CRIMPRO – ATTY.

SENGA – AY 2021-2022

SET 1

What is Remedial Law?

Remedial law prescribes the method of enforcing rights or obtains redress for their
invasion (Bustos v Lucero)

How is it different from Substantive Law?

Remedial Law Substantive Law

Remedial law prescribes the method of Substantive law is that part of the law
enforcing rights or obtains redress for which creates, defines and regulates
their invasion (Bustos v Lucero) rights, or which regulates the rights and
Definition duties which give rise to a cause of action;
that part of the law which courts are
established to administer (Bustos v Lucero)
Origin Does not originate from the Originates from the legislature
legislature but has the force and effect
of law see also Primicias v Ocampo

see also Alvero v De La Rosa

Application Construed to be applicable to actions By its very nature and essence,
pending and undetermined at the time substantive law operates
of their passage, and are deemed prospectively and may not be construed
retroactive in that sense and to that retroactively without affecting previous or
extent. As a general rule, the retroactive past rights. (Tirona v Alejo)
application of procedural laws cannot be
considered violative of any personal
rights because no vested right may
attach to nor arise therefrom. (Calacala v
Republic)
Vested As a general rule no vested right may If the rule takes away a vested right, it is
Right attach to, nor arise from, procedural not procedural. If the rule creates a right
laws. It has been held that "a person has such as the right to appeal, it may be
no vested right in any particular remedy, classified as a substantive matter; but if it
and a litigant cannot insist on the operates as a means of implementing an
application to the trial of his case, existing right then the rule deals merely
whether civil or criminal, of any other with procedure. (Fabian v Desierto)
than the existing rules of procedure."
(Tan v CA, GR 136368)
Note:
-Rights are considered vested when the right to enjoyment is a present interest, absolute, unconditional,
and perfect or fixed and irrefutable. (Quiao v Quiao)
-While one may not be deprived of his "vested right," he may lose the same if there is due process and
such deprivation is founded in law and jurisprudence. (Quiao v Quiao)

When may Substantive Rights be applied retroactively? What is the exception to the
exception?

Page 1 of 12
 CRIMPRO – ATTY. SENGA – AY 2021-2022

When the law creates new substantive rights, it may be given retroactive effect,
provided it has not prejudiced another acquired right of the same origin. (Bona Briones)

What is an ex post facto law?

An ex post facto Law is one which:

a. Makes an act punishable as a crime when it was not, at the time of the commission
of the offense
b. Aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it was, when committed
c. Inflicts a greater punishment than the law annexed to the crime when committed

To be an ex post facto law, the law must:

a. Refer to criminal matters
b. Be retroactive in its application; and
c. Prejudicial to the accused

Exceptions to ex post facto law?

a. If the law is favorable to the accused

b. Provided further that the accused is not a habitual delinquent as define in the
Revised Penal Code (a person shall be deemed to be habitual delinquent, if within a
period of ten years from the date of his release or last conviction of the crimes robo,
hurto, estafa, or falsification, he is found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or
oftener)

What is Criminal Procedure?

Criminal procedure treats of the series of processes by which the criminal laws are
enforced and by which the State prosecutes persons who violate the penal laws. In the
clear language of the Court, criminal procedure "regulates the steps by which one who
committed a crime is to be punished" (People v. Lacson).

Is this right to criminal due process may only be invoked by the accused?

XX

What are the requisites of criminal due process in Alonte v. Savellano?

a. that the court or tribunal trying the case is properly clothed with judicial power to
hear and determine the matter before it;
b. that jurisdiction is lawfully acquired by it over the person of the accused;

Page 2 of 12
 CRIMPRO – ATTY. SENGA – AY 2021-2022
c. that the accused is given an opportunity to be heard; and
d. that judgment is rendered only upon lawful hearing.
People v. Dapitan

you may check 2S CRIMPRO Case Digests

What is Jurisdiction?

Jurisdiction is defined as the power and authority of a court to hear, try, and decide a
case (Foronda-Crystal v Son).

Even after the judgment has become final the court retains its jurisdiction to execute
and enforce it. (Echegaray v Secretary of Justice).

How is jurisdiction determined?

a. Allegations by the complaint or information; or

b. by law with respect to adherence of jurisdiction

What are the requisites for a valid exercise of Criminal Jurisdiction?

What are the three kinds of Jurisdiction?

There are three important requisites which must be present before a court can acquire
criminal jurisdiction. First, the court must have jurisdiction over the subject matter.
Second, the court must have jurisdiction over the territory where the offense was
committed. Third, the court must have jurisdiction over the person of the accused. (Cruz
v CA, GR 123340)

How do you know when a court has jurisdiction over the subject matter?

Jurisdiction over the subject matter in a criminal case cannot be conferred upon the
court by the accused, by express waiver or otherwise, since such jurisdiction is
conferred by the sovereign authority which organized the court and is given only by law
in the manner and form prescribed by law. (Foz v People, GR 167764)

What is the difference between Jurisdiction conferred by law and allege in the
complaint?

CONFERRED BY LAW
The jurisdiction is granted by the Constitution or a statute. The provision of the law is
inquired into.

ALLEGE IN THE COMPLAINT

Page 3 of 12
 CRIMPRO – ATTY. SENGA – AY 2021-2022
To determine the jurisdiction of the court in criminal cases, the complaint must be
examined for the purpose of ascertaining whether or not the facts set out therein and
the punishment provided for by law for such facts fall within the jurisdiction of the court
where the complaint is filed.

What is Original Jurisdiction?

What is Appellate Jurisdiction?

Original Jurisdiction Appellate Jurisdiction

Original Jurisdiction is the power of the
Court to take judicial cognizance of a
case instituted for judicial action for the
Nature first time under the conditions prescribed
by law.
Courts which A court is one with original jurisdiction
have such when actions or proceedings are
Jurisdiction originally filed with it.
Appellate Jurisdiction is the power and
authority conferred upon a superior court to
rehear and determine causes which have
been tried in lower courts, the cognizance
which a superior court takes of a case
removed to it, by appeal or writ of error,
from the decision of a lower court, or the
review by a superior court of the final
judgment or order of some lower courts.
A court is one with appellate jurisdiction
when it has the power of review over the
decisions or orders of a lower court

Distinguish Exclusive Original from Concurrent Original?

Exclusive Jurisdiction Concurrent Jurisdiction

Exclusive Jurisdiction is the power to Concurrent Jurisdiction is the power
adjudicate a case proceeding to the conferred upon different courts, whether of
exclusion of all other courts at that stage. the same or different ranks, to take
Nature cognizance at the same stage
Courts which
have such
Jurisdiction

What do you mean by Special Jurisdiction?

Nature
Special or Limited Jurisdiction is one which restricts the court’s jurisdiction only to
particular cases and subject to such limitations as may be provided by the governing
law.

As to Courts which have such Jurisdiction

Courts of Special (Limited) Jurisdiction are those which have jurisdiction only for
particular purpose or are clothed with special powers for the performance of specified
duties beyond which they have no authority of any kind.

What is an example of a court with Special Jurisdiction?

Page 4 of 12
 CRIMPRO – ATTY. SENGA – AY 2021-2022
Family Court, CTA

re: Concurrent Jurisdiction: If I want to file before the Supreme Court, can I do so?

No. Hierarchy of Courts Doctrine.

What is the rationale behind the Doctrine of Hierarchy of Courts?

The doctrine that requires respect for the hierarchy of courts was created by this court
to ensure that every level of the judiciary performs its designated roles in an effective
and efficient manner. Trial courts do not only determine the facts from the evaluation of
the evidence presented before them. They are likewise competent to determine issues
of law which may include the validity of an ordinance, statute, or even an executive
issuance in relation to the Constitution. To effectively perform these functions, they are
territorially organized into regions and then into branches. Their writs generally reach
within those territorial boundaries. Necessarily, they mostly perform the all-important
task of inferring the facts from the evidence as these are physically presented before
them. In many instances, the facts occur within their territorial jurisdiction, which
properly present the "actual case" that makes ripe a determination of the
constitutionality of such action. (De Lima v Guerrero, GR 229781). Note: prevent
clogging

This doctrine is not mere policy, rather it is a constitutional filtering mechanism to enable
the Court to focus on more fundamental and essential tasks assigned to it by the
highest law of the land. (Gios-Samar, Inc v. Department of Transportation &
Communications, GR 217158.)

What are the exceptions to the Doctrine of Hierarchy of Courts?

De Lima v Guerrero, GR 229781, 2017

In a fairly recent case, we summarized other well-defined exceptions to the doctrine on
hierarchy of courts. Immediate resort to this Court may be allowed when any of the
following grounds are present:

1. when genuine issues of constitutionality are raised that must be addressed

immediately
2. when the case involves transcendental importance
3. when the case is novel
4. when the constitutional issues raised are better decided by this Court
5. when time is of the essence
6. when the subject of review involves acts of a constitutional organ.
7. when there is no other plain, speedy, adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law

Page 5 of 12
 CRIMPRO – ATTY. SENGA – AY 2021-2022
8. when the petition includes questions that may affect public welfare, public policy, or
demanded by the broader interest of justice
9. when the order complained of was a patent nullity and
10. when the appeal was considered as an inappropriate remedy.
Note: GIN-B-TOP-PPI

Gios-Samar, Inc v. Department of Transportation & Communications, GR 217158, 2019

1. When there are genuine issues of constitutionality that must be addressed at the
most immediate time;
2. When the issues involved are of transcendental importance;
3. Cases of first impression;
4. The constitutional issues raised are better decided by the Court;
5. exigency in certain situations;
6. the filed petition reviews the act of a constitutional organ;
7. when petitioners rightly claim that they had no other plain, speedy, and adequate
remedy in the ordinary course of law that could free them from the injurious effects of
respondents’ acts in violation of their right to freedom of expression; and
8. the petition includes questions that are “dictated by public welfare and the
advancement of public policy, or demanded by the broader interest of justice, or the
orders complained of were found to be patent nullities, or the appeal was considered
as clearly an inappropriate remedy.”

What is the Doctrine of Adherence to Jurisdiction (Continuity of Jurisdiction)

The jurisdiction of a court once attached cannot be ousted by subsequent happenings

or events, although of a character which would have prevented jurisdiction from
attaching in the first instance, and the Court retains jurisdiction until it finally disposes of
the case. (Barrameda v Rural Bank, GR 176260).

Guevarra v. Almodovar

you may check 2S CRIMPRO Case Digests

Penalty imposed by law or imposable penalty in the crime?

Imposed by law.

In criminal prosecutions, it is settled that the jurisdiction of the court is not determined by
what may be meted out to the offender after trial or even by the result of the evidence
that would be presented at the trial, but by the extent of the penalty which the law
imposes for the misdemeanor, crime or violation charged in the complaint. If
the facts recited in the complaint and the punishment provided for by law are sufficient

Page 6 of 12
 CRIMPRO – ATTY. SENGA – AY 2021-2022
to show that the court in which the complaint is presented has jurisdiction, that court
must assume jurisdiction. (People v Purisima, GR L-40902).

What cases fall under Original Jurisdiction of MTC?

a. EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION over all violations of city or municipal

ordinances committed within their respective territorial jurisdiction. (Sec. 32[1], BP
129, as amended by RA 7691)
b. EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION over all offenses punishable by
imprisonment not exceeding six (6) years irrespective of the amount of fine, and
regardless of other imposable or accessory penalties, including civil liability arising
from such offenses irrespective of kind, nature, value or amount (Sec. 32[2], BP 129,
as amended by RA 7691)
Note: exception when jurisdiction is vested by law to RTC or Sandiganbayan
e.g., Libel (RTC), Direct Bribery (Sandiganbayan)
c. Where the only penalty provided by law is a fine, over offenses punishable with a
fine or not more than 4000
d. EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTON over offenses involving damage to property
through criminal negligence (Sec. 32[2], BP 129, as amended by RA 7691)
e. Summary Procedure in certain cases (e.g., Violations of BP 22)
f. SPECIAL JURISDICTION to decide on applications of for bail in criminal cases in
the absence of all RTC judges in a province or city (Sec. 35, BP 129, as amended
by RA 7691)

If penalty is both fine and imprisonment, what do we look at?

Imprisonment.

What penalty is not exceeding six years?

Prision Correccional

Penalty is Arresto Menor or a fine of P10,000, or both. Which court has jurisdiction?

MTC

Penalty is Prision Correccional to Reclusion Temporal. Which court has jurisdiction?

RTC

Penalty exceeds 6 years, or fine of 4K, or both. Which court has jurisdiction?

RTC
Page 7 of 12
 CRIMPRO – ATTY. SENGA – AY 2021-2022

Less than 6 years can it fall under RTC?

Yes. The jurisdiction of the MTC is qualified by the phrase “except in cases falling within
the exclusive jurisdiction of RTC and Sandiganbayan.” This indicates that the MTC does
not at all times have jurisdiction over offenses punishable with imprisonment not
exceeding six (6) years. (RIANO)

Example
- Libel (People v. Benipayo, GR 154473)
- Violations of the Dangerous Drugs Act
- Violations of IPC
- Cases falling under Anti Money Laundering if not within the jurisdiction of the
Sandiganbayan
- Election Offenses

People v. Benipayo?

you may check 2S CRIMPRO Case Digests

What is Summary Procedure?

The purpose of the Rule on Summary Procedure is to achieve an expeditious and

inexpensive determination of cases without regard to technical rules.

What are the cases governed by Summary Procedure?

a. Violations of BP 22
b. Violations of City or Municipal Ordinances
c. Violations Rental Laws
d. All other criminal cases where the penalty prescribed by law for the offense charged
is imprisonment not exceeding six (6) months, or a fine not exceeding one thousand
pesos (1,000), or both, irrespective of other imposable penalties, accessory or
otherwise, or of the civil liability arising therefrom; and
e. Violations of traffic rules, laws and regulations
f. Offenses involving damage to property through criminal negligence where the
imposable fine does not exceed ten thousand pesos (10,000). (Sec. 1[b], The 1991
Rule on Summary Procedure)

Note: BORAT

Is it correct to say that all these cases fall within jurisdiction of MTC?

Page 8 of 12
 CRIMPRO – ATTY. SENGA – AY 2021-2022
Yes

Intel: MTC exclusive original jurisdiction over damage to property. If damage is 100K still
MTC, but the manner of hearing is ordinary proceeding.

Notes:
First level courts:
Municipal Trial Court = Municipality
Metropolitan Trial Court = Metro (e.g., Metro Manila)
Municipal Circuit Trial Court = 2 or 3 Municipalities
Municipal Trial Court in Cities = Cities in Provinces
RTC
CA = SANDIGANBAYAN = TAX APPEALS
SC

Assignment: Until Rule 110

JURISDICTION OF COURTS THAT TRY CRIMINAL CASES

Notes from Judge Hernandez class last year
s
1. FIRST LEVEL COURTS (MTC) (Section 21, B.P. 129, as amended by R.A. 7691)

It shall have exclusive original jurisdiction over the following:

a. Violations of city and municipal ordinances committed within their respective

territorial jurisdiction;
b. Offenses punishable with imprisonment not exceeding six (6) years, regardless of
the fine and other imposable accessory penalties;
c. Offenses involving damage to property through criminal negligence as defined in Art.
365 of the Revised Penal Code;
d. Offenses where the penalty prescribed by law is only a fine and the fine does not
exceed ₱4,000.00.

Note: Excepted from the enumeration are cases filing under the exclusive original
jurisdiction of the RTC and the Sandiganbayan

Cases under the MTC that are governed by the

Rule on Summary Procedure:
Page 9 of 12
 CRIMPRO – ATTY. SENGA – AY 2021-2022

a. Violations of traffic laws, rules and regulations;

b. Violations of the Rental Law;
c. Violation of city and municipal ordinances;
d. Criminal cases where the penalty prescribed by the law is imprisonment not
exceeding six (6) months and/or a fine not exceeding One Thousand Pesos
(₱1,000);
e. Offenses involving damage to property through criminal negligence where the
penalty is fine not exceeding ₱10,000;
f. Violations of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 (The Bouncing Checks Law)

2. SECOND LEVEL COURT (RTC) (Section 20, B.P. 129, as amended by R.A. 7691)

It shall exercise exclusive original jurisdiction over all criminal cases not falling within the
exclusive jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, or body.

3. FAMILY COURT (Section 5, R.A. 8369)

It has exclusive original jurisdiction over the following:

a. Offenses where a minor is involved whether as offender or offended party. However

under R.A. 9344, or the Juvenile Justice Act, one who is fifteen (15) years and below
is exempt from criminal liability.
b. Cases against minor under the Dangerous Drugs Act (R.A. 7610)
c. Violations of the Anti-Child Abuse Law (R.A. 7610)
d. Cases of domestic violence against women and children.

4. COURT OF TAX APPEALS (section 7, R.A. 9282)

It has exclusive original jurisdiction over offenses involving Violations of the National
Internal Revenue Code, Tariff and Customs Code as well as any law, rule or
regulation being administered by the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) and Bureau
of Customs, with a claim for taxes and fees against the accused in amount of not
less than ₱1 Million.

5. SANDIGANBAYAN (Section 4, P.D. 1606, as amended by R.A. 8249; further

amended by R.A. 10660).

a. Violation of R.A. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act), R.A. 1379
(Unexpected  Wealth Law) and Articles 210 (Direct Bribery), 211 (Indirect
Bribery) and 212 (Corruption of Public Officials) of the Revised Penal Code,
where one or more of the principle accused is are public officers occupying, at
the time of the commission of the offense, whether in a permanent, acting or
interim capacity, and of the positions enumerated in Section 4, P.D. 1606, as
amended by R.A. 8249;

Page 10 of 12
 CRIMPRO – ATTY. SENGA – AY 2021-2022
1. Officials of the executive branch occupying the positions of regional director
and higher, otherwise classified as Grade ‘27’ and higher, of the
Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989 (Republic Act No.
6758), specifically including:

(a) Provincial governors, vice-governors, members of the sangguniang

panlalawigan, and provincial treasurers, assessors, engineers and other
provincial department heads;

(b) City mayors, vice-mayors, members of the sangguniang panlungsod, city

treasurers, assessors engineers and other city department heads;

(c) Officials of the diplomatic service occupying the position of consul and
higher;

(d) Philippine army and air force colonels, naval captains, and all officers of
higher rank;

(e) Officers of the Philippine National Police while occupying the position of
provincial director and those holding the rank of senior superintendent or
higher;

(g) Presidents, directors, or trustees, or managers of government-owned or

controlled corporations, state universities or educational institutions or
foundations;

2) Members of Congress and officials thereof classified as Grade ‘27’ and up

under the Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989;

(3) Members of the judiciary without prejudice to the provisions of the

Constitution;

(4) Chairmen and members of Constitutional Commissions, without prejudice

to the provisions of the Constitution; and

(5) All other national and local officials classified as Grade’27’and higher
under the Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989.

b. Other offenses, whether simple or complexed with other crimes, committed by a

public officer occupying any of the positions referred to in par. (a), at the time of
the commission of the offense, in relations to office, including Violation of R.A No.
7080 or the law on Plunder. (It must be a public officer-related offense as defined
in Barriga v. Sandiganbayan, 457 SCRA 301); and

c. Criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection with Executive Orders Nos. 1,
2, 14 and 14-A issued in 1986 by Pres. Corazon Aquino (for the recovery of the
ill-gotten wealth of the Marcoses and their cronies).
Page 11 of 12
 CRIMPRO – ATTY. SENGA – AY 2021-2022

Note:    Amendment introduced by R.A. 10660 which took: effect on May 5, 2015

“Provided, 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 (b) alleges damage to the government or any bribery arising from the
same or closely related transactions or acts in an amount not exceeding One million
pesos (₱1,000,000.00).

“Subject to the rules promulgated by the Supreme Court, the cases falling under the
jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court under this section shall be tried in a judicial
region other than where the official holds office.”
“In cases where none of the accused are occupying positions corresponding to the
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 jurisdiction as
provided in Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, as amended.”

Sec. 5 Transitory Provision. – This Act shall apply to all cases pending in the
Sandiganbayan over which trial has not begun; Provided, That: (a) Section 2,
amending Section 4 of Presidential Decree No. 1606, as amended, on
“Jurisdiction”; and (b) Section 3, amending Section 5 of the Presidential Decree
No. 1606, as amended on “Proceedings, How Conducted; Decision by Majority Vote
“shall apply to cases arising from offenses committed after the effectivity of
this Act.”

Page 12 of 12