CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

1/31

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE1st Semester, AY 2009-2010

Prof. E. (Leo) D. BattadCollege of Law

University of the Philippines

The superior virtue is not to render justice,it is to fight relentlessly for it - to struggle for justice in time,

yet under the aspect of eternity.

- - Jose W. Diokno, A Filipino Conceptof Justice for Our Children

MANDATORY READINGS:

1. Jurisdiction

Batas Pambansa (BP) Blg. 129 (as amended)

SC Administrative Circular No. 09-94

The 1991 Revised Rules on Summary Procedure (RRSP)

Republic Act (RA) No. 8493 (The Speedy Trial Act of 1988)

SC Circular No. 38-98 (Implemenitng Rules to RA 8493)

Presidential Decree (PD) No. 1606, as amended(Sandiganbayan Law)

RA 8249 (Amendments to Sandiganbayan Law)

RA 6770 (Ombudsman Law)

2. Substantive Rights

1987 Const., Art. III

1987 Const., Art VIII, sec. 5(5)

Rule 115, 2000 Rules on Criminal Procedure (RCP)

RA 7438

DOJ National Prosecution Service Manual, Part XI, secs. 1, 2

Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act (JJWA), secs. 60-61

3. DOJ Inquest and Preliminary Investigation Procedure

DOJ Department Order No. 70 [2000 NPS Rule on Appeal]

DOJ Circular No. 61 (1993) [New Rules on Inquest]

DOJ National Prosecution Service Manual for Prosecutors (seereserved section)

4. Special Rules and Procedures

SC AM No. 00-04-07-SC [Child Witness Rule]

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

2/31

SC AM No. 02-1-18-SC [Rule on Juveniles in Conflict with theLaw]

SC AM No. 02-1-19-SC [Rule on Commitment of Children]

SC AM No. 02-2-07-SC [Amendments to Rule 110, sec. 5)

SC AM No. 03-1-09-SC [Rule on Guidelines to be Observed by

Trial Judges and Clerks of Court in the Conduct of Pre-Trial andUse of Deposition-Discovery Measures]

These materials are integral to the course. While all of them may not bediscussed or subject to recitation per se, they will be integrated into everydiscussion on the various rules in criminal procedure. Each student isconclusively presumed to have read them before the start of the first sessionas recitation and discussion will proceed on this premise.

PART IAPPREHENSION PHASE

RULE 113 Arrest

Pertinent Pleadings:

(1) Petition for Habeas Corpus(2) Motion for Judicial Determination of Probable Cause(3) Civil Suit for Damages

I. Nature and Definition

A. Definition Rule 113, secs. 1, 2

David et al. v. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, 489 SCRA 160 (2006)

Sanchez v. Demetriou, 227 SCRA 627 (1993)

People v. Sequino, 264 SCRA 79 (1996)

Defensor-Santiago v. Vasquez, 217 SCRA 633 (1993)

Cojuangco v. Sandiganbayan, 300 SCRA 367 (1998)

Cf. Diplomatic and parliamentary immunities from arrest, 1987 Const.,Art. VI, sec. 11; Rev. Pen. Code (RPC), Art 145; Vienna Conventionon Diplomatic Relations, Arts. 31, 37; Visiting Forces Agreement(VFA), Art. VII

People v. Siao, 327 SCRA 231 (2000)

B. Types

1. With warrant of arrest

2

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

3/31

a. When and how warrant issued 1987 Const., Art. III, sec. 2;Rule 112, sec. 6

b. Requisites for issuance 1987 Const., Art. III, sec. 2; DOJ-NPSManual for Prosecutors, Part VI, sec. 1

Placer v. Villanueva, 126 SCRA 463 (1983)

People v. Inting, 187 SCRA 788 (1990)

Allado v. Diokno, 232 SCRA 192 (1994)

Salonga v. Cruz Pao, 134 SCRA 438 (1985)

Lim v. Felix, 194 SCRA 292 (1991)

Pangandaman v. Casar, 159 SCRA 599 (1988)

People v. Court of Appeals (CA), 301 SCRA 475 (1999)

b. How effected Rule 113, secs. 2, 3, 4, 6, 7

People v. Lumayok, 139 SCRA 1 (1985)

Pagalunan v. Station Commander, 136 SCRA 332 (1985)

People v. Albior, 163 SCRA 332 (1988)

d. Assistance; breaking into and out of building or enclosure Rule113, secs. 10, 11, 12

2. Warrantless

a. When justified Rule 113, sec. 5

People v. Tudtud, 412 SCRA 142 (2003)

People v. Chua, 396 SCRA 657 (2003)

People v. Mendez, 392 SCRA 443 (2002)

People v. Doria, 301 SCRA 668 (1999)

Cadua v. CA, 312 SCRA 703 (1999)

People v. Montilla, 285 SCRA 703 (1998)

People v. Burgos, 144 SCRA 1 (1986)

People v. Jayson, 282 SCRA 166 (1997)

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968)

b. Method of arrest by officer Rule 113, sec. 8

Cf.

People v. Mahinay, 302 SCRA 455 (1999)(Guidelines, procedures and duties of officers arresting,detaining, inviting or investigating at the time of arrest or atcustodial interrogation}

c. Method of arrest by private person Rule 113, sec. 9

d. Post-arrest procedure Rule 112, sec. 7

3

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

4/31

e. Exceptions construed strictly

David et al. v. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo et al., supra

People v. Valdez, 304 SCRA 140 (1999)

People v. Burgos, supra

f. Special Rule for Juveniles in Conflict with the Law , Rule onJuveniles in Conflict with the Law (RJCL), secs. 6, 7; RA 9344(Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act [JJWA]), secs. 21, 22

3. John Doe warrants

People v. Veloso, 48 Phil. 169 ( )

Pangandaman v. Casar, supra

DOJ Circular No. 50, 29 October 1990

Cf. Proclamation 1017 (2006)

4. Invitations

Babst, et al. v. NIB, 132 SCRA 316 (1984)

People v. Sequino, supra

Cf. RA 7438; Proclamation 1017 (2006)

II. Custodial Investigation

A. Source, Definition, Scope and Procedure

1. Definition RA 7438, sec. 2(f), par. 2

People v. Pasudag, 357 SCRA 487 (2001)

People v. Zuela, 323 SCRA 589 (2000)

People v. Valdez, 341 SCRA 25 (2000)

Rodriguez, 341 SCRA 645 (2000) People v. Del Rosario, 305 SCRA 740 (1999)

RA 7438, sec. 2(f), par. 2Cf.

Babst v. NIB, supra

People v. Muleta, 309 SCRA 148 (1999)

People v. Tan, 286 SCRA 207 (1998)

People v. Baniquet, 341 SCRA 600 (2000)

2. Duty of police during custodial investigation; procedure 1987Const., Art. III, sec. 12

4

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

5/31

Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966)

People v. Obrero, 332 SCRA 190 (2000)

People v. Duero, 104 SCRA 379 (1981)

RA 7438, sec.(b). (c), (d)Cf.

People v. Ordoo, 334 SCRA 673 (2000)B. Rights involved and consequence of violation

1. Rights involved 1987 Const., Art. III, sec. 12 (1), (2); RA 7438,sec. 2(a), (b), (c), (d), (e), and (f)

People v. Obrero, supra

2. Consequence of violence 1987 Const., Art. III, sec. 12 (3); RA7438, sec. 4

Harris v. New York, 401 U.S. 222 (1971)

New York v. Quarles, 104 S. Ct. 2626 1984)

People v. Duero, supra

People v. Figueroa, 335 SCRA 299 (2000)

Gumabon v. Director of Prisons, 37 SCRA 429 (1971)

C. Specific Requirements in Case Law

1. Waiver of right to counsel

People v. Caguio, 141 SCRA 289 (1980)

People v. Galit, 135 SCRA 465 (1985)

People v. Continente, 339 SCRA 1 (2000)

Cf.

People v. Bacor, 306 SCRA 522 (1999)

People v. Quidato Jr. 297 SCRA 1 (1998)

2. Counsel of choice during custodial investigation

People v. Obrero, supra

People v. Labtan, 320 SCRA 140 (1999)

People v. Samulde, 336 SCRA 632 (2000)

People v. Gallardo, 323 SCRA 218 (2000)

3. Complaince with requirement to inform person detained of rights

People v. Canoy, 328 SCRA 385 (2000)

People v. Sapal, 328 SCRA 417 I2000)

5

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

6/31

People v. Jara, 144 SCRA 517 (1986)

People v. Nicandro, 141 SCRA 289 (1986)

People v. Continente, supra

4. Police line-up

Gamboa v. Cruz, 162 SCRA 642 (1988)

United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218 (1967)

People v. Pavillare, 329 SCRA 684 (2000)

5. Proof of voluntariness of confession; burden on prosecution

People v. Jara, supra

People v. Burgos, supra

6. Exceptional cases of uncounseled confessions not held to beexcluded

People v. Andan, 269 SCRA 95 (1997)

People v. Domantay, 307 SCRA 1 (1991)

But cf.

People v. Morada, 307 SCRA 362 (1999)

III. Rights and Remedies

A. Rights of persons under arrest 1987 Const., Art. III, sec. 12; Rule113, sec. 14; RA 7438, sec. 2

People v. Ramos, 186 SCRA 184 (1990)

People v. Galit, supra

People v. Nicandro, supra

People v. Decierdo, 149 SCRA 496 (1987)

Cf. V.V. Mendoza, the Right to Counsel in Custodial Interrogations,61 PHIL. L. J. 409 (1986)

B. Remedies

1. Bail 1987 Const., Art. III, sec. 14; RJCL, secs. 15, 16, 17; JJWA,secs. 34, 35, 36; Cf. sec. 4(p); Rule 114, sec. 26

Panada v. Veneracion, 269 SCRA 371 (1997)

2. Habeas Corpus

Ilagan v. Enrile, 139 SCRA 349 (1985)

Velasco v. CA, 245 SCRA 677 (1995)

Moncupa v. Enrile, 141 SCRA 233 (1986)

6

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

7/31

Enrile v. Perez, G.R. No. 147785 (Resolution of the Court enbancdated 5 May 2001) (Available at the UP Library, ReserveSection)

But cf. Effects of plea on objections to legality of arrest

People v. Alojado, 305 SCRA 236 (1999)

People v. Rondero, 320 SCRA 383 (1999)

7

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

8/31

Cf. also Non-curability of illegal nature of arrest

Umil v. Ramos, 187 SCRA 311 (1990)

Umil v. Ramos, 202 SCRA 251 (1991)

Bagcal v. Villaraza, 120 SCRA 525 (1983)

3. Motion to quash information; Preliminaryinvestigation/Reinvestigation Rule 117, secs. 1, 3

Luna v. Plaza, 26 SCRA 310 (1968)

Alimpoos c. CA, 106 SCRA 159 (1981)

4. Consequence of violence RPC, Arts. 124-126

5. Suppression of evidence obtained 1987 Const., Art. III, secs. 3(2),

12 (3), 12 (4)

Brown v. Illinois, 422 U.S. 590 (1975)

Sayo v. Chief of police, 80 Phil. 859 (1948)

Cf. Rule 126, sec. 14

RULE 126 Search and Seizure


(1) Motion to Quash Search Warrant(2) Motion to Suppress(3) Motion for return of Property Seized

I. Nature, Scope and Definition

A. Definition 1987 Const., Art. III, secs. 2, 3; Rule 126, secs. 1, 13

Stonehill v. Diokno, 20 SCRA 383 SCRA (1967)

Katz v. U.S. 389 U.S. 347 (1967)

People v. Marti, 193 SCRA 57 (1991)

B. Constitutional and statutory boundaries; Limitations on state action

1. Nature of right protected; waiver of protected right

Villanueva v. Querubin, 48 SCRA 349 (1972)

People v. Marti, supra

Guazon v. De Villa, 181 SCRA 623 (1990)

Cf. C. Z. Lopez, the Saturation Drive: A mass Arrest ofConstitutional Protection, 62 PHIL. L. J. 167 (1987)

8

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

9/31

C. Scope of protection 1987 Const., Art. III, sec. 3(1); RA 4200; Rule

126, sec. 13

Burgos v. Chief of Staff, 133 SCRA 800 (1984)

Katz v. U.S., 389 U.S. 347 (1967) Gaanan v. IAC, 145 SCRA 112 (1986)

D. Types

1. Through search warrant

c. Generally Rule 126, sec. 1

People v. Aruta, 288 SCRA 626 (1998)

Manalili v. CA, 280 SCRA 400 (1997)

b. Venue of application; jurisdiction of court Rule 126, sec. 2; BP129 (as amended by RA 7691), sec. 21; Interim Rules (11January 1983, par. A3

Malaloan v. CA, 232 SCRA 249 (1994)

People v. CA, 291 SCRA 400 (1998)

c. Requisites for issuance Rule 126, sec. 1; Cf. 1987 Const., Art.III, sec. 2

Paper Industries Corporation of the Philippines v.Asuncion, 307 SCRA 253 (1999)

(1) Concept of probable cause in search warrants

People v. Estrada, 296 SCRA 382 (1998)

Burgos v. Chief of Staff, supra

People v. Syjuco, 64 Phil. 667 (1937)

Entertainment Inc v. CA, 262 SCRA 219 (1996)

Stonehill v. Diokno, supra Columbia Pictures Inc. v. CA, 237 SCRA 367(1994); Cf. Columbia Pictures

Entertainment Inc. v. CA, 262 SCRA 219 (1996)

(2) Determining probable cause

(i) People responsible 1987 Const., Art. Iii, sec. 2; Rule126, sec. 4

(ii) Process Rule 126, sec. 5

9

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

10/31

Paper Industries Corporation of the Philippinesv. Asuncion, supra

Roan v. Gonzales, 145 SCRA 687 (1994)

Alih v. Castro, 151 SCRA 279 (1987)

(3) Description of things to be seized

Kho v. Macalintal, 306 SCRA 70 (1999)

(4) Description of place to be seized

Paper Industries Corporation of the Philippinesv. Asuncion, supra

d. Property that may be seized Rule 126, sec. 3

e. Form and content of warrant; Lifetime Rule 126, secs. 1, 6, 10

Bache v. Ruiz, 37 SCRA 823 (1971)

Mustang Lumber v. CA, 257 SCRA 430 (1996)

f. Validity of warrant

People v. Estrada, 296 SCRA 383 (1998)

People v. CA, supra

2. Warrantless

a. Search incident to lawful arrest Rule 126, sec. 13

Cf.

U.S. v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259 (1990)

Padilla v. CA, 269 SCRA 402 (1997)

People v. Chua Ho San, 308 SCRA 432 (1999)

Office of the Court Administrator v. Barron, 297

SCRA 376 (1998) Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752 (1969)

Nolasco v. Pano, 147 SCRA 509 (1987)

Cf.

Nolasco v. Pano, 139 SCRA 152 (1985)

Posadas v. CA, 188 SCRA 288 (1990)

Malacat v. CA, 283 SCRA 159 (1997)

b. Consented search

People v. Malasigui, 63 Phil. 221 (1936)

10

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

11/31

Alvarez v. CFI, 64 Phil. 48 (1937)

11

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

12/31

But Cf.(1) Peaceful submission not consent to search

Garcia v. Locsin, 65 Phil. 689 (1938)

(2) Effect of voluntary surrender

People v. Agbot, 106 SCRA 325 (1981)

(3) Effect of posting bail Rule 126, sec. 14

Cf. Rule 114, sec. 26

c. Stop and frisk, automobile roadblocks, and other less intrusivesearches

Terry v. Ohio, supra

Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648 (1979)

Caballes v. CA, 373 SCRA 221 (2002)

Valmonte v. De Villa, 178 SCRA 211 (1989)

Manalili v. CA, 280 SCRA 400 (1997)

Malacat v. CA, 283 SCRA 159 (1998)

People v. Laserna, 278 SCRA 564 (1997)

d. Moving vehicles/Hot pursuit

Caroll v. US,267 U.S. 132 (1925) Papa v. Mago, 22 SCRA 857 (1968)

Almeida-Sanchez v. U.S., 413 U.S. 266 (1973)

Caballes v. CA, supra

Asuncion v. CA, 302 SCRA 490 (1999)

Roldan v. Arca, 65 SCRA 336 (1975)

People v. Lo Ho Wing, 193 SCRA 277 (1995)

People v. Balingan, 241 SCRA 277 (1995)

Obra v. CA, 317 SCRA 594 (1999)

e. In Plain View

Harris v. U.S. 390 U.S. 234 (1966)

Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 472(1971)

Roan v. Gonzales, supra

People v. Musa, 217 SCRA 597 (1993)

People v. Doria, supra

People v. Bolasa, 321 SCRA 459 (1999)

f. Private searches

12

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

13/31

People v. Marti, supra

Waterous Drug Corporation v. NLRC, 280SCRA 735 (1997)

g. Extraordinary circumstances

People v. De Garcia, 233 SCRA 716 (1994)

II. Procedure for Service of Warrant; Post-Service Procedure

A. Service of Warrant

1. Time of search Rule 126, sec. 9

2. Two-witness rule Rule 126, sec. 8

People v. Gesmundo, 219 SCRA 743 (1993)

3. Breaking of door or window to effect search Rule 126, sec. 7

B. Post-Service Procedure

People v. Gesmundo, supra

1. Issuance of receipt Rule 126, sec. 11

People v. Lacbanes, 270 SCRA 193 (1997)

2. Delivery of property and inventory; return and proceedings on thereturn Rule 126, sec. 12

People v. Gesmundo, supra

III. Remedies Against Unreasonable Search and Seizure

A. Motion to Quash Search Warrant or Suppress Evidence Rule 126,sec. 14; RA 8493, sec. 2(d); Cf. Rule 118, sec. 2(d)

Stonehill v. Diokno, supra

Bache v. Ruiz, supra

Rakes v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128 (1978)

Paper Industries Corporation of the Philippines v. Asuncion,supra

B. Return of Property Illegally Seized

Uy Kheytin v. Villarieal, 42 Phil. 892 (1920)

Magoncia v. Palacio, 80 Phil. 170 (1948) Collector v. Villaruz, 71 SCRA 356 (1976)

13

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

14/31

Mata v. Bayona, 128 SCRA 388 (1984)

C. Criminal Liability and Civil Damages RPC, Arts. 128, 129, 130, 206

MHP Garments v. CA, 236 SCRA 227 (1994)

PART IIPROCECUTION PHASE

RULE 112 Preliminary Investigation and Inquest

Pertinent Pleadings/Legal Documents:

(1) Complaint-Affidavit(2) Counter-Affidavit(3) Resolution(4) Motion for Preliminary Investigation(5) Motion for Reinvestigation

I. Definition, Nature, and Purpose

A. Nature and views

PCGG v. Desierto, 397 SCRA 171 (2003)

Baytan v. COMELEC, 396 SCRA 703 (2003)

Ladlad v. Velasco, 523 SCRA 318 (2007)

B. Definition; when required Rule 112, sec. 1; DOJ-NPS Manual, PartIII, secs. 1, 2, 3, 7; RJCL, secs. 13, 8

Hashim v. Boncan, 71 Phil. 216 (1941)

Tandoc v. Resultan, 175 SCRA 37 (1989)

Doromal v. Sandiganbayan, 177 SCRA 354 (1989)

Cojuangco v. Sandiganbayan, 190 SCRA 226 (1990)

Webb v. De Leon, 247 SCRA 652 (1995)

C. Persons authorized to conduct Rule 112, sec. 2; DOJ-NPS Manual,sec. 6; RA 6770, secs. 11 (4)(a), 15

Velasco v. Casaclang, 294 SCRA 396 (1998)

Balgos v. Sandiganbayan, 176 SCRA 287 (1989)

D. Scope

Paderanga v. Drilon, 196 SCRA 86 (1991)

II. Procedure in Cases Where Preliminary Investigation Required

14

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

15/31

A. In cases cognizable by RTC

1. Conducted by prosecutor Rule 112, secs. 3, 4, 6, 8; RJCL, sec.13

Rodil v. Garcia, 104 SCRA 362 (1981) Allado v. Diokno, supra

2. Conducted by MTC Judge Rule 112, secs. 3, 5, 6, 8; RJCL, sec.13

B. In cases cognizable by MTC

1. Conducted by prosecutor Rule 112, secs. 1 [par. 2], 3, 4, 6, 8;RJCL, sec. 13

2. Conducted by MTC Judge Rule 112, secs. 3, 5, 6, 8; RJCL, sec.13

C. In cases cognizable by Sandiganbayan

1. Conducted by prosecutor or MTC Judge Rule 112, secs. 3, 4, 5, 8

2. Conducted by Ombudsman/Special Prosecutor RA 6770;Administrative Order No. 07; Rule II, secs. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7

III. Procedure in Cases Not Requiring a Preliminary Investigation

A. MTC cases or those covered by summary procedure Rule 112, sec.9

B. When person lawfully arrested without warrant Rule 112, sec. 7; DOJDept. Order No. 61 (21 September 1993) [New Rules on Inquest];RPC, Art. 125; RJCL, sec. 8

IV. Remedies from Preliminary Investigation

A. Appeal DOJ Dept. Order 70 (3 July 2000) [2000 NPS Rule on

Appeal]; Cf. DOJ-NPS Manual, Part IV (Petition for Review)

Dimatullac v. Villon, 297 SCRA 679 (1998)

B. Reinvestigaiton/Preliminary Investigation

Crespo v. Mogul, 151 SCRA 462 (1987)

Roberts v. CA, 254 SCRA 307 (1996)

Dungog v. CA, 159 SCRA 145 (1988)

Velasquez v. Undersecretary of Justice, 182 SCRA 388 (1990)

People v. Beriales, 70 SCRA 361 (1976)

15

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

16/31

Cf. Effects of absence of or irregularity in preliminary investigation

Socrates v. Sandiganbayan, 253 SCRA 773 (1996)

People v. Nitcha, 240 SCRA 283 (1995)

C. Injunction and writs of restraint in proper cases

Primicias v. Pangasinan, 93 SCRA 462 (1979)

Hernandez v. Albano, 19 SCRA 95 (1967)

Guingona Jr. v. City Fiscal, 137 SCRA 597 (1985)

D. Bail Rule 114, sec. 26; DOJ-NPS Manual, Part V, secs. 1-13

Go v. CA, 206 SCRA 138 (1992)

Larraaga v. CA, 287 SCRA 581 (1998)

RULE 110, 111, 127 Prosecutionof Criminal and Civil Aspects of Offense,

with Application for Provisional Remedies

Pertinent Forms:

(1) Complaint(2) Information(3) Authority to Appear as Private Prosecutor


(1) Motion for Suspension of Criminal Action(2) Reservation of Civil Action(3) Entry of Appearance as Private Prosecutor

I. Nature of Liability Arising from Criminal Act

A. Criminal RPC, Arts. 100-113

B. Civil Civil Code, Arts. 29, 32, 33, 34, 2176

Secretary of Justice v. Lantion, 322 SCRA 160 (2000)

II. Institution of Actions Arising from Crime

A. Criminal Aspect

1. Generally Rule 110, sec. 1; RJCL, sec. 11

2. Venue and jurisdiction BP 129 (as amended), secs. 20, 32; Rule110, sec. 15; RJCL, sec. 14

16

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

17/31

People v. Lagon, 185 SCRA 442 (1990)

Malaloan v. CA, 232 SCRA 249 (1994)

3. The complaint/information Generally, Rule 110, secs. 2, 3, 4;

DOJ-NPS Manual, Part III, sec. 8

4. Person prosecuting criminal action; intervention of offended party Rule 110, secs. 5 9as amended by SC AM No. 02-2-07-SC, 10 April2002), 16; JJWA, secs. 32, 33

People v. Beriales, 76 SCRA 42 (1977)

Republic v. Sunga, 162 SCRA 191 (1988)

People v. Ocapan, 150 SCRA 607 (1987)

People v. Ilarde, 125 SCRA 607 (1987)

People v. Madali, 349 SCRA 104 (2001)

Cf.

Crespo v. Mogul, supra

Roberts v. CA, supra

Cf. also Non-retroactivity of removal of complaint requirementin Rape

People v. Galigao, 395 SCRA 195 (2003) G.R. Nos.140961-63, 14 January 2003

5. Form and content

a. Procedural

(1) Name of accused and offended party Rule 110, secs. 7, 12

People v. Guevarra, 179 SCRA 740 (1989)

(2) Designation of offense Rule 110, secs. 8; DOJ-NPSManual, Part III, sec. 40

People v. Purisima, 86 SCRA 542 (1978)

People v. Buayaban, 400 SCRA 48 (2003)

People v. Delim, 396 SCRA 386 (2003), G.R. No.142773, 28 January 2003

People v. Fernandez, 414 SCRA 84 (2003)

People v. Masapol, 417 SCRA 371 (2003)

(3) Format amendment

People v. Degamo, 402 SCRA 133 (2003)

Villaflor v. Viver, 349 SCRA 194 (2001)

17

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

18/31

b. Substantive

(1) Single offense Rule 110, sec. 13

People v. Fernandez, 183 SCRA 511 (1990)

People v. Lopez, 312 SCRA 684 (1999)

(2) Cause of accusation Rule 110, sec. 9

People v. Chan Toco, 12 Phil. 262 (1908)

Balitaan v. CFI-Batangas, 115 SCRA 729 (1982)

Matilde v. Jabson, 68 SCRA 456 (1975)

People v. Gallo, 315 SCRA 461 (1999) (Resolutiondated 29 September 1999

Vasquez v. CA, 314 SCRA 460 (1999)

People v. Llanto, 395 SCRA 473 (2003)

(3) Date, place and time of commission Rule 110, secs. 10, 11

People v. Lizada, 396 SCRA 62 (2003)

People v. Ladrillo, 320 SCRA 61 (1999)

People v. Losano, 310 SCRA 707 (1999)

U.S. v. Javier Dichao, 27 Phil. 421 (1914)

People v. Molero, 144 SCRA 397 I1986)

People v. Lualhati, 171 SCRA 277 (1989)

Rocaberte v. People, 193 SCRA 152 (1991)

Cf. Need not be alleged

People v. Perez, 417 SCRA 449)

6. Suspension of criminal action by reason of prejudicial question Rule 111, secs. 6, 7; DOJ-NPS Manual, Part III, secs. 23-24

Marella-Bobis v. Bobis, 336 SCRA 742 (2000)

Ark Travel Express Inc. v. Abrogar, 410 SCRA 148 (2003)

People v. Consing Jr., 395 SCRA 366 (2003)

B. Civil Aspect

1. Generally Rule 111, sec. 1; RJCL, sec. 12

2. Suspension of separate civil action Rule 111, sec. 2

Cf. Suspension by reasons of prejudicial question Rule 111,secs. 6, 7

3. Independent civil actions Rule 111, sec. 3

4. Effect of death on civil actions Rule 111, sec. 4

18

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

19/31

5. Effect of judgment in civil action on criminal action Rule 111, sec.5

19

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

20/31

III. Remedies Available

A. Amendment/substitution of Information Rule 110, sec. 14; DOJ-NPSManual, Part III, sec. 4

Teehankee v. Madayag, 140 SCRA 425 (1985) Draculan v. Donato, 140 SCRA 425 (1985)

Almeda v. Villaluz, 66 SCRA 38 (1975)

People v. CA, 121 SCRA 733 (1983)

B. Motion to Quash Rule 117; Cf. Rule 119, sec. 19

Cruz v. CA, 194 SCRA 145 (1991)RA 733 (1983)

C. Bill of Particulars Rule 116, sec. 9

D. Provisional Remedies Rule 127, secs. 1, 2; Rules 57, 58, 1997 Ruleson Civil Procedure

RULE 114 Bail


(1) Motion to Set Bail/Petition for Bail(2) Motion to Reduce Bail

I. Nature and Definition

A. Definition; Persons covered or Required to Post Bail Rule 114, secs.1, 3

Feliciano v. Pasicolan, 2 SCRA 888 (1961)

Defensor-Santiago v. Vasquez, 217 SCRA 663 (1993)

Cortes v. Catral, 279 SCRA 1 (1997)

People v. Manalo, 400 SCRA 129 (2003)

B. Nature

1. Matter of right 1987 Const., Art III, sec. 13; Rule 114, sec. 4;RJCL, secs. 15, 16, JJWA, secs. 34-37

Cf. Arraignment not pre-requisite to bail

Lavides v. CA, G.R. No. 129670, 1 February 2000

Serapio v. Sandiganbayan, 396 SCRA 443 (2003)

2. Venue and jurisdiction 1987 Const., Art III, sec. 13; Rule 114,secs. 5, 6, 7, 8, 24; RJCL, sec. 17

20

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

21/31

Teehankee v. Director of Prisons, 76 Phil. 756 (1946)

People v. San Diego, 26 SCRA 522 (1988)

Ocampo v. Bernabe, 77 Phil. 55 (1946)

Siazon v. Judge, 4 SCRA 184 (1971)

Mamolo Narisima, 252 SCRA 613 (1995)

Cf. Duties of judge

Cortes v. Catral, 279 SCRA 1 (1997)

People v. Tuppal, 395 SCRA 72 (2003)

See also Interim bail

Enrile v. Perez, supra

II. Types and Conditions of Bail

A. Corporate Surety Rule 114, secs. 1, 2, 10, 13, 21, 22

B. Cash Deposit Rule 114, secs. 1, 2, 14, 21

C. Property Rule 144, secs. 1, 2, 11, 12, 13, 21, 22

D. Recognizance Rule 114, secs. 1, 2, 15, 16; RJCL, secs. 6(1), 15;JJWA, secs. 4(p), 35

III. Amount of Bail; When Not Required

A. Guidelines Rule 114, sec. 9

Dela Camara v. Enage, 41 SCRA 1 (1971)

Villaseor v. Albano, 21 SCRA 321 (1967)

B. When Not Required or Reduced Rule 114, secs. 16, 20; RA 6036

IV. Forfeiture and Cancellation of Bail; Remedies for Violation of BailConditions Rule 114, secs. 21, 22, 23

RULE 117 Motion to Quash


(1) Motion to quash Information(2) Motion to Quash Search Warrant

I. Nature and Grounds Rule 117, sec. 3; DOJ-NPS Manual, Part XA. No Offense Charged Rule 110, secs. 6-9

21

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

22/31

People v. Asuncion, 161 SCRA 490 (1988)B. No Jurisdiction over Offense or Person

Lopez v. City Judge, 18 SCRA 616 (1966)

Uy v. CA, 276 SCRA 371 (1977)

C. No Authority to File Information Rule 110, secs. 3-5; DOJ-NPSManual, Part III, sec. 48

D. Does Not Conform to Prescribed Form Rule 110, secs. 6-8

E. More than One Offense Charged Rule 110, sec. 13

F. Extinction of Criminal Action or Liability RPC, Arts. 89-90

G. Double Jeopardy 1987 Const., Art. III, sec. 21; Rule 117, secs. 3(h),5, 7

II. Period of Filing; Effects of Failure to file Motion and Effects ofSustaining the Motion to Quash

A. Period of Filing Rule 117, secs. 1, 8

B. Effects of Sustaining the Motion Rule 117, secs. 5, 6

C. Failure to Motion to Quash or Allege any Ground Therefor Rule 117,sec. 9

III. Provisional Dismissal Rule 117, sec. 8

People v. Lacson, 382 SCRA 365 (2002)



Condrada v. People, 398 SCRA 482 (2003)

RULE 116-118 Arraignment, Plea and Pre-Trial


(1) Motion for Bill of Particulars(2) Motion for Production and Inspection of Documents(3) Motion to Suspend Arraignment

I. Arraignment

A. Nature and Purpose Rule 116, sec. 1(a), (b), (e); DOJ-NPS Manual,Part VII

22

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

23/31

People v. Alicando, 251 SCRA 293 (1995)

People v. Estomaca, 256 SCRA 421 (1996)B. Procedure; Appointment of Counsel de Oficio 1987 Const., Art. III,

sec. 11; Rule 116, secs. 1(a), (f), (g), 6-8; RA 8493, sec. 7, par. 2

C. Pre-arraignment Procedure and Remedies

1. Attachment of PI record, raffle and transmittal of records SC AMNo. 03-1-09-SC, Part B1

2. Motion for Bill of Particulars Rule 116, sec. 9

People v. Gutierrez, 91 Phil. 876 (1952)

People v. Abad Santos, 76 Phil. 744 (1946)

People v. Arlegui, 128 SCRA 556 (1984)

3. Motion for Production and Inspection of Material Evidence inPossession of the Prosecution Rule 116 sec. 10

People v. Roldan, 99 SCRA 422 (1980)

People v. Palacios, 108 Phil. 220 (1960)

4. Suspension of arraignment Rule 116, sec. 11; Rule 111, secs. 6,7; DOJ Dept. Order No. 70 (Series of 2000)

5. Diversion Program for juveniles in Conflict with the Law RJCL,

secs. 19-25

II. Plea

A. Nature and purpose; Procedure Rule 116, sec. 1(a) to (g); RJCL,sec. 27; SC AM No. 03-1-09-SC, Part B(2), (3), (4); DOJ-NPS Manual,Part VII

B. Types of Plea

1. Not guilty

a. Denial; presumption of innocense 1987 Const., Art III, sec.14(2)

People v. Alba, 305 SCRA 811 (1999)

b. Refusal to enter plea; conditional plea Rule 116, sec. 1(c

People v. Strong, 63 SCRA 113 (1975)

Uy v. CA, 276 SCRA 371 (1977)

c. Plea of guilt but with exculpatory evidence Rule 116, sec. 1(d)

23

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

24/31

24

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

25/31

d. Withdrawal of improvident pleas of guilt Rule 116, sec. 5

People v. De Ocampo Gonzaga, 127 SCRA 158 (1984)

2. Guilty

a. To a lesser offense [plea bargain] Rule 116 sec. 2; Rule 118,sec. 1(a); SC AM No. 03-1-09-SC, Part B(5)

People v. Villarama, 210 SCRA 246 (1992)

People v. Mamarion, 412 SCRA 438 (2003)

b. Plea of guilty to non-capital offense Rule 118, sec. 4

c. Plea of guilty to capital offense RA 9346; Rule 116, sec. 3

People v. Sevillano, 305 SCRA 519 (1999)

People v. Lakindanum, 304 SCRA 429 (1999)

People v. Alicando, supra

People v. Serna, 130 SCRA 550 (1984)

People v. Tiongson, 130 SCRA 614 (1984)

People v. Camay, 152 SCRA 401 (1987)

d. Effect of improvident plea

People v. Molina, 372 SCRA 378 (2001), G.R. No.

141129-33, 14 December 2001

III. Pre-Trial

A. Nature and purpose Rule 118, sec. 1; SC AM No. 03-1-09-SC, partB(5), (6); RJCL, sec. 28; JJWA, secs. 23-31; DOJ-NPS Manual, PartVIII

B. Matters Covered by Pre-Trial; Effects of Pre-Trial Agreement and Pre-Trial Rule 118, secs. 1, 2, 4; SC AM No. 03-1-09-SC, Part B(7), (8),(9), (10)

People v. Abelita, 210 SCRA 446 (1992)

People v. Uy, 327 SCRA 335 (2000)

C. Effect of Non-appearance Rule 118, sec. 3

Fule v. CA, 162 SCRA 446 (1988)

25

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

26/31

RULE 119 Trial

I. Order and Procedure

A. Notice of Trial; Speedy and Continuous Trial Rule 119, secs. 1-6, 8-

10; RJCL, sec. 29

Cf. RA 8493, sec. 7 [par. 2]; DOJ-NPS Manual, Part IX

See also (1) Public Defenders Duty Where Accused is DetentionPrisoner Rule 119, sec. 7

(2) Appointment of Acting Prosecutor Rule 119, sec. 20

B. Order of Trial

1. Generally Rule 119, secs. 11, 21; DOJ-NPS Manual, Part IX,secs. 4, 12, 15, 16, 17

2. Trial of Several Accused; Discharge of Accused to be State Witness Rule 119, secs. 16, 17, 18; RA 6981; PD 1732 (13 October 1980)

People v. Ocimar, 212 SCRA 711 (1992)

People v. Ramirez, 169 SCRA 711 (1989)

People v. Moreno, 208 SCRA 86 (1992)

3. Consolidation of Trials of Related Offenses Rule 119, sec. 22

C. Examination of Witnesses Outside or In advance of Trial

1. Witnesses for the prosecution Rule 119, secs. 14, 15

2. Witnesses for the Accused Rule 119, secs. 12, 13, 14

D. Examination of Child Witnesses

1. Child Witness Rule (CWR), secs. 8-27, 31 (c)

2. Demurrer to the Evidence Rule 119, sec. 23

Ocampo v. CA, 180 SCRA 27 (1989)

Onas v. Sandiganbayan, 178 SCRA 261 (1989)

26

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

27/31

PART IIISENTENCING PHASE

RULE 120 Judgment

I. Definition and Form Rule 120, sec. 1

People v. Lizada, supra

People v. Pablo, 98 SCRA 289 (1980)

People v. Escober, 157 SCRA 541 (1988)

People v. Toling, 91 SCRA 382 (1979)

II. Types of Judgments and Remedies Against Such Judgment

A. Acquittal Rule 120, sec. 2 [par. 2]; 1987 Const., Art. III, sec. 21; Rule117, secs. 2(h), 7; Rule 65, sec. 1, 1997 Rules on Civil Procedure

Galman v. Sandiganbayan, 144 SCRA 43 (1986)

Manahan v. CA, 350 SCRA 387 (2001)

B. Conviction Rule 120, sec. 2 [par. 1]; 121-125; Rule 119, sec. 24

1. Judgment for two or more offenses Rule 120, sec. 3

2. Judgment in case of variance between allegation and proof, Rule

120, sec. 4

People v. Guevarra, 179 SCRA 740 (1989)

Sayson v. People, 166 SCRA 680 (1988)

Vino v. People, 178 SCRA 626 (1989)

3. Guidelines for judging juveniles in conflict with the law RJCL, sec.20

III. Promulgation, Modification and Finality of Judgment

A. Promulgation Rule 120, sec. 6; RJCL, sec. 31

B. Modification Rule 120, sec. 7; Rule 119, sec. 24; Cf. Rule 121

C. Finality of Judgment Rule 120, sec. 8, 7 [second sentence] (in deathpenalty cases

27

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

28/31

PART IVPOST SENTENCING

RULES 121, 122, 123, 124 and 125

Post Judgment Remedies

Pertinent Pleadings:(1) Notice of Appeal(2) Special Civil Action for Certiorari (Rle 65)(3) Appeal on Certiorari (Rules 42, 43, 45)(4) Motion for New Trial(5) Motion for Reconsideration

I. Remedies From a Judgment of Acquittal Rule 65, 1997 Rules on CivilProcedure; 1987 Const., Art. III, sec. 21

Dimatulac v. Villon, 297 SCRA 679 (1998)

Galman v. Sandiganbayan, 144 SCRA 43 (1986)

II. Remedies from a Judgment of Conviction

A. Before Finality of Judgment

1. Motion for New Trial Rule 121, secs. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6; Rule 124, secs.14, 15

People v. Almendars, 401 SCRA 555 (2003)

People v. Datu, 397 SCRA 695 (2003)

People v. Ebias, 342 SCRA 675 (2000)

People v. Alicando, supra

People v. Del Mundo, 262 SCRA 266 (1996)

Agulto v. CA, 181 SCRA 80 (1990)

Alegre v. Reyes, 161 SCRA 226 (1988)

Valdez v. Aquilizan, 133 SCRA 150 (1984)

People v. Amparado, 156 SCRA 712 (1987)

2. Motion for Reconsideration Rule 121, secs. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6; Rule 124,sec. 16

People v. Enriquez, 90 Phil. 423 (1951)

3. Reopening Rule 119, sec. 24

28

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

29/31

Sir, justice has prevailed,said the young defense attorney to hisboss. APPEAL at once!, instructed the latter.

-- Author unknown

4. Appeal

a. Generally Rule 122, secs. 1, 2, 3, 6, 9; Rule 123, 124, 125

People v. Molina, supra

b. Specific procedures on appeal

(1) Death penalty cases Rule 122, secs. 3, 10 and Rule 124,sec. 12, 13 (as amended by SC A.M. No. 00-5-03 [15

October 2004]),Amendments to the Revised Rules ofCriminal Procedure to Govern death Penalty Cases); Cf. RA9346; Rule 125

(2) Appeal by any of several accused Rule 122, sec. 11

(3) Withdrawal of appeal Rule 122, sec. 12; PD 968 (asamended), sec. 4

(4) Even split or no majority in Supreme Court Rule 125, sec.

3

People v. Saliling, 249 SCRA 185 (1995)

(5) Effects of death of accused pending appeal

Villegas v. CA, 271 SCRA 148 (1997)

B. After finality of Judgment

Echegaray v. Secretary of Justice, 301 SCRA 96 (1999)

People v. Parazo, 272 SCRA 512 (1997) People v. Gallo, supra

C. Effect of Failure to Appeal a Patently Wrong Judgment

People v. Barro Sr., 338 SCRA 312 (2000)

29

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

30/31

PART VTHE ANTI-TERRORISM LAW

(Republic Act No. 9372 (6 March 2007)

I. Preliminaries

A. Short Title sec. 1

B. Declaration of Policy sec. 2

II. Definitions and Consequences

A. Terrorism and Conspirary to Commit Terrorism secs. 3-6

1. Surveillance of suspects and interception and recording ofcommunications secs. 7-9, 11-15, 16

2. Effective period of judicial authorization sec. 10

3. Evidentiary value of Deposited Materials sec. 15

B. Proscription of Organizations, Associations or Group of Persons sec.17

1. Period of detention without judicial warrant of arrest sec. 18

2. Period of detention in the event of an actual or imminent terroristattack sec. 19

6. Procedure sec. 23

C. Rights of a person under custodial detention secs. 21, 24; Cf. RA7438

E. Effect on the Right to Bail sec. 26

F. Inquiry into Financial Information; Seizure and Sequestration secs.

30-35, 39-41, 44

G. Penalties and Damages secs. 20, 22, 25, 36, 38, 42,46, 47, 50

H. Oversight

1. Anti-Terrorism Council secs. 53-54

2. Commission on Human Rights sec. 55

3. Grievance Committee sec. 56

4. Joint Oversight Committee sec. 59

30

8/3/2019 CRIM PRO, AY 09-10

31/31

I. Others

1. Immunity sec. 45

2. Double Jeopardy sec. 49

3. Recording name of informant sec. 51

7. Applicability of RPC sec. 528. Ban on extraordinary rendition sec. 57

9. Extra-territorial application sec. 58

10.Separability and repealing secs. 60, 61

11.Special effectivity clause sec. 62

REMINDERS:

1. Cases must be read in the original.2. Voluntary recitation is encouraged. The professor however reservesthe right to call on students for recitation.3. The 20% rule on absences will be strictly observed. Three times oftardiness will be considered absent. All those who come between 15 to 30minutes after the class will be marked late; after 30 mins, absent.4. A student who is absent and is called gets a 5.0 for the session.5. No make-up examination will be given.

REQUIREMENTS:

Recitation - 25%Reflection Paper on the

Field Observation - 15%Mid-Term Examination - 30%Final Examination - 30%

31