-
CRIMINAL PROCEDURERule 110 PROSECUTION of Offenses1. General
Rule: MTC and RTC courts gain jurisdiction over the offense upon
the filing of complaint by a complainant or an information by the
prosecuting officer Court gains jurisdiction over the person of the
accused upon arrest or surrender; such jurisdiction once gained
cannot be lost even if accused escapes (Gimenez vs. Nazareno)
Jurisdiction of the court over the offense is determined at the
time of the institution of the action and is retained even if the
penalty for the offense is later lowered or raised (People vs.
Lagon)2. Complaint sworn written statement charging a person with
an offense, subscribed by the offended party, any peace officer or
other public official charged with the enforcement of the law
violatedInformation accusation in writing charging a person with an
offense, subscribed by the fiscal and filed with the court3.
Complaint and Information distinguished:Complaint InformationA
sworn statement Need not be sworn toSubscribed by the offended
party, any peace officer or other officer charged with the
enforcement of the law violated
Subscribed to by the fiscal
May be filed either with the court or in the fiscals office
generally to commence the preliminary investigation of the charges
made
Filed with the court
4. Cases where civil courts of equal rank are vested with
concurrent jurisdiction:
1. Features stated in Art. 2, RPC Cognizable by proper court in
which charge is first filed
1. Continuing crimes committed in different judicial regions2.
Offenses wherein any of the essential elements were committed
in
different territorial jurisdictions
-
3. Offenses committed aboard a train, vehicle, aircraft or
vessel (see R110, 15)
i. Railroad, train, aircraft(1) Territory or municipality where
vehicle passed(2) Place of departure(3) Place of arrivalii.
Vessel(1) First port of entry(2) Thru which it passed during
voyagee. Libel and written defamation5. Remedies of offended party
when fiscal unreasonably refuses to file an information or include
a person therein as an accused
1. In case of grave abuse of discretion, action for mandamus2.
Lodge a new complaint against the offenders3. Take up matter with
the Secretary of Justice4. Institute administrative charges against
the erring fiscal5. File criminal charges under Art. 208, RPC
(prosecution of offenses)6. File civil action under Art. 27, NCC
for damages (PO refuses or
neglects to perform official duty)7. Secure appointment of
another fiscal8. Institute another criminal action if no double
jeopardy is involved
6. Writs of injunction or prohibition to restrain a criminal
prosecution are not available, EXCEPT
1. To afford adequate protection to constitutional rights of
accused2. Necessary for the orderly administration of justice or to
avoid
oppression or multiplicity of actions3. Pre-judicial question
which is sub judice4. Acts of the officer are without or in excess
of authority5. Prosecution is under an invalid law, ordinance or
regulation6. Double jeopardy is clearly apparent7. Court has no
jurisdiction over the case
-
8. Case of persecution rather than prosecution9. Charges are
manifestly false and motivated by lust for vengeance10.Clearly no
prima facie case against the accused and MTQ on that
ground had been denied7. Institution of Criminal Actions:a. In
RTC: By filing a complaint with the appropriate officer for the
purpose of conducting requisite preliminary investigation
therein.b. In Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial
Courts: By filing the complaint or information directly with said
courts, or a complaint with the fiscals officec. In Metropolitan
Trial Courts By filing the complaint ONLY with the office of the
fiscal In all 3 above cases, such institution shall interrupt the
period of prescription of the offense charged (Rule 110, 1)d.
Offenses subject to summary procedure[i.e. (1) violation of traffic
laws; (2) violation of rental laws; (3) violation of municipal or
city ordinances; and (4) criminal cases where the penalty does not
exceed 6 months or fine of P1000 or both, irrespective of other
imposable penalties and civil liabilities] The complaint or
information shall be filed directly in court without need of a
prior preliminary examination or preliminary investigation.
Zaldivia vs. Reyes since a criminal case covered by the Rules of
Summary Procedure shall be deemed commenced only when it is filed
in court, then the running of the prescriptive period shall be
halted on the date the case is actually filed in court and not on
any date before that. Reodica vs. CA [clarifies Zaldivia above]
Under Art. 91 of the RPC, the period of prescription shall be
interrupted by the filing of the complaint or information. It does
not distinguish whether the complaint is filed for preliminary
examination or investigation only, or for an action on the merits.
Thus, the filing of the complaint even with the fiscals office
should suspend the running of the Statute of Limitations. The
ruling in Zaldivia is not applicable to all cases subject to the
Rules on Summary Procedure, since that particular case involved a
violation of an ordinance. Therefore,
-
the applicable law therein was not Art. 91 of the RPC, but Act
No. 3326 (An Act to Establish Periods of Prescription for
Violations Penalized by Special Acts and Municipal Ordinances and
to Provide when Prescription Shall Begin to Run), 2 of which
provides that period of prescription is suspended only when
judicial proceedings are instituted against the guilty party.8.
Contents of informationa. Name of the accused Information may be
amended as to the name of the accused, but such amendment cannot be
questioned for the first time on appeal (People vs. Guevarra) Error
of name of the offended party: if material to the case, it
necessarily affects the identification of the act charged.
Conviction for robbery cannot be sustained if there is a variance
between the allegation and the proof as to the ownership of the
property stolen.b. Designation of offense by statute (or of
section/subsection of statute violated) Only one offense charged,
EXCEPT where law prescribes a single punishment for various
offenses. If facts do not completely allege all the elements of the
crime charged, the info may be quashed; however, the prosecution is
allowed to amend the info to include the necessary facts (People
vs. Purisima)c. Acts or omissions complained of constituting the
offense Information need only allege facts, not include all the
evidence which may be used to prove such facts (Balitaan vs. CFI)d.
Name of offended partye. Approximate time of commission
Approximation of time is sufficient; amendment as to time is only a
formal amendment; no need to dismiss case (People vs. Molero) A
significant discrepancy in the time alleged cannot be sustained
since such would allow the prosecution to prove an offense
distantly removed from the alleged date, thus substantially
impairing the rights of the accused to be informed of the charges
against him (People vs. Reyes)f. Place of commission
-
Conviction may be had even if it appears that the crime was
committed not at the place alleged, provided that the place of
actual commission was within the courts jurisdiction and accused
was not surprised by the variance between the proof and the
information Qualifying and inherent aggravating circumstances need
to be alleged as they are integral parts of the crime. If proved,
but not alleged, become only generic aggravating circumstances.9.
Amendment of information and Substitution of information,
distinguishedAmendment SubstitutionInvolves either formal or
substantial changes
Necessarily involves a substantial change
Without leave of court if before plea
Needs leave of court as original information has to be
dismissed
Where only as to form, there is no need for another preliminary
investigation and retaking of plea of accused
Another preliminary investigation is entailed and accused has to
plead anew
Refers to the same offense charged or which necessarily includes
or is necessarily included in original charges, hence, substantial
amendments to info after plea taken cannot be made over objections
of accused for if original info is withdrawn, accused could invoke
double jeopardy
Requires or presupposes that new info involves a different
offense which does not include or is not included in the original
charge, hence, accused cannot claim double jeopardy
10. After plea, amendment only as to matters of form, provided1.
Leave of court is obtained; and2. Amendment is not prejudicial to
rights of accused
11. When amendment is only as to form1. Neither affects or
alters nature of offense charged2. Charge does not deprive accused
of a fair opportunity to present his
defense
-
3. Does not involve a change in basic theory of prosecution12.
Exceptions to rule on venue
1. Felonies in Art. 2, RPC (cognizable by proper court in which
charge is first filed)
2. Continuing offenses3. Piracy which is triable anywhere4.
Libel (residence; or where first published)5. In exceptional cases,
to ensure fair trial and impartial inquiry
13. Special cases (who may prosecute)a. Adultery and concubinage
Only offended spouse can be complainant Both guilty parties must be
included in complaintb. Crimes against chastity With consent of the
offended party, offended spouse, grandparents, guardian, or state
as parens patriae, in that order Offended party, even if minor, has
right to initiate the prosecution of the case independently of
parents, grandparents or guardian, unless she is
incompetent/incapable on grounds other than minority. If offended
party who is a minor fails to file the complaint, her parents,
grandparents or guardian may do so. In crimes against chastity, the
consent of the victim is a jurisdictional requirementretraction
renders the information void (People vs. Ocapan) If complexed with
a public crime, the provincial fiscal may sign the complaint on his
ownc. Defamation (consisting of imputation of offenses in [a] or
[b]) Complainant must be offended party The offended party may
intervene in the prosecution of the criminal case because of her
interest in it (Banal vs. Tadeo)14. Procedure
1. Complaint filed in MTC or info filed in RTC where an
essential ingredient of the crime took place (territorial
jurisdiction)
-
1. Amendment as a matter of right before plea2. Amendment upon
discretion of the court after plea
Inclusion of other accused is only a formal amendment which
would not be prejudicial to the accused and should be allowed
(People vs. CA)d. After plea and before judgment, if it appears
there was a mistake in charging proper offense, court shall dismiss
original info upon the filing of a corrected one, provided that the
accused will not be placed in double jeopardy (substitution) Fiscal
determines direction of prosecution; complainant must ask fiscal if
he wants to dismiss the case; the motion to dismiss must be
addressed to the court which has discretion over the disposition of
the case (Republic vs. Sunga) Objection to the amendment of an
information or complaint must be raised at the time the amendment
is made; otherwise, deemed to have consented thereto.15. Remediesa.
Motion to quash May be filed after arraignment but before plea on
the grounds provided by the rules (generally, a flaw in the info)
If duplicity of offense charged is not raised in trial through a
motion to quash info, the right to question it is waived (People
vs. Ocapan)b. Motion to dismiss May be filed after plea but before
judgment on most of grounds for motion to quash16. Duplicity of
Offense (in information or complaint) Defined as the joinder of
separate and distinct offenses in one and the same
information/complaint Remedy: file a motion to quash; failure is
equivalent to a waiver Exception: when existing laws prescribe a
single punishment (complex crimes)Rule 111 Prosecution of Civil
Action1. General Rule: The injured party may file a civil action
independent of the criminal proceeding to recover damages from the
offender.
-
Article 32 is a valid cause of a civil action for damages
against public officers who impair the Constitutional rights of
citizens (Aberca vs. Ver) Even if the private prosecutor
participates in the prosecution, if he is not given the chance to
prove damages, the offended party is not barred from filing a
separate civil action2. Civil action for recovery of civil
liability impliedly instituted, EXCEPT
1. Waiver2. Reservation of right to institute separate action3.
Institution of civil action prior to criminal action
NOTE: Under SC Circular 57-97, all criminal actions for
violations of BP Blg. 22 shall be deemed to necessarily include the
corresponding civil action, and no reservation to file such civil
action separately shall be allowed or recognized. San Ildefonso
Lines vs. CA past pronouncements of the SC that the requirement in
Rule 111 that a reservation be made prior to the institution of an
independent civil action is an unauthorized amendment to
substantive law is now no longer controlling. Far from altering
substantive rights, the primary purpose of the reservation
requirement is to avoid multiplicity of suits, to prevent delays,
to clear congested dockets, to simplify the work of the trial
court, and in short, the attainment of justice with the least
expense and vexation to parties-litigants.3. Civil action suspended
when criminal action filed, EXCEPT
1. Independent civil action (Arts. 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of NCC)2.
Prejudicial civil action3. Civil case consolidated with criminal
action4. Civil action not one intended to enforce civil liability
arising from the
offense (e.g., action for legal separation against a spouse who
committed concubinage)
4. Prejudicial question arises when1. The civil action involves
an issue similar or intimately related to the
issue raised in the criminal action2. The resolution of such
issue will determine whether the criminal
action will proceed or not
-
Requisites for a prejudicial question:1. The civil action
involves an issue similar or intimately related to the
issue raised in the criminal action: and2. The resolution of
such issue determines whether or not the criminal
action may proceed Petition for suspension of criminal action is
to be filed at any time before prosecution rests.5. Remediesa.
Reservation of right to institute separate civil proceedings to
recover civil liability arising from crime Must be made before
prosecution presents evidence Action instituted only after final
judgment in criminal actionb. Petition to suspend the criminal
action May be filed upon existence of a prejudicial question in a
pending civil action Filed at any time before the prosecution
rests6. Extinction of penal action does not carry with it
extinction of the civil unless the extinction proceeds from a
declaration in a final judgment that the fact from which the civil
might arise did not exist. Final judgment in civil absolving
defendant from civil liability not a bar to criminal action7.
Filing fees:
1. Actual or compensatory damages filing fees not required2.
Moral, temperate and exemplary filing fees required1. If alleged,
fees must be paid by offended party upon filing of
complaint or information 1. If not alleged, filing fees
considered a first lien on the judgment
Rule 112 Preliminary Investigation1. Preliminary investigation
inquiry or proceeding to determine if there is sufficient ground to
engender a well-founded belief that a crime cognizable by the RTC
has been committed, and that the respondent is probably guilty
thereof, and should be held for trial
-
A preliminary investigation is only necessary for an information
to be filed with the RTC; complaints may be filed with the MTC
without need of an information, which is merely recommendatory
(Tandoc vs. Resultan) Absence of a preliminary investigation is NOT
a ground for a motion to quash the information; an information
filed without a preliminary investigation is defective but not
fatal; in its absence, the accused may ask for one; it is the
fiscals refusal to conduct a preliminary investigation when the
accused demands one which is a violation of the rights of the
accused (Doromal vs. Sandiganbayan). Court should not dismiss the
info, but hold the case in abeyance and either: (1) conduct its own
investigation; or (2) require the fiscal to hold a
reinvestigation.2. GENERAL RULE: The fiscal conducts the
preliminary investigation before filing an information with the
RTC, EXCEPT where the accused is lawfully arrested without a
warrant and an inquest is conducted.3. Right to Preliminary
Investigation A personal right and may be waived Waived by failure
to invoke the right prior to or at least at the time of the plea4.
Who conducts Preliminary Investigation
1. Provincial or city fiscals and their assistants2. Judges of
MTC and MCTC3. National and regional state prosecutors4. Such other
officers as may be authorized by law5. Duly authorized legal
officers of COMELEC
1. The Ombudsman2. The PCGG, in cases of ill-gotten wealth
5. Procedurea. If conducted prior to arresti. Complainant files
complaint with(a) Provincial or city fiscal(b) Regional or state
prosecutor(c) MTC or MCTC judge, excluding MTC judge of Metro
Manila or chartered
-
cities(d) Other offices authorized by law
1. Investigating officer either dismisses complaint or asks by
subpoena complainant and respondent to submit affidavits and
counter-affidavits
1. If the investigating officer finds prima facie evidence, he
prepares an information and a resolution
i.e., if fiscal finds reasonable ground to believe that a crime
has been committed and accused is probably guilty thereof Prima
facie evidence is that evidence which, standing alone, unexplained
and uncontradicted, would be enough to merit a conviction of the
accusediv. Otherwise, he recommends the dismissal of the complaint
If the investigating officer is an MTC judge, and he finds that
probable cause exists and that there is a need to place the accused
under custody, then he may issue a warrant of arrest Flores vs.
Sumaling What differentiates the present rule from the previous one
is that while before, it was mandatory for the investigating judge
to issue a warrant for the arrest of the accused if he found
probable cause, the rule now is that the investigating judges 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. It is therefore error for the
investigating judge to order the issuance of a warrant of arrest
solely on his finding of probable cause, without making any finding
of a necessity to place the accused in immediate custody to prevent
a frustration of justice.
1. Investigating officer forwards records to the city fiscal or
chief state prosecutor
1. City fiscal or state prosecutor either dismisses the
complaint or files the information in court
Decision prevails over decision of the MTC judgevii. Records
will not form records of the case proper Court on its own or on
motion may order production of recordb. If conducted after
warrantless arrest
1. If accused waives Art. 125, RPC and asks for a
preliminary
-
investigation, with the assistance of counsel, then the
procedure for one prior to arrest is followed
1. Inquest conducted as follows(a) Fiscal determines the
validity of the arrest(b) Fiscal determines existence of prima
facie evidence based on the statements of the complainant,
arresting officer and witnesses(c) Fiscal either dismisses the
complaint and orders the immediate release of the accused, OR
prepares and files an information While fiscal has quasi-judicial
discretion whether or not to file an information, once it is filed
with the court, the court acquires jurisdiction giving it
discretion over the disposition of the case and the Sec. of Justice
should refrain from entertaining petitions for review or appeals
from the decision of fiscal (Crespo vs. Mogul; Velasquez vs.
Undersecretary of Justice )NOTE: Information may be filed by
offended party, peace officer or fiscal without preliminary
investigation.6. Remediesa. Motion for preliminary investigation
Filed when accused is arrested without warrant Must be with
assistance of counsel and after waiving Art. 125, RPCb. Motion for
preliminary investigation Filed within 5 days after accused learns
an information against him has been filed without a preliminary
investigationc. Motion for re-investigationd. Appeal to DOJ Filed
upon denial of his motion for a preliminary investigation, on the
ground that his rights to due process of law were violated, ousting
the court of jurisdictione. Petition for prohibition Filed with
appellate court to stop the criminal proceedings Ordinarily,
injunction will not lie but may be granted in certain cases When
prohibition proper to restrain criminal proceedings:
-
1. When strong-arm tactics are used for vindictive purposes
(Salonga vs. Cruz-Pano)
2. When the accused is deprived of his rights3. When the statute
on which the charge is based is null and void4. When it will aid
the administration of justice (Tatad vs.
Sandiganbayan)5. When multiplicity of suits will be avoided
(Guingona vs. City Fiscal)
Rule 113 Arrest1. Arrest taking a person into custody in order
that he may be bound to answer for the commission of some offense,
made by an actual restraint of the person or by his submission to
custody2. General Rule: No person may be arrested without a
warrant. Not all persons detained are arrested; only those detained
to answer for an offense. Invitations are not arrests and are
usually not unconstitutional, but in some cases may be taken as
commands (Babst vs. NBI); however, the practice of issuing an
invitation to a person who is investigated in connection with an
offense he is suspected to have committed is considered as placing
him under custodial investigation. (RA 7438) Warrants of arrest
remain valid until arrest is effected, or the warrant is lifted
Arrest may be made at any time of the day or night3. Warrantless
arrests by a peace officer or a private persona. When person to be
arrested is committing, attempting or has committed an offenseb.
When an offense has just been committed and the person making the
arrest has personal knowledge that the person to be arrested
committed it Warrantless arrest anytime for a continuing offense
like rebellion, subversion (Umil vs. Ramos) The continuing crime,
not the crime finally charged, needs only be the cause of the
arrest (Umil vs. Ramos)c. When person to be arrested is an escaped
detainee (either serving sentence or with case pending)
-
1. When a person lawfully arrested escapes2. Bondsman, for
purpose of surrendering the accused3. Accused attempts to leave
country without court permission
4. Procedurea. With warrant
1. Complainant files application with affidavits attached2.
Judge conducts ex parte preliminary examination to determine
probable cause In determining probable cause, judge must:(1)
Personally examine witness(2) Witness must be under oath(3)
Examination must be reduced to writing (Luna vs. Plaza) In
determining probable cause, the judge may rely on findings by
responsible officer (Lim vs. Felix)iii. Judge issues warrant of
arrest If without preliminary examination, considered irregular
(Bagcal vs. Villaraza)iv. If peace officer is unable to serve
warrant 10 days after issuance, he must file a report and
explanation with judge within 10 daysv. If warrant served(1) Person
informed that he is being arrested(2) Informed of cause of his
arrest(3) Officer may break door or window if admission to building
is refused(4) Person physically restrained For private citizens
making an arrest May not do so except to do some service to
humanity or justice(5) No violence or unnecessary force may be
used(6) Officer may summon assistance(7) Person who escapes after
arrest may be immediately pursuedvi. Person arrested is brought to
nearest police station or jail
-
b. Without warrant:1. Person is arrested
1. Person arrested may waive right to Art. 125, RPC and ask for
preliminary investigation or inquest
Fiscal is not judicial authority contemplated under Art. 125
(Sayo vs. Chief of Police)
1. Fiscal files info5. Requisites for a warrant of arrest:
1. Probable cause2. Signed by judge3. Specifically naming or
particularly and sufficiently describing person
to be arrested John Doe warrants are void for being general
warrants (Pangandaman vs. Cesar)6. Remediesa. Petition for writ of
habeas corpus Filed with any court, to effect immediate release of
the person detained Filed when a person is being illegally detained
(without judicial process), or was illegally arrested (void warrant
or unlawful warrantless arrest, or warrantless arrest beyond period
with no information filed) Habeas corpus is not allowed when:
1. The person is in custody of an officer under process of law,
and2. The court had jurisdiction to issue the process (Luna vs.
Plaza)
If an arrest is improper, the remedy is a motion for quashal of
the warrant of arrest and/or a motion to quash the information, not
habeas corpus (Ilagan vs. Enrile) Habeas corpus is no longer
available after an information has been filed, the information
being the judicial process required by law (Ilagan vs. Enrile)
Habeas corpus is proper when a person is being restrained
illegally, e.g., imprisoned past maximum penalty allowed by law
(Gumabon vs. Director of Prisons)b. Quashal of warrant of
arrest
-
Filed with court which issued the warrant of arrest when the
warrant of arrest is fatally flawedc. Motion to quash information
Filed with court when information against the person arrested has
been filed Must be made in a special appearance before the court
questioning only its lack of jurisdiction over the person of the
accused Otherwise, the voluntary appearance of the person arrested
by filing a motion before the court would be deemed a submission to
the authority of the court, thus granting it whatever jurisdiction
it lacked over the person Any irregularity in the arrest is cured
when the petitioner submits himself to the jurisdiction of the
court, e.g., by filing for bail (Bagcal vs. Villaraza)7. V.V.
Mendoza, Rights to Counsel in Custodial Investigation Evolution of
rights of the accused under custodial investigation
1. All involuntary confession were inadmissible; accused had to
prove involuntariness
1. Involuntary confessions were inadmissible only if they were
false
2. Revert to exclusionary rule: any involuntary confession is
inadmissible
1. Miranda rule: the accused must be informed of his rights 1.
To remain silent2. Against self-incrimination3. To counsel4.
Definition of custodial investigation questioned
1. It begins only after arrest2. Police investigations prior to
arrest are not
covered3. The rights may be waived, but the rights to be
informed of these rights, i.e., to warning, may not be
waived
4. Warning must not only be said, officer must make sure the
person arrested understands
-
them specifically5. Present rules
1. Voluntary confessions are admissible2. Test of voluntariness
determined on a
case-to-case basis3. Waiver of rights must not only be with
counsel but must be in writing Confessions made without
assistance of counsel are inadmissible as evidence to incriminate
the accused, but they may be used to impeach the credibility of the
accused, or they may be treated as verbal admission of the accused
through the testimony of the witnesses (People vs. Molas)Rule 114
Bail1. Bail security given for the release of a person in custody
of law, furnished by him or a bondsman, conditioned upon his
appearance before any court as required under the following
conditions:
1. Undertaking effective upon approval and remains in force at
all stages until promulgation of judgment, unless sooner
cancelled
2. Accused shall appear before court when required3. Failure to
appear despite notice to him or the bondsman will waive his
right to be present and trial shall proceed in absentia4.
Bondsman shall surrender accused for execution of judgment
Bail applies to all persons detained, not just to those charged
with the offense (Herras vs. Teehankee) Court has power to prohibit
person out on bail from leaving the country (Manotoc, Jr. vs. CA)
Bail implies delivery of the accused to the sureties who, though
not holding him prisoner, may seize him and imprison him until they
can deliver him to court (US vs. Bonoan)2. General Rule: All
persons are entitled to bail as a matter of right, except those
charged with capital offenses. Right to bail traditionally
unavailable to military personnel facing court martial, who are not
in the same class as civilians (Comendador vs. de Villa) Bail
should be available regardless of other circumstances or the
merits
-
of the case, if the health or the life of the detainee is in
danger (Dela Rama vs. Peoples Court) Excessive bail is tantamount
to denial of bail, which is unconstitutional (Dela Camara vs.
Enage)3. When bail is a matter of right Before or after conviction
by MTC, MCTC, MJC Before conviction by the RTC of an offense not
punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment4. When
bail is discretionary (application filed with court where case is
pending)
1. Upon conviction by RTC of an offense not punishable by death,
reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment
2. Provisional liberty under same circs. but during period to
appeal subject to consent of bondsman
3. In case he has applied for probation after final judgment, he
may be allowed temporary liberty under his bail or recognizance
5. Procedurea. Offense charged is not capital:i. Accused applies
for bail(1) Where information against him was filed or where case
is pending(2) Absent (1), in another branch of the same court
within the province or city where he is held(3) If arrested in
another province, city or municipality, file with the RTC(4) Absent
(3), with the MTC
1. Judge sets bail 1. Accused may move to reduce bail, and
hearing will be set2. Accused posts bail and deposits the same with
the
Municipal/City/Provincial Treasurer or, if cash, with the
Collector of Internal Revenue
3. Accused is releasedb. Offense charged is capital:
1. Accused petitions for bail
-
2. Judge sets hearing to determine whether evidence of guilt is
strong Ex-parte hearing on bail is arbitrary and unacceptable
(Herras vs. Teehankee)
1. Prosecution presents evidence 1. Court may not force fiscal
to produce evidence (Herras vs.
Teehankee)2. If evidence is strong, bail is denied
1. Otherwise, judge sets bail and procedure for non-capital
offense is followed
In capital crimes, judges discretion is limited to determining
strength of evidence and does not cover determining whether bail
should be allowed (Herras vs. Teehankee) Evidence must be strong
that the accused is guilty of the capital offense charged, not just
of any offense (Bernardez vs. Valera)6. Bail bond an obligation
under seal given by accused with one or more sureties and made
payable to proper officer with the condition to be void upon
performance by the accused of such acts as he may legally be
required to perform7. Recognizance
1. Obligation of record entered into before some court of
magistrate duly authorized to take it, with the condition to do
some particular act, the most usual condition in criminal cases
being the appearance of the accused for trial
2. Does not require signature of accused for trial3. Does not
require signature of accused to be valid
8. Prosecution witnesses may be required to post bail to ensure
their appearance at the trial, except:
1. Substitution of info (see R110, 14)2. Court believes that
material witness may not appear at the trial
9. When bail required under RA 6036 (violation of ordinance,
light felony, criminal offense not higher that 6 month imprisonment
and/or P2000 fine, or both)
1. a. Caught in flagrante
-
2. Confessed to commission of offense unless repudiated (force
and intimidation)
3. Previously escaped, evaded sentence or jumped bail4.
Violation of Sec. 2 (fails to report to clerk of court periodically
under
his recognizance)5. Recidivist, habitual delinquent previously
convicted for an offense to
which the law or ordinance attaches an equal or greater penalty
or for 2 or more offenses to which it attaches a lighter
penalty
6. Committed offense while on parole or under conditional
pardon7. Previously pardoned by municipal or city mayor for
violation of
ordinance for at least 2 times10. Instances when accused may be
released on recognizance:
1. Offense charged is a violation of an ordinance, a light
felony or criminal offense the imposable penalty to which does not
exceed 6 months and or P2000 fine
2. 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
3. Accused has applied for probation and before the same has
been resolved, but NO BAIL was filed or accused is incapable of
filing one
4. Youthful offender held for physical and mental examination,
trial or appeal, if unable to furnish bail
11. Cancellation of baila. Upon application with the court and
due notice to the fiscal
1. Accused surrenders back to custody 1. Accused dies
b. Automatic cancellation1. Case is dismissed
1. Accused is acquitted2. Accused is convicted and surrenders
for execution of judgment
12. When bail cancelled or denied: after RTC imposes
imprisonment exceeding 6 years, but not more than 20 years,
and:
-
1. Accused is a recidivist, quasi-recidivist, habitual
delinquent or guilty of the aggravating circumstance of
reiteration;
2. Provisionally escaped, evaded sentence, violated provisions
of bail;3. Committed offense while on probation, parole, or
conditional pardon;4. Probability of flight; or5. Undue risk that
during appeal, he may commit another crime
13. When bail is forfeiteda. Accused fails to appear before
court when required 30 days for bondsman to show cause why judgment
should not be rendered against himb. Bondsman fails to produce him
within 30 daysc. Bondsman fails to satisfactorily explain to the
court why accused did not appear when first required to do so
Sureties guarantee only appearance of the accused, not his conduct
(US vs. Bonoan) Sureties exonerated if appearance made impossible
by an act of God, the obligee or the law (US vs. Bonoan)14.
Provisional forfeiture
1. Within 30 days, produce the body or give reason for
non-production AND
2. Explain satisfactorily the absence of the accused when first
required to appear
15. Remedies1. Application for bail, when bail can be availed of
as a matter of right2. Petition for bail, when the offense charged
is a capital offense
For judge to set hearing for the determination of strength of
evidence of guilt16. Circumstances to be considered in fixing
amount of bail:
1. Financial ability of accused to give bail;2. Nature and
circumstances of offense;3. Penalty of offense charged;
-
4. Character and reputation of accused;5. Age and health of
accused6. Weight of evidence against accused7. Probability of
accused appearing for trial;8. Forfeiture of other bonds;9. Fact
that accused was a fugitive from justice when arrested;
and10.Pendency of other cases in which the accused is under
bond
17. Notes:1. Posting bail waives the right to question any
irregularity attending the
arrest of a person (Callanta vs. Villanueva). However, this does
not result in waiver of the inadmissibility of the articles seized
incidentally to such illegal arrest.
2. Accused waived the right to question any irregularity in the
conduct of the preliminary investigation when he failed to do so
before entering his plea (People vs. Dela Cerna)
3. Accused out on bail may be re-arrested if he attempts to
depart from the Philippines without prior court permission
(warrantless arrest allowed).
Rule 115 Rights of Accused1. Right of the accused under the
Rulesa. To be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond
reasonable doubt In an appeal from a conviction, the accused shall
again be presumed innocent until and unless his conviction is
affirmed (Castillo vs. Felix)b. To be informed of the nature and
cause of charges The right must be substantially complied with;
arraignment and later proceedings must be in a language the accused
understands (People vs. Crisologo)c. To be present at every stage
of proceedings, subject to waiver by bail If an accused escapes, he
waives this right and merits a trial in absentia; the accused
forfeits his rights to be notified of proceedings in the future and
to adduce evidence in his behalf (People vs. Salas)
1. To testify as witness on his own behalf, subject to
cross-examination on matters covered by direct examination; not to
be prejudiced by his
-
silence2. Not to be compelled to be a witness against himself3.
To confront and examine the witnesses against him, including
the
right to use in evidence testimony of a witness4. Who is
deceased, out of or cannot with due diligence be found in the
RP 1. Given in another proceeding2. With the same parties3. Same
subject matter4. Opportunity to cross-examine
Prosecution has no privilege to withhold the identity of
informers when such informer was crucial in the operation itself;
failure to present the informer is a denial of the right to
confront the witness which merits the reversal of the conviction
(People vs. Bagano)g. To have compulsory process to secure
witnesses and evidence in his behalfh. To have a speedy, impartial
and public trial Unreasonable postponements of trial amounts to a
denial of the right to a speedy trial, entitling the accused to
mandamus to compel dismissal of the case, or to habeas corpus if he
is detainedi. To have the right of appeal2. Rights of the accused
under the Constitutiona. To due processb. Against
self-incrimination Right is limited to testimonies; ocular
inspection of the body may be allowed (Villaflor vs. Summers) Being
informed of rights means a meaningful transmission of information,
without which confession made by the accused is inadmissible
(People vs. Nicandro) Confessions obtained through coercion are
inadmissible (People vs. Opida) Right against self-incrimination
and to counsel do not apply during
-
custodial investigation (People vs. Ayson) During trial, the
right against self-incrimination takes the following form:
1. Accused may refuse to testify2. If he testifies, he may
refuse to answer those questions which may
incriminate him in ANOTHER offensec. Against double jeopardyd.
To be heard by himself and counsel3. Double jeopardy
1. First jeopardy must have attached prior to the first2. First
jeopardy attached and terminated3. Valid complaint or
information
1. Competent court with jurisdiction2. Accused had pleaded3.
Action ended in conviction, acquittal or termination without
the
consent of the accusedc. Offense charged in later case is:
1. Same as that in previous case 1. Necessarily includes or is
included in the previous case2. An attempt or frustration of the
offense in previous case
1. An offense lesser than that charged to which the accused
pleaded guilty with the consent of the fiscal and the offended
party
4. Exceptions to double jeopardy1. The offense was made graver
by supervening events2. The facts constituting the graver offense
were only discovered after
the filing of the earlier information No double jeopardy if the
new fact which justified the new charge arose only after
arraignment and conviction (People vs. City Court) No double
jeopardy where the trial was a sham since there was no competent
court (Galman vs. Sandiganbayan) No double jeopardy if first case
was dismissed with consent of the
-
accused (Caes vs. IAC) There is double jeopardy if a person is
charged twice under different penal statutes for the same acts
(People vs. Relova)c. Plea of guilty to a lesser offense without
the consent of the fiscal and the offended party5. Remedies
1. Motion to quash2. Motion to dismiss
Both filed on the ground of violation of accuseds rights,
thereby ousting the court of jurisdiction6. NOTES: Constitution,
Art. III, Sec. 1No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or
property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied
the equal protection of the laws. Constitution, Art. III, Sec.
14
1. No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense
without due process of law.
2. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed
innocent until the contrary is proved, and shall enjoy the right to
be informed of the nature and cause of the accusations against him,
to have a speedy, impartial and public trial, to meet the witnesses
face to face, and to have compulsory process to secure the
attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence in his
behalf.
However, after arraignment, trial may proceed notwithstanding
the absence of the accused provided that he has been duly notified
and that his failure to appear is unjustifiable. Constitution, Art.
III, Sec. 16All persons shall have the right to a speedy
disposition of their cases before all judicial, quasi-judicial, or
administrative bodies. Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 17No person
shall be compelled to be a witness against himself. Constitution,
Art. III, Sec. 21No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of
punishment for the same
-
offense.If an act is punished by a law or ordinance, conviction
or acquittal under either shall constitute a bar to another
prosecution for the same act.Rule 116 Arraignment and Plea1.
Procedure
1. Court informs accused of his right to counsel and asks him if
he wants one
2. Court appoints counsel de oficio if accused has none If no
such member of the available, any person who is a resident of the
province, of good repute for probity and ability to defend
accusedc. Court gives counsel time to confer with accused at least
an hour before arraignment Period allowed for counsel de oficio to
confer with accused must be substantially complied with; if not,
case may be remanded for re-arraignment (People vs. Gonzaga)
1. Accused given a copy of the information, which is read to him
in a language he understands
2. Accused is asked whether he pleads guilty or not guilty3.
Accused files a motion to quash or makes plea4. Accused personally
makes his plea5. Plea is entered into record6. If accused makes
plea of not guilty, counsel has at least 2 days to
prepare for trial People vs. Agbayani the right for 2 days to
prepare must be expressly demanded. Only when so demanded does
denial thereof constitute reversible error and ground for new
trial. Further, such right may be waived, expressly or impliedly.
NOTE, HOWEVER, under SC Circular 38-98 (implementing Speedy Trial
Act of 1997), accused must be given at least 15 days to prepare for
trial, which shall commence within 30 days from receipt of
Pre-Trial Order.j. Case proceeds to pre-trial, trial or hearing,
depending on the plea Statement in the judgment that the accused
was arraigned and pleaded is sufficient; the manner of statement of
such fact is immaterial (People vs.
-
Cariaga)2. Kinds of plea
1. No plea a plea of not guilty shall be entered2. Conditional
plea of guilt a plea of not guilty shall be entered3. Not guilty
case proceeds to trial or pre-trial4. Guilty to a lesser offense if
fiscal and offended party consents,
conviction under offense charged for purposes of double
jeopardy5. Info may be amended
1. Case goes to trial2. Even if info is not amended, and even if
lesser offense is not
included in offense charged, court may still find the accused
guilty of that lesser offense
e. Guilty to a capital offense Court conducts searching inquiry
to determine if accused was aware of the charges, of his plea, and
its consequences Court requires prosecution to present evidence to
prove guilt of accused and determine his degree of culpability, and
accused may still establish presence of mitigating circumstances in
his favorf. Guilty to a non-capital offense Court receives evidence
from the parties to determine penalty to impose Plea of guilty not
necessarily followed by conviction. Upon receipt of exculpatory
evidence (if accused pleaded guilty), trial court should consider
the plea withdrawn and in its place, order the plea of not guilty
Plea of guilty waives only defects which may be taken advantage of
by motion to quash or by plea in abatement; cannot cure
jurisdictional defects.3. Effectsa. Entry of plea will waive
1. Right to question illegality of the arrest2. Right to
question any irregularity in the preliminary investigation3. Right
to file a motion to quash
b. Improvident plea of guilty may be changed to not guilty any
time before judgment is rendered
-
c. A plea of not guilty may not be changed to guilty, as doing
so would only spare the prosecution of presenting evidence and
still result in the conviction of the accused.4. Remediesa. Motion
for specification May be filed any time before plea, even after a
MTQ Filed when the information is insufficient in form or is
generally worded, that a Bill of Particulars is necessary to
clarify the acts for which the accused is being chargedb. Motion to
quash May be filed at anytime before plea is entered Based on
grounds provided by the rulesc. Motion to suspend arraignment Filed
when the accused seems mentally unsound or if there is a
prejudicial question in a pending civil cased. Motion to withdraw
an improvident plea of guilt May be filed at any time before
judgment of conviction becomes final, when it can be shown that the
accused was not aware of the significance of pleading guilty to the
chargesRule 117 Motion to Quash1. Motion to quash a hypothetical
admission that even if all the facts alleged were true, the accused
still cannot be convicted due to other reasons2. When to file
Motion to QuashGeneral Rule: Before entering plea; all grounds not
raised deemed waivedException: The following grounds may be used in
MTQ even after plea
1. No offense charged2. Lack of jurisdiction over the offense
charged3. Extinction of the offense or of the penalty4. Double
jeopardy
3. Grounds
-
a. Information does not conform to prescribed form For the info
to charge a complex crime, it is not necessary that it be defined
by law, only that it alleges that one offense was necessary to
commit the other (People vs. Alagao)b. Court has no
jurisdiction
1. No territorial jurisdiction2. No jurisdiction over offense
charged may be raised at any time;
no waiver considered even upon failure to move to quash on such
ground
3. No jurisdiction over person of the accused The court gained
jurisdiction over the person of the accused when he voluntarily
appeared for the pre-suspension hearing (Layosa vs. Rodriguez)c.
Accused would be put in double jeopardy Bars another prosecution No
waiver No double jeopardy if first case was dismissed with the
consent of the accused (Que vs. Cosico), unless ground for
dismissal is: (a) denial of right to speedy trial; or (b)
insufficiency of evidence. If the first case was dismissed due to a
deficient information, then there was no valid information and
there could be no double jeopardy (Caniza vs. People) Cudia vs CA
it should be the Provincial Prosecutor of Pampanga, not the City
Prosecutor, who should prepare informations for offenses committed
within Pampanga but outside Angeles City. An information must be
prepared and presented by the prosecuting attorney or someone
authorized by law. If not, the court does not acquire jurisdiction.
Although failure to file a motion to quash the information is a
waiver of all objections to it insofar as formal objections to
pleadings are concerned, questions relating to want of jurisdiction
may be raised at any stage of the proceedings. Moreover, since the
complaint or information was insufficient because it was so
defective in form or substance that conviction upon it could not
have been sustained, its dismissal without the consent of the
accused cannot be pleaded as prior jeopardy, and will not be a bar
to a second prosecution.
-
d. More than one offense was charged, EXCEPT where law
prescribes single punishment for various offensese. Facts alleged
do not constitute an offense May be raised at any time No waiver
For charge to be complete, it is necessary to state that it was
exempted from any amnesty existing at the timef. Criminal action or
liability has been extinguishedg. Information contains allegations
which, if true, would be a legal excuse or justificationh. Officer
who filed the information had no authority Presentation of evidence
cannot cure an invalid information (People vs. Asuncion)NOTE: Court
will consider no other grounds other than those raised, EXCEPT lack
of jurisdiction over offense charged.4. Requisites of Double
jeopardya. Valid information or complaint, sufficient in form and
substanceb. Before court of competent jurisdiction Doctrine of
Jurisdiction by Estoppel: depends upon whether the lower court
actually had jurisdiction or not. If it had no jurisdiction, but
the case was tried and decided upon the theory that it had
jurisdiction, the parties are not barred on appeal, from assailing
such jurisdiction, for the same must exist as a matter of law, and
may not be conferred by consent of the parties or by estoppel.
However, if the lower court had jurisdiction, and the case was
heard and decided upon a given theory, such, for instance, as that
the court had no jurisdiction, the party who induced it to adopt
such theory will not be permitted, on appeal, to assume an
inconsistent position that the lower court had jurisdiction. Here,
the principle of estoppel applies. The rule that jurisdiction is
conferred by law, and does not depend upon the will of the parties,
has no bearing thereon.c. Accused had pleadedd. Conviction,
acquittal, or dismissal or termination of case without consent of
accusede. Bar to offense charged, attempt to commit the same or
necessarily
-
includes or is necessarily included Conviction for physical
injuries through reckless imprudence constitutes double jeopardy to
the charge of damage to property through reckless imprudence.5.
Procedure
1. MTQ filed2. If based on defect in info which can be cured,
court shall order its
amendment3. Quashing the info shall NOT be a bar to subsequent
prosecution
(accused has not pleaded yet), EXCEPT when the ground is: 1.
Double jeopardy OR2. Extinction of criminal liability
6. Remedies1. Motion to dismiss if certain grounds were not
raised or denied in a
MTQ2. Trial
If there was really no basis for the info, then such could be
proved in the trial Upon denial of a MTQ, the proper remedy is to
go on trial and later to appeal, if necessary; mandamus or
certiorari will only be granted if there is not other plain, simple
and adequate remedy7. Failure to move to quash or to allege any
ground therefor deemed a waiver of such grounds, except:
1. Failure to charge an offense2. Lack of jurisdiction over the
offense charged3. Extinction of the offense or of the penalty4.
Double jeopardy
Rule 118 Pre-Trial1. Plea bargaining process whereby the accused
and the prosecution in a criminal case work out a mutually
satisfactory disposition of the case subject to court approval. It
usually involves the defendants pleading guilty to a lesser offense
or to only some of the counts of a multi-count
-
indictment in return for a lighter sentence than that for the
greater charge. Under Speedy Trial Act of 1997, in all criminal
cases cognizable by the MTC, MCTC, MeTC, RTC and Sandiganbayan,
pretrial is mandatory. Under SC Circular 38-98, implementing the
Speedy Trial Act of 1997, an accused may plea guilty to a lesser
offense only if said offense is necessarily included in the offense
charged.2. Stipulation of facts Facts which both parties and
respective counsels agree on as evidenced by their signatures;
these facts need not be proved by evidence in trial Stipulation is
inadmissible if unsigned by either accused or counsel; a later memo
of confirmation, signed only by counsel, cannot cure defect (Fule
vs. CA)3. Pre-trial order binds the parties, limits the trial to
matters not yet disposed of, and controls the course of action
during the trial4. Procedure
1. Judge must calendar pre-trial2. Either party may waive the
pre-trial3. If court appoints counsel de oficio, counsel has at
least 2 days to
prepare4. In the pre-trial conference5. Plea bargaining6.
Stipulation of facts7. Marking of evidence (does not imply
conceding to its admissibility or
credibility)8. Waiver of objections to admissibility of
evidence9. Other matters which will promote a fair and expeditious
trial
e. Judge issues pre-trial orderRule 119 Trial1. In trial, the
defense tries
1. To assail the admissibility of evidence which prove the
elements of the offense charged
2. To assail the credibility of such evidence
-
3. To prove another version, possibly admitting certain evidence
of the prosecution and adding other evidence to cast reasonable
doubt
Even in summary procedure, the judge cannot base his decision
simply on affidavits; he must give the defendant the chance to
cross-examine (Combate vs. San Jose)2. Procedurea. Parties notified
of date of trial 2 days before trial date (R119, 1) HOWEVER, under
SC Circular 38-98, accused must be given at least 15 days to
prepare for trial, which shall commence within 30 days from receipt
of Pre-Trial Order.
1. Accused may move that his witnesses be examined2. Defense
witnesses examined by any judge or lawyer3. Prosecution witnesses,
if they would be unable to attend trial, may be
examined by the judge handling the case4. Trial continues from
day to day, unless postponed for a just cause5. Prosecution
presents evidence
Presentation Testimonies: direct examination Cross-examination
Re-cross Offer
1. Accused may move for discharge2. Prosecution rests3. Defense
may, with or without leave of court, file a demurrer to
evidence4. Defense presents evidence5. Defense rests6.
Prosecution presents rebuttal evidence7. Defense presents rebuttal
evidence8. Trial is closed; case is submitted for judgment
3. When mistake made in charging proper offense
-
1. If Accused cannot be convicted of offense charged or offense
necessarily included therein
2. Accused detained, not discharged3. Original case dismissed
upon filing of proper information
Example: Charged with theft. At trial, appears that offense is
estafa. The prosecution can ask for the dismissal of the info in
order to file a new one for estafa. No Double Jeopardy because no
valid info in the first case.4. Application for examination of
witnesses for accused before trial
1. Sick or infirm; unable to attend trial2. Resides more than
100 km. from means of trial; no means to attend
5. Application (prosecution)1. Sick or infirm2. Has to leave the
RP with indefinite date of returning
6. Requisites for postponement due to absence of a witness1.
Witness is really material and appears to the court to be so2.
Party who applies for postponement has not been guilty of neglect3.
Witness can be had at the time to which the trial has been
deferred4. No similar evidence could be obtained
7. Requisites to discharge of an accused as State Witness1.
Testimony of accused absolutely needed2. No other direct evidence
available EXCEPT his testimony3. Testimony can be corroborated on
material points4. Accused does not appear to be most guilty5.
Accused has never been convicted of offense involving moral
turpitude Discharge of accused, when not all the requisites were
met, cannot be revoked as long as he testified according to what
was expected of him (People vs. Aninon)8. Remediesa. Motion for
separate trials Filed by the fiscal to try several accused
separately
-
Granted at the courts discretion May also be ordered by the
court motu propriob. Motion to consolidate Upon the courts
discretion, separate charges may be tried in one single case if the
offenses charged arise form the same facts or form part of a series
of similar offenses Court allowed consolidation of rape cases
substantially committed in the same manner (People vs. David)c.
Motion for continuance filed to postpone trial for just caused.
Motion to exclude public Excluding parties, counsels and court
personnel May also be ordered by court motu proprioe. Motion for
discharge Filed before the prosecution rests Hearing to determine
existence of requisites for discharge Prosecution will present
evidence and the sworn statement of the proposed state witness
Evidence adduced in this said hearing automatically form part of
trial; however, if court denies motion for discharge, his sworn
statement shall be inadmissible in evidence. Discharge of the
accused has the effect of acquittal, unless accused fails or
refuses to testify against his co-accused in accordance with his
statement (which formed the basis for his discharge)f. Demurrer to
evidence May be made after the prosecution rests its case If the
court finds the prosecutions evidence insufficient, the case will
be dismissed Otherwise, if demurrer denied
1. If the demurrer was made with leave of court, defense gets to
present evidence
2. If the demurrer was made without leave of court, defense is
deemed to have waived the right to present evidence and the case
is
-
submitted for judgment Case may also be dismissed motu propriog.
Motion to reopen Filed after the case is submitted for judgment but
before judgment is actually rendered To allow either side to
present additional evidence, if such could not be found before
Granted on discretion of the judge The accused cannot move to
reopen the case to allow him to adduce evidence in his behalf when
his failure to adduce them during the trial was his own fault
(People vs. Cruz)Rule 120 Judgment1. Judgment adjudication by the
court that the accused is guilty or not guilty of the offense
charged, and the imposition of the proper penalty and civil
liability provided by law on the accused2. General Rule: If the
accused is found not guilty, he will be acquitted and the acquittal
immediately becomes final and executory. If the accused is found
guilty, penalty and civil liability will be imposed on him.3.
Accused may be convicted of
1. The offense charged2. A lesser offense necessarily included
in the offense charged
Accused cannot be convicted for an offense graver than that
charged (People vs. Guevarra)4. Contents
1. Written in official language2. Personally prepared and signed
by the judge3. Contains facts proved4. Contains law upon which
judgment is based
In case of conviction, judgment must state:1. Legal
qualification of offense and aggravating and mitigating
circumstances2. Level of participation
-
3. Penalty imposed4. Civil liability for damages, unless right
to separate civil action has
been reserved In case of acquittal, judgment must state:
1. Civil liability for damages, unless acts alleged clearly did
not exist2. Basis of liability
5. Procedure1. Judge reads judgment in presence of accused2. If
judgment is of acquittal3. It becomes final and executory4. It bars
subsequent prosecution for the same offense
c. If judgment is of conviction, remedy is to file:1. Motion for
reconsideration2. Motion for new trial3. Notice of appeal
Or else, judgment becomes final and is entered in the book of
Judgments6. When judgment in a criminal case becomes final:
1. After lapse of period for perfecting an appeal; or2. When
sentence partially or totally satisfied or served; or3. Accused has
expressly waived in writing his right to appeal, EXCEPT
in cases of automatic review where death penalty is imposed4.
Accused has applied for probation
7. Only a judgment in conviction can be modified or set aside1.
Before judgment had been final (otherwise double jeopardy);2.
Before appeal had been perfected; or3. To correct clerical errors
in the judgment
8. Remediesa. Appeal Filed within 15 days of promulgation of
judgment Period is interrupted by filing of a motion for new trial
or reconsideration
-
On motion of accused or at its own instance with consent of the
accusedb. Motion for reconsideration Filed when there are errors of
law or fact in the judgment Shall require no further proceedings
Notice should be given to the fiscalc. Motion for new trial Notice
should be given to the fiscal Filed on the following grounds:
1. Error of law or irregularities have been made during trial
which are prejudicial to the substantial rights of the accused
ii. New evidence has been found which could not have been found
before and which could change the judgment9. Procedure for new
trial
1. Hearing shall be set and held2. All evidence not alleged to
be in error shall stand3. New evidence will be introduced4. Old
judgment may be set aside and a new one rendered
10. Notes: Suspension of sentence for youthful offenders after
conviction, minor is committed to custody and care of DSWD or any
training institution until reaches 21 years of age, or a shorter
period Probation disposition under which a defendant after
conviction and sentences, is released subject to conditions imposed
by the court and to the supervision of a probation officer Parole
the conditional release of an offender from a penal or correctional
institution after he has served the minimum period of his prison
sentence under the continued custody of the state and under
conditions that permit his reincarceration if he violated the
conditions of his releaseRule 121 New Trial or Reconsideration1.
Reopening of the case
1. Made by the court before judgment is rendered in the exercise
of
-
sound discretion2. Does not require consent of accused3. May be
made at the instance of either party who can thereafter
present additional evidence2. Motion for new trial
1. Filed after judgment is rendered but before the finality
thereof2. At the instance or with the consent of the accused3. The
prosecution can move only for the reconsideration of the
judgment but cannot present additional evidence3. Motion for New
Trial is denied if:
1. Only impeaching evidence is sought to be introduced as the
court had already passed upon issue of credibility
2. Only corroborative evidence is offered3. Prisoner admits
commission of crime with which accused is charged
(facility with which such confession can be obtained and
fabricated)4. Alleged new evidence is inherently improbable and
could easily be
concocted5. Alleged new evidence consists of recantations of
prosecution
witness, due to unreliability of such recantations, EXCEPT if no
other evidence to sustain conviction aside from recanted
testimony
4. New Trial vs. Reconsideration Motion for recon is based on
the grounds of errors of law in the judgment is court is not asked
to reopen the case for further proceedings, but to reconsider its
findings or conclusions of law and make them conformable to the law
applicable to the case on the judgment the court has to render
anew.5. New Trial vs. Modification of Judgment In New Trial,
irregularities are expunged from the record and/or new evidence is
introduced. In modification of judgment, no new hearings or
proceedings of any kind or change in the record or evidence. A
simple modification is made on the basis of what is on the
record.6. New Trial vs. Reopening of the Case New trial presupposes
that existence of a judgment to be set aside upon
-
the granting of a new trial In reopening, no judgment has yet
been rendered, although the hearing may have already been closed7.
Motion for Reconsideration Grounds are errors of law or fact in
judgment, which require no further proceedings.8. Effects of
Granting Motion for New Trial or Reconsiderationa. Based on error
of law or irregularities during trial: Proceedings and evidence not
affected by irregularities stand, and those affected are set aside.
Court may allow introduction of new evidenceb. Based on newly
discovered evidence: Evidence already taken shall stand; new
evidence taken with the oldRule 122 Appeal1. Procedurea. Filed with
RTC, if original case was with MTC Notice served to lower court and
to adverse partyb. Filed with the CA or SC, if original case was
with RTCi. With CA: notice of appeal with court, and with copy on
adverse party If CA is of opinion that penalty should be reclusion
perpetua or higher, it shall render judgment imposing said penalty,
but refrain from entering judgment and then certify the case and
the entire record thereof to the SC for review (R124, 13) CA may
reverse, affirm, or modify judgment of RTC, or remand case for new
trial or re-trial, or dismiss the case If RTC decided case in
appellate jurisdiction: Petition for Reviewii. With SC: notice of
appeal where penalty imposed is life imprisonment, or lesser
penalty involving offenses committed on the same occasion, or
arising out of same occurrence where graver penalty of death is
available but life imprisonment is imposed; all other cases, by
petition for review on certiorari If death penalty, automatic
reviewiii. Withdrawal of appeal
-
May be made at any time before judgment on the appeal is
rendered Lower court judgment becomes final Case remanded for
execution of judgment Once notice of appeal is filed, cannot be
validly withdrawn to give way for a Motion for Recon or a Motion
for New Trial, since the filing of the notice perfected the appeal,
and the trial court loses its power to modify or set aside the
judgment. The only valid withdrawal of an appeal is where the
accused decides to serve his sentence.2. Effect of appeal by any of
several accused
1. Shall not affect those who did not appeal, EXCEPT if
favorable and applicable to them
2. Civil appeal by offended party shall not affect criminal
aspect of judgment
3. Execution of judgment on appellant will be stayed upon
perfection of appeal
3. When appeal by prosecution from order of dismissal of
criminal case will not result in double jeopardy
1. Dismissal made upon motion or with express consent of the
accused2. Dismissal is not an acquittal nor based upon
consideration of the
evidence or merits of the case3. Question to be passed upon by
the appellate court is purely legal so
that if the dismissal is found incorrect, the case has to be
remanded to the court of origin to determine the guilt or innocence
of the accused
4. When serving sentence, remedy is to petition for habeas
corpus1. Filed when the law under which the accused was convicted
is
repealed or declared unconstitutional2. When a later judgment is
rendered acquitting others for similar
circumstances Otherwise, equal protection is violated
1. When penalty is lowered and convict has already served more
than the maximum period of the new penalty
Habeas corpus is available when a person is imprisoned beyond
the
-
maximum penalty imposed by law (Gumabon vs. Dir. of
Prisons)NOTE: When dismissal is capricious, certiorari lies and no
double jeopardy since validity and not correctness of dismissal is
being challenged.Rule 126 Search and Seizure 1. Search warrant an
order in writing issued in the name of the People of the
Philippines, signed by a judge and directed to a peace officer,
commanding him to search for personal property described therein
and bring it before the court Cannot be issued to look for evidence
(Uy Khetin vs. Villareal) Seizing objects to be used as evidence is
equivalent to forcing one to be a witness against himself (Uy
Khetin vs. Villareal) For a warrant to be valid, it must meet the
requirements set by law (Burgos vs. Chief of Staff) Tapping
conversations is equivalent to a search and seizure (US vs. Katz)2.
General Rule: No search or seizure can be conducted unless it is
authorized by a search warrant. Evidence gathered from an illegal
search and seizure is inadmissible. Warrantless searches are
illegal, unreasonable and unconstitutional (Alvarez vs. CFI) It is
not the police action which is impermissible, but the procedure and
unreasonable character by which it is exercised (Guazon vs. de
Villa) Court gains jurisdiction over items seized by a valid search
warrant and returned to it, and such is not an unconstitutional
deprivation of property (Villanueva vs. Querubin) Evidence from an
illegal search may be used as evidence, if no objection is raised
(Stonehill vs. Diokno) Right against unreasonable search and
seizure may be waived, but for the waiver to be effective:
1. The right must exist2. Person must be aware of the right3.
Person clearly shows the intent to relinquish such right
No waiver against unreasonable search and seizure when one
compromises the criminal proceedings (Alvarez vs. CFI)
-
There is no waiver of right when evidence of coercion is present
(Roan vs. Gonzales)3. Requisites of a valid search warranta. Issued
upon probable cause Probable cause such facts and circumstances
which would lead a reasonably prudent man to believe that a crime
has been committed and the thing to be searched for and seized is
in the place to be searchedb. Probable cause is personally
determined by the issuing judge Hence, signed by him By any RTC, to
be served anywhere in the country, for an offense which occurred
anywhere in the country (Malaloan vs. CA)c. Issuing judge
personally examined, in the form of searching questions, the
appellant and his witness and took down their written depositionsd.
Search warrant particularly describes or identifies the property to
be seized Property which men may lawfully possess may not be the
object of a search warrant (Uy Khetin vs. Villareal) Nature of
goods may allow description to be general or not too technical
(Alvarez vs. CFI)e. Particularly describes the place to be
searchedf. It shall issue only for one specific offense Otherwise,
cannot be said to have issued upon probable cause (Asian Surety vs.
Herrera) Absence of specific offense makes impossible determination
of probable cause (Stonehill vs. Diokno)g. Was not issued for more
than 10 days prior to a search made pursuant thereto (search
warrant becomes void after 10 days)h. Indicates time, if to be
served at night4. When a search warrant may be said to particularly
describe the thing to be seized
1. Description is as specific as circumstances allow2. Expresses
a conclusion of fact by which the warrant officer may be
-
guided3. Things described are limited to those which bear a
direct relation to
the offense for which the warrant is issued5. Procedurea.
Complainant files application, attaches affidavits Oath requires
that the person taking it personally knows the facts of the case
(People vs. Sy Juco ) Affidavits submitted must state that the
premises is occupied by the person against whom the warrant is
issued, that the objects to be seized are fruits or means of
committing a crime, and that they belong to the same person, thus,
not affecting third persons (People vs. Sy Juco ) When complainants
knowledge is hearsay, affidavits of witnesses are necessary
(Alvarez vs. CFI)b. Judge conducts ex parte preliminary examination
of complainant and witnesses under oath to determine probable cause
Judge must ask probing questions, not just repeat facts in the
affidavit (Roan vs. Gonzales)c. Judge issues search warrant good
for 10 daysd. Peace officer in presence of occupant, members of the
family OR 2 witnesses of sufficient age and discretion residing in
the same locality Search may last for more than a day as long as it
is part of the same search for the same purpose and of the same
place (Uy Khetin vs. Villareal)e. Peace officer leaves receipt with
occupant at place searchedf. Peace officer files return of search
warrant and inventory, and surrenders items seized to receiving
court (not necessarily court which issued the warrant) Items seized
illegally must remain in custodia legis pending resolution of the
case (Roan vs. Gonzales)6. Remedies from an unlawful search
1. MTQ the warrant2. Motion to suppress as evidence the objects
illegally taken3. Return of property illegally seized
-
7. When a search may be validly conducted without a warrant1.
Without consent of person searched2. When the search is incident to
a lawful arrest3. Personal knowledge of the arresting person
(Posadas vs. CA)4. Limited to:
(1) Immediate time of arrest(2) Immediate vicinity of the
arrest(3) Weapons and things which may be used as proof of offense
charged (Nolasco vs. Pano)iii. Subject in an offense which is mala
prohibita cannot be summarily seized (Roan vs. Gonzales)iv. May
extend beyond arrestee to include premises and surrounding under
his immediate control
1. Border searches (customs, mail and airport)2. Vessels and
aircrafts for violation of Tariff and Customs Code,
EXCEPT dwelling houses3. Plain view4. Moving vehicle5. Hot
pursuit6. Stop-and-frisk, reasonable check-points7. Private
searches with no state action (People vs. Marti)8. Inspection of
building and premises for enforcement of fire, sanitary
and building regulations8. Person making the arrest may take
from the arrestee
1. Properties used in the commission of the crime2. Fruits or
proceeds thereof3. Property which may furnish the arrestee with a
weapon against the
arresting person4. Property which may be used as evidence at the
trial
9. NOTES: Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 2
-
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, papers,
houses and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of
whatever nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and no
search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue except upon
probable cause to be determined personally by the judge after
examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the
witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing the place to
be searched and the persons or things to be seized. Constitution,
Art. III, Sec. 3
1. The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be
inviolable except upon lawful order of the court, or when public
safety or order requires otherwise as prescribed by law.
2. Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding
section shall be inadmissible for any purpose in the
proceeding.
Rule 127 Provisional Remedies in Criminal Cases1. Attachment as
provisional remedy in criminal cases
1. Accused is about to abscond from RP2. Criminal action is
based on a claim for money or property embezzled
or fraudulently misapplied or converted to the use of the
accused who is a public officer, or any officer of a corporation,
or an attorney, factor, broker, agent or clerk in a fiduciary
capacity, in willful violation of duty
3. Accused has concealed, removed or disposed of his property,
or is about to do so
4. Accused resides outside the RP