Regional Trial
Courts in the Exercise of their appellate jurisdiction over tax collection cases originally
decided by the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit
Trial Courts, in their respective jurisdiction."
13
III.G. COURT OF APPEALS
Jurisdiction (BP 129, Sec. 9)
1. 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;
2. Exclusive original jurisdiction over actions for annulment of judgements of Regional Trial Courts;
and
3. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all final judgements, resolutions, orders or awards of
Regional Trial Courts and quasi-judicial agencies, instrumentalities, boards or commission,
including the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Social Security Commission, the
Employees Compensation Commission and the Civil Service Commission, Except those falling
within the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in accordance with the Constitution, the
Labor Code of the Philippines under Presidential Decree No. 442, as amended, the provisions of
this Act, and of subparagraph (1) of the third paragraph and subparagraph 4 of the fourth
paragraph od Section 17 of the Judiciary Act of 1948.
Internal Rules of the Court of Appeals (2009)
1. Only criminal cases not involving detention prisons and civil cases shall be raffled to the Presiding Justice or the Executive Justice which shall be in the
ratio of 1:4 and 3:4, respectively (Rule III, Sec. 2h)
2. Consolidation of Cases - When related cases are assigned to different Justices, they shall be consolidated and assigned to one Justice (Rule III, Sec. 3)
a. Upon motion of a party which notice to the other party/ies, or at the instance of the Justice to whom any of the related cases is assigned,
upon notice to the parties, consolidation shall ensure when the cases involve the same parties and/or related questions of facts and/or
law.
b. Consolidated cases shall pertain to the Justice -
i. To whom the case with the lowest docket number is assigned, if they are of the same kind;
ii. To whom the criminal case with the lowest docket number is assigned, if two or more of the cases are criminal and the others
are civil or special;
iii. To whom the criminal case is assigned and the others are civil or special; and
iv. To whom the civil case is assigned, or to whom the civil case with the lowest docket number is assigned, if the cases involved
are civil and special.
c. In cases of consolidation involving petitions for writ of amparo and writ of habeas data, the provisions of Sec. 23 of A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC
and Sec. 21 of A.M. Mo. 08-1-16-SC, respectively, shall apply.
i. When a criminal action is filed subsequent to the filing of a petition for the writ, the latter shall be consolidated with the
criminal action (Sec. 23 of A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC, Sec. 21 of A.M. Mo. 08-1-16-SC).
ii. When a criminal action and a separate civil action are filed subsequent to a petition for a writ of amparo, the latter shall be
consolidated with the criminal action (Sec. 23 of A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC).
iii. When a criminal action and a separate civil action are filed subsequent to a petition for a writ of habeas data, the petition shall
be consolidated with the criminal action (Sec. 21 of A.M. Mo. 08-1-16-SC).
iv. After consolidation, the procedure under this Rule shall continue to apply to the disposition of the reliefs in the petition (Sec.
23 of A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC, Sec. 21 of A.M. Mo. 08-1-16-SC).
d. Notice of the consolidation and replacement shall be given to the Raffle Staff and the Judicial Records Division. (Sec. 7, Rule 3, RIRCA[a])
3. Processing of Ordinary Appeals – The original records of criminal cases shall be processed by the Criminal Cases Section in accordance with this Section
insofar as applicable, and assigned a corresponding CA-G.U. CR number. (Sec. 2, Rule 5, RIRCA[a]) (Rule IV, Sec. 4b)
a. Docket and Other Lawful Fees and Deposit for Costs. No payment of docket and other lawful fees, and deposit for costs shall be required
in criminal cases except in petitions fur review of criminal cases and appeals from confiscation or forfeiture of bail bonds. (Sec. 3, Rule 5,
RIRCA [a])
b. Appeals from Confiscation of Bond. Appeals from orders of confiscation or forfeiture of bail bonds shall be treated as appeals in civil cases.
The green-colored rollo cover for civil cases shall be used over the cream-colored cover for criminal cases. The case shall be re-captioned
"Republic of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, versus (the name of the bondsman/surety), defendant-appellant". (Sec. f, Rule 5, RIRCA)
c. Appeals from Contempt of Court Appeals from orders finding a person in indirect contempt of couil si sail ( court shall? Typo in the
website) be treated as appeals in criminal cases
4. Process of Adjudication (Rule VI) (This part is confusing in the website due to numerous typographic errors. I’ll try my best)
a. Justice to whom a case is assigned
i. Every case assigned to a Justice, whether appealed or original, shall be retained by him/her even if he/she is transferred to
another Division in the same station (Sec. 2, Rule 8, RIRCA [a]).
ii. Adjudication of cases shall be made by the Justice to whom the case is assigned and the members of his/ her Division except
as provided hereunder.
iii. Members shall have five (5) working days from receipt of the draft report to make their concurrence or dissent
b. Justices who may participate in adjudication of cases – In the determination of the two other Justices who shall participate in the
adjudication of cases, the following shall be observed (Sec. 2):
i. The case shall be the subject of consultation among the members of the Division;
ii. If the Justice to whom the case is assigned is disqualified, his/her replacement shall be chosen by raffle from among the
Justices in the same station;
iii. If one or both of the other members of the Division is/are on leave of absence, disqualified, transferred or no longer
member/s of the Court, his/her/their replacement shall be chosen by raffle from among the Justices in the same station. The
Division shall be called Special (No.) Division;
iv. When, in an original action or petition for review, any of the following proceedings has been taken, namely:
 giving due course;
 granting temporary restraining order, writ of preliminary injunction, or new trial;
14
 granting an application for writ of habeas corpus, amparo or habeas data;
 granting an application for a freeze order; and
 granting judicial authorization under the Human Security Act of 2007, the case shall remain with the Justice to
whom the case is assigned and the Justices who participated therein, regardless of their transfer to other
Divisions in the same station. The case may not be unloaded by the ponenta to complete the case assignments of
a Justice who is newly- appointed or transferred from another station of the Court.
v. However, if only one member of the Division who participated in any of the proceedings mentioned in subparagraph (d)
hereof remains (Note: d here is outline iv, the one above), the Raffle Committee shall automatically assign the case to him/her;
 However, if all the members of said Division have ceased to be members of the Court or have transferred to other
stations, the Judicial Records Division shall make a request to the Raffle Committee for a new ponente; and
vi. Where the composition of a Division which decided a case has changed, the Division which shall subsequently act on the case
shall be called the Former (No.) Division. (Sec. 2, Rule 8, RIRCA [a])
vii. When the issuance of a warrant of arrest has been authorized by the Division, the same shall be signed by the concerned
Division Clerk of Court
c. Power of the Court to Receive Evidence – The Court may receive evidence in the following cases (Sec. 3):
i. In actions falling within its original jurisdiction, such as: (1) certiorari, prohibition and mandamus, (2) annulment of judgment
or final order; (3) quo warranto; (4) habeas corpus; (5) amparo, (6) habeas data, (7) anti-money laundering and (8) application
for judicial authorization under the Human Security Act of 2007.
ii. In appeals in civil cases where the Court grants a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence, pursuant to Sec. 3,
Rule 53 of the Rules of Court;
iii. In appeals in criminal cases where the Court grants a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence, pursuant to Sec.
12, Rule 124 of the Rules of Court; and In appeals involving claims for damages arising from provisional remedies.
d. Hearing on Preliminary Injunction (Sec. 4)
i. The requirement of a hearing on an application for preliminary injunction is satisfied with tine issuance by the Court of a
resolution served upon the party sought to be enjoined requiring him/ her to comment on said application within a period of
not more than ten (10) days from notice.
ii. Said party may attach documents to his/her comment which may show why the application for preliminary injunction should
be denied.
iii. The Court may require the party seeking the injunctive relief to file a reply to the comment within five (5) days from receipt of
the latter.
iv. If the party sought to be enjoined fails to file his/her comment as provided for in the preceding paragraph, the Court may
resolve the application on the basis of the petition and its annexes.
v. The preceding paragraphs, riotvyjthstending (notwithstanding?), the, Court may, in its sound discretion, set the application for
preliminary injunction for hearing, during which the parties may present their respective positions or submit evidence in
support thereof
e. Action by a Justice (Sec. 5)
i. All members of the Division shall act upon an application for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction.
ii. However, if the matter is of extreme urgency and a Justice is absent, the two other justices shall act upon the application.
iii. If only the ponente (ponente?) is present, then he/she shall act alone upon the application, the action of the two Justices or of
the ponente shall, however, be submitted on the next working day to the absent member or members of the Division for
ratification, modification or recall.
f. Judicial Action on Certain Petitions (Sec. 6)
i. Before requiring comment on or giving due course to, a petition for review or after the receipt of the respondent's comment
on, or answer to, the petition, or if no comment or answer is filed within the period to file it, the Court may dismiss the
petition if it finds the same to be patently without merit or prosecuted manifestly for delay or the questions raised therein are
too unsubstantial to require consideration.
 Before the petition for review is given due course, the Court may require the court a quo or quasi-judicial agency
to either elevate the original records of the case or supply it with copies of pleadings and documents which it
needs in acting upon the petition at that stage of the proceedings.
 If the petition is given due course, the Court may either (i) require the court a quo or quasi-judicial agency to
elevate the records of the case, (ii) set the case for oral argument, (iii) require the parties to submit their
memoranda or (iv) consider the case submitted for decision. After the oral argument or upon submission of the
memoranda or expiration of the time to file the same, the case shall be deemed submitted for decision.
ii. In petitions for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus, the provisions of Rule 65, in relation to Rule 46, of the Rules of Court
shall apply.
g. The Justices Who Shall Act on Motions for Reconsideration (Sec. 7)
i. If during the completion-of-record stage, there is no unanimous concurrence of the members of the Division on the resolution
disposing of an interlocutory matter and a Division of Five is constituted, the latter shall act on said matter only up to the
resolution of the motion for reconsideration of said interlocutory order.
 The adjudication on the merits of the case shall be made by the current members of the Division of the Justice to
whom the case is assigned
ii. A motion for reconsideration of a decision or final resolution shall be acted upon by the ponente and the other members of
the Division, whether of Three or Five and whether regular or acting, who participated in the rendition of said decision or final
resolution, regardless of whether such members are already in other Divisions at the time the motion for reconsideration is
filed or acted upon, provided that they are still in the same station, otherwise, Sec. 2, Rule VI shall apply,
iii. If the ponente has ceased to be a member of the Court or has inhibited himself/herself from acting on the abovementioned
motion for reconsideration or has transferred to another station, he/she shall be replaced by another Justice who shall be
chosen by raffle from among the remaining members of his/her Division in the same station, whether regular or acting, who
participated in the rendition of the decision or final resolution, and the resulting vacancy therein shall be filled by raffle from
among the other Justices in the same station.
 If only one member of the Division, whether regular or acting, who participated in the rendition of the decision or
final resolution, remains, the motion for reconsideration shall be sent to him/her by the Raffle Committee and
he/she shall act thereon with the participation of the other members of his/her Division,
iv. If the ponente and all the members of the Division, whether regular or acting, who rendered the decision or final resolution
have ceased to be members of the Court or are no longer in the same station, the case shall be raffled to any Justice in the
15
same station and the motion for reconsideration shall be acted upon by him/her with the participation of the other members
of his/her Division,
h. Priorities in Adjudication of Cases – Subject to existing laws and as far as practicable, cases shall be adjudicated in accordance with the
following priorities (Sec. 8):
i. (a) In Civil Cases.
 Those where temporary restraining orders, writs of preliminary injunction or execution pending appeal or other
auxiliary writs were issued;
 Those involving a prejudicial question; and
 The oldest cases submitted for decision.
ii. In Criminal Cases.
 Those where the accused is detained;
 Those where the Solicitor General recommends the acquittal of the accused; and
 The oldest cases submitted for decision.
iii. In Original Actions and Petitions for Review.—
 Habeas corpus cases;
 Anti money-laundering cases;
 Amparo cases;
 Habeas data cases;
 Agrarian cases;
 Original petitions where injunctive relief has been granted; and
 Petitions for review which have been pending in the Court for a long time. (Sec. 3, Rule 8, RIRCA [a])
i. Study, Report and Deliberation on the Case (Sec. 9)
i. The Justice to whom the case is assigned shall submit a written report thereon to the other members of his/her Division for
consultation. The Chairperson of the Division shall include the case in an agenda for a meeting of the Division for its
deliberation, if the other members agree with the report after such deliberation, the Division shall choose the ponente who
shall write the decision for signature and immediate promulgation. Minutes of the meeting shall be kept. (Sec. 4, Rule 8, RIRCA
[a])
ii. Every decision shall be accompanied by the minutes of consultation and deliberation duly accomplished and signed by all the
members of the Division in the following form:
j. Procedure in Case of Dissent – When the unanimous vote of the members of the Division cannot be attained, the following shall be
observed:
i. Within five (5) working days from the date of deliberation, the Chairperson of the Division shall refer the case in writing,
together with the ro//o, to the Raffie Committee (rollo? Raffle Committee? typographic error) which shall designate two (2)
Justices by raffle from among the Justices in the same station to sit temporarily with the three members, forming a Special
Division of Five.
 A written dissenting opinion shall be submitted by a Justice to the ponente and the other members of the Special
Division of Five within ten (10) working days from his/her receipt of the records,
 If no written dissenting opinion is submitted within the period above-stated, with no additional period being
agreed upon by the majority of said, Division, that Special Division shall be automatically abafished ( abolish?
Typographic error) and 'the" case "shall revert' to the regular Division as if no dissent has been made.
ii. The Special Division of Five shall retain the case until its final disposition regardless of reorganization, provided that all the
members thereof remain in the same station. (Sec. 4, Rule 8, RIRCA [a])
iii. After a member of the Division, whether regular or acting, has expressed his/her dissent in writing and the Special Division of
Five is constituted, that Special Division shall retain the case until its final disposition despite changes in membership of the
Division to which the ponante has been assigned caused by reorganization or other causes, provided that the members of the
Special Division remain in the same station. (Supreme Court Resolution dated May 25, 1993).
 An acting member who has expressed his/her dissent in writing shall continue to be a member of the Division of
the ponente in such capacity until the final disposition of the case, regardless of reorganization which results in
the transfer of either the ponente or the acting member to the other divisions, provided the two remain in the
same station.
iv. The concurrence of a majority shall be necessary for the pronouncement of a decision or resolution of the Special Division of
Five. The most senior among the five members shall be the Chairperson.
v. After due consultation, the members of the Special Division of Five, whose opinions constitute the majority, shall choose from
among them the ponente.
vi. Any member of the Special Division of Five may write a separate concurring or dissenting opinion which, together with the
majority opinion, shall be promulgated and attached to the rollo. (n)
16
vii. if the consultation in the Special Division of Five results in a unanimous concurrence, all its members shall sign the decision or
resolution.
k. Certification – Every decision shall be accompanied by a certification signed by the Chairperson or the most senior member as the Acting
Chairperson of the Division in the following form (Sec. 11):
l. Resolutions – Any disposition other than on the merits shall be embodied in a resolution. (Sec. 6, Rule 8, RIRCA) Any action modifying or
reversing a decision of the Division shall be denominated as "Amended Decision", (Sec. 12)
m. Promulgation of Decisions and Resolutions – Promulgation of decisions and resolutions shall be the direct responsibility of the Division
Clerk of Court (Sec. 13).
i. Promulgation is made by filling the decision or resolution with the Division Clerk of Court who shall fortwith annotate the date
and time thereof and attest to it by his/her signature thereon.
ii. The Division Clerk of Court shall record in the Promulgation Book the docket number, title of the case, ponente and other
members, nature of the document (whether decision or resolution) and the action taken by the Division. The Promulgation
Book shall be under his/her care and custody.
iii. Within one working day from promulgation of a decision or resolution, the Division Clerk of Court shall send notices and
copies thereof in sealed envelopes to the parties through their counsel, either personally or by registered mail. However, a
judgment of acquittal of an accused who is detained shall, whenever practicable, be served personally on the Director of
Prisons or whoever has official custody of said accused.
iv. immediately after promulgation of a decision or resolution, the Division Cierk of Court shall forward the original and two
copies thereof to the Court Reporter and a copy each to the Information and Statistical Data Division and the Judicial Records
Division, the latter to forward the same copy to the Archives Section. (Sec. 8, Rule 8, RIRCA[a])
v. A case remanded by the Supreme Court to the Court of Appeals for further proceedings shall go back to the justice to whom
the case has been assigned. If such justice is no longer a member of the same station or of the Court, the case shall be raffled
stationwide.
n. Number of Copies and Distribution – Decisions and resolutions of the Court shall be distributed as follows: (a) original plus two copies to
the Court Reporter; (b) one copy to be attached to the rollo; (c) one copy to the ponente; (d) one copy to the Information & Statistical Data
Division; and (e) one copy to the Judicial Records Division. In addition, sufficient copies (Sec. 14).
o. Effect of Filing an Appeal in the Supreme Court – No motion for reconsideration or rehearing shali be acted upon if the movant has
previously filed in the Supreme Court a petition for review on certiorari or a motion for extension of time to file such petition. If such
petition or motion is subsequently filed, the motion for reconsideration pending in this Court shall be deemed abandoned. (Sec. 8, Rule 9,
RIRCA) (Sec. 15)
Cases
People v. Mateo (GR 147678-87, July 7, 2004)
Efren Mateo was charged for the rape of Imelda Mateo, who was under his guardianship. The Supreme
Court remanded to the Court of Appeals for Intermediate Review because it has not been established
that there was guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The Court held that a intermediate review by the Court of
Appeals before cases involving penalties of death/reclusion perpetua can be done before it is elevated
to the Supreme Court on automatic review because the constitution did not prevent the Court, in
exercise of its rule-making power to do this, and a prior determination by the Court of Appeals,
particularly on factual issues would minimize the possibility of an error of judgment.
III.H. SUPREME COURT
Jurisdiction (Art. VIII, Sec. 1, Constitution)
The judicial power shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be established
by law.
Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights
which are legally demandable and enforceable, and to determine whether or not there has been a grave
abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or
instrumentality of the Government.
Internal Rules of the Supreme Court

1. Court en banc matters and cases – The Court en banc shall act on the following matters and cases (Rule 2, Sec. 3):
a. cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, international or executive agreement, law, executive order, presidential
decree, proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance, or regulation is in question;
b. criminal cases in which the appealed decision imposes the death penalty or reclusion perpetua;
c. cases raising novel questions of law;
d. cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls;
17
e. cases involving decisions, resolutions, and orders of the Civil Service Commission, the Commission on Elections, and the Commission on
Audit;
f. cases where the penalty recommended or imposed is the dismissal of a judge, the disbarment of a lawyer, the suspension of any of them
for a period of more than one year, or a fine exceeding forty thousand pesos;
g. cases covered by the preceding paragraph and involving the reinstatement in the judiciary of a dismissed judge, the reinstatement of a
lawyer in the roll of attorneys, or the lifting of a judge’s suspension or a lawyer’s suspension from the practice of law;
h. cases involving the discipline of a Member of the Court, or a Presiding Justice, or any Associate Justice of the collegial appellate court;
i. cases where a doctrine or principle laid down by the Court en banc or by a Division my be modified or reversed;
j. cases involving conflicting decisions of two or more divisions;
k. cases where three votes in a Division cannot be obtained;
l. Division cases where the subject matter has a huge financial impact on businesses or affects the welfare of a community;
m. Subject to Section 11 (b) of this rule, other division cases that, in the opinion of at least three Members of the Division who are voting and
present, are appropriate for transfer to the Court en banc;
n. Cases that the Court en banc deems of sufficient importance to merit its attention; and
o. all matters involving policy decisions in the administrative supervision of all courts and their personnel.
2. Action on cases referred to the Court en banc – The referral of a Division case to the Court en banc shall be subject to the following rules (Rule 2, Sec.
11):
a. the resolution of a Division denying a motion for referral to the Court en banc shall be final and shall not be appealable to the Court en
banc;
b. the Court en banc may, in the absence of sufficiently important reasons, decline to take cognizance of a case referred to it and return the
case to the Division; and
c. No motion for reconsideration of a resolution of the Court en banc declining cognizance of a referral by a Division shall be entertained.
3. Per curiam decisions - Unless otherwise requested by the Member assigned to write the opinion of the Court, the decision or resolution shall be
rendered per curiam (Rule 2, Sec. 14).
a. where the penalty imposed is dismissal from service, disbarment, or indefinite suspension in administrative cases; or
b. in any other case by agreement of the majority of the Members or upon request of a Member.
4. The Court not a trier of facts - The Court is not a trier of facts its role is to decide cases based on the findings of fact before it. Where the Constitution,
the law or the Court itself, in the exercise of its discretion, decides to receive evidence, the reception of evidence may be delegated to a member of the
Court, to either the Clerk of Court or one of the Division Clerks of Court, or to one of the appellate courts or its justices who shall submit to the Court a
report and recommendation on the basis of the evidence presented (Rule 3, Sec. 2).
5. Advisory Opinions Proscribed - The Court cannot issue advisory opinions on the state and meaning of laws, or take cognizance of moot and academic
questions, subject only to notable exceptions involving constitutional issues (Rule 3, Sec. 3).
6. Cases when the Court may determine factual issues – The Court shall respect factual findings of lower courts, unless any of the following situations is
present (Rule 3, Sec. 4):
a. the conclusion is a finding grounded entirely on speculation, surmise and conjecture;
b. the inference made is manifestly mistaken;
c. there is grave abuse of discretion;
d. the judgment is based on a misapprehension of facts;
e. the findings of fact are conflicting;
f. the collegial appellate courts went beyond the issues of the case, and their findings are contrary to the admissions of both appellant and
appellee;
g. the findings of fact of the collegial appellate courts are contrary to those of the trial court;
h. said findings of fact are conclusions without citation specific evidence on which they are based;
i. the facts set forth in the petition as well as in the petitioner’s main and reply briefs are not disputed by the respondents;
j. the findings of fact of the collegial appellate courts are premised on the supposed evidence, but are contradicted by the evidence on
record; and
k. all other similar and exceptional cases warranting a review of the lower courts’ findings of fact.
7. Consolidation of cases (Rule 9, Sec. 5)
a. The Court may order the consolidation of cases involving common questions of law or of act. The Chief Justice shall assign the consolidated
cases to the Member-in-Charge to whom the case having the lower or lowest docket number has been raffled, subject to equalization of
case load by raffle.
b. The Judicial Records Office shall see to it that (a) the rollos of the consolidated cases are joined together to prevent the loss, misplacement
or detachment of any of them; and (b) the cover of each rollo indicates the G.R. or UDK number of the case with which the former is
consolidated.
c. The Member-in-Charge who finds after study that the cases do not involve common questions of law or of fact may request the Court to
have the case or cases returned to the original Member-in-Charge.
8. Confidentiality of Court Sessions (Rule 10, Sec. 2)
a. Court sessions are executive in character, with only the Members of the Court present.
b. Court deliberations are confidential and shall not be disclosed to outside parties, except as may be provided herein or as authorized by the
Court.
c. The Chief Justice or the Division Chairperson shall record the action or actions taken in each case for transmittal to the Clerk of Court or
Division Clerk of Court after each session.
d. The notes of the Chief Justice and the Division Chairperson, which the Clerk of Court and the Division Clerks of Court must treat with strict
confidentiality, shall be the bases of the minutes of the sessions.
III.I. JURISDICTION IN CERTAIN CRIMES

Complex Crime – maximum and most serious penalty imposable
Continuing Crime – court which first acquires jurisdiction excludes the other courts
Civil liability – not included in determining jurisdiction in particular
Habitual delinquency – not considered in determining jurisdiction
18

Criminal

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Criminal

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

III. JURISDICTION – IN PARTICULAR

Summary Procedure (Revised Rules on Summary Procedure)

III.B. KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY

III.D. JURISDICTION OF FAMILY COURTS

Revised Internal Rules of the Sandiganbayan

Internal Rules of the Supreme Court

III.I. JURISDICTION IN CERTAIN CRIMES

You might also like