Criminal Procedure – Study Notes
Prosecution is
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
(Part I – Notes)
I. PRELIMIARY CONSDERATIONS
A. Definition of Criminal Procedure
Criminal procedure deals with the set of rules
governing the series of proceedings through which the
government enforces substantive criminal law.
B. Sources of Criminal Procedure
The sources of procedural criminal law were the
constitution, the revised penal code of 1930, the
New Rules of Court of 1964, special laws, and
certain presidential orders and letters of
instruction. These governed the pleading, practice,
and procedure of all courts as well as admission to the
practice of law. All had the force and effect of law.
The rights of the accused under Philippine law are
guaranteed under Article 3 of the 1987 constitution
and include the right to be presumed innocent until
proven guilty, the right to enjoy due process under the
law, and the right to a speedy, public trial. Those
accused must be informed of the charges against
them and must be given access to competent,
independent counsel, and the opportunity to post bail,
except in instances where there is strong evidence
that the crime could result in the maximum
punishment of life imprisonment. Habeas corpus
protection is extended to all except in cases of
invasion or rebellion. During a trial, the accused are
entitled to be present at every proceeding, to compel
witnesses, to testify and cross-examine them and to
testify or be exempt as a witness. Finally, all are
guaranteed freedom from double jeopardy and, if
convicted, the right to appeal.
Criminal action can be initiated either by a complaint--
a sworn statement by the offended party, a witness,
or a police officer--or by "information." Information
consists of a written accusation filed with the court by
a prosecutor, known as a fiscal at the provincial levels
of government and below. No information can be filed
unless investigation by a judge, fiscal, or state
prosecutor establishes a prima facie case. Warrant for
arrest is issued by a judge. Warrantless arrest by a
police officer can be made legally only under
extraordinary circumstances. Aquino immediately
discontinued Marcos-era practices of presidentially
ordered searches and arrests without judicial process
and prolonged "preventative detention actions."
Trial procedure consists of arraignment, trial, and the
court's judgment and sentencing. The accused must
be arraigned in the court where the complaint or
information is filed. A defendant must be present to
plead to the charge, except in certain minor cases
where a lawyer can appear for him or her. All offenses
are bailable, save the most serious cases when strong
evidence of guilt exists. If a defendant has no lawyer,
the court is required to supply one.
carried out by the state prosecutor or provincial fiscal,
who exercises broad discretion in screening cases and
affixing charges. No jury is employed; the judge
determines all questions of law and fact and passes
sentence. A written sentence must be read to the
court. Afterward, either party may appeal.
Where do you find the rules?
In Criminal Procedure, you will study, well, the rules of
criminal procedure. All the rules are in the Revised
Rules of Court (or 2000 Rules of Criminal Procedure),
and Crim. Pro. begins from Rule 110.
Note: That these are rules promulgated by the
Supreme Court (remember the SC’s rule-making power
under Sec. 5(5), Art. VIII of the Constitution?); they
aren’t laws made by Congress.
C. System of Criminal Procedure in the
Philppines
Jurisdiction: From the MTC to the SC
Let’s begin with jurisdiction. What is criminal
jurisdiction in the Philippines?
If you’re asked to define criminal jurisdiction, you can
cite Florenz Regalado in his Remedial Law
Compendium:
“Criminal jurisdiction is essentially the power of a
State to try and punish a person for a violation of its
penal laws.”
It’s a simple and effective definition. Keep rereading it
until it makes sense. Don’t proceed to the next
paragraph until you understand that definition.
Before we talk about the courts, there are three
important principles about jurisdiction that you need to
understand. You will very likely discuss this in class, so
it’s incredibly helpful to understand them early on:
1. Jurisdiction over the Subject Matter. Basically:
the court cannot rule on a criminal case if it does not
have jurisdiction over the crime involved. According to
Riano, subject matter jurisdiction is the authority of
the court to hear and determine the particular case; it
is basically jurisdiction over the offense charged. Still a
little confusing? Okay, different courts have different
jurisdictions, as will be explained further later. Some
courts can rule on certain crimes, and some courts
cannot rule on certain crimes. A court has to have
jurisdiction over the subject matter (basically, the
crime involved in the case) before it can rule on the
case. Hence, jurisdiction over the subject matter is
essential.
2. Jurisdiction over the Person of the Accused.
Basically: the court cannot just rule on an accused
who never showed up — that violates due process,
since he cannot defend himself, among others; the
court must first have jurisdiction over the accused.
There are two ways for a court to acquire jurisdiction
over the person: (1) through the enforcement of a
warrant of arrest; or (2) through the accused’s
voluntary appearance.
3. Territorial Jurisdiction. Basically: the court
cannot rule on a case involving a crime committed
outside its territory. Generally, the criminal action shall
be instituted and tried in the court of the municipality
or territory where the offense was committed or where
any of its essential ingredients occurred (see Rule 110,
Sec. 15). So, where the crime was committed
determines the court which has territorial jurisdiction.
The court has to have all three, or the case can be
dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Now, let’s talk about the courts. For this one, my
reference is Riano.
There are different levels of courts. I will only
enumerate the courts with a very brief description, but
you can check this link for a complete list of the courts
and their respective jurisdictions. Below is a list of the
relevant courts from the first level courts, to the
Supreme Court.
MTC (Municipal Trial Court; Municipal Circuit
Trial Court; Metropolitan Trial Court) — The
MTCs are the first level courts, for the smaller stuff like
traffic violations and crimes punishable with
imprisonment not exceeding six years.
Regional Trial Court — This is the court we see a lot
in the jurisprudence we read. The cases which do not
fall under the jurisdiction of other courts go here.
Sandiganbayan — This one is interesting and it
involves a lot of memorization; anyway, it’s basically
the court for criminal cases involving graft and
corruption and higher public officials.
Court of Appeals — This is, well, the court of
appeals. Appeals from other courts go here.
Supreme Court — This is the highest court in the
Philippines. When it decides a case, you can’t appeal
to a higher court.
Prosecutor, Fiscal, Ombudsman
Fiscal is just another name for the Public Prosecutors.
They basically investigate and prosecute crimes.
They’re like the lawyers for the side of the government
and they go against the accused, while the accused
gets his own lawyer.
The Ombudsman is the public prosecutor counterpart
for cases involving public officials. The Office of the
Ombudsman has primary jurisdiction over cases
cognizable by the Sandiganbayan and, in the exercise
of its primary jurisdiction, it may take over, at any
stage, from any investigatory agency of Government,
the investigation of such cases.
These are just primarily what they do, of course. The
links above provide a full list of what they do.
How Do Criminal Actions Start?
For this part, I quote Riano in his 2016 work on
Criminal Procedure:
If the offense requires a preliminary investigation, a
criminal action is instituted by filing a complaint with
the proper officer for purposes of preliminary
investigation. [Otherwise], the action is instituted by
filing the complaint or information directly with the
MTC or by filing a complaint with the office of the
prosecutor… In Manila and other chartered cities, the
complaint shall be filed with the office of the
prosecutor, unless otherwise provided in their
charters.
What is a preliminary investigation?
Rule 112 talks all about it. It’s an inquiry or proceeding
to determine whether there is sufficient ground to
engender a well-founded belief that a crime has been
committed and the respondent is probably guilty
thereof, and should be held for trial (Sec. 1, R. 112).
Basically, it’s an investigation conducted to determine
whether someone is probably guilty of a crime and
should be held for trial. The investigation is generally
conducted by the Prosecutors (Sec. 2, R. 112).
General rule: preliminary investigation is required for
offenses where the penalty prescribed by law is at
least 4 years, 2 months, and 1 day. Exceptions: (1)
Where the complaint or information is filed directly in
court; or (2) In the case of a lawful warrantless arrest.
(See Rule 112)
What is a complaint? Is that different from an
information?
A complaint is a sworn written statement charging a
person with an offense. It is made by: (1) the
offended party; (2) any peace officer; or (3) other
public officer charged with the enforcement of the law
violated. (Sec. 3, R. 110) Some crimes need the
offended party to file a complaint, like crimes against
chastity (see Sec. 5, R 110). This is the complaint
referred to under Rule 110. (Note that this is different
from the complaint filed with the prosecutor for
purposes of preliminary investigation! For that one, it
can be filed by any competent person so the
preliminary investigation begins! Source: Regalado)
On the other hand, an information is an accusation in
writing charging a person with an offense. It is made
by the prosecutor, and it is filed with the court. (Sec.
4, R. 110) Anyway, you’ll learn more about these in
class. The complaint or information charges someone
with an offense, so such person becomes an accused.
Bail
Growing up, I thought bail was money you pay to get
out of jail even if you’re found guilty with finality.
That’s what TV shows made them look like. Anyway, I
was wrong.
Sec. 1, Rule 114 has an official definition of bail. But
put simply, bail is the security given (like money or
property) so an accused doesn’t stay in jail while the
case hasn’t been decided with finality. It’s like
payment for temporary release, pending the final
decision of the case, since as you know, the accused is
usually arrested while the case is ongoing (I say
usually, because if the penalty is just a fine, you don’t
arrest the accused — see Sec. 6, R. 112).
You can’t pay to get out of jail when you’re decided
with finality to be guilty. You just stay in jail until your
time is up.
If you’re wondering, I keep using the term ‘with
finality’ because when the accused appeals a decision,
bail may still be allowed by the court pending appeal.
But when the accused is finally decided to be guilty,
with no more remedies available, no more bail for him.
Heads Up
When my Crim. Pro. professor (who was a Justice)
gave questionnaires for our exams, they were very
short. It was relieving for all of us, until we read the
questions. In a nutshell, he made us answer the
following:
Summarize the procedure in criminal proceedings.
(Yup, the whole thing from Rule 110. I suggest using
numbers or indicators such as “First,” “Second,” so
your professor can read it better.)
What is the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan? The
RTC?
When is bail a matter of right? When is it a matter of
discretion?
Then he gave us one hypothetical question.
So, you should prepare yourself for questions like that
for your exams. If you can answer the questions
above (especially the first one), you’re prepared for
hypos.
It would help if you could make a whole diagram
illustrating the procedure, from institution of criminal
actions until appeal. If that’s too much work, you can
at least memorize the order and the headings of Rules
110 until 122, especially for finals. If you have that
down, you have a general idea of the flow of criminal
procedure, so you can play with that.
D. Jurisdiction
1. Criminal Jurisdiction
Criminal jurisdiction is essentially the power of a
State to try and punish a person for a violation of its
penal laws.
Criminal jurisdiction is the authority to hear and try
a particular offense and impose the punishment for it.
Commission of the offense within the territorial
jurisdiction of the court.
2. Requisites for the Exercise of Criminal
Jurisdiction
a. Trenas vs. People, 664 SCRA 355
b. Lacson vs. Executive, 301 SCRA 298
c. People vs. Lagon, 185 SCRA 442
d. Asistio vs. People G.R. No. 200465, 20 April 2015
E. CRIMINAL JURISDICTION OF COURTS
1. MeTC, MTCC, MTC, MCTC (Exclusive Original
and Special)
2. RTC (Exclusive Original, Appellate and
Special)
3. Shari’a Circuit Courts/ Shari’a District
Courts/ Shari’a Appellate Court
4. Sandiganbayan (Exclusive Original,
Concurrent and Appellate)
5. CTA
6. Court of Appeals (Exlusive Original,
Concurrent and Appellate)
7. Supreme Court (Exclusive Original,
Concurrent Appellate)
F. CASES
1. Morillo vs. People, 777 SCRA 207
2. Chiok vs. People, 776 SCRA 120*
3. Laude vs. Ginez-Jabalde, 775 SCRA 408
4. Atienza vs. People, 716 SCRA 84
5. Ombudsman vs. Dechavez, 709 SCRA 375
6. Garcia vs. Executive Secretary, 677 SCRA 751
7. People vs. Sandiganbayan, 630 SCRA 489*