Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Criminal Procedure Reviewer Part 1
Criminal Procedure Reviewer Part 1
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
PRELIMINARIES
1. Jurisdiction is determined by the extent of the penalty which the law imposes,
on the basis of the facts as recited in the complaint or information constitutive of
the offense charged.
3. Venue is jurisdictional.
• Thus: Action must be instituted and tried in the municipality or territory where the
offense has been committed or where any one of the essential ingredients
thereof took place.
4. General Rule: the question of jurisdiction may be raised at any stage of the
proceedings.
• Exception: may not be raised for the first time on appeal, where there has been
estoppel and laches on the party who raises the question.
• By filing the complaint with the proper officer for preliminary investigation.
Refers to a complaint-affidavit, and is different from the complaint defined in
Section 3 of Rule 110.
These offenses are those where the penalty prescribed by law is at least 4
years, 2 months and 1 day of imprisonment without regard to the fine.
2. For all other offenses, or for offenses which are penalized by law with lower
than at least 4 years, 2 months and 1 day without regard to the fine:
• Instituted directly with the MTC and MCTC, or the complaint is filed 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.
1
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
3. Take Note: A complaint for offenses cognizable by the RTC is NOT filed directly with
the RTC either for purposes of preliminary investigation or for commencement of the
criminal prosecution.
4. The institution of the criminal action interrupts the running of the period of
prescription of the offense charged
• Unless: otherwise provided in special laws.
• Act No. 3323 governs the prescriptive periods of violations of special laws, or
offenses other than those penalized under the Revised Penal Code.
1. Requisites:
• in writing
• in the name of the People of the Philippines
• Against all persons who appear to be responsible for the offense involved.
2. Who is the real offended party? The People of the Philippines, but since the crime
is also an outrage against the offended party, he is entitled to intervene in its prosecution
in cases where the civil action is impliedly instituted therein.
Complaint
2. The complaint as defined under Section 3 is different from the complaint filed with the
Prosecutor’s Office.
3. The complaint filed with the Prosecutor’s Office, from which the latter may
initiate a preliminary investigation, refers to:
• any written complaint
• filed by an offended party or not
• not necessarily under oath, except in 2 instances:
complaint for commission of an offense which cannot be prosecuted de officio
or is private in nature
where the law requires that it is to be started by a complaint sworn to by the
offended party, or when it pertains to those which need to be enforced by
specified public officers.
Information
2
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
court. All that is required is that it be subscribed or signed by the fiscal or prosecutor,
which is an indispensable requirement.
• Exceptions:
where injunction is justified by the necessity to afford protection to the
constitutional rights of the accused
where the charges are manifestly false and motivated by the lust for
vengeance
when there is clearly no prima facie case against the accused and the
motion to quash on that ground has been denied
2. Prior to the filing of the information in court, the prosecutor has full control of the
case. He decides who should be charged in court and who should be excluded from the
information.
• Public Prosecutor must be present during the proceedings and must take over
the conduct of the trial from the private prosecutor at any time the cause of the
prosecution may be adversely affected.
3
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
Thus, where the prosecutor has turned over the active conduct of the trial
to the private prosecutor who presented testimonial evidence even when
the public prosecutor was absent during the trial, the evidence presented
could not be considered valid evidence of the People.
However: this rule applies only to courts which are provided by law with
prosecutors, and not to municipal courts which have no trial prosecutors,
in which case the evidence presented by the private prosecutor can be
considered as evidence for the People.
4. General Rule: In appeals, the Sol. Gen. has control. He may abandon or discontinue
the prosecution of the case in the exercise of his sound discretion and may even
recommend the acquittal of an accused when he believes that the evidence does not
warrant his conviction.
• Exception: provided for in RA 8249 which states in part that “in all cases
elevated to the Sandiganbayan and from the SB to the SC, the Office of the
Ombudsman, through its special prosecutor, shall represent the People of the
Philippines, except in cases filed pursuant to EO Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A, issued
in 1986.”
5. When it is said that the requirement of Art. 344 of RPC is jurisdictional, what is meant
is that it is the complaint that starts the prosecutory proceeding. It is not the complaint
which confers jurisdiction on the court to try the case.
6. Once the complaint is filed, does death of the complainant in a crime of adultery
extinguish the criminal liability of the accused? No. The participation of the offended
party in private crimes is essential not for the maintenance of the criminal action but
solely for the initiation thereof. Any pardon given by the complainant or her death after
the filing of the complaint would not deprive the court of the jurisdiction to try the case.
4
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
1. If name is known: the name and surname of the accused or any appellation or
nickname by which he has been or is known.
2. If name cannot be ascertained: a fictitious name with a statement that his true name
is unknown.
• If true name thereafter disclosed: such true name shall be inserted in the
complaint or information and record.
3. While one or more persons, along with specified and named accused, may be sued
as “John Does,” an information against all accused described as “John Does” is void,
and an arrest warrant against them is also void.
1. In case of a conflict between the designation of the crime and the recital of facts
constituting the offense, the latter prevails over the former.
2. The real question is not, did he commit a crime given in the law some technical and
specific name, but did he perform the acts alleged in the body of the information. If he
did, it is of no consequence to him, either as a matter of procedure or of substantive
right, how the law denominates the crime.
Cause of accusation
1. If one or more elements of the offense have not been alleged in the information,
the accused cannot be convicted of the offense charged, even if the missing elements
have been proved during the trial.
• Even the accused’s entering a plea of guilty to such defective information will not
cure the defect, nor justify his conviction of the offense charged.
2. Important: The new rule requires that the qualifying and aggravating circumstances
be alleged in the information.
the information is sufficient if it alleges facts which the offender did as constituting a
violation of law, without explicitly negating the exception, as the exception is a matter of
defense which the accused has to prove.
5. Where what is alleged in the information is a complex crime and the evidence fails to
support the charge as to one of the component offenses, the defendant can only be
convicted of the offense proven.
5
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
May conviction be had even if it appears that the crime was committed not at the
place alleged in the information? Yes, provided the place of actual commission was
within the jurisdiction of the court.
• Unless: the particular place of commission is an essential element of the offense
charged.
1. Waiver:
• When the accused fails, before arraignment, to move for the quashal of the
information which charges 2 or more offenses, he thereby waives the objection
and may be found guilty of as many offenses as those charged and proved
during the trial.
2. Where the law with respect to an offense may be committed in any of the different
modes provided by law, the indictment in the information is sufficient if the offense is
alleged to have been committed in one, two or more modes specified therein. The
various ways of committing the offense should be considered as a description of only
one offense and the information cannot be dismissed on the ground of multifariousness.
Amendment or substitution
6
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
• whether any evidence defendant might have would be equally applicable to the
information in the new form as in the other.
5. General Rule: after arraignment, the prosecutor may no longer amend the information
which changes the nature of the crime, as it will prejudice the substantial rights of the
accused.
• Exception: when a fact supervenes which changes the nature of the crime
charged in the information or upgrades it to a higher crime, the prosecutor, with
leave of court, may amend the information to allege such supervening fact and
upgrade the crime charged to the higher crime brought about by such
supervening fact.
• However: if the supervening event which changes the nature of the crime to a
more serious one occurred after the accused has been convicted, which makes
the amendment of the information no longer the remedy of the prosecution, the
prosecution can and should charge the accused for such more serious crime,
without placing the accused in double jeopardy, there being no identity of the
offense charged in the first information and in the second one.
2. General Rule: Penal laws are territorial; hence Philippine courts have no jurisdiction
over crimes committed outside the Philippines.
• Exceptions: those provided in Article 2 of the Revised Penal Code. Those who
commit any of the crimes contemplated therein can be tried by Philippine courts.
1. Where the offended party withdrew a reservation to file a separate civil action, the
private prosecutor may still intervene in the prosecution of the criminal case, by
conducting the examination of witnesses under the control of the prosecutor.
• However: once the offended party has filed a separate civil action arising from
the crime, he may not withdraw such civil case in order to intervene in the
criminal prosecution. He loses the right to intervene. He no longer has any
standing in the criminal case, except to be a prosecution witness.
2. Where a criminal action has been provisionally dismissed upon motion of the
prosecutor, can the case be revived upon motion of the offended party? No,
because the offended party or complaining witness cannot act for the prosecutor.
1. General Rule: the institution or filing of the criminal action includes the institution
therein of the civil action for recovery of civil liability arising from the offense charged.
7
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
4. When the reservation of the right to institute the separate civil actions shall be
made: before the prosecution starts to present its evidence and under circumstances
affording the offended party a reasonable opportunity to make such a reservation.
5. The rule requiring reservation to file a separate civil action does not apply to civil
actions which can be filed and prosecuted independently of the criminal action, namely,
those provided in Arts. 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of the Civil Code.
6. Although the criminal and civil actions may be joined in the criminal case, they are
distinct from each other. The plaintiffs in the two actions are different.
• Thus: even if the accused started serving his sentence within the 15-day period
from the promulgation of the judgment of conviction by the lower court, thereby
making the judgment against him final, the complainant may, within the 15-day
reglementary period, still ask that the civil liability be fixed by the court, if the
judgment does not adjudicate any civil liability, as the judgment regarding civil
liability has not become final and the court still has jurisdiction to adjudge the civil
liability.
• With respect to damages other than actual, if these damages are specified in the
complaint or information, the corresponding filing fees should be paid, otherwise,
the trial court will not acquire jurisdiction over such other damages.
• Where moral, exemplary and other damages are not specified in the complaint or
information, the grant and amount thereof are left to the sound discretion of the
8
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
trial court, the corresponding filing fees need not be paid and shall simply
constitute a first lien on the judgment.
9. The offended party in a criminal case may appeal the civil aspect despite the acquittal
of the accused.
Where the trial court convicted the accused, but dismissed the civil action instituted
therein, the offended party may appeal the dismissal to the CA.
11. Important!: Section 1, Rule 111 now expressly provides that no counterclaim,
cross-claim or third-party complaint may be filed by the accused in the criminal case, but
any cause of action which could have been subject thereof may be litigated in a
separate civil action.
• Reasons:
the counterclaim of the accused will unnecessarily complicate and
confuse the criminal proceedings;
the trial court should confine itself to the criminal aspect and the possible
civil liability of the accused arising out of the crime.
Take Note: Article 29 of the Civil Code merely emphasizes that a civil action for
damages is not precluded by the acquittal of an accused for the same criminal act or
omission. It does not state that the remedy can be availed of only in a separate civil
action.
1. Prior reservation is not necessary to file separate civil action under Arts. 32, 33, 34
and 2176 of the Civil Code. The phrase “which has been reserved” that has caused
conflicting rulings in the past has now been deleted.
• General Rule: death extinguishes the civil liability arising from delict or the
offense
9
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
2. Before arraignment:
• The civil action impliedly instituted in the criminal action shall be dismissed
without prejudice to the offended party’s filing a civil action against the
administrator of the estate of the deceased.
The judgment in civil actions based on Arts. 32, 33, 34 and 2176 absolving the
defendant from civil liability does not bar the criminal action.
Prejudicial question
1. The prejudicial question may be raised during the preliminary investigation of the
offense or in court before the prosecution rests its case.
2. The suspension of the criminal case due to a prejudicial question is only a procedural
matter, and is subject to a waiver by virtue of prior acts of the accused.
3. There is no prejudicial question where one case is administrative and the other is civil.
• not part of the trial of the criminal action in court. Nor is its record part of the
record of the case in the RTC.
10
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
2. The refusal of the court to remand the case for PI can be controlled by certiorari
and prohibition to prevent trial.
2. Two types of offenses may be filed in the MTC for preliminary investigation:
• a case cognizable by the RTC may be filed with the MTC for PI;
• Moreover, the prosecutor or judge cannot dismiss the complaint without the prior
written authority of the Ombudsman or his deputy, nor can the prosecutor file an
information with the Sandiganbayan without being deputized by, and without prior
written authority of, the Ombudsman or his deputy.
11
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
• does not affect the court’s jurisdiction or the validity of the information.
Procedure
5. The respondent now has the right to examine the evidence submitted by the
complainant of which he may not have been furnished and to obtain copies thereof at his
expense.
1. After having filed the information, the prosecutor is called upon to prosecute the case
in court. It has been said that at this stage, unlike judges who are mandated to display
cold neutrality in hearing cases, the prosecutors are not required to divest themselves of
their personal convictions and refrain from exhibiting partiality. But while he may strike
hard blows, he is not at liberty to strike foul ones.
• The accused who has been charged with the offense is not allowed to escape
punishment merely because it develops in the course of the trial that there were
other guilty participants in the crime.
• It does not vitiate the validity of the information. Neither is the same a ground for
a motion to quash.
12
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
• The Secretary of Justice is not prevented from entertaining an appeal from the
accused or from the offended party even after the information has been filed and
the trial court has arraigned the accused. Section 4 of DOJ 223 should be
construed as merely enjoining the Secretary of Justice to refrain, as far as
practicable, from entertaining a petition for review or appeal from the action of the
prosecutor once the complaint or information is filed in court. If the Secretary
reverses the ruling of the prosecutor, the latter has to file the necessary motion to
dismiss the complaint or information, the grant or denial of which is subject to the
discretion of the trial court.
5. The prosecutor is required to resolve the complaint based on the evidence presented
by the complainant in the event that the respondent cannot be subpoenaed or the
respondent, if subpoenaed, does not submit a counter-affidavit within the 10-day period.
Non-judicial function:
1. Invalid: A warrant issued by the judge solely on the basis of the report and
recommendation of the investigating prosecutor, without personally determining the
existence of probable cause by independently examining sufficient evidence submitted
by the parties during the PI
3. What the accused who believes that there is no probable cause to hold him for
trial may do:
• to file with the trial court a motion to dismiss on such ground or for the
determination of probable cause.
• if the warrant of arrest has been issued, the accused may file a motion to quash
the arrest warrant or to recall the same on the ground of lack of probable cause.
4. Where an information has already been filed in court, and the Secretary of
Justice reversed the prosecutor’s finding of probable cause, what should the trial
court do upon the prosecutor’s motion to dismiss? He must make his own
assessment of the evidence and not just rely on the conclusion of the prosecutor,
otherwise the court becomes a mere rubber stamp.
5. Regarding reinvestigation:
• Once the complaint or information is filed in court, any motion for reinvestigation
is addressed to the sound discretion of the court.
13
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
• While the trial court judge has the power to order the reinvestigation of the case
by the prosecutor, he may not, before the prosecutor concluded the
reinvestigation, recall said order, set the case for arraignment and trial, without
gravely abusing his discretion.
7. Important: The rule is now that the investigating judge’s power to order the arrest of
the accused is limited to instances in which there is a necessity for placing him in
custody in order not to frustrate the ends of justice. Thus, even if the judge finds
probable cause, he cannot, on such ground alone, issue a warrant of arrest. He must
further find there is a necessity of placing the accused under immediate custody in order
not to frustrate the ends of justice.
8. The investigating judge has no power to reduce or change the crime charged in
order to justify the grant of bail to the accused. The power belongs to the
prosecutor.
9. After the conclusion of his PI, the judge has to transmit to the provincial prosecutor his
resolution and entire records of the case, regardless of whether he finds a probable
cause or sufficient ground to issue a warrant of arrest.
• Exception: when the accused has been lawfully arrested without warrant, in
which case, an inquest must be conducted by an inquest prosecutor who will
determine whether his arrest without warrant is lawful. The inquest prosecutor
may order the release of the arrested person if he finds no sufficient ground to
hold him without prejudice to conducting further investigation, or file complaint or
information within the period specified in Art. 125 of the RPC.
3. Before the filing of a complaint or information, the person arrested without a warrant
may ask for a preliminary investigation by a proper officer, but he must sign a waiver of
the provisions of Art. 125 of the RPC.
14
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
• cases where the punishment does not exceed 4 years 2 months and 1 day.
Definition of arrest
Application of actual force, manual touching of the body, physical restraint or formal
declaration of arrest is not required. Arrest includes submission to the custody of the
person making the arrest.
Execution of warrant
2. A warrant of arrest has no expiry date. It remains valid until arrest is effected or the
warrant is lifted.
• However, Sec. 4 of Rule 113 requires the head of the office who applied for
warrant to execute the same within 10 days from receipt thereof and for the
arresting officer assigned to execute the same to submit, within 10 days from the
expiration of the first 10-day period, a report to the judge who issued the warrant.
1. In a citizen’s arrest, the person may be arrested and searched of his body and of his
personal effects or belongings, for dangerous weapons or anything which may be used
as proof of the commission of an offense, without need of a search warrant.
2. Sec. 5(a) refers to arrest in flagrante delicto while Sec. 5(b) refers to hot pursuit.
3. Sec. 5(b) authorizes warrantless arrest “when an offense has in fact just been
committed.” The word “just” implies immediacy in point of time.
4. Delivery of the detained person to the proper judicial authorities means the filing of the
complaint or information with the municipal trial court or with the inquest fiscal or
prosecutor who shall then decide either to order the release of the detained person or to
file the corresponding information in court.
1. Custodial investigation
15
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
• Involves any questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has
been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any
significant way.
re-enactment
2. When the threat or promise was made by, or in the presence of, a person in authority,
who has, OR is supposed by the accused to have power or authority to fulfill the threat
or promise, the confession of the accused is inadmissible.
4. The arresting officer may be held civilly liable for damages under Art. 32 of the Civil
Code. The very nature of Art. 32 is that the wrong may be civil or criminal. It is not
necessary that there should be malice or bad faith.
5. On Civil Procedure:
• Section 20 Rule 14 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure provides in part that the
inclusion in a motion to dismiss of other grounds aside from lack of jurisdiction
over the person of the defendant shall not be deemed a voluntary appearance.
• These changes in the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure are applicable to criminal
cases as Section 3 Rule 1 thereof provides that “these rules shall govern the
procedure to be observed in actions, civil or criminal, and special proceedings.”
Moreover, the omnibus motion rule applies to motions to quash.
6. Section 26 of Rule 114 of the New Rules of Criminal Procedure provides that bail is
not a bar to objection on illegal arrest, lack of or irregular preliminary
investigation. This is an abandonment of the Cojuangco, Jr. v. Sandiganbayan ruling.
Bail defined
1. Purpose:
16
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
• to honor the presumption of innocence until his guilt is proven beyond reasonable
doubt
• to enable him to prepare his defense without being subject to punishment prior to
conviction.
2. Upon assumption of the obligation of bail, the sureties become in law the jailers
of their principal.
2. If the accused presents his notice of appeal, the trial court will order the accused to be
taken into custody in the absence of a new bail bond on appeal duly approved by the
court. If the accused does not appeal, the bondsman must produce the accused on the
15th day from promulgation of sentence for service of sentence.
• before conviction, for all offenses punishable by lower than reclusion perpetua
prosecution does not have the right to oppose or to present evidence for its
denial.
Rationale: The unique structure of the military justifies exempting military men
from the constitutional coverage on the right to bail.
17
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
7. It would be premature, not to say incongruous, to file a petition for bail for
someone whose freedom has yet to be curtailed.
• However if the decision of the trial court convicting the accused changed the
nature of the offense from non-bailable to bailable, the application for bail can
only be filed with and resolved by the appellate court.
3. After appeal is perfected, the trial court loses jurisdiction to grant bail and to
approve bail bond.
• However, the accused may apply for bail or provisional liberty with the appellate
court.
The capital nature of an offense is determined by the penalty prescribed by law, and not
by the penalty that may be imposed after trial and on the basis of the evidence adduced
and the presence of aggravating or mitigating circumstance.
18
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
• Why? because in both cases, the grant of bail before conviction by the trial court
is a matter of discretion when evidence of guilt is strong.
2. The constitutional mandate makes the grant or denial of bail in capital offenses
hinge on the issue of whether or not the evidence of guilt is strong.
3. Meaning of “conviction”
• The word “conviction” in Section 13, Article III of the 1987 Constitution refers to
conviction by the trial court, which has not become final, as the accused still has
the right to appeal. After conviction by the trial court, the accused convicted of a
capital offense is no longer entitled to bail, and can only be released when the
conviction is reversed by the appellate court.
1. “Evidence of guilt” in the Constitution and the Rules refers to a finding of innocence
or culpability, regardless of the modifying circumstances.
• If the person charged with a capital offense, such as murder, admittedly a minor,
which would entitle him, if convicted, to a penalty next lower than that prescribed
by law, he is entitled to bail regardless of whether the evidence of guilt is strong.
The reason for this is that one who faces a probable death sentence has a
particularly strong temptation to flee. This reason does not hold where the
accused has been established without objection to be minor who by law cannot
be sentenced to death.
• Where the prosecution agrees with the accused’s application for bail or foregoes
the introduction of evidence, the court must nonetheless set the application for
hearing.
• It is mandatory for the judge to conduct a hearing and ask searching and
clarificatory questions for the purpose of determining the existence of strong
evidence against the accused; and the order, after such hearing, should make a
finding that the evidence against the accused is strong.
Corporate surety
The term of the bail bond is not dependent upon faithful payment of the bond premium.
Justification of sureties
Before accepting a surety or bail bond, the following requisites must be complied
with:
• photographs of the accused;
• affidavit of justification;
• clearance from the Supreme Court;
• certificate of compliance with Circular No. 66 dated September 19, 1996;
• authority of the agent; and
• current certificate of authority issued by the Insurance Commissioner with a
financial statement showing the maximum underwriting capacity of the surety
company.
19
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
The trial judge has no authority to strictly require that only cash bond, instead of a surety
bond, be deposited for the provisional release of the accused.
Recognizance
1. The release of the accused may be on his own recognizance, which means that he
has become his own jailer. It may be to a responsible person. Persons charged with
offenses falling under the Rule on Summary Procedure may be released either “on bail
or on recognizance of a responsible citizen acceptable to the court.”
2. In Espiritu v. Jovellanos (280 SCRA 579, 1997), the Court held that the release on
recognizance of any person under detention may be ordered only by a court and
only in the following cases:
• where a person has been in custody for a period equal to or more than the
minimum of the imposable principal penalty, without application of the
Indeterminate Sentence Law or any modifying circumstance, in which case the
court, in its discretion, may allow his release on his own recognizance
• where the accused has applied for probation, pending resolution of the case but
no bail was filed or the accused is incapable of filing one
• in case of a youthful offender held for physical and mental examination, trial, or
appeal, if he is unable to furnish bail and under circumstances envisaged in PD
No. 603 as amended.
A judge presiding in one branch has no power to grant bail to an accused who is being
tried in another branch presided by another judge who is not absent or unavailable, and
his act of releasing him on bail constitutes ignorance of law which subjects him to
disciplinary sanction.
Forfeiture of bail
Compliance with the first requisite without meeting the second requisite will
not justify non-forfeiture of a bail bond or reduction of liability.
20
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
1. The bondsmen who put the bail bond for the accused become the jailers and they or
the police officer to whom authority is endorsed may arrest the accused for the purpose
of surrendering him to the court. The accused cannot leave the country without the
permission of the bondsmen and the court.
• Supreme Court Circular No. 39-97 dated June 19, 1997 limits the authority to
issue hold departure orders to the RTCs in criminal cases within their exclusive
jurisdiction. Consequently, MTC judges have no authority to issue hold-
departure orders, following the maxim, express mention implies the exclusion.
Neither does he have authority to cancel one which he issued.
General Rule: no bail shall be allowed after the judgment has become final, as what is
left is for him to serve the sentence.
Important: An application for admission to bail shall not bar the accused from
challenging the validity of his arrest or the legality of the warrant issued therefore, or
from assailing the regularity or questioning the absence of a preliminary investigation of
the charge against him, provided that he raises them before entering his plea. The court
shall observe the matter as early as practicable but not later than the start of the trial of
the case.
2. Equipoise rule:
21
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
3. If the judgment of conviction had become final and executory, it may still be recalled,
and the accused afforded the opportunity to be heard by counsel, where he has been
denied the right to counsel during the hearing.
7. The accused’s right to meet the witnesses face to face is limited to proceedings
before the trial court, during trial, and not during custodial or preliminary investigation.
8. Requests by a party for the issuance of subpoenas do not require notice to other
parties to the action.
9. The sanctions of arrest and contempt in respect to disobedience to subpoena are not
applicable to a witness who resides more than 100 kilometers from the residence to the
place where he is to testify, or if he is a detention prisoner no permission of the court in
which his case is pending was obtained.
10. Public trial should not be confused with trial by publicity which is proscribed.
• intention to relinquish such right, which must be shown clearly and convincingly
• where the law or the Constitution so provides, the waiver must be with the
assistance of counsel, to be valid.
1. Definition: Arraignment is the stage where the issues are joined in criminal action and
without which the proceedings cannot advance further or, if held, will otherwise be void.
2. No trial in absentia can be validly held without first arraigning the accused, and
he cannot be arraigned without his personal appearance in court.
22
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
• The presence of the offended party is now required at the arraignment and also
to discuss the matter of accused’s civil liability. In case the offended party fails to
appear despite due notice, the trial court may allow the accused to plead guilty to
a lower offense with solely the conformity of the trial prosecutor.
• While RA 8493, or the Speedy Trial Act, provides that the accused shall be
arraigned within 30 days from the time a court acquires jurisdiction over his
person, Rule 116 section 1(e) provides for a shorter time within which an
accused who is under preventive detention should be arraigned. When an
accused is detained, his case should be raffled within 3 days from the filing of the
information or complaint against him, and the judge to whom his case is raffled
shall have him arraigned within 10 days from receipt by the judge of the records
of the case. The pre-trial conference shall be held within 10 days after the
arraignment.
5. The arraignment shall be held within 30 days from the date the court acquires
jurisdiction over the person of the accused, unless a shorter period is provided by
special law or by SC Circular.
• Certain laws and SC Circulars provide for a shorter time within which the
accused should be arraigned:
RA 7610 (Child Abuse Act) – the trial shall be commenced within 3 days from
arraignment
1. The new rule provides that the accused may be allowed by the trial court to plead
guilty to a lesser offense which is necessarily included in the offense charged, and
deleted the phrase, “regardless of whether or not it is necessarily included in the crime
charged, or is cognizable by a court of lesser jurisdiction than the trial court.”
• It should be noted, however, that the amendment did not say that an accused
may be allowed to plead to a lesser offense only if the same is necessarily
included in the offense charged. The provision employs the word “may,” which is
permissive and implies that the court may still allow an accused to plead guilty to
a lesser offense, even if the latter is not included in the offense charged.
• The consent of the offended party to allowing the accused to plead guilty to a
lesser offense is necessary. It has been held that if the plea of guilty to a lesser
offense is made without the consent of the prosecutor and the offended party, the
23
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
conviction of the accused shall not be a bar to another prosecution for an offense
which necessarily includes the offense charged in the former information.
3. Change of plea
• After the prosecution has rested its case, a change of plea to a lesser offense
may be granted by the judge, with the approval of the prosecutor and the
offended party and only when the prosecution does not have sufficient evidence
to establish the guilt of the crime charged. The judge cannot on its own grant the
change of plea.
2. Conviction in a capital offense cannot rest alone on a plea of guilty, a free and
intelligent plea. It is mandatory for the trial court to require the prosecution to present its
evidence and, if the accused so desires, to allow him to submit his evidence. This is so
even if the accused formally manifests that he waives presentation of evidence by the
prosecution.
• The plea of guilty covers both the crime as well as its attendant circumstances
alleged in the complaint or information, qualifying and/or aggravating the crime.
Such plea removes the necessity of presenting further evidence and for all
intents and purposes the case is deemed tried on its merits and submitted for
decision. It leaves the court with no alternative but to impose the penalty
prescribed by law.
2. Mitigating circumstances:
• The trial court may allow an accused to plead guilty and at the same time allow
him to prove other mitigating circumstances. However, if what the accused
would prove is an exempting circumstance, which would amount to a withdrawal
of his plea of not guilty, the trial court may not allow him to take the witness
stand.
3. If the accused is permitted to present evidence after his plea of guilty to a non-capital
offense and such shows that the accused is not guilty of the crime charged, the accused
must be acquitted, for there is no rule which provides that simply because the accused
pleaded guilty to the charge that his conviction automatically follows. Additional
evidence independent of the plea may be considered to convince the judge that it was
intelligently made.
2. Effect:
• change of the accused’s plea from guilty to that of not guilty is the setting aside of
the judgment of conviction and the re-opening of the case for new trial.
24
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
3. The withdrawal must at least have a rational basis. The accused should state that he
has a meritorious defense to the charge. The motion should be set for hearing and the
prosecution heard thereon.
Express demand:
• Counsel for the accused must expressly demand the right to be given reasonable
time to consult with the accused. Only when so demanded does denial thereof
constitute reversible error and a ground for new trial.
Bill of particulars
• Set forth the pleader’s theory of his cause of action or a rule of evidence on
which he intends to rely
3. The filing of a motion for bill of particulars suspends the period to file a
responsive pleading.
• If the motion is granted, the moving party has the remaining period or at least 5
days to file his answer from service of the bill of particulars.
• If the motion is denied, he has the same period to file his responsive pleading
from receipt of the order denying the motion.
Suspension of arraignment
• the test of volition or that there be a total deprivation of freedom of the will.
25
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
• A nolle prosequi is a dismissal of the criminal case by the government before the
accused is placed on trial and before he is called to plead, with the approval of
the court in the exercise of its judicial discretion. It partakes of the nature of a
nonuser or discontinuance in a civil suit and leaves the matter in the same
condition in which it was before the commencement of the prosecution. It is not
an acquittal; it is not a final disposition of the case; and it does not bar a
subsequent prosecution for the same offense.
2. General Rule: A MTQ may be filed by the accused at any time before the accused
enters his plea. Thereafter, no MTQ can be entertained by the court.
3. The right to file a MTQ belongs only to the accused. There is nothing in the rules
which authorizes the court or judge to motu propio initiate a MTQ by issuing an order
requiring why the information may not be quashed on the ground stated in said order.
Grounds
1. In a MTQ based on the ground that the facts alleged in the information do not
constitute the offense charged, the trial court should limit its inquiry to:
• the averments in the information, as hypothetically admitted;
• indubitable facts.
3. The prosecutor who signed the information must have territorial jurisdiction to conduct
the preliminary investigation of the offense, otherwise the information filed by him would
be invalid and can be quashed on such ground.
4. The fact that the allegations in the complaint or information are vague or broad, is not
generally a ground for a motion to quash, the remedy being to file a motion for bill of
particulars.
6. The period of prescription of violation of special laws or offenses not penalized by the
Revised Penal Code but by special laws, and municipal ordinances is governed by Act
No. 3326 which took effect on December 4, 1926.
26
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
• If the commission of the crime is known, the prescriptive period shall commence
to run on the day it was committed, otherwise on the date of its discovery.
• In the very nature of things, acts made criminal by special laws are frequently
not immoral or obviously immoral in themselves. For this reason, the applicable
statute requires that if the violation of the special law is not known at the time, the
prescriptive period begins to run only from the discovery thereof, that is,
discovery of the unlawful nature of the constitutive act or acts, in connection with
which there should be evidence.
• Where an accused has been found to have committed a lesser offense includible
within the offense charged, he cannot be convicted of the lesser offense if it has
already prescribed. To hold otherwise would be to sanction the circumvention of
the law on prescription by the simple expedient of accusing the defendant of the
graver offense.
• The rule that if the last day falls on a Sunday or a holiday, the act can still be
done the following day does not apply to the computation of the period of
prescription of a crime, in which the rule is that if the last day in the period of
prescription of a felony falls on a Sunday or legal holiday, the information
concerning said felony cannot be filed on the next working day, as the offense
has by then already prescribed.
• The period of a continuing crime’s prescription is counted from the latest or last
act constituting the series of acts continuing the single crime.
• The period of prescription does not run when the offender is absent from the
Philippines.
9. Regarding pardon:
• Contentious motions in criminal cases must comply with the requirements that
they be set for hearing at a specified date with prior notice to the adverse party or
the prosecutor at least 3 days before the hearing, the notice of hearing should be
addressed to adverse counsel or the prosecutor, and proof of service of the
motion upon the adverse party or prosecutor at least 3 days prior to such
hearing. This is mandatory.
27
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
1. An information does not charge an offense if one or more of its essential elements
have not been alleged therein. The amendment of the information to allege the
element(s) not stated in the information is a material amendment, but the same can be
done because the accused has not been arraigned, nor can a dismissal of the
information on such ground put the accused twice in jeopardy.
2. A good tactical move may require that the accused should first plead to the
information and thereafter file a motion to quash either before or after the prosecution
has presented its evidence. Pursuant to Sec. 9 of Rule 117, an accused, even after he
has entered his plea, may still move to quash the information on the ground that it does
not charge an offense. If the case is dismissed on such ground, the prosecution may not
be permitted to correct the information because the accused has already pleaded and to
allow such amendment may place the accused twice in jeopardy.
• …even if the dismissal is made with the express consent of the accused, or upon
his own motion, if it is predicated on insufficiency of the prosecution evidence or
denial of the right to a speedy trial. In both instances, the dismissal has the
effect of acquittal.
• where 2 informations are filed charging the same accused with 2 different
elements, as in the issuance of bouncing check for estafa under the RPC and
violation of BP 22.
• where after trial of a charge of serious physical injuries, the municipal trial court
dismissed the case to give way to the filing of a complaint for frustrated murder,
as it believed that what was proved was frustrated murder, the dismissal was null
and void because the trial court should have rendered judgment based on the
charge alleged in the information and the evidence adduced during the trial.
Since the dismissal was null and void, it did not place the accused twice in
jeopardy for the continuation of the proceedings for serious physical injuries.
• where the accused has been sentenced to suffer a wrong penalty by the trial
court, the petition for certiorari filed by the prosecutor to correct the penalty which
28
REMEDIAL LAW (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
REVIEWER – Part 1
Lambda Epsilon Xi – DVOREF College of Law
should be lower than that imposed does not place the accused twice in jeopardy
because it would shorten the penalty and is favorable to the accused.
• where one case is administrative in nature and the other criminal. Neither does it
apply in preliminary investigations.
Provisional dismissal
1. Important!: A trial court may not order a provisional dismissal of the case without the
express consent of the accused and prior notice to the offended party. The trial court,
cannot, on its own, provisionally dismiss the case, nor can it dismiss it provisionally
without the express consent of the prosecutor.
The accused may still file a motion to dismiss the information based on the following
grounds even if he has already pleaded not guilty:
• the information charges no offense;
• the trial court has no jurisdiction over the offense charged;
• the penalty or the offense has been extinguished; and
• double jeopardy has attached.
29