Notes in Criminal Procedure

Prepared by:
Francess A. Piloneo
JD-1A
s/y 2024-2025 First Semester
 A. General Matters

• Nature of Criminal Procedure

As discussed in the case of People v. Lacson, “The Court agrees with the respondent that
procedural laws may be applied retroactively. As applied to criminal law, procedural law
provides or regulates the steps by which one who has committed a crime is to be punished.
However, a procedural law may not be applied retroactively if to do so would work injustice or
would involve intricate problems of due process or impair the independence of the Court.”

• Criminal Due Process

In the case of Alonte v. Savellano, Jr., it is stated that “Jurisprudence acknowledges that due
process in criminal proceedings, in particular, require:

(a) That the court or tribunal trying the case is properly clothed with judicial power to hear and
determine the matter before it;
(b) That jurisdiction is lawfully acquired by it over the person of the accused;
(c) That the accused is given an opportunity to be heard; and
(d) That judgment is rendered only upon lawful hearing.

The above constitutional and jurisprudential postulates, by now elementary and deeply imbedded
in our own criminal justice system, are mandatory and indispensable.”

• Requisites for Criminal Jurisdiction

1) Jurisdiction over the Offense (subject matter)

2) Jurisdiction over the territory where the offense was committed.
3) Jurisdiction over the person of the accused.
“Jurisdiction over the subject-matter is the power to hear and determine cases of the general
class to which the proceedings in question belong (C. J. S. p. 36) and is conferred by the
sovereign authority which organizes the court and defines the court and defines its powers”
(Bernabe v. Vergara, G.R. No. L-48652)

“Subject to existing laws, in all criminal prosecutions, the action shall be instituted and tried in
the court of the municipality or territory wherein the offense was committed or any one of the
essential ingredients thereof took place”
(Fukuzume v. People, G.R. No. 143647)
Jurisdiction over the offense or over the subject matter refers to the power of a particular court to
hear, determine and decide cases of a general class to which the proceeding in question belongs.
It is conferred by law and not governed by the agreement of the parties. It remains with the court
unless a law expressly divests it of that jurisdiction.
A court has an inchoate right of jurisdiction over all crimes committed within its territorial
jurisdiction, which is perfected on the institution of the action. The change in the territorial limits
of the place may be a cause for a court to lose jurisdiction over the offense.
“Jurisdiction over the person of the accused is acquired upon his arrest or apprehension, with or
without a warrant, or his voluntary appearance or submission to the jurisdiction of the court.”
(Valdepenas v. People, G.R. No. L-20687, 30 Apr. 1966)

B. Jurisdiction in Criminal Courts

• B.P. 129, as amended

METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS, AND

MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS

Section 32. Jurisdiction of Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal
Circuit Trial Courts in criminal cases. – Except in cases falling within the exclusive original
jurisdiction of Regional Trial Courts and of the Sandiganbayan, the Metropolitan Trial Courts,
Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts shall exercise:

(1) Exclusive original jurisdiction over all violations of city or municipal ordinances
committed within their respective territorial jurisdiction; and

(2) Exclusive original jurisdiction over all offenses punishable with imprisonment not
exceeding six (6) years irrespective of the amount of fine, and regardless of other
imposable accessory or other penalties, including the civil liability arising from such
offenses or predicated thereon, irrespective of kind, nature, value, or amount
thereof: Provided, however, That in offenses involving damage to property through
criminal negligence they shall have exclusive original jurisdiction thereof. (as amended
by R.A, No. 7691)

Section 33. Jurisdiction of Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal
Circuit Trial Courts in civil cases. – Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and
Municipal Circuit Trial Courts shall exercise:

(1) Exclusive original jurisdiction over civil actions and probate proceedings, testate and
intestate, including the grant of provisional remedies in proper cases, where the value of
 the personal property, estate, or amount of the demand does not exceed One hundred
thousand pesos (P100,000.00) or, in Metro Manila where such personal property, estate,
or amount of the demand does not exceed Two hundred thousand pesos (P200,000.00)
exclusive of interest damages of whatever kind, attorney's fees, litigation expenses, and
costs, the amount of which must be specifically alleged: Provided, That where there are
several claims or causes of action between the same or different parties, embodied in the
same complaint, the amount of the demand shall be the totality of the claims in all the
causes of action, irrespective of whether the causes of action arose out of the same or
different transactions;

(2) Exclusive original jurisdiction over cases of forcible entry and unlawful detainer:
Provided, That when, in such cases, the defendant raises the question of ownership in his
pleadings and the question of possession cannot be resolved without deciding the issue of
ownership, the issue of ownership shall be resolved only to determine the issue of
possession.

(3) Exclusive original jurisdiction in all civil actions which involve title to, or possession
of, real property, or any interest therein where the assessed value of the property or
interest therein does not exceed Twenty thousand pesos (P20,000.00) or, in civil actions
in Metro Manila, where such assessed value does not exceed Fifty thousand pesos
(P50,000.00) exclusive of interest, damages of whatever kind, attorney's fees, litigation
expenses and costs: Provided, That value of such property shall be determined by the
assessed value of the adjacent lots. (as amended by R.A. No. 7691)

REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS

Section 20. Jurisdiction in criminal cases. – Regional Trial Courts shall exercise exclusive
original jurisdiction in all criminal cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court,
tribunal or body, except those now falling under the exclusive and concurrent jurisdiction of the
Sandiganbayan which shall hereafter be exclusively taken cognizance of by the latter.

COURT OF APPEALS

Section 9. Jurisdiction. – The Court of Appeals shall Exercise:

1. Original jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, habeas

corpus, and quo warranto, and auxiliary writs or processes, whether or not in aid of its
appellate jurisdiction;

2. Exclusive original jurisdiction over actions for annulment of judgements of Regional

Trial Courts; and

3. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all final judgements, resolutions, orders or awards
of Regional Trial Courts and quasi-judicial agencies, instrumentalities, boards or
commission, including the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Social Security
Commission, the Employees Compensation Commission and the Civil Service
 Commission, Except those falling within the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
in accordance with the Constitution, the Labor Code of the Philippines under Presidential
Decree No. 442, as amended, the provisions of this Act, and of subparagraph (1) of the
third paragraph and subparagraph 4 of the fourth paragraph od Section 17 of the Judiciary
Act of 1948.

The court of Appeals shall have the power to try cases and conduct hearings, receive evidence
and perform any and all acts necessary to resolve factual issues raised in cases falling within its
original and appellate jurisdiction, including the power to grant and conduct new trials or
Appeals must be continuous and must be completed within three (3) months, unless extended by
the Chief Justice. (as amended by R.A. No. 7902.)

• Art. 360, Revised Penal Code

ART. 360. Persons responsible. —The person who shall publish, exhibit or cause the
publication or exhibition of any defamation in writing or by similar means, shall be responsible
for the same.
• Section 90, RA 9165

Section 90. Jurisdiction. – The Supreme Court shall designate special courts from among the
existing Regional Trial Courts in each judicial region to exclusively try and hear cases involving
violations of this Act. The number of courts designated in each judicial region shall be based on
the population and the number of cases pending in their respective jurisdiction.

The DOJ shall designate special prosecutors to exclusively handle cases involving violations of
this Act.

The preliminary investigation of cases filed under this Act shall be terminated within a period of
thirty (30) days from the date of their filing.

When the preliminary investigation is conducted by a public prosecutor and a probable cause is
established, the corresponding information shall be filed in court within twenty-four (24) hours
from the termination of the investigation. If the preliminary investigation is conducted by a judge
and a probable cause is found to exist, the corresponding information shall be filed by the proper
prosecutor within forty-eight (48) hours from the date of receipt of the records of the case.

Trial of the case under this Section shall be finished by the court not later than sixty (60) days
from the date of the filing of the information. Decision on said cases shall be rendered within a
period of fifteen (15) days from the date of submission of the case for resolution.

• A.M. No. 03-03-03-SC

 • Sec. 5, R.A. 9160
SEC. 5. Jurisdiction of Money Laundering Cases. — The regional trial courts shall have
jurisdiction to try all cases on money laundering. Those committed by public officers and private
persons who are in conspiracy with such public officers shall be under the jurisdiction of the
Sandiganbayan.

• P.D. 1606, as amended

Section 4. Jurisdiction. The Sandiganbayan shall have jurisdiction over:

(a) Violations of Republic Act No. 3019, as amended, otherwise, known as the Anti-Graft
and Corrupt Practices Act, and Republic Act No. 1379;

(b) Crimes committed by public officers and employees including those employed in
government-owned or controlled corporations, embraced in Title VII of the Revised
Penal Code, whether simple or complexed with other crimes; and

(c) Other crimes or offenses committed by public officers or employees, including those
employed in government-owned or controlled corporations, in relation to their office.

The jurisdiction herein conferred shall be original and exclusive if the offense charged is
punishable by a penalty higher than prision correccional, or its equivalent, except as herein
provided; in other offenses, it shall be concurrent with the regular courts.

In case private individuals are charged as co-principals, accomplices or accessories with the
public officers or employees including those employed in government-owned or controlled
corporations, they shall be tried jointly with said public officers and employees.

Where an accused is tried for any of the above offenses and the evidence is insufficient to
establish the offense charged, he may nevertheless be convicted and sentenced for the offense
proved, included in that which is charged.

Any provision of law or the Rules of Court to the contrary notwithstanding, the criminal action
and the corresponding civil action for the recovery of civil liability arising from the offense
charged shall at all times be simultaneously instituted with, and jointly determined in the same
proceeding by, the Sandiganbayan, the filing of the criminal action being deemed to necessarily
carry with it the filing of the civil action, and no right to reserve the filing of such action shall be
recognized; Provided, however, that, in cases within the exclusive jurisdiction of the
Sandiganbayan, where the civil action had therefore been filed separately with a regular court but
judgment therein has not yet been rendered and the criminal case is hereafter filed with the
Sandiganbayan, said civil action shall be transferred to the Sandiganbayan for consolidation and
joint determination with the criminal action, otherwise, the criminal action may no longer be
filed with the Sandiganbayan, its exclusive jurisdiction over the same notwithstanding, but may
be filed and prosecuted only in the regular courts of competent jurisdiction; Provided, further,
that, in cases within the concurrent jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan and the regular courts,
where either the criminal or civil action is first filed with the regular courts, the corresponding
civil or criminal action, as the case may be, shall only be filed with the regular courts of
competent jurisdiction.

Excepted from the foregoing provisions, during martial law, are criminal cases against officers
and members of the armed forces in the active service.

• R.A. 6758

C. Prosecution of Offenses (Rule 110)

• Institution of Criminal Actions

Criminal actions are instituted as follows:
For offenses requiring a preliminary investigation, by filing the complaint with the proper
officer for the purpose of conducting a preliminary investigation. (Sec. 1 (a), Rule 110; Note: This
should be read with Section 1, Rule 112) The term “offenses requiring a preliminary
investigation” refer to those offenses cognizable by the Regional Trial Courts and those offenses
that are punished by at least 4 years 2 months and 1 day.
For all other offenses or those offenses that do not require preliminary investigation, by
filing the complaint or information directly with the Municipal Trial Court or with the proper
prosecution office. Note however, that for offenses committed in Manila and other chartered
cities, the criminal action shall be instituted only by filing the complaint with the proper city
prosecution office unless provided otherwise by their respective charters (Sec. 1 (b), Rule 110)
Effect of institution of the criminal action:

The institution of the criminal action in accordance with the above shall interrupt the running of
the period of prescription of the offense unless otherwise provided in special laws.

“While the State, as parens patriae, was added and vested by the 1985 Rules of Criminal
Procedure with the power to initiate the criminal action for a deceased or incapacitated victim
in the aforesaid offenses of seduction, abduction, rape and acts of lasciviousness, in default of
her parents, grandparents or guardian, such amendment did not include the crimes of adultery
and concubinage. In other words, only the offended spouse, and no other, is authorized by law to
initiate the action therefor.” (Pilapil v. Somera, G.R. No. 80116)

“Thus, the law leaves it to the option of the aggrieved spouse to seek judicial redress for the
affront committed by the erring spouse. And this, to Our mind, should be the overriding
consideration in determining the issue of whether or not the condition precedent prescribed by
said Article 344 has been complied with.” (People v. Ilarde, G.R. No. L-58595)
“Adultery, being a private offense, it cannot be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by the
offended spouse who cannot institute the criminal prosecution without including both the guilty
parties, if they are both alive, nor in any case, if he shall have consented or pardoned the
offenders.” (Donio-Teves v. Vamenta, G.R. No. L-38308)

• Control and Direction of Criminal Action

“All criminal actions commenced by complaint or information are prosecuted under the
direction and control of public prosecutors. In the prosecution of special laws, the exigencies of
public service sometimes require the designation of special prosecutors from different
government agencies to assist the public prosecutor. The designation does not, however, detract
from the public prosecutor having control and supervision over the case.” (Bureau of Customs
v. Whelan, G.R. No. 190487)

[O]nce a complaint or information is filed in Court, any disposition of the case as its dismissal
or the conviction or acquittal of the accused rests in the sound discretion of the Court. Although
the fiscal retains the direction and control of the prosecution of criminal cases even while the
case is already in Court, he cannot impose his opinion on the trial court. The Court is the best
and sole judge on what to do with the case before it. The determination of the case is within its
exclusive jurisdiction and competence. A motion to dismiss the case filed by the fiscal should be
addressed to the Court who has the option to grant or deny the same. It does not matter if this is
done before or after the arraignment of the accused or that the motion was filed after a
reinvestigation or upon instructions of the Secretary of Justice who reviewed the records of the
investigation. (Flores v. Gonzales, G.R. No. 188197)

“It is a cardinal principle that an criminal actions either commenced by complaint or by

information shall be prosecuted under the direction and control of the fiscal. The institution of a
criminal action depends upon the sound discretion of the fiscal. He may or may not file the
complaint or information, follow or not follow that presented by the offended party, according to
whether the evidence in his opinion, is sufficient or not to establish the guilt of the accused
beyond reasonable doubt.” (Crespo v. Mogul, G.R. No. L-53373)

• Sufficiently of Complaint or Information

A complaint or information is sufficient if it states the [Sec. 6, Rule 110]:

(1) Name and surname of the Accused; or any appellation or nickname by which he or she is
known or had been known;
- When an offense is committed by more than one person, all of them shall be included in the
complaint or information [Sec. 6, Rule 110]
The complaint or information must state the name and surname of the accused or any appellation
or nickname by which he has been or is known.
If his name cannot be ascertained, he must be described under a fictitious name with a statement
that his true name is unknown.
If the true name of the accused is thereafter disclosed by him or appears in some other manner to
the court, such name shall be inserted in the complaint or information and record [Sec. 7, Rule
110].

(2) Designation of the offense given by the statute;

The designation of the offense given by the statute must be stated in the complaint or information
with the averment of acts or omissions constituting the offense and the attendant qualifying and
aggravating circumstances. If there is no designation of the offense, reference shall be made to
the section or subsection of the statute punishing it. [Sec. 8, Rule 110].

(3) Acts or Omissions complained of as constituting the offense;

The acts or omissions complained of as constituting the offense and the qualifying and
aggravating circumstances must be stated:
In ordinary and concise language; and
Not necessarily in the language used in the statute; but
In terms sufficient to enable a person of common understanding to know what offense is being
charged, as well as its qualifying and aggravating circumstances [Sec. 9, Rule 110]

(4) Name of the Offended party

The name and surname of the person against whom or against whose property the offense was
committed; or
Any appellation or nickname by which such person has been or is known.

If there is no better way of identifying him, he must be described under a fictitious name.
In crimes against property, if the name of the offended party is unknown, the property must be
described with such particularity as to properly identify the offense charged.
If the true name of the person against whom or against whose property the offense was
committed is thereafter disclosed or ascertained, the court must cause such true name to be
inserted in the complaint or information and the record.
If the offended party is a juridical person, it is sufficient to state its name, or any name or
designation by which it is known or may be identified, without need of averring that it is a
juridical person. [Sec. 12, Rule 110]

(5) Approximate Date of the commission of the offense, and

General Rule: It is not necessary to state the precise date the offense was committed.
The offense may be alleged to have been committed on a date as near as possible to the actual
date of the commission.

Exception: When it is an essential element of the offense (e.g., abortion, bigamy) [Sec. 11, Rule
110].
(6) Place where the offense was committed

General Rule: The complaint or information is sufficient if it can be understood from its
allegations that the offense was committed or some of its essential ingredients occurred at some
place within the jurisdiction of the court.
Exception: If the particular place where it was committed constitutes an essential element of the
offense charged or is necessary for its identification [Sec. 10, Rule 110].

The test is whether the crime is described in intelligible terms with such particularity as to
apprise the accused, with reasonable certainty, of the offense charged.

• Substitution and Amendment of Information

Amendment
A change in either the form or substance of the same offense in the Information. It is not a new
charge; it just supersedes the original Information but relates back to the date at which the
original information was filed

Formal Amendment
A formal amendment is made when:
1. It neither affects nor alters the nature of the offense charged;
2. The charge does not deprive the accused of a fair opportunity to present his defense; or
3. It does not involve a change in the basic theory of the prosecution.

Substantial Amendment
An amendment is substantial when it covers matters involving the recital of facts constituting the
offense charged and determinative of the jurisdiction of the court.

Substitution
When it becomes manifest at any time before judgment that a mistake has been made in charging
the proper offense and the accused cannot be convicted of the offense charged or any other
offense necessarily included therein, the accused shall not be discharged if there appears good
cause to detain him.

If it appears any time before judgment that a mistake has been made in charging the proper
offense, the court shall dismiss the original complaint or information upon the filing of a new
one charging the proper offense, provided the accused shall not be placed in double jeopardy.
(Sec. 14, Rule 110, ROC, as amended)

Substitution of the information entails another preliminary investigation and plea to the new
information.

• Venue
Subject to existing laws, criminal action shall be instituted and tried in the court of the
municipality or territory where the offense was committed or any of its essential ingredients
occurred. (Sec. 15(a), Rule 110, ROC, as amended)

The venue of criminal cases is jurisdictional.

• Injunction, Prohibition and Mandamus in Criminal Actions

General Rule: In criminal prosecution and in cases under preliminary investigation or

reinvestigation, injunction will not lie to enjoin a criminal prosecution for the reason that public
interest requires that criminal acts be immediately investigated and prosecuted for the protection
of society [OCA Circular No. 79-03].
Exceptions: Specified cases among which are to prevent the strong arm of the law in an
oppressive and vindictive manner, and to afford adequate protection to constitutional rights.
1. To afford adequate protection to the constitutional rights of the accused;
2. For the orderly administration of justice
3. To avoid oppression or multiplicity of suits
4. Where there is a prejudicial question which is sub judice
5. Where acts of the officer are without or in excess of authority
6. When the prosecution is under an invalid law, ordinance or regulation
7. When double jeopardy is clearly apparent
8. When the court has no jurisdiction over the offense
9. When it is a case of persecution rather than prosecution
10. Where the charges are manifestly false and motivated by vengeance
11. Where there is no prima facie case and a motion to quash on that ground has been denied
12. To prevent the use of the strong arm of the law in an oppressive and vindictive manner
[Hernandez v. Albano, G.R. No. L-19272 (1967)]

D. Civil Aspect of a Criminal Case

General Rule: The civil action for the recovery of civil liability arising from the offense charged
is deemed instituted with the criminal action [Sec. 3, Rule 111].
Exception: When the offended party:
Waives the civil action;
Reserves the right to institute it separately before the prosecution presents its evidence;
Institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action [Sec. 1, Rule 111];

“The real parties in interest in the civil aspect of a decision are the offended party and the
accused. Hence, either the offended party or the accused may appeal the civil aspect of the
judgment despite the acquittal of the accused. The public prosecutor generally has no interest in
appealing the civil aspect of a decision acquitting the accused.” (Hun Hyung Park v. Eun Wong
Choi, G.R. No. 165496, 12 Feb. 2007)
Instances when the Reservation to file a Separate Civil Action is NOT Allowed
1. Criminal action for violation of BP 22; (Sec. 1(b), Rule 111, ROC, as amended)
2. A claim arising from an offense which is cognizable by the Sandiganbayan; and
(Herrera, 2007)
3. Tax cases. (Sec. 7(b)(1), R.A. No. 9282)

“Only the civil liability arising from the crime charged (cause of action arising from delict) as a
felony is now deemed instituted.” (Sarmiento, Jr. v. CA, G. R. No. 122502, 27 Dec. 2002)

“Recovery of civil liability under Arts. 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of the NCC may be prosecuted
separately even without reservation.” (DMPI Employees Credit Cooperative v. Velez, G.R. No.
129282, 29 Nov. 2001)

“Under Art. 89 (1) of the RPC, as amended, the death of an accused pending his appeal
extinguishes both his criminal and civil liability ex delicto. The death of Paras, thus,
extinguished his criminal liability, as well as his civil liability directly arising from and based
solely on the crime committed.” (People v. Paras, G.R. No. 192912, 03 Oct. 2014)

“When the trial court acquits the accused based on reasonable doubt, it could make a
pronouncement on the civil liability of the accused.” (Lontoc v. Jarantilla, G.R. No. 80194, 21
Mar. 1989)
“An independent civil action based on fraud initiated by the defrauded party does not raise a
prejudicial question to stop the proceedings in a pending criminal prosecution of the defendant
for estafa through falsification. This is because the result of the independent civil action, the civil
case for damages and attachment, is irrelevant to the issue of guilt or innocence of the accused.
Hence, the determination of the issue involved in the civil case for injunctive relief is irrelevant
to the guilt or innocence of the respondent in the criminal case for estafa through falsification of
public document.” (Consing v. People, G.R. No. 161075, 15 July 2013)
“The administrative case before the HLURB case raises a prejudicial question that sufficed to
suspend the criminal proceedings since the action before the HLURB was “civil in nature” and
could not be instituted elsewhere except in the HLURB whose jurisdiction over the action was
exclusive and original.” (San Miguel Properties, Inc. v. Perez, G.R. No. 166836)

Administrative cases against lawyers are sui generis. They are distinct from and may proceed
independently of criminal cases. The burden of proof in a criminal case is guilt beyond
reasonable doubt, while in an administrative case, only substantial evidence is required. Thus, a
criminal prosecution will not constitute a prejudicial question even if the same facts and
circumstances are attendant in the administrative proceedings. (Yu v. Palaña, A.C. No. 7747, 14
July 2008)
The petition to suspend can be filed only in the criminal action. The determination of the
pendency of a prejudicial question should be made at the first instance in the criminal action and
not before the Supreme Court in an appeal from the civil action. (IBP v. Atienza, G.R. No.
175241, 24 Feb. 2010)

E. Preliminary Investigation
It is an inquiry or proceeding to determine whether there is sufficient ground to engender a well-
founded belief that a crime has been committed and the respondent is probably guilty thereof and
should be held for trial. (Sec. 1, Rule 112, ROC, as amended)

Merely inquisitorial, and it is often the only means of discovering the persons who may
reasonably be charged with a crime, to enable the prosecutor to prepare his complaint or
information.
This is a substantive right. To deny the accused’s claim to a PI would be to deprive him of the
full measure of his right to due process.

Not a trial of the case on the merits” and does not place the persons against whom it is taken in
jeopardy.

Who Determines Probable Cause

- This is an executive function that the courts cannot interfere with in the absence of grave
abuse of discretion.
- A prosecutor cannot then be compelled by mandamus to file a case against an alleged criminal,
except when such prosecutor acted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction

This is NOT a constitutional right; rather, the right thereto is of statutory character and may be
invoked only when specifically created by statute. It is not a fundamental right and may be
waived expressly or by silence. (Marinas v. Siochi, G.R. Nos. L-25707)

Waiver of Right

It shall be deemed waived by:

1. Express waiver or by silence; (Herrera, 2007)
2. Failure to invoke it during arraignment; (People v. De Asis, G.R. No. 105581, 07 Dec.
1993)
3. Consenting to be arraigned and entering a plea of not guilty without invoking the right to
preliminary investigation; or (People v. Bulosan, G.R. No. 58404, 15 Apr. 1988)
4. Failure to request for it within 5 days from the time he learns of the filing of the
complaint or information, in those instances where the accused is lawfully arrested without a
warrant. (Sec. 6, Rule 112, ROC, as amended)

The right to PI is a personal right which the accused may waive either expressly or by
implication but at all times must be unequivocal. The waiver, whether express or implied, must
be in a clear and unequivocal manner. (Larranaga v. CA. G.R. No. 130644)

Mere failure of a defendant and/or his counsel to appear during PI cannot be construed as a
waiver. (Larranaga v. CA, G.R. No. 130644)

An application for or admission to bail shall not bar the accused from assailing the regularity or
questioning the absence of a PI of the charge against him provided that he raises the challenge
before entering his plea [Sec. 26, Rule 114].

The following are the specific purposes of

preliminary investigation [IPA]:
To Inquire concerning the commission of a crime and the connection of the accused with it. This
is so that: The accused may be informed of the nature and character of the crime charged against
him; and
The State may take the necessary steps to bring him to trial if there is a finding of probable
cause;

To Preserve the evidence and keep the witnesses within the control of the State; and
To determine the Amount of bail, if the offense is bailable [Callo-Claridad v. Esteban, G.R. No.
191567 (2013)].

When Preliminary Investigation is Required

General Rule: Before the filing of a complaint or information for an offense where the penalty
prescribed by law is imprisonment of at least 4 years, 2 months and 1 day without regard to the
imposable fine. (Sec. 1, Rule 112, ROC, as amended)
Exceptions:
1. Where an information or complaint is filed pursuant to Sec. 7, Rule 112 of the ROC, i.e.,
the complaint or information is filed directly in court (Sec. 1, Rule 112, ROC, as amended);
or

1. For cases requiring preliminary investigation, when a person is lawfully arrested without a
warrant provided that inquest was made in accordance with Rule 112. (Sec. 6, Rule 112,
ROC, as amended)
Who may Conduct Preliminary Investigation?

1. Provincial or City prosecutors and their assistants; (Sec. 2(a), Rule 112, ROC, as
amended)
2. National and Regional State Prosecutors; (Sec. 2(b), Rule 112, ROC, as amended)

3. Other officers as may be authorized by law, such as:

Ombudsman – for any act or omission of any public officers or employees which appears to be
illegal, unjust, improper, or inefficient which is cognizable by the Sandiganbayan; (R.A. No.
6770)

COMELEC – for all election offenses punishable by Omnibus Election Code; (Sec. 265,
Omnibus Election Code)

PCGG, with the assistance of the OSG – for ill-gotten wealth cases of former President Marcos,
his relatives, and associates; and (E.O. No. 14)

Other government agencies empowered to investigate, file, and prosecute cases investigated by
it.

Probable Cause

It is the existence of such facts and circumstances as would excite belief in a reasonable mind,
acting on the facts within the knowledge of the prosecutor, that the person charged was
prosecuted. A finding of probable cause merely binds over the suspect to stand trial. It is not a
pronouncement of guilt. (Sps. Balangauan v. CA, G.R. No. 174350, 13 Aug. 2008)

It is not only in preliminary investigation that probable cause needs to be determined. There are
other instances provided under the Rules where probable cause needs to be established:
1. When issuing a warrant of arrest or a commitment order; (Secs. 5 and 8, Rule 112, ROC,
as amended)

2. A peace officer or a private person making a warrantless arrest when an offense has just
been committed, and he has probable cause to believe based on personal knowledge of facts or
circumstances that the person to be arrested has committed it; (Sec. 5(b), Rule 113, ROC, as
amended) and

3. To determine whether a search warrant shall be issued. (Sec. 4, Rule 126, ROC, as
amended)

Quantum of Evidence
The quantum of evidence now required in PI is such evidence sufficient to “engender a well-
founded belief” as to the fact of the commission of a crime and the respondent's probable guilt
thereof. A PI is not the occasion for the full and exhaustive display of the parties’ evidence.

Executive vs. Judicial Determination of Probable Cause

Executive

definition
- One made during preliminary investigation. It is a function that properly pertains to the public prosecutor
who is given a broad discretion to determine whether probable cause exists and to charge those whom he
believes to have committed the crime as defined by law and thus should be held for trial.

What is determined
- whether there is enough evidence to support an Information being filed

Made by Who,
- Prosecutor

Purpose
- Determination of PC to hold a person for trial [Sec. 1, Rule 112, as amended by A.M. No. 05-8-
26-SC].

Standard
- Sufficient ground to engender a well-founded belief that a crime has been committed, and that
the respondent is probably guilty thereof and should be held for trial [Sec. 1, Rule 112, as
amended by A.M. No. 05-8-26-SC].

Judicial

Definition
- One made by the judge to ascertain whether a warrant of arrest should be issued against the
accused. The judge must satisfy himself that based on the evidence submitted, there is necessity
for placing the accused under custody in order not to frustrate the ends of justice. If the judge
finds no probable cause, the judge cannot be forced to issue the arrest warrant. (Reyes v. The
Honorable Ombudsman, G.R. Nos. 212593-94, 15 Mar. 2016)

What is determined
- whether a warrant of arrest should be issued.

Made by Whom
-Judge
Purpose
- Determination of PC for the arrest of the accused

Standard
- Set of facts and circumstances which would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to
believe that the offense charged in the Information or any offense included therein has been
committed by the person sought to be arrested

F. Arrest

Arrest is the taking of a person into custody in order that he may be bound to answer for the
commission of an offense.

How Arrest is made

1. By an actual restraint of a person to be arrested; or
2. By his submission to the custody of the person making the arrest. (Sec. 2, Rule 113, ROC,
as amended)

Time of Making Arrest

An arrest may be made on any day and at any time of the day or night

General Rule: No peace officer or person has the power or authority to arrest anyone without a
warrant [Umil v. Ramos, G.R. No. 81567 (1991)]

Exceptions:

In flagrante delicto cases [Sec. 5(a), Rule 113]

Hot pursuit arrest cases [Sec. 5(b), Rule 113]
Arrest of escaped prisoner [Sec. 5(c), Rule 113]

Other lawful warrantless arrests:

If a person lawfully arrested escapes or is rescued, any
person may immediately pursue or retake him without a warrant at any time and in any place
within the Philippines [Sec. 13, Rule 113]
(2) For the purpose of surrendering the accused, the bondsmen may arrest him or, upon written
authority endorsed on a certified copy of the undertaking, cause him to be arrested by a police
officer or any other person of suitable age and discretion [Sec. 23, Rule 114]
(3) An accused released on bail may be rearrested without the necessity of a warrant if he
attempts to depart from the Philippines without permission of the court where the case is pending
[Sec. 23, Rule 114]

Essential Requisites of a Valid Warrant of Arrest

1. Issued upon probable cause;
2. Probable cause is to be determined personally by the judge after examination under oath
of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce;

3. The judge must personally evaluate the report of the prosecutor and the evidence adduced
during the preliminary examination; (Soliven v. Makasiar, G.R. No. L-82585, 14 Nov. 1988)
4. The warrant must particularly describe the person to be arrested; and
5. It must be in connection with specific offense or crime.

Period of the Validity of a Warrant of Arrest

No time limit is fixed for the validity of a warrant of arrest, unlike a search warrant, which is
effective only for 10 days. (Pamaran, 2007) It remains valid until arrest is effected or the
warrant is lifted. (Manangan v. CFI, G.R. No. 82760, 30 Aug. 1990)

Objection on the Validity of the Warrant

Any objection involving a warrant of arrest or the procedure for the acquisition by the court of
jurisdiction over the person of the accused must be made before he enters his plea; otherwise,
the objection is deemed waived. An accused may be estopped from assailing the illegality of his
arrest if he fails to move for the quashing of the information against him before his arraignment.
And since the legality of an arrest affects only the jurisdiction of the court over the person of the
accused, any defect in the arrest of the accused may be deemed cured when he voluntarily
submits to the jurisdiction of the trial court. (Lapi v. People, G.R. No. 210731, 13 Feb. 2019)

Instances when Warrant of Arrest is not necessary

1. Accused is already under detention;

2. Complaint or information was filed pursuant to a valid warrantless arrest; and
3. Complaint or information is for an offense penalized by fine only. (Sec. 5(c), Rule 112, ROC,
as amended)

Instances of a Valid Warrantless Arrest

1. In flagrante delicto arrest;

2. Doctrine of hot pursuit;
3. Escapee; (Sec. 5, Rule 113, ROC, as amended) and
4. Other lawful warrantless arrests:

G. Searches and Seizures

Nature of Search Warrant

It is in the nature of a criminal process and may be invoked only in furtherance of public
prosecutions. Search warrants have no relation to civil process or trials and are not available to
individuals in the course of civil proceedings, nor for the maintenance of a mere private right. It
is interlocutory in character because it leaves something more to be done, which is the
determination of the guilt of the accused.

It is not a proceeding against a person but is solely for the discovery and to get possession of
personal property. It is a special and peculiar remedy, drastic in nature, and made necessary
because of public necessity. It resembles in some respects with what is commonly known as John
Doe proceedings. (Riano, 2019, citing Worldwide Web Corporation v. People, G.R. No. 161106,
13 Jan. 2014)

An application for a search warrant is not a criminal action. Hence, any aggrieved party may
question an order quashing the same without need for the conformity of the public prosecutor.

Search Warrant

1. An order in writing issued in the name of the People of the Philippines;

2. Signed by a judge; and
3. Directed to a peace officer, commanding him to:
a. Search for personal property described therein; and
b. Bring it before the court. (Sec. 1, Rule 126, ROC, as amended)

General Warrant

A general warrant is defined as a search or arrest warrant that is not particular as to the person to
be arrested or the property to be seized. It allows the seizure of one thing under a warrant
describing another and gives the officer executing the warrant the discretion over which items to
take.

Such discretion is abhorrent, as it makes the person, against whom the warrant is issued,
vulnerable to abuses. The Constitution guarantees our right against unreasonable searches and
seizures, and safeguards have been put in place to ensure that people and their properties are
searched only for the most compelling and lawful reasons. (Worldwide Web Corporation v.
People, G.R. No. 161106, 13 Jan. 2014)

Duration of the Validity of a Search Warrant

A search warrant shall be valid for ten (10) days from its date. Thereafter it shall be void. (Sec.
10, Rule 126, ROC)
A search warrant can be used only once, thereafter it becomes functus officio, except when the
search conducted on one day was interrupted, in which case the same may be continued under
the same warrant the following day if not beyond the 10-day period.

Requisites before a Search Warrant may be issued

1. It must be issued upon Probable cause;
2. It must be in connection with One specific offense;
3. Probable cause must be Determined by the issuing judge personally;

4. The judge must have personally Examined, in the form of searching questions and
answers, the applicant and his witnesses;

5. The search warrant must Particularly describe or identify the property to be seized as far
as the circumstances will ordinarily allow;

6. The warrant issued must Particularly describe the place to be searched and the
persons or things to be seized; and

7. The Sworn statements together with the affidavits submitted by witnesses must be
attached to the record. (Prudente v. Dayrit, G.R. No. 82870, 14 Dec. 1989)

Probable Cause
Probable cause means the existence of such facts and circumstances which would lead a
reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that:
(1) An offense has been committed; and
(2) Objects sought in connection with the offense are in the place sought to be searched [People
v. Breis., G.R. No. 205823 (2015)].

Personal Examination by Judge of the Applicant and Witness

Procedure for Judge’s Examination of the Complainant and Witnesses

(1) The examination must be personally conducted by the judge;
(2) The examination must be in the form of searching questions and answers;
(3) The complainant and the witnesses shall be examined on those facts personally known to
them;
(4) The statements must be in writing and under oath; and
(5) The sworn statements of the complainant and the witnesses, together with the affidavits
submitted, shall be attached to the record. [Sec. 5, Rule 126]

Searching Questions

A judge must ask searching questions to determine whether the application is supported by
substantial evidence that:
(1) The items sought are in fact seizable by virtue of being connected with criminal activity; and
(2) The items will be found in the place to be searched

Examination under Oath

The judge must examine under oath or affirmation the complainant and the witness he may
produce [Sec. 2, Art. III, Const.]
Oath includes any form of attestation by which a party signifies that he is bound in conscience to
perform an act faithfully and truthfully [Alvarez v. CFI, G.R. No. 45358 (1937)].
Mere affidavits of the complainant or his witnesses are not sufficient. The examining judge has
to take depositions in writing of the complaint or his witnesses, and attach the same to the record
[Prudente v. Judge Dayrit, G.R. No. 82870 (1989)].

Service of the Search Warrant

Generally, officers executing a search must do the

following acts:
1. Announce their presence;
2. Identify themselves to the accused and to the persons who rightfully have possession of the
premises to be searched;
3. Show to them the search warrant; and
4. Explain the warrant in a language or dialect known and understood by them. (People v.Huang
Zen Hua, G.R. No. 139301, 29 Sept. 2004)

Two-witnesses Rule

General Rule: Any search of a house, room, or any other premise shall be made in the presence
of:
(1) The lawful occupant thereof; or
(2) Any member of his family.

Exception: In the absence of the lawful occupant or any member of his/her family, there must be
two witnesses of sufficient age and discretion residing in the same locality.
It must be stressed that it is only upon their absence that their presence may be replaced by two
(2) persons of sufficient age and discretion residing in the same locality.

When Search Warrant Enforced

The warrant must direct that it be served in the day time, unless the affidavit asserts that the
property is on the person or in the place ordered to be searched, in which case a direction may be
inserted that it be served at any time of the day or night. Sec. 9, Rule 126, ROC

Personal Property to be Seized

What May Be Seized
(1) Personal property subject of the offense;
(2) Personal property stolen/embezzled and other proceeds/fruits of the offense;
(3) Personal property used or intended to be used as the means of committing an offense [Sec. 3,
Rule 126]

The scope of the search warrant is limited to personal property. It does not issue for seizure of
immovable properties [see Sec. 3, Rule 126]

Right to break door or window to effect search

If the officer is refused admittance to the place of directed search after giving notice of his
purpose and authority, he/she may break open:
(1) Any outer or inner door; or
(2) Window of a house; or
(3) Any part of a house; or
(4) Anything therein to execute the warrant or liberate himself or any person lawfully aiding him
when unlawfully detained therein.

Receipt for the property seized

General Rule: The officer seizing property under the warrant must give a detailed receipt for the
same to the lawful occupant of the premises in whose presence the search and seizure were made

Exception: In the absence of such occupant, the officer must leave a receipt in the place in which
he found the seized property in the presence of at least two witnesses of sufficient age and
discretion residing in the same locality.
It is settled that the signature of an accused in the receipt of property seized is inadmissible in
evidence if it was obtained without the assistance of counsel

Delivery of property and inventory thereof to court; return and proceedings thereon

Under the rule, the officer must deliver the seized property to the judge who issued the warrant.
It must be accompanied by a true inventory duly verified.

Lawful Warrantless Search

General Rule: Search of property is unreasonable unless it has been authorized by a valid search
warrant.
Exceptions:
(1) Search incidental to a lawful arrest;
(2) Consented search;
(3) Search of a moving vehicle;
(4) Checkpoint;
(5) Plain view;
(6) Stop and frisk;
(7) Customs search;
(8) Rule specific to Public Utility Searches [Yu v. Presiding Judge, G.R. No. 142848 (2006)];
(9) Airport Searches [People v. O’Cochlain, G.R. No. 229071 (2018)];
(10) Other exceptions, such as exigent circumstances.

FRUIT OF THE POISONOUS TREE

Otherwise known as the exclusionary rule or the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine, this
constitutional provision originated from Stonehill v. Diokno.

Doctrine
Evidence obtained through unlawful seizures should be excluded as evidence because it is "the
only practical means of enforcing the constitutional injunction against unreasonable searches and
seizures."

H. Bail
Bail is the security given for the release of a person in custody of the law, furnished by him or a
bondsman, to guarantee his appearance before any court as required under the conditions
prescribed under the Rules. (Sec. 1, Rule 114, ROC, as amended)

Purposes of Bail

1. To relieve an accused from the rigors of imprisonment until his conviction and yet secure his
appearance at the trial; (Almeda v. Villaluz, G.R. No. L-31665, 06 Aug. 1975)
2. To honor the presumption of innocence until his guilt is proven beyond reasonable doubt; and
3. To enable him to prepare his defense without being subjected to punishment prior to
conviction.

Forms of Bail

-Corporate Surety
-Property Bond
-Cash Deposit
-Recognizance

Bail shall be Filed:

1. In the court where the case is pending;
2. In the absence or unavailability of the judge thereof, with any RTC judge, MTC judge, or
MCTC judge in the province, city, or municipality;
3. If the accused is arrested in a province, city, or municipality other than where the case is
pending, bail may also be filed with any RTC of said place, or if no judge thereof is available,
with any MTC judge, MCTC therein; (Sec. 17(a), Rule 114, ROC, as amended)

Requirements

All kinds of bail are subject to the following conditions:

1. Unless the court directs otherwise, the bail bond posted by an accused remains in force at
all stages of the case until promulgation of the judgment of the Regional Trial Court.
2. The accused shall appear before the proper court whenever required by the court or rules.
3. Failure of the accused to appear at the trial without justification despite due notice shall
be deemed a waiver of his right to be present thereat. The trial may proceed in absentia.
4. The bondsman shall surrender the accused to court for execution of the final judgment.
[Sec. 2, Rule 114]

Bail as a Matter of Right

1. Before or after conviction by the MeTC, MTC, MTCC or MCTC;

2. Before conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or
life imprisonment; (Sec. 4, Rule 114, ROC, as amended) and
3. Before final conviction by all children in conflict with the law for an offense not punishable
by reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment.

All criminal cases under their jurisdiction are bailable as a matter of right because these courts
have no jurisdiction to try cases punishable by death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment.
(Enrile v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 213847, 18 Aug. 2015)

Bail as a Matter of Discretion

1. Upon conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or
life imprisonment;

2. Regardless of the stage of the criminal prosecution, a person charged with a capital
offense, or an offense punishable by reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, when
evidence of guilt is not strong; (Sec. 7, Rule 114, ROC, as amended) and

3. A child in conflict with the law charged with an offense punishable by death, reclusion
perpetua or life imprisonment when evidence of guilt is not strong. (Sec. 28, A.M. No.
02-1-18-SC)

Application for Bail

The application for bail may be filed in and acted upon by the RTC despite the filing of notice of
appeal, provided that it has not transmitted the original record to the appellate court. [Sec. 5,
Rule 114]
If the RTC decision changed the nature of the offense from non-bailable to bailable, the
application for bail can only be filed with and resolved only by the appellate court. [Sec. 5, Rule
114]

No Entitlement to Bail
If the conviction by the trial court is for a capital offense, the accused convicted of a capital
offense is no longer entitled to bail, and can only be released when the conviction is reversed by
the appellate court. [Sec. 13, Article III, Const.]

When Bail is Denied/Canceled

If the penalty imposed by the trial court is imprisonment exceeding 6 years, the accused shall be
denied bail or his bail shall be cancelled upon showing by the prosecution, with notice to the
accused, of any of the following [Sec. 5, Rule 114]:
Recidivism, quasi-recidivism, or habitual delinquency or commission of a crime aggravated by
reiteration of the accused
The accused previously escaped from legal confinement, evaded sentence or violated bail
conditions without valid justification
Commission of offense while under probation, parole or conditional pardon
Probability of flight;
Undue risk of the commission of another crime during the pendency of the appeal [Sec. 5, Rule
114]

When New Application for Bail Required

Upon conviction of the RTC, the bail posted earlier as a matter of right loses its force and the
accused must file a new and separate petition for bail. In deportation proceedings, bail is
discretionary upon the Commissioner of Immigration and Deportation.

Capital Offense

A capital offense is an offense which under the law existing at the time of commission and of the
application for admission to bail is punishable by death.

How Determined
The capital nature of the offense is determined by the penalty prescribed by law and not the one
actually imposed.

Custody as a Requirement

General Rule: Custody of the law is required before the court can act on an application for bail
[Miranda v. Tuliao, G.R. No. 158763
(2006)]
Exceptions: Custody is not required in cases of witnesses posting bail:
When bail is required to guarantee the appearance of a material witness [Sec. 14, Rule 119];
When bail is required to guarantee the appearance of a prosecution witness in cases where there
is substitution of the information [Sec. 14, Rule 110]

I. Arraignment and Plea

Arraignment
- It is the formal mode of implementing the constitutional right of the accused to be informed of
the nature of the accusation against him. (People v. Pangilinan, G.R. No. 171020, 14 Mar. 2007)
Arraignment is a proceeding in a criminal case, the object of which is to fix the identity of the
accused, to inform him of the charge and to give him an opportunity to plead, or to obtain from
the accused his answer, in other words, his plea to the information.

How Arraignment is Made

The arraignment is made in open court by the judge or clerk by furnishing the accused with a
copy of the complaint or information, reading the same in the language or dialect known to him,
and asking him whether he pleads guilty or not guilty. (Sec. 1(a), Rule 116, ROC, as amended)

Procedure of Arraignment
1. It must be in open court where the complaint or information has been filed or assigned for
trial;
2. By the judge or clerk of court;
3. By furnishing the accused with a copy of the complaint or information;
4. Reading it in a language or dialect known to the accused; (People v. Albert, G.R.
No. 114001, 11 Dec. 1995)

5. Asking accused whether he pleads guilty or not guilty; (Sec. 1(a), Rule 116, ROC,
as amended) and

6. Both arraignment and plea shall be made of record but failure to enter of record
shall not
(Sec. 1(b), Rule 116, ROC, as amended)

Waiver of Reading of the Information

In multiple cases, the court, upon personal examination of the accused, may allow a waiver of
the reading of the information upon the full understanding and express consent of the accused
and his/her counsel, which consent shall be expressly stated in both the minutes/certificate of
arraignment and the order of arraignment.
The court shall explain the waiver to the accused in the language or dialect known to him/her,
and ensure the accused's full understanding of the consequences of the waiver before approving
the same. (Revised Guidelines on Continuous Trial of Criminal Cases)

Options of the Accused before Arraignment and Plea:

1. Bill of particulars;
2. Suspension of arraignment;
3. Motion to Quash; or
4. Challenge the validity of arrest or legality of the warrant issued or assail the regularity or
question the absence of preliminary investigation of the charge.

Absence of Arraignment
If the accused has not been arraigned, he cannot be tried in absentia. (Sec. 14(2), Art. III, 1987
Constitution)

Presence of the Accused during Arraignment

The accused must be present at the arraignment and personally enter his plea. (Sec. 1(b), Rule
116, ROC, as amended) Counsel cannot enter plea for the accused.

Presence of the Offended Party during Arraignment

The private offended party shall be required to appear in the arraignment for the following
purposes:
1. Plea bargaining;
2. Determination of civil liability; and
3. Other matters requiring his presence. (Sec. 1(f), Rule 116, ROC, as amended)

Grounds for Suspension of Arraignment

Upon motion by the proper party, the arraignment shall be suspended in the following cases:

1. The accused appears to be suffering from an unsound mental condition which effectively
renders him unable to fully understand the charge against him and to plead intelligently thereto;

1. There exists a valid prejudicial question;

1. A petition for review of the resolution of the prosecutor is pending at the Department of
Justice or the Office of the President (Sec. 11, Rule 116, ROC, as amended); and

1. There are pending incidents such as:

a. Motion to Quash;
b. Motion for Inhibition; or
c. Motion for Bill of Particulars.

Plea
- It is the formal answer of the defendant in common law pleading. The answer of “guilty” or
“not guilty” in an arraignment for a criminal charge.

Plea of Guilty
It is an unconditional plea of guilt which admits the truth of the material facts and all the
attendant (e.g., aggravating) circumstances alleged in the information. (People v. Koloh Pohong,
G.R. No. L-32332, 15 Aug. 1973)

Effect of a Plea of Guilty

1. Submission to the court’s jurisdiction; and
2. It cures the defect in his arrest.
Requisites of a Voluntary Plea of Guilty
1. Spontaneous confession of guilt;
2. It is made in open court;
3. It is made prior to the presentation of evidence for prosecution; and
4. Confession of guilt was to the offense charged in the information.

Reception of Evidence in case the Accused Pleads Guilty

The plea of guilty does not dispense with the presentation of evidence as it is merely a secondary
basis of the guilt of the accused.
1. For non-capital offenses – the reception of evidence is merely discretionary on the part of the
court. (Sec. 4, Rule 116, ROC, as amended) If the information or complaint is sufficient for the
judge to render judgment on a non-capital offense, he may do so.
1. For capital offense – the reception of evidence to prove the guilt and degree of
culpability of the accused is mandatory in which case, the accused may present evidence in his
behalf and the court shall conduct a searching inquiry into the voluntariness and full
comprehension of the consequences of his plea. (Sec. 3, Rule 116, ROC, as amended)

Searching Inquiry

A searching inquiry means more than informing cursorily the accused that he faces a jail term
but so also, the exact length of imprisonment under the law and the certainty that he will serve
time at the national penitentiary or a penal colony.

Improvident Plea

An improvident plea is one without proper information as to all the circumstances affecting it;
based upon a mistaken assumption or misleading information/advice.

Effect of an Improvident Plea

Plea of guilty should not be held to be sufficient to sustain a conviction in the following cases:
(1) If the accused does not clearly and fully understand the nature of the offense charged;
(2) If he is not advised as to the meaning and effect of the technical language often used in
formal complaints and information in qualifying the acts constituting the offense; or
(3) If he does not clearly understand the consequences by way of a heavy and even a capital
penalty flowing from his admission of his guilt of the crime.

When Improvident Plea May be Withdrawn

At any time before judgment of conviction becomes final, the court may permit an improvident
plea of guilty to be withdrawn and be substituted by a plea of not guilty [Sec. 5, Rule 116]

The withdrawal of a plea of guilty is not a matter of right of the accused but of sound discretion
of the trial court [People v. Lambino, G.R. No. L-10875 (1958)]

J. Motion to Quash
The motion to quash is the mode by which an accused, before entering his plea, challenges the
complaint or information for insufficiency on its face in point of law, or for defects apparent on
its face.

Purpose of Motion to Quash

The designated purpose of a motion to quash is to assail the validity of the criminal information
for defects or defenses apparent on the face of the information. (Galzole y Soriaga v. Briones and
People, G.R. No. 164682, 14 Sept. 2001)

Period to file Motion to Quash an Information or Complaint

GR: At any time before entering his plea, the accused may move to quash the complaint or
information. (Sec. 1, Rule 117, ROC, as amended)
XPNs: Instances where a motion to quash may be filed after entering plea:
1. The facts charged do not constitute an offense;

2. Lack of jurisdiction over the offense charged;

3. The criminal action or liability has been extinguished; and
4. Double Jeopardy. (Sec. 9, Rule 117, ROC, as amended)

Grounds

1. The Facts charged do not constitute an offense;

2. Lack of jurisdiction over the Offense charged;
3. Lack of jurisdiction over the Person of the accused;
4. Lack of Authority of the officer to file information;
5. When the complaint or information does not Conform substantially to the prescribed
form;
6. Multiplicity of offenses charged;
7. Extinction of criminal action or liability;
8. The complaint or information contains averments, which if true, would constitute a Legal
excuse or justification; or
9. Double Jeopardy

Waiver of Grounds
General Rule: Failure of the accused to assert any ground on a MTQ before he pleads, either
because he did not file MTQ or failed to allege said ground in the MTQ shall be deemed a
waiver of any objections. [Sec. 9 Rule 117].
Exceptions:
(1) Facts charged do not constitute an Offense;
(2) Court trying the case has no Jurisdiction over the offense charged;
(3) Criminal Action or Liability has been Extinguished;
(4) Accused has been previously Convicted, or in Jeopardy of being convicted, or Acquitted of
the offense charged [Sec. 9, Rule 117]
 K. Double Jeopardy

-Double jeopardy, as a criminal law concept, refers to jeopardy of punishment for the same
offense, suggesting that double jeopardy presupposes two criminal prosecutions. ( Garcia v.
Sandiganbayan, 603 SCRA 348, 361)
-A person who has been convicted, acquitted or the case against him dismissed or otherwise
terminated without his express consent cannot again be charged with the same or identical
offense.
-The Philippine Constitution does not prohibit placing a person in jeopardy. What it prohibits is
putting the accused in double jeopardy in which he is put in danger of conviction and punishment
for the same offense for more than once.

Purpose of the Rule against Double Jeopardy

It guarantees that the state shall not be permitted to make repeated attempts to convict an
individual for an alleged offense, thereby subjecting him to embarrassment, expense and ordeal
and compelling him to live in a continuing state of anxiety and insecurity. [People v. Velasco,
G.R. No. 127444 (2000)]
Primarily, it prevents the State from:
(1) Suing criminal processes as instrument to harass the accused and wear him out by the
multitude of cases
(2) Successively retrying the defendant in the hope of securing a conviction
(3) Successively retrying the defendant in the hope of securing a greater penalty [People v. CA,
G.R. No. 159261 (2007)]

Requisites to Successfully Invoke Double Jeopardy

(1) A first jeopardy must have attached;

(2) The first jeopardy must have been validly terminated; and
(3) The second jeopardy must be for the same offense or the second offense necessarily includes
or is necessarily included in the offense charged in the first information, or is an attempt to
commit the same or a frustration thereof.

Requisites for First Jeopardy to Attach

(1) Valid indictment;
(2) Before a competent court;
(3) Arraignment;
(4) A valid plea entered; and
(5) The accused has been convicted or acquitted, or the case dismissed or otherwise validly
terminated without his express consent

Effect
The conviction or acquittal of the accused or the dismissal of the case shall be a bar to another
prosecution for:
(1) The offense charged; or
(2) Any attempt to commit the same or frustration thereof; or
(3) Any offense which necessarily includes or is necessarily included in the offense charged in
the former complaint or information

Double jeopardy does not apply to these cases:

(1) Administrative Cases;

- The dismissal of the criminal case does not result in the dismissal of the administrative case
because there exists a difference between the 2 remedies

(2) When the same criminal act gives rise to two or more separate and distinct offenses;

(3) Preliminary investigation (PI);

- A PI is merely inquisitorial. It is executive in character and is not part of the trial; hence, a PI is
not a trial to which double jeopardy attaches.

(4) When the first offense was committed under the RPC and the second was committed under a
special penal law;

(5) When two offenses are punished by two separate penal laws;

(6) The mere filing of two informations charging the same offense when there is not yet a
conviction, acquittal, or termination without consent of any of the two cases

Types of Double Jeopardy

- Double Jeopardy for the Same Offense

- Double Jeopardy When an Act Punished by a Law and an Ordinance

L. Provisional Dismissal

It contemplates that the dismissal of the action is not permanent and can be revived within the
period set by the Rules of Court. (Riano, 2022)

Period when Provisional Dismissal becomes permanent

1. Offenses punishable by imprisonment not exceeding 6 years or a fine of any amount, or
both – shall become permanent 1 year after issuance of the order without the case having been
revived.
1. Offenses punishable by imprisonment of more than 6 years – shall become permanent 2
years after issuance of the order without the case having been revived. (Sec. 8, Rule 117, ROC,
as amended)

Time-Bar Rule
If no revival of the case is made within the prescribed period, the dismissal shall be removed
from being provisional and shall become permanent.

The State may revive a criminal case beyond the one-year or two-year periods, provided there is
justifiable necessity for the delay, and subject to the right of the accused to oppose the same on
the ground of double jeopardy, or that such revival or refiling is barred by the statute of
limitations. (People v. Lacson, G.R. No. 149453, 07 Oct. 2003)

Revival of the Case

The case may be revived by the State within the time-bar rule either by the refiling of the
information or by filing of new information for the same offense or offense necessarily included
therein. There would be no need for a new preliminary investigation.

Requisites of Provisional Dismissal

1. The prosecution with the express conformity of the accused, or the accused, moves for a
provisional (sin perjuicio) dismissal of the case; or both the prosecution and the accused move
for a provisional dismissal of the case;

1. The offended party is notified of the motion for a provisional dismissal of the case;

1. The court issues an order granting the motion and dismissing the case provisionally; and

1. The public prosecutor is served with a copy of the order of provisional dismissal of the
case. (People v. Lacson, et al., G.R. No. 149453, 01 Apr. 2003)
Rule on Provisional Dismissal of a Case
GR: Where the case was dismissed provisionally with the consent of the accused, he cannot
invoke double jeopardy in another prosecution therefor or where the case was reinstated on a
motion for reconsideration by the prosecution.
XPNs: The dismissal amounts to an acquittal even if the dismissal was ordered at the instance of
the defendant if:
1. It is based on lack or insufficiency of evidence;

1. It was predicated upon the violation of the right of the accused to a speedy trial, hence,
even if the accused gave his express consent to such dismissal or moved for dismissal, such
consent would be immaterial as such dismissal is actually an acquittal; and

1. There is variance between the proof and the allegations in the complaint or information.

Express Consent
Express consent to a provisional dismissal is given either orally or in writing. It is a positive,
direct, unequivocal consent requiring no inference or implication to supplying its meaning.
(People v. Vergara, G.R. No. 101557-58, 28 Apr. 1993)
The mere inaction or silence of the accused or his failure to object to a provisional dismissal of
the case does not amount to express consent. (People v. Ylagan, G.R. No. L-38443, 25 Nov.
1933)

Reckoning Period of One- or Two-year Period for Revival of Criminal Case

The one- or two-year period allowed for reviving a criminal case that has been provisionally
dismissed shall be reckoned from the issuance of the order of dismissal. The dismissal shall
become automatically permanent if the case is not revived within the required period. Such
permanent dismissal shall amount to an adjudication of the case on the merits. (Sec. 14, A.M. No.
12-11-2-SC)

M. Pre-Trial

Pre-trial is a procedural device intended to clarify and limit the basic issues between the parties
and to take the trial of cases out of the realm of surprise and maneuvering. It thus paves the way
for a less cluttered trial and resolution of the case. (LCK Industries v. Planters Development
Bank, G.R. No. 170606, 23 Nov. 2007)

Period of Pre-Trial
It shall be held after arraignment and within 30 days from the date the court acquires jurisdiction
over the person of the accused unless a shorter period is provided for in special laws or circulars
of the Supreme Court. (Sec. 1, Rule 118, ROC, as amended)
If the accused is under preventive detention, the pre-trial shall be held within 10 days after
arraignment unless a law provides for a shorter period. (A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC, IB(1))
Under the Revised Guidelines for Continuous Trial of Criminal Cases, the arraignment and pre-
trial/preliminary conference are scheduled on the same day.
Furthermore, the Pre-Trial Order shall immediately be served upon the parties and counsel on the
same day after its termination. (A.M. No. 15-06-10-SC)

Court in which Pre-Trial is Mandatory

Pre-trial is mandatory in all criminal cases cognizable by the:
1. Sandiganbayan;
2. RTC;
3. Metropolitan Trial Court;
4. Municipal Trial Court in Cities;
5. Municipal Trial Court; and
6. Municipal Circuit Trial Court (Sec. 1, Rule 118, ROC, as amended)

Matters to be Considered during Pre-Trial

1. Plea bargaining;
2. Stipulation of facts;
1. Marking for identification of evidence of parties;
No evidence shall be allowed to be presented and offered during the trial other than those
identified and marked during the pre-trial except when allowed by the court for good cause
shown. (I-B (2), AM No. 03-1-09-SC)
1. Waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence;
2. Modification of the order of the trial if one of the accused admits the charge but
interposes a lawful defense (reverse trial); and
3. Such matters as will promote a fair and expeditious trial of the criminal and civil aspects
of the case. (Sec. 1, Rule 118, ROC, as amended)

Duty of the Judge before Pre-trial Conference

The judge before pre-trial conference must study the following:
1. Allegations of the information;
2. Statements in the affidavits of witnesses; and
3. Other documents which form part of the record of the preliminary investigation. (A.M.
No. 03-1-09-SC)

Duty of the Branch Clerk of Court during the Preliminary Conference

During the preliminary conference, the branch clerk of court shall:
1. Assist the parties in reaching a settlement of the civil aspect of the case;
2. Mark the documents to be presented as exhibits and copies thereof attached to the records
after comparison;
3. Ascertain from the parties the undisputed facts and admissions on the genuineness and
due execution of documents marked as exhibits; and
4. Consider such other matters as may aid in the prompt disposition of the case. (A.M. No.
03-1-09-SC)

Order of Pre-Trial Conference

Order for pre-trial conference must contain orders:
1. Requiring the private offended party to appear thereat for purposes of plea-bargaining and for other
matters requiring his presence;
2. Referring the case to the branch clerk of court, if warranted, for a preliminary conference to be set at
least 3 days prior to the pre-trial to mark the documents or exhibits to be presented by the parties and copies
thereof to be attached to the records after comparison and to consider disposition; and
3. Informing the parties that no evidence shall be allowed to be presented and offered during the trial
other than those identified and marked during the pre-trial except when allowed by the court for good cause
shown. In mediatable cases, the judge shall refer the parties and their counsel to the Philippine Mediation
Center unit for purposes of mediation if available. (A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC)

PRE-TRIAL AGREEMENT
Requirements
Reduced in writing;
Signed by the accused and counsel;
With approval of court if agreements cover matters in Sec. 1, Rule 118 [Sec. 2, Rule 118]

Effects
Constitutional right to present evidence is waived [Rivera v. People, G.R. No. 163996 (2005)]
If the requisites are not followed – admissions shall be inadmissible as evidence

All proceedings during pre-trial shall be:

a. Recorded
b. Transcripts prepared
c. Minutes signed by the parties and their counsel [Item I-B[9], A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC (2004)]

WHO MUST BE PRESENT DURING PRE-TRIAL

Counsel of accused
Prosecutor

Effect of Failure to Appear

The court may impose proper sanctions or penalties, if counsel for the accused or the prosecutor
to enforce the mandatory character of the pre-trial in criminal cases:
Does not appear at the pre-trial conference; and
Does not offer an acceptable excuse for his lack of cooperation [Sec. 3, Rule 118]

APPLICATION OF JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT RULE

When Applicable

The Judicial Affidavit Rule shall apply to all criminal actions:

(1) Where the maximum of the imposable penalty does not exceed six years;
(2) Where the accused agrees to the use of judicial affidavits, irrespective of the penalty
involved; or
(3) With respect to the civil aspect of the actions, whatever the penalties involved

N. Trial

It is the examination before a competent tribunal according to the laws of the land, of facts put in
issue in a case for the purpose of determining such issue.

When Trial shall Commence

1. The trial shall commence within 30 days from receipt of pre-trial order. (Sec. 1, Rule 119,
ROC, as amended)

1. If the accused is to be tried again pursuant to an order for a new trial, the trial shall
commence within 30 days from notice of the order granting a new trial. (Sec. 5, Rule 119, ROC,
as amended)

Hearing
Hearing is not confined to trial but embraces several stages of litigation including the pre-trial
stage. A hearing does not necessarily imply the presentation of oral or documentary evidence in
open court but that the parties are afforded an opportunity to be heard. (Republic v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 104768, 21 Jul. 2003)

Continuous Trial
The trial once commenced, shall continue from day to day as far as practicable until terminated.
However, it may be postponed for a reasonable period of time for good cause. (Sec. 2, Rule 119,
ROC, as amended)
It is one where the courts are called upon to conduct the trial with utmost dispatch, with judicial
exercise of the court’s power to control the trial to avoid delay and for each party to complete the
presentation of evidence with the trial dates assigned to him. (Adm. Cir. No. 4, 22 Sep. 1988)

DURING TRIAL

Examination of Witnesses

Discharge of Accused to Be State Witness

Requisites:
(1) Two or more persons are jointly charged with the commission of any offense;
(2) Upon motion of the prosecution before resting its case, showing that: There is absolute
necessity for the testimony of the accused whose discharge is requested;
The is no other direct evidence available for the proper prosecution of the offense committed,
except the testimony of said accused;
The testimony of said accused can be substantially corroborated in its material points;
Said accused does not appear to be the most guilty; and
Said accused has not at any time been convicted of any offense involving moral turpitude. (Sec
17, Rule 119)

Absence of Counsel de Parte

In the absence of the counsel de parte, the hearing shall proceed upon appointment by the court
of a counsel de officio. [A.M No. 15-06- 10- SC, III No. 13 (b)].
One Day Examination of Witness Rule

The court shall strictly adhere to the rule that a witness has to be fully examined in one day.
[A.M No 15-06-10-SC, III No 13 (f)]

SUBMISSION OF MEMORANDA

Nature
The submission of memoranda is discretionary on the part of the court.
Format
Does not exceed 25 pages of Single spaced;
Legal sized paper;
Size 14 font.
When to Submit
The period to submit shall:
Be non-extendible; and
Not suspend the running of the period of promulgation of the decision.
With or without memoranda, the promulgation shall push through as scheduled.

Applicability
The Revised Guidelines for Continuous Trial of Criminal Cases (Revised Guidelines) shall apply
to:
1. All newly filed criminal cases in the First and Second Level Courts, the Sandiganbayan and
the Court of Tax Appeals, as of effectivity date;
2. All newly filed criminal cases governed by Special Laws and Rules, as of effectivity date; and
3. Pending criminal cases with respect to the remainder of the proceedings.

Prohibited Motions
The following motions are prohibited:
a. Motion for Judicial determination of probable cause.
b. Motion for Preliminary investigation filed beyond the five (5)-day reglementary period in
inquest proceedings under Sec. 6, Rule 112 of the ROC, or when preliminary investigation is
required under Sec. 8, Rule 112 of the ROC, or allowed in inquest proceedings and the accused
failed to participate in the preliminary investigation despite due notice.
Motion for Reinvestigation of the prosecutor recommending the filing of information once the
information has been filed before the court
i. if the motion is filed without prior leave of court;
ii. when preliminary investigation is not required under Sec. 8, Rule 112 of the ROC; and
iii. when the regular preliminary investigation is required and has been actually conducted, and
the grounds relied upon in the motion are not meritorious, such as issues of credibility,
admissibility of evidence, innocence of the accused, or lack of due process when the accused was
actually notified, among others.
d. Motion to Quash information when the ground is not one of those stated in Sec. 3, Rule 117 of
the ROC.
e. Motion for Bill of particulars that does not conform to Sec. 9, Rule 116 of the ROC.
f. Motion to Suspend the arraignment based on grounds not stated under Sec. 11, Rule 116 of the
ROC.
g. Petition to Suspend the criminal action on the ground of prejudicial question, when no civil
case has been filed, pursuant to Sec. 7, Rule 111 of the ROC.
h. Motion for Postponement, except if it is based on acts of God, force majeure or physical
inability of the witness to appear and testify.

Meritorious Motions
Motions that allege plausible grounds supported by relevant documents and/or competent
evidence, except those that are already covered by the Revised Guidelines, are meritorious
motions, such as:
1. Motion to Withdraw information, or to downgrade the charge in the original information,
or to exclude an accused originally charged therein, filed by the prosecution as a result of a
reinvestigation, reconsideration, and review;
2. Motion to Quash Warrant of Arrest;
3. Motion to Quash Search Warrant under Sec. 14 of Rule 121 or motion to suppress evidence.

O. State Witness

Section 17. Discharge of accused to be state witness. — When two or more persons are jointly
charged with the commission of any offense, upon motion of the prosecution before resting its
case, the court may direct one or more of the accused to be discharged with their consent so that
they may be witnesses for the state when, after requiring the prosecution to present evidence and
the sworn statement of each proposed state witness at a hearing in support of the discharge, the
court is satisfied that:

(a) There is absolute necessity for the testimony of the accused whose discharge is
requested;

(b) The is no other direct evidence available for the proper prosecution of the offense
committed, except the testimony of said accused;

(c) The testimony of said accused can be substantially corroborated in its material points;

(d) Said accused does not appear to be the most guilty; and

(e) Said accused has not at any time been convicted of any offense involving moral
turpitude.

P. Demurrer to Evidence

Section 23. Demurrer to evidence. — After the prosecution rests its case, the court may dismiss
the action on the ground of insufficiency of evidence (1) on its own initiative after giving the
prosecution the opportunity to be heard or (2) upon demurrer to evidence filed by the accused
with or without leave of court.

If the court denies the demurrer to evidence filed with leave of court, the accused may adduce
evidence in his defense. When the demurrer to evidence is filed without leave of court, the
accused waives the right to present evidence and submits the case for judgment on the basis of
the evidence for the prosecution. (15a)

The motion for leave of court to file demurrer to evidence shall specifically state its grounds and
shall be filed within a non-extendible period of five (5) days after the prosecution rests its case.
The prosecution may oppose the motion within a non-extendible period of five (5) days from its
receipt.

If leave of court is granted, the accused shall file the demurrer to evidence within a non-
extendible period of ten (10) days from notice. The prosecution may oppose the demurrer to
evidence within a similar period from its receipt.

The order denying the motion for leave of court to file demurrer to evidence or the demurrer
itself shall not be reviewable by appeal or by certiorari before judgment. (n)

Q. Judgment

Judgment is the 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, if any. (Sec. 1, Rule 120,
ROC, as amended)

Formal Requisites
1. Written in official language;
If given verbally, it is incomplete. (People v. Catolico, G.R. No. L-31260, 29 Feb. 1972) An oral
dismissal of a criminal case does not attain the effect of judgment of acquittal. So that it is still
within the powers of the judge to set aside and enter another order. This is so because the order
of dismissal must be written and signed by the judge. (Abay, Sr. v. Garcia, G.R. No. L-66132, 27
June 1988)
2. Personally and directly prepared by the judge;
3. Signed by the judge; and

4. Contains clearly and distinctly a statement of the facts and the law upon which it is based.
(Sec. 1, Rule 120, ROC, as amended)

Jurisdictional Requirements before a Judgment may be Rendered

1. Jurisdiction over the subject matter;
2. Jurisdiction over the territory; and
3. Jurisdiction over the person of the accused. (Antiporda, Jr. v. Garchitorena, G.R. No.
133289, 23 Dec. 1999)

Contents of Judgment
The judgment must state:
1. If of conviction:
a. Legal qualification of the offense constituted by the acts committed by the accused, and the
aggravating or mitigating circumstances attending its commission;
b. Participation of the accused whether as principal, accomplice or accessory;
c. Penalty imposed upon the accused; and
d. Civil liability or damages caused by the wrongful act or omission unless a separate civil action
has been reserved or waived. (Sec. 2, Rule 120, ROC, as amended)
2. If of acquittal:
a. Whether the evidence of the prosecution absolutely failed to prove the guilt of the accused or
merely failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt; and
b. In either case, the judgment shall determine if the act or omission from which the civil liability
might arise did exist. (Sec. 2, Rule 120, ROC, as amended)

Award of Indemnity to Offended Party in spite of Acquittal

In case of acquittal, unless there is a clear showing that the act from which the civil liability
might arise did not exist, the judgment must make a finding on the civil liability of the accused in
favor of the offended party. (Sec. 2, par. 2, Rule 120, ROC, as amended)
Remedies when the Judgment fails to award Civil Liability:
1. Appeal;
2. Certiorari; or
3. Mandamus.

Judgment for Two or More Offenses

Also known as duplicitous complaint or information.

When two or more offenses are charged in a single complaint or information but the accused
fails to object to it before trial, the court may:
(1) Convict him of as many offenses as are charged and proved; and
(2) Impose on him the penalty for each offense, setting out separately the findings of fact and law
in each offense [Sec. 3, Rule 120]

Variance Doctrine
General Rule: The defendant can be convicted only of the crime with which he is charged [Riano
504, 2016 Ed.]
Exception: Accused shall be convicted of the:
Offense proved, which is included in the offense charged (offense proved is lesser) –– Some or
all of the ingredients of the offense charged constitutes the offense proved (Sec 4, Rule 120);

Example:
1. Murder includes homicide;
2. Serious physical injuries includes less serious or slight physical injuries;
3. Robbery includes theft [Riano]

. Offense charged, which is included in the offense proved (offense charged is lesser) ––
Essential ingredients of the offense charged constitute or form part of the ingredients of the
offense proven (Sec 4, Rule 120)

Promulgation of Judgment

It is the official proclamation or announcement of judgment. It is promulgated by reading it in

the presence of the accused and any judge of the court which it was rendered, or when the
judgment is one of conviction for a light offense, in the presence of the accused’s counsel or
representative. (Sec. 6, Rule 120, as amended)

Authority to Promulgate the Judgment

General Rule: The judge of the court who renders the judgment.
Exceptions:
1. When the judge is absent or outside the province or city – Judgment may be promulgated
by the clerk of court; and

1. When the accused is confined or detained in another province or city – Judgment may be
promulgated by the executive judge of the RTC having jurisdiction over the place of
confinement or detention. (Sec. 6, Rule 120, ROC, as amended)

Notice of Promulgation to the Accused

The proper clerk of court shall give notice to the accused requiring him or to be present at the
promulgation of the decision:
1. personally;
2. through his bondsman or warden and counsel; or
3. notice shall be served at his or her last known address, if the accused tried in absentia because
he jumped bail or escaped from prison

How Promulgation is made when the Accused is absent despite notice

The promulgation shall still be made by:
1. Recording such judgment in the criminal docket; and
2. Serving him a copy thereof at his last known address or through his counsel.

Effects of the Absence of the Accused in the Promulgation of Judgment; Remedies

If judgment is one of conviction and the accused is absent without justifiable cause, the court
shall order his arrest and he shall lose the remedies available in the rules against the judgment
and his bail shall be forfeited.
However, the accused may surrender and file a motion for leave of court to avail of these
remedies within 15 days from the promulgation of judgment.
If such motion is granted, he may avail of these remedies within 15 days from notice of such
order granting the motion. (Sec. 6, Rule 120, ROC, as amended) He must however, state the
reasons for his absence at the promulgation and prove that his absence was for a justifiable
cause.

Instances when Judgment may be promulgated even if the Accused is not present
1. A judgment of acquittal; and
2. Judgment is for a light offense, in which case judgment may be promulgated in the presence of
the counsel for the accused or a representative

Modification of Judgment
A judgment of conviction may, upon motion of the accused, be modified or set aside before it
becomes final or before appeal is perfected. (Sec. 7, Rule 120)
Thus, a modification of the judgment must be upon motion of the accused. It cannot be done on
the court’s own motion.
Instances when Judgment becomes Final
1. After the lapse of time for perfecting an appeal;

1. When the sentence has been partially or totally satisfied;

2. When the accused has expressly waived in writing his right to appeal; or

1. When the accused has applied for probation. (Sec. 7, Rule 120, ROC, as amended)

1. When the accused has applied for probation. (Sec. 7, Rule 120, ROC, as amended)

Entry of Judgment
The recording of the judgment or order in the book of entries of judgments shall constitute its
entry. The record shall contain the dispositive part of the judgment order and shall be signed by
the clerk, with a certificate that such judgment or order has become final and executory. (Sec. 2,
Rule 36, ROC, as amended)
Finality of Judgment vs. Entry of Judgment
The finality of the judgment is entirely distinct from its entry and the delay in the latter does not
affect the effectivity of the former, which is counted from the expiration of the period to appeal.
(Munnez v. CA, G.R. No. L-46040, 23 July 1987)

R. New Trial or Consideration

GROUNDS FOR NEW TRIAL

Errors of law or irregularities prejudicial to the substantial rights of the accused have been
committed during the trial

General Rule: Errors of the defense counsel in the conduct of the trial is neither an error of law
nor an irregularity
Exception: They become an error of law or irregularity when acquittal would, in all probability,
have followed the introduction of certain testimony which was not submitted at the trial under
improper or injudicious advice of incompetent counsel of the accused.
Irregularities must be with such seriousness as to affect prejudicially the substantial rights of the
accused.

New and material evidence discovered which the accused could not, with reasonable diligence,
have discovered and produced at the trial and which, if introduced and admitted, would probably
change the judgment

GROUNDS FOR RECONSIDERATION

The court shall grant reconsideration on the ground of errors of law or fact in the judgment,
which requires no further proceedings [Sec. 3, Rule 121]

REQUISITES BEFORE A NEW TRIAL MAY BE GRANTED ON GROUND OF NEWLY

DISCOVERED EVIDENCE
The evidence:
Was discovered after the trial;
Could not have been discovered and produced at the trial even with the exercise of reasonable
diligence;

The accused has the burden of proving item (b) above [US v. Torrente, G.R. No. 1001 (1922)]
The determinative test is the presence of due or reasonable diligence to locate the thing to be
used as evidence in the trial [Briones v. People, G.R. No. 156009 (2009)]
Is material, not merely cumulative/ corroborative/impeaching; and
Is of such weight that it would probably change the judgment if admitted [Tadeja v. People, G.R.
No. 145336 (2013)]

Effects of Granting a New Trial or Reconsideration

In all cases, when the court grants a new trial or reconsideration, the original judgment shall be
set aside or vacated and a new judgment rendered accordingly.
The other effects would depend upon the ground availed of in granting the new trial or
reconsideration, thus:

1. Errors of law or irregularities committed during the trial

a. All proceedings and evidence not affected by such errors and irregularities shall stand;
b. Those affected shall be set aside and taken anew; and
c. In the interest of justice, the court may allow the introduction of additional evidence.

2. Newly discovered evidence

a. The evidence already taken shall stand; and
b. Newly discovered and other evidence as the court may, in the interest of justice, allow to be
introduced, shall be taken and considered together with the evidence already in the record. (Sec.
6, Rule 121, ROC, as amended)

Application of the Neypes Rule in Criminal Cases (Fresh Period Rule)

The period for appeal is not only within 15 days from notice of the judgment but also within 15
days from notice of the final order appealed from.
 S. Appeal
Appeal
A proceeding for review by which the whole case is transferred to the higher court for a final
determination. The right of appeal is a mere statutory privilege. Only final judgments and orders
are appealable.
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall have the right to appeal in the manner prescribed
by law. It is an essential part of our judicial system and trial courts are advised to proceed with
caution so as not to deprive a party of the right to appeal and instructed that every party-litigant
should be afforded the amplest opportunity for the proper and just disposition of his cause, freed
from the constraints of technicalities. While this right is statutory, once it is granted by law,
however, its suppression would be a violation of due process, a right guaranteed by the
Constitution
Period to take an Appeal
It must be taken within 15 days from promulgation of judgment or from notice of final order
appealed from. (Sec. 6, Rule 122, ROC, as amended)
Who may Appeal
Any party may appeal from a judgment or final order, unless the accused will be placed in
double jeopardy. (Sec. 1, Rule 122, ROC, as amended)

Modes of Appeal
Modes of appeal that may be taken from a judgment convicting the accused are:
1. The accused may seek a review of said judgment as regards both criminal and civil
actions; or

1. The private offended party may appeal only with respect to the civil action either because
the lower court has refused or failed to award damages or because the award made is
unsatisfactory to him.

Modes of review recognized by the Rules of Court:

1. Ordinary appeal;
2. Petition for review;
3. Petition for review on certiorari; and
4. Automatic appeal.

Effect of an Appeal
An appeal in a criminal case opens the whole case for review and this includes the review of
penalty, indemnity, and the damages involved. Consequently, on appeal, the appellate court may
increase the penalty and indemnity of damages awarded by the trial court although the offended
party had not appealed from said award, and the party who sought a review of the decision was
the accused.
Effect of Perfection of Appeal with regard to the Jurisdiction of the Court
Once an appeal in a case, whether civil or criminal, has been perfected, the court a quo loses
jurisdiction over the case both over the record and over the subject of the case. (Director of
Prisons v. Teodoro, G.R. No. L-9043, 30 July 1955)

Death of the Accused Pending Appeal

Upon the death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction, the criminal action is
extinguished inasmuch as there is no longer a defendant to stand as the accused; the civil action
instituted therein for the recovery of civil liability ex delicto is ipso facto extinguished, grounded
as it is on the criminal action. (People v. Paras, G.R. No. 192912, 03 Oct. 2014)
Factual Findings of the Trial Court
GR: The trial court’s factual findings are accorded great respect and even conclusive effect if
duly supported by evidence.
XPNs: When facts or circumstances of weight and substance have been:
1. Overlooked;
2. Misapprehended;
3. Misinterpreted; or
4. The court gravely abused its discretion

Where to Appeal
Appeals shall be taken before the:
1. To the RTC, in cases decided by the MTC, MTCC, MeTC, or MCTC;
2. To the CA or to the SC in the proper cases provided by law, in cases decided by the RTC;
3. To the SC, in cases decided by the CA; (Sec. 2, Rule 122, ROC, as amended)
4. To the SC, in cases decided by CTA en banc; (Sec. 1, Rule 116, ROC, as amended)
5. To the SC, in cases decided by Sandiganbayan. (Sec. 1, Rule 45, ROC, as amended)

Service of Notice of Appeal

GR: Notice of appeal should be served upon the adverse party or his counsel by personal service.
XPN: If personal service cannot be made, through:
Registered mail;
By substituted service pursuant to Secs. 7 and 8 of Rule 13 (Sec. 4, Rule 122, ROC, as amended);
or
By publication, made in a newspaper of general circulation in the vicinity once a week for a
period not exceeding 30 days. (Pamaran, 2010)

Effect of Appeal by any of Several Accused

Appeal taken by any of the several accused shall have the following effects:
1. It shall not affect those who did not appeal, except insofar as the judgment of the
appellate court is favorable and applicable to the latter (People v. Gandia, G.R. No. 175332, 06
Feb. 2008)
1. The appeal of the offended party from the civil aspect shall not affect the criminal aspect
of the judgment or order appealed from; and

1. Upon perfection of the appeal, the execution of the judgment or final order appealed from
shall be stayed as to the appealing party. (Sec. 11, Rule 122, ROC, as amended)

Grounds for Dismissal of Appeal

1. Failure of the appellant to serve and file the required number of copies of his brief of
memorandum within the time provided by these Rules;

1. Appellant escapes from prison or confinement, jumps bail or flees to a foreign country
during the pendency of the appeal.

1. Failure of the record on appeal to show on its face that the appeal was taken within the
period fixed by these Rules;

1. Failure to file the notice of appeal or the record on appeal within the period prescribed by
these Rules;

1. Failure of the appellant to pay the docket and other lawful fees as provided in Sec. 5 of
Rule 40 and Sec. 4 of Rule 41 of the Rules of Court;

1. Unauthorized alterations, omissions or additions in the approved record on appeal as

provided in Sec. 4 of Rule 44 of the ROC;;

1. Absence of specific assignment of errors in the appellant’s brief, or of page references to

the record as required in Sec. 13, pars. (a), (c), (d) and (f) of Rule 44 of the ROC; and

1. Failure of the appellant to take the necessary steps for the correction or completion of the
record within the time limited by the court in its order.