CHAPTER I: PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
BASIC CONCEPTSCriminal Procedure Series of processes by which
criminal laws are enforced and by which the State prosecutes
persons who violate the penal laws Regulates the steps by which one
who committed a crime is to be punished Procedural administration
of justiceSystem of procedure in our jurisdiction: ACCUSATORIAL/
ADVERSARIAL Accusatorial/ adversarial two contending parties
(prosecution & defense) before the court which hears them
impartially and renders judgment only after trial Inquisitorial
system court may utilize evidence gathered outside the court and a
judge/ group of judges actively participates in the gathering of
facts & evidence instead of mere passively receiving evidence
from the parties Rules of criminal procedure are liberally
construed in order to promote their objective of securing a just,
speedy and inexpensive disposition of every action and
proceeding.Cariaga v. People: Petitioners former counsel
erroneously appealed her conviction to the CA instead of to the
Sandiganbayan. Petitioner pleaded that the rule which mandates the
dismissal of cases erroneously appealed to the CA be relaxed. The
SC granted the petitioners prayer and held that since the appeal
involved a criminal case and the possibility of a person being
deprived of liberty due to a procedural lapse is great, a
relaxation of the Rules was warranted.Due process in criminal
proceedings is mandatory. Requirements of due process in criminal
proceedings (Alonte v. Savellano, Jr.): The court/ tribunal trying
the case is properly clothed with judicial power to hear &
determine the matter before it Jurisdiction is lawfully acquired by
it over the person of the accused Accused is given opportunity to
be heard Judgment is rendered only upon lawful
hearing*********************REQUISITES FOR THE EXERCISE OF CRIMINAL
JURISDICTIONA. Jurisdiction over the subject matter Refers to the
authority of the court to hear and determine a particular criminal
case Jurisdiction of the class of cases to which the particular
case belongs How it is conferred: Conferred by law Cannot be
presumed Cannot be fixed by the will of the parties nor can it be
acquired or diminished by any act of the parties Not conferred by
mere administrative policy of any trial courtHow it is determined:
Determined by the allegations in the complaint/ information
Sandiganbayan cases = both nature of offense & position
occupied by accused are conditions sine qua non before the
Sandiganbayan can validly take cognizance of the case Complex
crimes = jurisdiction is with the court having jurisdiction to
impose the maximum & most serious penalty imposable on the
offense forming part of the complex crimeJurisdiction is determined
by the law in force at the time of the institution of the action
and not during arraignment, or at the time of its commission. What
is considered is the penalty which may be imposed and not the
actual penalty imposed after trial. Jurisdiction of the court is
continuing Once a court has acquired jurisdiction, that
jurisdiction continues Cannot be withdrawn or defeated by
subsequent valid amendment of the information Cannot be lost by a
new law Exception: when the statute expressly so provides, or is
construed to the effect that it is intended to operate upon actions
pending before its enactmentAn objection based on the ground that
the court lacks jurisdiction over the subject matter may be raised/
considered motu proprio at any stage of the proceedings or on
appeal.A party may be estopped from questioning the jurisdiction
for reasons of public policy as when he initially invokes the
jurisdiction of the court and then later on repudiates it exception
to the general rule that jurisdiction is vested by law and cannot
be conferred or waived by the parties
B. Jurisdiction over the territory Requires that the offense
must have been committed within the courts territorial jurisdiction
To be determined by the facts alleged in the complaint or
information The offense should have been committed or any one of
its essential ingredients should have taken place within the
territorial jurisdiction of the court If the evidence adduced
during the trial shows that the offense was committed somewhere
else, the court should dismiss the action for want of
jurisdictionGeneral rule: The offense must be prosecuted and tried
in the place where the same was committed.Exceptions: Art. 2 of the
RPC = offenses cognizable before Philippine courts even if
committed outside of the territory of the Philippines (offense
shall be cognizable by the court where the criminal action is first
filed) Committed on a Philippine ship/ airship Forge/ counterfeit
currency of the Philippines or obligations & securities issued
by the government Acts connected with the introduction into the
country of the obligations & securities mentioned above While
being public officers & employees, should commit an offense in
the exercise of their functions Crimes against national security
& the law of nations Where the SC, pursuant to its
constitutional powers, orders a change of venue to avoid a
miscarriage of justice Offense committed in a train, aircraft, or
other public/ private vehicle in the course of its trip may be
instituted in any place where said vehicle passed during its trip
(including place of departure and arrival) Offense committed on
board a vessel in the course of its voyage instituted in court of
first port of entry, or any place where the vessel passed during
the voyage Case cognizable by the Sandiganbayan Written defamation
may be filed in the province/ city where the offended party held
office at the time of commission of offense (if public officer), or
in the province or city where he actually resided at the time of
commission of offense (if private individual)Rules for written
defamation: If public official/ private person: RTC of province/
city where libellous article is printed & first published
(information must allege with particularity where the defamatory
article was printed & published) If private individual: RTC of
province where he actually resided at the time of commission of
offense Public officer in Manila at the time of the commission of
offense: RTC of Manila Public officer holding office outside Manila
RTC of province/ city where he held office at the time of
commission of offense
C. Jurisdiction over the person of the accused Refers to the
authority of the court over the person charged Acquired upon:
Arrest or apprehension, with or without warrant Voluntary
appearance or submission Filing motion to quash Appearing for
arraignment Participating in trial Giving bail Not a voluntary
submission: Making special appearance to question jurisdiction of
the court over the person of the accused When accused files a
motion to quash the warrant of arrestBeing in the custody of the
law is not necessarily being under the jurisdiction of the
court.
Injunction to Restrain Criminal ProsecutionGeneral rule: Court
will not issue writs of prohibition/ injunction preliminary or
final, to enjoin/ restrain criminal prosecution.Exceptions: When
injunction is necessary to afford adequate protection to the
constitutional rights of accused When it is necessary for the
orderly administration of justice or to avoid oppression or
multiplicity of actions When there is a prejudicial question which
is subjudice When the acts of the officer are without or in excess
of authority When prosecution is under an invalid law, ordinance or
regulation Double jeopardy Court has no jurisdiction over the
offense Case of persecution rather than prosecution Charges are
manifestly false and motivated by lust for vengeance When there is
clearly no prima facie case against the accused and a motion to
quash on that ground has been denied
Mandamus to Compel ProsecutionMatter of discretion (prosecutor):
to determine which persons appear responsible for a crimeMandatory:
the moment he finds one to be so liable it becomes his inescapable
duty to charge him and to prosecute him If despite sufficiency of
evidence, prosecutor refuses to file information, he abuses his
discretion tantamount to a deliberate refusal to perform a duty
enjoined by law Judicial review is allowed when it has been clearly
established that the prosecutor committed grave abuse of
discretion.
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION OF COURTSMTC, MCTC, Metropolitan Trial
CourtExcept in cases falling within the exclusive jurisdiction of
the RTC & the Sandiganbayan, the MTC shall exercise the
following criminal jurisdiction:1. EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
over all violations of city/ municipal ordinances committed within
their respective territorial jurisdiction 2. EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL
JURISDICTION over all offenses punishable with imprisonment not
exceeding 6 years irrespective of amount of fine (prision
correcional) There are offenses which even if punishable by prision
correcional are not cognizable by the MTC (libel RTC, some forms of
direct bribery Sandiganbayan)3. Where only penalty provided for by
law is a fine:EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION over offenses
punishable with a fine not more than P4,000.004. EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL
JURISDICTION over offenses involving damage to property through
criminal negligence 5. Violations of BP 22 6. SUMMARY PROCEDURE:a.
Violations of traffic laws, rules & regulations; violations of
rental law; violations of municipal/ city ordinancesb. All other
criminal cases where penalty prescribed by law is imprisonment not
exceeding 6 months or a fine not exceeding P1,000.00 or bothc.
Offenses involving damage to property through criminal negligence
where imposable fine does not exceed P10,000.007. SPECIAL
JURISDICTION to decide on applications for bail in criminal cases
in the absence of all RTC judges in a province/ cityRegional Trial
Court1. EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION in all criminal cases not
within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court/ tribunal/ body
(EXCEPT those falling under the exclusive and concurrent
jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan)2. APPELLATE JURISDICTION over
all cases decided by the MTC within its territorial jurisdiction3.
SPECIAL JURISDICTION to handle exclusively criminal cases as
designated by the SC4. Jurisdiction over criminal cases under
specific laws:a. Written defamation b. Jurisdiction of designated
courts over cases in violation of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs
Actc. Violations of intellectual property rights5. Money Laundering
cases
SandiganbayanSec. 4. Jurisdiction. The Sandiganbayan shall
exercise original jurisdiction in all cases involving:a. Violations
of Republic Act No. 3019, as amended, otherwise known as the
Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, Republic Act No. 1379, and
Chapter II, Section 2, Title VII of the Revised Penal Code, where
one or more of the principal accused are officials occupying the
following positions in the government, whether in permanent, acting
or interim capacity, at the time of the commission of the
offense:(1) Officials of the executive branch occupying the
positions of regional director and higher, otherwise classified as
grade 27 and higher, of the Compensation and Position
Classification Act of 1989 (Republic Act No. 6758), specifically
including:(a) Provincial governors, vice-governors, members of the
sangguniang panlalawigan, and provincial treasurers, assessors,
engineers, and other provincial department heads;(b) City mayors,
vice-mayors, members of the sangguniang panlungsod, city
treasurers, assessors, engineers, and other city department
heads;(c) Officials of the diplomatic service occupying the
position of consul and higher;(d) Philippine army and air force
colonels, naval captains, and all officers of higher rank;(e) PNP
chief superintendent and PNP officers of higher rank;(f) City and
provincial prosecutors and their assistants, and officials and
prosecutors in the Office of the Ombudsman and special
prosecutor;(g) Presidents, directors or trustees, or managers of
government-owned or controlled corporations, state universities or
educational institutions or foundations;(2) Members of Congress and
officials thereof classified as Grade "27" and up under the
Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989;(3) Members of
the judiciary without prejudice to the provisions of the
Constitution;(4) Chairmen and members of Constitutional
Commissions, without prejudice to the provisions of the
Constitution; and(5) All other national and local officials
classified as Grade "27" and higher under the Compensation and
Position Classification Act of 1989b. Other offenses or felonies
committed by the public officials and employees mentioned in
subsection (a) of this section in relation to their office.c. Civil
and criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection with
Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A.in cases where none of the
accused are occupying positions of SG27, or military & PNP
officers mentioned above, EOJ vested in proper RTC, MTC, or
MCTC.Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction where one or more of the
accused are officials occupying the positions enumerated in the law
Sandiganbayan shall exercise: EXCLUSIVE APPELLATE JURISDICTION over
final judgments, resolutions, orders of RTCs EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL
JURISDICTION over petitions for issuance of writs of mandamus,
prohibition, certiorari, habeas corpus, injunctions and other
ancillary writs and processes in aid of its appellate jurisdiction
and over petitions of similar nature, including quo warranto,
arising or that may arise in cases filed or which may be filed
under EO 1, 2, 14, 14-A.Offenses subject to the jurisdiction of the
Sandiganbayan:1. Violations of Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
(RA 3019)2. Act Declaring Forfeiture in Favor of the State Any
Property Found to Have Been Unlawfully Acquired by Any Public
Officer or Employee (RA 1379)3. Violations of Chapter II, Section
2, Title VII, Book II, RPC (bribery)4. Other offenses or felonies,
whether simple or complexed, committed by public officials
mentioned in (a) of Sec 4 in relation to their office5. Civil and
criminal offenses filed pursuant to and in connection with
Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-a (sequestration cases)
Should one or more of the officials charged have SG 27 or higher
for the Sandiganbayan to have jurisdiction?No. The law mentions SG
27 only in relation to the following officials: Officials of the
executive branch, occupying position of regional director &
higher Members of Congress or officials thereof All other national
and local officials Those others who were enumerated are subject to
the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan regardless of salary
grade.Geduspan v. PeopleFacts: Records showed that although
petitioner was a director of Region VI Philhealth she was not
occupying the position of Regional Director but that of Department
Manager A. She contended that it is classified under salary grade
26. Issue: Whether or not the Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over a
regional director/ manager of GOCCs organized under the Corporation
CodeRuling: The court found that petitioner held the position of
Department Director at the time of the commission of the offense
and that position is among those enumerated in RA 8249 (presidents,
directors or trustees, or managers of GOCCs, state universities or
educational institutions or foundations). Officials whose positions
may not be of grade 27 and higher but are included by express
provision of law are placed under the jurisdiction of said
court.Salary grade alone does not determine jurisdiction of the
Sandiganbayan. Serana v. SandiganbayanFacts: Petitioner claimed
that as student regent she was not a public officer since she
merely represented the students of the institution. She added that
she did not receive any salary thus could not fall under any salary
grade.Issue: Whether Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over a student
regentRuling: Yes. The petitioner is a public officer whose
position is covered by the law vesting jurisdiction over the
Sandiganbayan presidents, directors or trustees, or managers of
GOCCs, state universities or educational institutions or
foundations. Petitioner falls under this category. The board of
Regents of UP performs functions similar to those of a board of
trustees of a non-stock corporation. By express mandate of the law,
petitioner is a public officer as contemplated by PD 1606.
Compensation is not an essential element of a public office and is
merely incidental.
Offenses committed in relation to the office The relation has to
be such that, in the legal sense, the offense cannot exist without
the office The office must be a constituent element of the crime as
defined by statuteSanchez v. Demetriou: Even if the position is not
an essential ingredient of the offense charged, if the information
avers the intimate connection between the office and the offense,
this would bring the offense within the definition of an offense
committed in relation to the public office.An offense may be said
to have been committed in relation to the office if the offense is
intimately connected with the office of the offender and
perpetrated while he was in the performance of his official
functions even if public office is not an element of the offense
charge. Esteban v. SandiganbayanFacts: Accused filed motion to
quash the two informations filed against him for acts of
lasciviousness against a female casual employee assigned to his
office. He argued that the Sandiganbayan has no jurisdiction since
the alleged acts were not committed in relation to his office as a
judge.Ruling: SC sustained the Sandiganbayan. The information
alleged with clarity that the accused used his official position to
commit the acts charged. He could not have committed the crimes
charged were it not for his being the judge of the court where
victim was working. He had the authority to recommend appointment
of victim. People v. MontejoFacts: A city mayor was accused of
murder.Issue: Whether accused committed the murder in relation to
his officeRuling: Yes. The information sufficiently indicated the
existence of acts and events intimately connected to the public
office of the accused. It alleged that the murder was a consequence
of his act as a mayor, that he organized armed patrols and civilian
commandos and provided them with arms. He ordered the arrest and
maltreatment of the victim while acting as city mayor and leader of
the patrols. Information must contain the specific factual
allegations that would indicate the close intimacy between the
discharge of the official duties of the accused and the commission
of the offense, in order to qualify the crime as having been
committed in relation to public office (requirement is not complied
with if information merely alleges because such allegation is
merely a conclusion of law)No need to allege intimacy between
offense and official duties if public office is a constituent
element of the crime charged as provided for by statute
Offense is deemed to be committed in relation to public office
of accused when:a. Such office is an element of the crime chargedb.
When the offense charged is intimately connected with the discharge
of the official functions of the accused In Anti-Money Laundering
cases those committed by public officers and private persons who
are in conspiracy with the public officers shall be under the
jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan Crime of plunder does not absorb
forfeiture casesPlunder what is sought to be established is the
commission of the criminal acts in furtherance of the acquisition
of ill-gotten wealthForfeiture case all that the court needs to
determine, by preponderance of evidence, is the disproportion of
respondents properties to his legitimate income (unnecessary to
prove how he acquired such properties)
Summary procedure in criminal casesCases subject to summary
proceedings:a. Violations of traffic laws, rules and regulationsb.
Violations of the rental law and BP 22c. Violations of municipal or
city ordinancesd. All other criminal cases where the penalty
prescribed by law is imprisonment not exceeding 6 months or a fine
not exceeding P1,000.00 or bothe. Offenses involving damage to
property through criminal negligence where the imposable fine does
not exceed P10,000.00Summary proceedings: Filing may either be by
complaint or information In Metro Manila and other chartered
cities, filing shall be by information except when the offense is
one which cannot be prosecuted de officio If no cause/ ground to
hold accused dismissed Before conducting trial, court shall call
the parties to a preliminary conference during which the following
may be done Enter into a stipulation of facts Consider the
propriety of allowing the accused to enter a plea of guilty to a
lesser offense Take up such other matters to clarify the issues
& ensure a speedy disposition of the case Any admission accused
makes during preliminary conference must be reduced to writing and
signed by accused & counsel Actual direct examination of
witnesses not required (affidavits constitute their testimonies)
but they can be subjected to cross, re-direct, re-cross Court
cannot order arrest of accused except where ground is failure to
appear when required If arrested, may be released on bail or
recognizance Court shall promulgate judgment not later than 30 days
after termination of trialProhibited pleadings, motions and
petitions in summary procedure:1. Motion to quash complaint/
informationExceptions: Lack of jurisdiction over subject matter
Failure to comply with the barangay conciliation proceedings2.
Motion for bill of particulars3. Motion for new trial, or for
consideration of a judgment, or for reopening of trial4. Petition
for relief from judgment5. Motion for extension of time to file
pleadings, affidavits, or any other paper6. Memoranda7. Petition
for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition against any interlocutory
order issued by the court8. Motion to declare the defendant in
default9. Dilatory motions for postponement10. Reply11. Third-party
complaints12. Interventions
SYNOPSIS OF THE CRIMINAL LITIGATION PROCESSCriminal litigation
process: Presupposes prior commission of a crime Or at least the
perception that a crime has been committedMere commission of a
crime does not automatically trigger the application of the rules
of criminal procedure! Rules of criminal procedure only come into
operation only when acts are initiated that would put the offender
in contact with the law when the criminal act is brought to the
attention of duly constituted authoritiesBarangay conciliation
proceedings There are violations of laws/ ordinances which require
compliance with this Referral of a case to the Lupon for
conciliation/ settlement is required before a complaint, petition
or action is filed in court Cases not requiring barangay
conciliation Penalty is at least 4 years, 2 months, 1 day
Ways of instituting criminal action: Barangay conciliation
proceedings Filing complaint for purpose of PI Filing directly with
first level courts When a person is lawfully arrested without
warrant either by peace officer or private person When law
enforcement officers are in possession of information on possible
criminal activitiesArrest deemed lawful: when person arrested has
committed, was actually committing, was attempting to commit a
crime in the presence of person arresting when arrest was made
after a crime has just been committed and person making the arrest
has personal knowledge of facts and circumstances which makes him
believe that there is probable cause that the person to be arrested
has committed the offense When accused lawfully arrested without
warrant, no preliminary investigation only inquest BUT person
arrested can ask for PI after validly signing a waiver of Art. 125
RPC (Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper
judicial authorities) may apply for bail even before he is charged
in court even after filing of complaint/ information, person
arrested can ask for PI within 5 days from the time he learns of
the complaint/ information being filed If no inquest prosecutor
complaint may be filed by offended party or peace officer directly
with the court on the basis of the affidavit of the party or
arresting officer or person
Filing of the information or complaint and other
processesCriminal action Commenced by the filing of a complaint or
information in court Under the control and direction of the public
prosecutorComplaint/ information Required to be in writing Contains
at least 2 names People of the Philippines & person named as
offender Must state: Name of accused Name of offended party
Designation of offense Acts/ omissions constituting the offense
Specific qualifying and aggravating circumstances involved Must
also state cause of accusation
Implied institution of the civil actionCivil action (for
recovery of civil liability arising from the offense charged) is
deemed instituted with the criminal action.Exceptions: Waiver
Reserving the right Institution of civil action prior to criminal
actionIndependent civil actions are not deemed instituted they do
not legally arise from the offense charged and are independent
sources of liability After criminal action has commenced, separate
civil action (arising from offense) cannot be instituted until
final judgment in the criminal action. If criminal action filed
after civil action civil action will be suspended.Suspension of
civil action when the criminal action is commenced does not apply
to prejudicial questions in this case, it is the criminal action
which is suspended upon proper petition.Independent civil actions
can proceed independently of the criminal action.
Bail Can apply for bail before or after he is formally charged
Application shall be made in the court where his case is pending No
bail shall be allowed after a judgment of conviction has become
final Person in custody who is not yet charged in court may apply
for bail Application for bail shall not bar accused from
challenging validity of arrest Bail can be a matter of right/
matter of judicial discretion Even person charged with capital
offense may be allowed bail when evidence of guilt is not strong
Bail may be given in the form of: Corporate surety Property bond
Cash deposit Recognizance
Arraignment Formal mode and manner of implementing the
constitutional right of an accused to be informed of the nature and
cause of the accusation against him No trial in absentia if accused
escapes before arraignment Made in open court by judge/ clerk and
consists of furnishing accused with copy of the complaint/
information and the reading of the same in a language he
understands He then pleads guilty or not guiltyOptions of accused
before arraignment & plea: Bill of particulars if there are
defects in the information/ complaint which prevent him from
properly pleading to the charge and preparing for trial Suspension
of the arraignment when justifiable reason exists (ex. accused is
suffering from unsound mental condition) Move to quash to dismiss
complaint/ information Grounds: Facts charged do not constitute an
offense Court has no jurisdiction
Pre-trial conference- mandatory trial conferencePurpose is to
consider certain matters such as: Plea bargaining Stipulation of
facts Marking of evidence Waiver of objections to admissibility
Possible modification of order of trial The pre-trial order shall
bind the parties, limit the trial to matters not disposed of, and
control the course of the action during trial, unless modified to
prevent manifest injustice. All agreements reduced in writing and
signed by accused and counsel (otherwise they cannot be used
against the accused).
Trial Commences within 30 days from receipt of pre-trial order
Normally begins with the prosecution presenting its evidence
Exception: when accused admits the act/ omission charged but
interposes a lawful defense After prosecutions evidence, accused
may now present evidence Instead of presenting evidence, accused
may opt to move to dismiss by presenting a demurrer to evidence on
the ground of insufficiency of evidence may be presented with or
without leave of court Court can also dismiss case on its own
initiative after giving prosecution opportunity to be heard If
demurrer filed with leave of court is denied accused my present
evidence If demurrer filed without leave of court is denied
presenting of evidence by accused is waived
Judgment Adjudication by the court on the guilt or innocence of
the accused Imposition on accused of the proper penalty and civil
liability, if any Promulgated by reading it in presence of accused
Except for light offense in which it may be pronounced in presence
of counsel or representative
Post-judgment remedies Motion for modification of judgment/
setting aside of the same Move for new trial/ reconsideration
Motion for new trial predicated upon errors of law or
irregularities during trial and the discovery of new/ material
evidence Motion for reconsideration filed on grounds of errors of
law or fact in the judgment Court can grant new trial/
reconsideration on its own motion with consent of accused Appeal
from judgment of conviction Appellant can withdraw appeal before
record has been forward to the proper appellate court Can also be
withdrawn before rendition of the judgment judgment of court of
origin becomes final and case shall be remanded to the latter court
for execution of judgment
Cases from MTC, MTCC, MCTC appealed to the RTCCases from RTC
appealed to CA or SC Cases from CA or Sandiganbayan appealed to
SCAppeal to CA of cases decided by RTC in exercise of its appellate
jurisdiction = petition for review under Rule 42 (first level
courts RTC CA)Appeal in cases where penalty imposed by RTC is
reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment shall be by notice of
appeal to the CA = Rule 122 Review by CA is necessary before it is
elevated to the SCDecisions and final orders of the Sandiganbayan
appealable to SC = petition for review on certiorari under Rule
45
