CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

REMEDIAL NOTES 2004 - SIGMA RHO - CALLANTA & PARTNERS

Personal Copy Of ATTY. RENE CALLANTA , jr

Criminal Procedure(With The 2000 Amendments)PreliminariesCriminal ProcedureCriminal Law

Method Fixed By Law For The Apprehension And Prosecution Of A Person Who Is Accused Of A Crime And For His Punishment, Whenever ConvictedBranch Of The Law Which Declares What Acts Are Classified As Crimes, And Prescribes The Punishment For Committing Them

Criminal Jurisdiction Is The Authority To Hear And Try A Particular Offense And Impose The Punishment For It. (People Vs. Mariano, 71 Scra 600)Elements Of A Criminal Jurisdiction:1. Nature Of Offense And/Or The Penalty Attached Thereto;2. Territorial Jurisdiction Of The Court, I.E. Place Of Commission Of The Crime;*** Jurisdiction Is Determined By The Extent Of The Penalty Which The Law Imposes, On The Basis Of The Facts As Recited In The Complaint Or Information Constitutive Of The Offense Charged.*** Jurisdiction Of Criminal Court Is Determined By The Nature Of Offense And/Or Penalty Attached Thereto As Reflected In The Averments In The Complaint Or Information; (People Vs. Magallanes 249 Scra 212)Not Determined By:1) What May Be Meted Out To The Offender After Trial2) The Result Of The Evidence That Would Be Presented During The TrialJurisdiction Is Retained Regardless Of:1) Whether The Evidence Proves A Lesser Offense Than That Charged In The Information, 2) The Subsequent Happening Of Events, Although Of A Character Which Would Have Prevented Jurisdiction From Attaching In The First Instance.*** Jurisdiction Of Criminal Court Is Determined Not By The Penalty Finally Imposed But The Penalty Imposable Under The Law For The Offense (Dioquino Vs. Cruz Sept. 9, 1982) > Thus, Any Circumstances Which May Affect Criminal Liability Like Mitigating Or Aggravating Circumstances Must Not Be Considered In Determining Jurisdiction (Guevarra Vs. Almodovar 169 Scra 476)*** Once Vested, Jurisdiction Cannot Be Withdrawn Or Defeated By A Subsequent Valid Amendment Of The Information (People Vs. Chupeco 10 Scra 640)General Rule: Jurisdiction Of A Court To Try Criminal Action Is To Be Determined By The Law At The Time Of The Institution Of The Action. Exception: Where The Statute Expressly Provides, Or Is Construed That It Is Intended To Operate To Actions Pending Before Its Enactment, In Which Case, The Court Where The Criminal Action Is Pending Is Ousted Of Jurisdiction And The Pending Action Will Have To Be Transferred To The Other Tribunal Which Will Continue The Proceeding.Determination Of Jurisdiction Based On Penalty ImposedRtc- Exceeding 6 YearsMtc- Below 6 Years*** The Additional Penalty For Habitual Delinquency Is Not Considered In Determining Which Court Shall Have Jurisdiction Over A Criminal Case Because Such Delinquency Is Not A Crime*** Cases Wherein Fine Is The Only Penalty:Rtc- More Than 4,000 (Except: Reckless Imprudence Always Mtc )Mtc- Less Than 4,000 *** Where Penalty Of Imprisonment For Reckless Imprudence Falls Within Mtc But The Fine Falls Within Rtc, Jurisdiction Is Determined Not By The Penalty On Physical Injuries But By The Fine Imposable (People Vs. Malabanan 2 Scra 1185)*** Where The Charge Involves A Complex Crime, Jurisdiction Of The Court Is Determined By Looking At The Most Serious Penalty Imposable Of An Offense Forming Part Of The Complex Crime (Cuyos Vs. Garcia 160 Scra 302)*** Where The Imposable Penalty Involves Not Imprisonment But Destierro Only, The Jurisdiction Falls Within The Mtc, Destierro Under Rpc Is Following Arresto Mayor (People Vs. Eduarte 182 Scra 750)*** Where The Action Involves Libel, Although Punishable By Prision Correcional, The Jurisdiction To Try The Same Falls Within Rtc (People Vs. Mtc Of Qc 265 Scra 645)*** Where The Case Involves Violation Of Dangerous Drugs Act, Regardless Of Its Penalty, Jurisdiction Falls Within The Rtc (People Vs. Morales 283 Scra 211)*** Venue Is Jurisdictional. Thus: Action Must Be Instituted And Tried In The Municipality Or Territory Where The Offense Has Been Committed Or Where Any One Of The Essential Ingredients Thereof Took Place.*** Territorial Jurisdiction Of The Court Is Determined By The Allegations In The Complaint Or Information As To The Situs Of The Crime (Colmenares Vs. Villar May 29, 1970)*** In The Absence Of All Rtc Judges In A Province Or City, Any Mtc Judge May Hear And Decide Petitions For A Writ Of Habeas Corpus Or Applications For Bail In Criminal Cases In The Province Or City Where The Absent Rtc Judges Sit*** General Rule: The Question Of Jurisdiction May Be Raised At Any Stage Of The Proceedings. Exception: May Not Be Raised For The First Time On Appeal, Where There Has Been Estoppel And Laches On The Party Who Raises The Question.Jurisdiction Over The Territory Where The Offense Was Committed; General Rule: A Criminal Case Should Be Instituted And Tried In The Place Where The Offense Was Committed Or Any Of Its Essential Ingredients Took Place (People Vs. Mercado 65 Phil 665)Exceptions:1. Sc May Order Change Or Transfer Of Venue To Avoid A Miscarriage Of Justice; 2. Offenses Outside Of Phils Under Art. 2 Of Rpc;3. When The Law Expressly Provides Such As Offenses Cognizable By Sandiganbayan; 4. Under The Rules Of Court On Venue Where Crime Was Committed On Board An Aircraft, Vehicle Or Vessel;5. Continuing Crime Which May Be Filed Anywhere Where The Accused Is Arrested (Umil Vs. Ramos)6. Libel Or Written Defamation Which May Be Filed In Different Venue; 7. Piracy Which Is Triable Anywhere (Us Vs. Lol-Lo 43 Phil 1) Jurisdiction Over The Person Of The Accused - It Is Acquired By His/Her Arrest Or Voluntary Appearance (Republic Vs. Sunga 162 Scra 191), In Person Or Through Counsel, (Layosa Vs. Rodriguez Nov. 10, 1978) In Court By Filing A Pleading In The Court Where The Action Was Filed. Exceptions: Jurisdiction Over The Person Presupposes That Accused Is Within The Phil. Territory And Within The Physical Control Of The Court. Hence, If Accused Is In The Us Where He Filed A Motion To Dismiss, No Jurisdiction Was Acquired.Sanchez Vs. Demetriou, Et Al. (G.R. No. 111771 November 9, 1992)

If The Accused Filed A Motion To Quash The Information On The Ground That The Court Had No Jurisdiction Over His Person And, On The Additional Grounds That He Was Not Accorded A Valid Preliminary Investigation And That The Information Were Discriminatory And That The Sandiganbayan Had Exclusive Jurisdiction Over The Offense, He Thereby Submitted Himself To The Jurisdiction Of The Court. Even If The Accused Was Arrested Illegally But Later The Court Where The Case Was Filed Issued A Warrant For His Arrest And The Accused Was Arrested On The Basis Of Said Warrant, The Court Acquired Jurisdiction Over His Person.Giminez, Et Al. Vs. Nazareno (160 Scra 1)

Where The Detained Accused Has Been Arraigned But Escapes Before Trial, The Jurisdiction Acquired By The Court Over His Person Continues Until The Termination Of The Case, Notwithstanding The Escape Of The Accused. The Court May Hold Trial Against The Accused In Absentia And After Trial, Should Render A Decision. Where The Accused Escapes, He Thereby Waives His Right To Cross-Examine The Witnesses Of The Prosecution, His Right To Present Evidence In His Behalf And To Confront The Witnesses Against Him.People Vs. Mapalao (G.R. No. L-92415 May 14, 1991)

If The Accused Escapes From Confinement Or Prison Before Arraignment, And/Or Remain At Large After The Filing Of The Information He Has No Standing In Court And Cannot Apply For Bail Or Be Granted Any Other Relief By The Court Until He Submits Himself To Its Jurisdiction Or Is Arrested; Once The Accused Is Arrested And/Or Voluntary Surrenders, He Regains His Standing In Court.People Vs. Redolusa (255 Scra 279)

If The Accused Was Meted The Death Penalty And Accused Escaped From Detention, The Supreme Court Should Continue To Resolve The Appeal On The Merits Because The Supreme Court Is Mandated Under The Constitution To Do So.Summary Of Criminal Procedure:A) Commission Of A Crime Rules In Criminal Jurisdiction Comes Into Play S To What Court Should Take Cognizance Of The Act, Whether The Elements And Requisites Of Valid Exercise Are Present;B) Arrest Of The Accused Or Issuance Of Search Warrant Manner Of Applying For Warrant Of Arrest And Search Warrant And Incidental Matters Thereto; Rule 113 & 126 1. Issuance Of Warrant Of Arrest And Search Warrant; 2. Service Of Warrant And Search Warrant; 3. Warrantless Arrest And Warrantless Search;C) Custodial Investigation Application Of Miranda Rights And The Escobedo Doctrine And Other Concomitant Rights Of A Person Under Investigation For An Offense;D) Preliminary Investigation And Its Procedural Requirements;E) Filing Of A Complaint Or Information In The Court Including: 1. Prosecution Of Criminal Action And Required Form And Substance Of Complaint Or Information; 2. Rules On Amendments, Substitution And Venue Of Criminal Action; 3. Prosecution Of Civil Action Arising From The Crime And Independent Civil Action + Prejudicial Question. F) Application To Admit Bail And Related Rules And Also In Relation To Hold Departure Order (Hdo);G) Motion To Quash By The Accused And Double Jeopardy;H) Arraignment And Plea Of The Accused And Plea Bargaining;I) Pre-Trial And Its Procedural Requirements;J) Trial And The Speedy Trial Act Of 1991 And The Rights Of The Accused During The Trial; K) Remedies Available During Trial Including Demurrer To Evidence And Discharge To Be A State Witness;L) Judgment By The Court And Promulgation Of Decision;M) Remedies Of The Accused And After Judgment Including New Trial And Reconsideration And Automatic Review;N) Execution Of Service Of Sentence By The Convict;Rule 110Prosecution Of Offenses2000 AmendmentSec. 1. Institution Of Criminal Actions. Criminal Actions Shall Be Instituted As Follows:(A) For Offenses Where A Preliminary Investigation Is Required Pursuant To Section 1 Of Rule 112, By Filing The Complaint With The Proper Officer For The Purpose Of Conducting The Requisite Preliminary Investigation.(B) For All Other Offenses, By Filing The Complaint Or Information Directly With The Municipal Trial Courts And Municipal Circuit Trial Courts, Or The Complaint With The Office Of The Prosecutor. In Manila And Other Chartered Cities, The Complaint Shall Be Filed With The Office Of The Prosecutor Unless Otherwise Provided In Their Charters.The Institution Of The Criminal Action Shall Interrupt The Running Of The Period Of Prescription Of The Offense Charged Unless Otherwise Provided In Special Laws.________*** A Case Prescribes If Filed After The Prescriptive Period Although The Last Day Of The Prescriptive Period Is Sunday, A Legal Holiday Or A SaturdayZaldivia Vs. Judge Reyes (211 Scra 377)

The Filing Of The Criminal Complaint For Preliminary Investigation Suspends The Running Of The Prescriptive Period For The Crime. Where The Crime Is A Violation Of An Ordinance And Is Covered By The Rules Of Summary Procedure, The Prescriptive Period For The Crime Is Suspended Only When The Information Is Filed In Court. This Is Covered By Section 2 Of Act 326.Reodica Vs. Court Of Appeals (292 Scra 87)

However, If The Crime Covered By The Rules On Summary Procedure Is A Felony, Then, The Prescriptive Period Is Suspended Upon The Institution Of The Criminal Action With The Prosecutors Office.The Parties May Go Directly To Court Without Submitting The Matter Upon The Lupon Chairman In The Following Cases:1. Where The Accused Is Under Detention;2. Where A Person Has Otherwise Been Deprived Of Personal Liberty Calling For Habeas Corpus Proceedings;3. Where The Actions Are Coupled With Provisional Remedies Such As Preliminary Injunction, Attachment, Delivery Of Personal Property, And Support Pendente Lite; And4. Where The Action May Otherwise Be Barred By The Statute Of Limitations.Exceptions To The Authority Of The Lupon Of Each Barangay To Bring Together The Parties Actually Residing In The Same City Or Municipality For Amicable Settlement (Confrontation And Conciliation):1. Where One Party Is The Government Or Any Subdivision Or Instrumentality Thereof;2. Where One Party Is A Public Officer Or Employee, And The Dispute Relates To The Performance Of His Official Functions;3. Offenses Where There Is No Private Offended Party;4. Where The Dispute Involves Real Properties Located In Different Cities Or Municipalities Unless The Parties Thereto Agree To Submit Their Differences To Amicable Settlement By An Appropriate Lupon;5. Disputes Involving Parties Who Actually Reside In Barangays Of Different Cities Or Municipalities, Except Where Such Barangay Units Adjoin Each Other And The Other Parties Thereto Agree To Submit Their Differences To Amicable Settlement By An Appropriate Lupon;6. Such Other Classes Of Disputes Which The President May Determine In The Interest Of Justice Or Upon The Recommendation Of The Secretary Of Justice.*** Where A Preliminary Investigation Is Required, The Complaint Must Be Filed With The Proper Officer For The Purpose Of Conducting The Investigation.*** The Filing Of A Complaint For Purposes Of Preliminary Investigation Starts The Prosecution Process.Preliminary Investigation Is Required: Where The Offense Is Punishable By Imprisonment Of At Least Four (4) Years, Two (2) Months And One (1) Day, Without Regard As To The Fine Except As Provided In Section 7 Of Rule 112.*** Under The Amendment, The Institution Of All Criminal Actions Shall Be The Same, Including Those Offenses That Are Subject To The Rule On Summary Procedure In Relation To The Interruption Of The Period Of Prescription.*** In The Filing Of All Criminal Actions, Even Those Subject To Summary Procedure Shall Interrupt The Running Of The Prescriptive Period, Except Those Punishable By Special Laws.*** To Be Valid, Pardon Must Be Tended Before The Institution Of The Action*** Marriage Made In Good Faith Between The Offender & The Offended Party Prevents The Institution Of The Action > Other Co-Accused Also BenefitsSection 3. Complaint DefinedDefinition: A Complaint Is A Sworn Written Statement Charging A Person With An Offense, Subscribed By The Offended Party, Any Peace Officer, Or Other Public Officer Charged With The Enforcement Of The Law Violated. * The Complaint As Defined Under Sec. 3 Is Different From The Complaint Filed With The Prosecutors Office. The Complaint Filed With The Prosecutors Office, From Which The Latter May Initiate A Preliminary Investigation, Refers To:1) Any Written Complaint 2) Filed By An Offended Party Or Not3) Not Necessarily Under Oath, Except In 2 Instances: A. Complaint For Commission Of An Offense Which Cannot Be Prosecuted De Officio Or Is Private In Nature B. Where The Law Requires That It Is To Be Started By A Complaint Sworn To By The Offended Party, Or When It Pertains To Those Which Need To Be Enforced By Specified Public Officers.Requisites Of A Complaint:1. It Must Be In Writing And Under Oath;2. It Must Charge A Person With An Offense;3. It Must Be Subscribed By The Offended Party, By Any Peace Officer Or Public Officer Charged With The Enforcement Of The Law ViolatedPersons Who Can File A Complaint:1. Offended Party (Especially In Personal Crimes)2. Any Peace Officer3. Other Public Officer Charged With The Enforcement Of The Law Violated4. Chief Of Police In The Municipality5. Customs Authority6. Forestry Officials7. Internal Revenue Officers8. Officials Of The Bureau Of Posts*** A Private Offense Cannot Be Instituted Except Upon A Written Complaint Of The Offended Party*** Who Is The Real Offended Party? The People Of The Philippines, But Since The Crime Is Also An Outrage Against The Offended Party, He Is Entitled To Intervene In Its Prosecution In Cases Where The Civil Action Is Impliedly Instituted Therein.Under The Rule On Summary Procedure: - A Complaint May Be Directly Filed In The Mtc, Provided That In Metro Manila And In Chartered Cities, The Criminal Action May Only Be Commenced By The Filing Of Information, Which Means By The Prosecutor, Except When The Offense Cannot Be Prosecuted De Officio As In Private Crimes.Section 4. Information Defined.Definition: An Accusation In Writing A Person With An Offense, Subscribed By The Prosecutor And Filed With The Court.Requisites Of An Information:1. It Must Be In Writing;2. It Must Charge A Person With An Offense;3. It Must Be Subscribed By The Fiscal;4. It Must Be Filed In CourtComplaintInformation

1. Sworn Statement1. Need Not Be Sworn

2. Subscribed By The Offended Party, Any Peace Officer Or Other Officer Charged With The Enforcement Of The Law Violated

2. Subscribed By The Fiscal

3. It May Be Filed Either In Court Or In The Prosecutors Office3. It Is Filed With The Court

4. Usually Refers To Private Crimes4. Usually Refers To Public Crimes

*** Any Amendment To The Complaint Or Information After Arraignment Without Leave Of Court Is VoidSanchez Vs. Demetriou (G.R. No. 111771 November 9, 1992)

The Prosecutor Must Include In The Information All Persons Who Are Criminally Liable Of The Crime Charged. If The Prosecutor Failed To Do So, The Aggrieved Party May Request The Investigating Prosecutor To Amend The Information To Include Those Who Had Been Omitted. If The Prosecutor Refused, The Aggrieved Party May File A Petition For Review With The Secretary Of Justice. If The Latter Denies The Petition, Then The Aggrieved Party May File A Petition For Mandamus.Section 5. Who Must Prosecute Criminal Actions.Fiscals Discretion In ProsecutionFiscals Control The Prosecution Of Criminal Action Is An Executive Function, A Power Which Must Be Exercised By Fiscal Without Interference From The Court As To The Following Discretionary Matters: 1) Determination Of What Crime Should Be Filed Or What Case To File (People Vs. Pineda 20 Scra 748)2) Determination Of Who Are The Accused That Should Be Included In Information Or Whom To Prosecute (People Vs. Devaras 228 Scra 482)3) The Manner Of Prosecution Or How He Will Prosecute (People Vs. Nazareno 260 Scra 256)4) Right Of Prosecution To Withdraw Information Before Arraignment Even Without Notice And Hearing (Galvez Vs. Ca 237 Scra 685) Prior To Filing A Case In Court:1. A Prosecuting Attorney Cannot Be Compelled To File A Particular Information When He Is Convinced That He Does Not Have The Necessary Evidence.2. The Court Cannot Interfere With The Fiscals Discretion And Control Of The Criminal Prosecution.Remedies Against Acts Of Fiscal: 1) Mandamus If He Refuses To Include Co-Accused Or Amend Information If Evidence Warrants The Same;2) Appeal To Secretary Of Doj For The Exercise Of Its Supervisory Control; 3) Administrative Case Against Erring Fiscal Either In Csc Or In Disbarment;4) Criminal Charges Under Art. 208 Of Rpc For Negligence To Prosecute Or Tolerance Of The Crime; 5) Civil Action For Damages Under Art. 27 Of Ncc For Failure To Render Service Of Public Officer;6) Appointment For Another Fiscal;7) Refile The Case In Case No Double Jeopardy.After The Filing Of The Case:1. Once A Case Is Filed In Court, The Court Acquires Jurisdiction And Such Continues Until The Termination Of The Case.2. Criminal Prosecution Cannot Be Restrained Or Stayed By Injunction, Preliminary Or Final.3. Prosecutor Has No More Control Of The Case And Desired Relief Must Be Addressed To The Court.Courts Control- Once The Case Is Filed In The Court And It Acquired Jurisdiction Over The Same, Every Action Of The Fiscal Respecting The Information Or Complaint Is Subject To The Discretion Of The Court On The Following Matters: 1) Suspension Of Arraignment (Crespo Vs. Mogul) 2) Reinvestigation (Velasquez Vs. Usec Of Doj 182 Scra 388) 3) Downgrading An Offense Or Dropping Of An Accused (Rule 110 Sec. 14) 4) Prosecution Of The Fiscal (Sta Rosa Mining Vs. Zabala 153 Scra 367)5) Dismissal Of The Case (Dungog Vs. Ca 159 Scra 145)Limitations Of The Courts Control:A) Prosecution Is Entitled To Notice And Hearing Like Admission To Bail (Republic Vs. Sunga)B) Court Must Await Result Of Petition Of Review But In No Case Be More Than 60 Days From Filing Of Petition (Rule 116 Section 11) C) Prosecutions Stand To Maintain Prosecution Should Be Respected By The Court (People Vs. Montesa 248 Scra 641)D) Court Must Make Its Own Independent Assessment Of Evidence In Granting Or Dismissing Motion To Dismiss (Martinez Vs. Ca 237 Scra 575) Otherwise, Judgment Is Void. Crespo Vs. Mogul (157 Scra 462)

Distinction Between Control By The Public Prosecutor Of The Prosecution Of The Criminal Case And Control Of The Court Of The Disposition Of The Case. The Prosecutor Once The Information Is Filed, Retains The Direction And Control Of The Prosecution. However, The Disposition Of The Case Is The Exclusive Prerogative Of The Court.Roberts, Jr. Vs. Court Of Appeals (254 Scra307)

Under Doj Circular No. 223, Dated June 30, 1993, No Appeal From A Resolution Of The City Of Provincial Prosecutor Of Probable Cause Except When Manifest Error Or Grave Abuse Of Discretion Exists. In No Case May Appeal Be Made If The Accused Has Already Been Arraigned. If The Appellant Had Already Been Arraigned During The Pendency Of The Appeal, The Appeal Shall Be Made Motu Proprio. An Appeal/Motion For Reinvestigation From Finding The Probable Cause Shall Not Hold The Filing Of The Information.Offenses Prosecuted Only By The Offended Party:1. Adultery And Concubinage (By The Offended Spouse)2. Seduction, Abduction, And Acts Of Lasciviousnes (By Offended Party, Parents, Grandparents, Guardian, State)3. Defamation Which Consists In The Imputation Of An Offense Mentioned Above (By Offended Party)*** Rape Is Now Classified Under Crimes Against Persons. It May Now Be Filed By The Prosecutor. (Ra 8353)* Compliance Is Not Jurisdictional, But Merely A Condition Precedent. In The Sense That If Non-Compliance Is Not Objected To, The Action May Still Proceed.May A Criminal Prosecution Be Restrained By Injunction? General Rule: No.Reason: Public Interest Requires That Criminal Acts Be Immediately Investigated And Prosecuted For The Protection Of Society. Exceptions: 1) Where Injunction Is Justified By The Necessity To Afford Protection To The Constitutional Rights Of The Accused 2) When Necessary For The Orderly Administration Of Justice Or To Avoid Oppression Or Multiplicity Of Actions 3) When There Is A Prejudicial Question Which Is Sub Judice 4) When The Acts Of The Officer Are Without Or In Excess Of Authority 5) Where The Prosecution Is Under An Invalid Law, Ordinance Or Regulation 6) When Double Jeopardy Is Clearly Apparent 7) Where The Court Has No Jurisdiction Over The Offense 8) Where It Is A Case Of Persecution Rather Than Prosecution 9) Where The Charges Are Manifestly False And Motivated By The Lust For Vengeance10) When There Is Clearly No Prima Facie Case Against The Accused And The Motion To Quash On That Ground Has Been Denied11) Preliminary Injunction Has Been Issued By The Supreme Court To Prevent The Threatened Unlawful Arrest Of Petitioners.Private Prosecutor Participation:May A Public Prosecutor Allow A Private Prosecutor To Actively Handle The Conduct Of The Trial? Yes, Where The Civil Action Arising From The Crime Is Deemed Instituted In The Criminal Action.*** Public Prosecutor Must Be Present During The Proceedings And Must Take Over The Conduct Of The Trial From The Private Prosecutor At Any Time The Cause Of The Prosecution May Be Adversely Affected. Thus, Where The Prosecutor Has Turned Over The Active Conduct Of The Trial To The Private Prosecutor Who Presented Testimonial Evidence Even When The Public Prosecutor Was Absent During The Trial, The Evidence Presented Could Not Be Considered Valid Evidence Of The People. However, This Rule Applies Only To Courts Which Are Provided By Law With Prosecutors, And Not To Municipal Courts Which Have No Trial Prosecutors, In Which Case The Evidence Presented By The Private Prosecutor Can Be Considered As Evidence For The People.*** However, Under An Amendment Made By The Sc Effective May 1, 2002, Rule 110 Section 5 Now Provides That All Criminal Actions Either Commenced By Complaint Or By Information Shall Be Prosecuted Under The Direction And Control Of A Public Prosecutor. In Case Of Heavy Work Schedule Of The Public Prosecutor Or In The Event Of Lack Of Public Prosecutors, The Private Prosecutor May Be Authorized In Writing By The Chief Of The Prosecution Office Or The Regional State Prosecutor To Prosecute The Case Subject To The Approval Of The Court. Once So Authorized To Prosecute The Criminal Action, The Private Prosecutor Shall Continue To Prosecute The Case Up To The End Even In The Absence Of A Public Prosecutor, Unless The Authority Is Revoked Or Otherwise Withdrawn."

Ildefonso Liner, Inc. Vs. Court Of Appeals (289 Scra 568)

Where The Employee Is Charged Of Reckless Imprudence And Resulting In Damage To Property And Multiple Physical Injuries And The Private Complainant Was Represented By Private Prosecutor, The Insurance Company, Which Insured The Damaged Van And Paid The Proceeds Of The Insurance, Cannot Recover Anymore, In A Separate Civil Action Against The Accused. The Insurance Company, As A Subrogee, Merely Stepped Into The Shoes Of The Aggrieved Party.Rule Regarding Solicitor GeneralGeneral Rule: In Appeals, The Sol. Gen. Has Control. He May Abandon Or Discontinue The Prosecution Of The Case In The Exercise Of His Sound Discretion And May Even Recommend The Acquittal Of An Accused When He Believes That The Evidence Does Not Warrant His Conviction.Exception: Provided For In Ra 8249 Which States In Part That In All Cases Elevated To The Sandiganbayan And From The Sb To The Sc, The Office Of The Ombudsman, Through Its Special Prosecutor, Shall Represent The People Of The Philippines, Except In Cases Filed Pursuant To Eo Nos. 1, 2, 14 And 14-A, Issued In 1986.Section 6. Sufficiency Of Complaint Or Information.Minimum Requirements For A Valid Complaint Or Information:1. Name Of The Accused, Including Any Appellation Or Nickname-- When Offense Is Committed By More Than One Person, All Of Them Shall Be Included In The Complaint Or Information2. The Designation Of The Offense By The Statute3. The Acts Or Omissions Complained Of As Constituting The Offense4. The Name Of The Offended Party5. The Approximate Time Of The Commission Of The Offense6. The Place Wherein The Offense Was CommittedPurpose: To Safeguard The Constitutional Right Of An Accused To Be Informed Of The Nature And Cause Of The Accusation Against Him.*** When It Is Said That The Requirement Of Art. 344 Of Rpc Is Jurisdictional, What Is Meant Is That It Is The Complaint That Starts The Prosecutory Proceeding. It Is Not The Complaint Which Confers Jurisdiction On The Court To Try The Case. Once The Complaint Is Filed, Does Death Of The Complainant In A Crime Of Adultery Extinguish The Criminal Liability Of The Accused? No. The Participation Of The Offended Party In Private Crimes Is Essential Not For The Maintenance Of The Criminal Action But Solely For The Initiation Thereof. Any Pardon Given By The Complainant Or Her Death After The Filing Of The Complaint Would Not Deprive The Court Of The Jurisdiction To Try The Case.The Desistance Of Complainant: > Does Not Bar The People From Prosecuting The Criminal ActionBut: It Does Operate As A Waiver Of The Right To Pursue Civil Indemnity.People Vs. Asuncion (161 Scra 490)

If The Information Does Not Allege A Negative Averment Which Is An Essential Element Of The Crime, The Defect Cannot Be Cured Evidence Or Want Of License Or Authority To Possess A Firearm. The Information Does Not Exist In Law And Cannot Thus Be Cured. Besides, That Would Deprive The Accused Of His Right To Be Informed Of The Nature Of The Charge Against Him.Sec. 7. Name Of The Accused* If Name Is Known: The Name And Surname Of The Accused Or Any Appellation Or Nickname By Which He Has Been Or Is Known.* If Name Cannot Be Ascertained: A Fictitious Name With A Statement That His True Name Is Unknown. * If True Name Thereafter Disclosed: Such True Name Shall Be Inserted In The Complaint Or Information And Record.*** While One Or More Persons, Along With Specified And Named Accused, May Be Sued As John Does, An Information Against All Accused Described As John Does Is Void, And An Arrest Warrant Against Them Is Also Void.2000 AmendmentSec. 8. Designation Of The Offense. The Complaint Or Information Shall State The Designation Of The Offense Given By The Statute; Aver The Acts Or Omissions Constituting The Offense, And Specify Its 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. 9. Cause Of The Accusation. 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 And For The Court To Pronounce Judgment. ________The Information Or Complaint Must State Or Designate The Following Whenever Possible:1. The Designation Given To The Offense By The Statute.2. The Statement Of The Acts Or Omissions Constituting The Same, In Ordinary, Concise & Particular Words.-- If There Is No Such Designation, Reference Should Be Made To The Section Or Subsection Punishing It.3. The Specific Qualifying And Aggravating Circumstances Must Be Alleged.*** The Title Or Designation Of The Offense Is Not Controlling. It Is The Actual Facts Recited In The Information That Determines The Nature Of The Crime.*** Allegations Prevail Over The Designation Of The Offense In The Information. The Accused May Therefore Be Convicted Of A Crime More Serious Than That Named In The Title Or Preliminary Part If Such Crime Is Covered By The Facts Alleged In The Body Of The Information And Its Commission Is Established By Evidence.*** In Case Of A Conflict Between The Designation Of The Crime And The Recital Of Facts Constituting The Offense, The Latter Prevails Over The Former.*** The Real Question Is Not, Did He Commit A Crime Given In The Law Some Technical And Specific Name, But Did He Perform The Acts Alleged In The Body Of The Information. If He Did, It Is Of No Consequence To Him, Either As A Matter Of Procedure Or Of Substantive Right, How The Law Denominates The Crime.*** If One Or More Elements Of The Offense Have Not Been Alleged In The Information, The Accused Cannot Be Convicted Of The Offense Charged, Even If The Missing Elements Have Been Proved During Trial( Even The Accuseds Entering A Plea Of Guilty To Such Defective Information Will Not Cure The Defect Nor Justify His Conviction Of The Offense ChargedLimitation To The Above Rule:An Accused Could Not Be Convicted Under One Act When He Is Charged With A Violation Of Another If The Change From One Statute To The Other Involves:A) Change Of The Theory Of The TrialB) Requires The Defendant A Different DefenseC) Surprises The Accused In Anyway*** Complaint Must Include The Time And Place Of Commission, Whenever Necessary, And The Name Of The Offended Party.*** Qualifying And Aggravating Circumstances Are Now Required To Be Alleged In The Complaint Or Information. The Failure To Specifically Allege Either Circumstance, Even If Proved, Cannot Be Taken Into Account.Cause Of Accusation*** If One Or More Elements Of The Offense Have Not Been Alleged In The Information, The Accused Cannot Be Convicted Of The Offense Charged, Even If The Missing Elements Have Been Proved During The Trial. - Even The Accuseds Entering A Plea Of Guilty To Such Defective Information Will Not Cure The Defect, Nor Justify His Conviction Of The Offense Charged.*** Where The Law Alleged To Have Been Violated: - Prohibits Generally Acts Therein Defined - Is Intended To Apply To All Persons Indiscriminately, - But Prescribes Certain Limitations Or Exceptions From Its ViolationThe Information Is Sufficient If It Alleges Facts Which The Offender Did As Constituting A Violation Of Law, Without Explicitly Negating The Exception, As The Exception Is A Matter Of Defense Which The Accused Has To Prove.*** Where The Law Alleged To Have Been Violated - Applies Only To Specific Classes Of Persons And Special Conditions - The Exemptions From Its Violation Are So Incorporated In The Language Defining The Crime That The Ingredients Of The Offense Cannot Be Accurately And Clearly Set Forth If The Exemption Is Omitted,The Information Must Show That The Accused Does Not Fall Within The Exemptions.*** Where What Is Alleged In The Information Is A Complex Crime And The Evidence Fails To Support The Charge As To One Of The Component Offenses, The Defendant Can Only Be Convicted Of The Offense Proven.Sec. 10. Place Of Commission Of The OffenseMay Conviction Be Had Even If It Appears That The Crime Was Committed Not At The Place Alleged In The Information? Yes, Provided The Place Of Actual Commission Was Within The Jurisdiction Of The Court. Unless: The Particular Place Of Commission Is An Essential Element Of The Offense Charged. Sec. 11. Date Of The Commission Of The OffenseWhat Is The Determinative Factor In The Resolution Of The Question Involving A Variance Between The Allegation And Proof In Respect Of The Date Of The Crime? The Element Of Surprise On The Part Of The Accused And His Inability To Defend Himself Properly.Section 12. Name Of The Offended Party.*** In Case Of Offenses Against Property, The Designation Of The Name Of The Offended Party Is Not Absolutely Indispensable; If Unknown, The Subject Property Must Be Described With Particularity That It Can Be Properly Identified.*** To Constitute Larceny, Robbery, Embezzlement, Obtaining Money By False Pretenses, Malicious Mischief, Etc., The Property Obtained Must Be That Of Another Person, And Indictment For Such Offense Must Name The Owner And A Variance In This Respect Between The Indictment And The Proof Will Be Fatal.Pilapil Vs. Somera (June 30, 1989)

The Offended Party Must Have The Capacity To File The Criminal Action At The Time Of The Institution Of The Criminal Action. So That Even If The Victim Was Still A Minor At The Time Of The Commission Of The Crime But The Criminal Action Is Filed When The Offended Party Is Already 18 Years Of Age Or Above, Only The Offended Party May Give His Consent To The Charge.Section 13. Duplicity Of Offense.General Rule: A Single Complaint Or Information Must Charge Only One Offense.Exception: Complex Crimes -- Where The Law Prescribes A Single Punishment For Various Crimes*** Where What S Alleged In The Information Is A Complex Crime And The Evidence Fails To Support The Charge As To The One Of The Component Offenses, The Defendant Can Only Be Convicted Of The Offense ProvenWaiver: *** When The Accused Fails, Before Arraignment, To Move For The Quashal Of The Information Which Charges 2 Or More Offenses, He Thereby Waives The Objection And May Be Found Guilty Of As Many Offenses As Those Charged And Proved During The Trial.*** Where The Law With Respect To An Offense Which May Be Committed In Any Of The Different Modes Provided By Law, The Indictment In The Information Is Sufficient If The Offense Is Alleged To Have Been Committed In One, Two Or More Modes Specified Therein. The Various Ways Of Committing The Offense Should Be Considered As A Description Of Only One Offense And The Information Cannot Be Dismissed On The Ground Of Multifariousness.2000 AmendmentSec. 14. Amendment Or Substitution. (Now Requires) Any Amendment Before Plea, Which Downgrades The Nature Of The Offense Charged In Or Excludes Any Accused From The Complaint Or Information, Can Be Made Only Upon Motion By The Prosecutor, With Notice To The Offended Party And With Leave Of Court. The Court Shall State Its Reasons In Resolving The Motion And Copies Of Its Order Shall Be Furnished All Parties, Especially The Offended Party.________*** Before Entering Plea, Amendment Of A Complaint Or Information Is A Matter Of Right, In Substance And In Form.*** Before The Accused Enters His Plea, The Prosecutor May:- Upgrade The Offense- Allege Qualifying And Aggravating Circumstances Or- Change The Offense ChargedWithout Leave Of Court, Provided There Is Evidence Thereon Which Has Been Presented During The Preliminary Investigation. *** If The Amendment Downgrades The Offense Or Excludes One Of The Accused, It Can Only Be Made Upon Motion By The Prosecutor, With Notice To The Offended Party And With Leave Of Court. *** The Court Shall State The Reasons In Resolving The Motion And Copies Thereof Furnished All Parties, Especially The Offended Party.*** After The Plea And During The Trial, Amendment Is A Matter Of Judicial Discretion (Requires Leave Of Court) But Only As To Matters Of Form, And When The Same Can Be Done Without Prejudice To The Rights Of The Accused.*** Technically, Paragraph 2 Of Section 14 Does Not Refer To Amendment, But To Substitution Of The Complaint Or Information By A New One. If The Substitution Is Made Before The Accused Enters His Plea, The Question Of Double Jeopardy Does Not Arise. If The Filing Of New Information Is Done After The Plea And Before Judgment On The Ground That There Has Been A Mistake In Charging The Proper Offense, The Filing Thereof May Only Be Allowed If It Will Not Place The Accused Twice In Jeopardy.*** If A Complaint Is Erroneous In Charging The Proper Offense, The Courts Must Dismiss It Upon Filing Of A New One. (Sec. 19, Rule 119)AmendmentSubstitution Of Information Or Complaint

1. May Involve Either Formal Or Substantial Changes1. Involves Substantial Change From The Original Charge

2. Amendment Before The Plea Has Been Entered Can Be Effected Without Leave Of Court.2. Substitution Of Information Must Be With Leave Of Court As The Original Information Has To Be Dismissed.

3. Amendment Is Only As To Form, There Is No Need For Another Preliminary Investigation And The Retaking Of The Plea Of The Accused.3. Another Preliminary Investigation Is Entailed And The Accused Has To Plead Anew To The New Information

4. An Amended Information Refers To The Same Offense Charged In The Original Information Or To An Offense Which Necessarily Includes Or Is Necessarily Included In The Original Charge, Hence Substantial Amendments To The Information After The Plea Has Been Taken Cannot Be Made Over The Objection Of The Accused, For If The Original Information Would Be Withdrawn, The Accused Could Invoke Double Jeopardy.4. Requires Or Presupposes That The New Information Involves A Different Offense Which Does Not Include Or Is Not Necessarily Included In The Original Charge, Hence The Accused Cannot Claim Double Jeopardy.

Substantial Amendment Consists Of The Recital Of Facts Constituting The Offense Charged And Determinative Of The Jurisdiction Of The Court; Formal Amendment Consists Of Amendments: 1. It Does Not Involve A Change In The Basic Theory Of The Prosecution2. It Does Not Affect Nor Alter The Nature Of The Offense Charged Or3. It Does Not Deprive The Accused Of Fair Opportunity To Present His Defense.Limitation To The Rule On Substitution:1. No Judgment Has Yet Been Rendered.2. The Accused Cannot Be Convicted Of The Offense Charged Or Of Any Other Offense Necessarily Included Therein.3. The Accused Would Not Be Placed In Double Jeopardy.Prejudicial To The Accused Means Where The Proposed Amendment:(I) The Defense Of The Accused Under The Original Information Would No Longer Be Available After Amendment Is Made And (Ii) When Any Evidence That The Accused Might Have Would Be Inapplicable To The Amended InformationTest As To Whether A Defendant Is Prejudiced By An Amendment: 1) Whether A Defense Under The Information As It Originally Stood Would Be Available After The Amendment Is Made, And 2) Whether Any Evidence Defendant Might Have Would Be Equally Applicable To The Information In The New Form As In The Other.*** Amendment For Purposes Of Including An Additional Accused Is Only Amendment As To From Since There Was No Change Of Prosecutions Theory (People Vs. Ca 1988) However, Amendment For Purposes Of Including An Additional Accused But Introducing Alternative Imputation Inconsistent With The Original Information Is A Substantial Amendment (People Vs. Zulueta 23 Phil 300) General Rule: After Arraignment, The Prosecutor May No Longer Amend The Information Which Changes The Nature Of The Crime, As It Will Prejudice The Substantial Rights Of The Accused. Exception: When A Fact Supervenes Which Changes The Nature Of The Crime Charged In The Information Or Upgrades It To A Higher Crime, The Prosecutor, With Leave Of Court, May Amend The Information To Allege Such Supervening Fact And Upgrade The Crime Charged To The Higher Crime Brought About By Such Supervening Fact.However: If The Supervening Event Which Changes The Nature Of The Crime To A More Serious One Occurred After The Accused Has Been Convicted, Which Makes The Amendment Of The Information No Longer The Remedy Of The Prosecution, The Prosecution Can And Should Charge The Accused For Such More Serious Crime, Without Placing The Accused In Double Jeopardy, There Being No Identity Of The Offense Charged In The First Information And In The Second One.*** Section 14 Applies Only To Original Case And Not To Appealed Case.Galvez Vs. Court Of Appeals (237 Scra 685)

There Is No Need For Notice Of Hearing Of An Ex-Parte Motion To Withdraw Information If Filed Before Arraignment.

Under Section 19, Rule 119 Of The 1985 Rules Of Summary Procedure, Where It Becomes Manifest That There Is A Mistake In Charging The Proper Offense, The Court, May During Trial, Motu Proprio, Order The Prosecution To Charge The Proper Offense Or The Prosecution Of The Accused May So Move, This Is Done During Trial.

An Order Based On Nolle Prosequi Is An Order Of Dismissal. If A Case Is Dismissed On A Nolle Prosequi, Before Arraignment, The Same May Be Refiled In A Court Other Than Where The Original Case Was Filed Without Violating The Rule That The Court First Acquiring The Jurisdiction Will Retain The Case Until It Is Terminated Because The Jurisdiction Of The Court In The Original Case Terminated Upon The Nolle Prosequi.People Vs. Montenegro (G.R. No. 45772 March 25, 1988)

An Amendment Which Merely States With Additional Precision Something Which Is Already Contained In The Original Information And Which Therefore, Adds Nothing Essential For Conviction For The Crime Charged, Is An Amendment Of Form That Can Be Made At Anytime.Teehankee Vs. Judge Madayag (G.R. No. 103102 March 6, 1992)

Death Of A Victim Is A Supervening Event, Thus If The Accused Was Charged Of Frustrated Homicide And During The Trial The Victim Died, The Amendment From Frustrated Homicide To Homicide Is Merely Formal And Not A Substantial Amendment.Ceferino Regala Vs. Judge (77 Phil 684)

The Supreme Court Held That It Was Merely A Formal Amendment Where, In The Amended Information, Two Other Accused Were Included And An Allegation Of Conspiracy Was Incorporated. The Allegation Of Conspiracy Did Not Change The Theory Of The Prosecution That The Accused Did Commit The Crime Deliberately.Transitory And Continuing Offenses Distinguished:Transitory Offense One Where Any Of The Essential Elements Of The Offense Took Place In Different PlacesContinuing Offense One Which Is Consummated In One Place, Yet By Reason Of The Nature Of The Offense, The Violation Of The Law Is Deemed Continuing.*** Offenses Are Continuing Or Transitory Upon The Theory That There Is A New Commission, Continuance Or Repetition Of The Offense Wherever The Defendant May Be Found.*** In Both Offenses, The Court Of Either Province, In Which Some Acts Material And Essential To The Crime And Requisite To Its Consummation Occur, Has Jurisdiction; It Being Understood That The First Court Taking Cognizance Of The Case Will Exclude The Others.Section 15. Place Where Action Is To Be Instituted.*** Venue In Criminal Case Is Jurisdictional, Being An Essential Element Of Jurisdiction.General Rule: Penal Laws Are Territorial; Hence Philippine Courts Have No Jurisdiction Over Crimes Committed Outside The Philippines. Exceptions: Those Provided In Article 2 Of The Revised Penal Code. Those Who Commit Any Of The Crimes Contemplated Therein Can Be Tried By Philippine Courts.*** A Crime May Be Prosecuted Where It Was Committed Or Where Any Of The Elements Of The Offense Occurred*** To Determine The Correct Venue, The Vital Point Is The Allegation In The Complaint Or Information Of The Situs Of The Offense Charged. If The Complaint Or Information Alleges That The Crime Was Committed In The Place Where The Court Has Jurisdiction, Then The Court Can Hear And Decide The Case.*** Venue In Criminal Cases Is An Element Of Jurisdiction; Hence It Cannot Be Waived, Or Changed By Agreement Of The Parties, Or By The Consent Of The Defendant. *** Where The Crime Charged Is A Complex Crime, The Rtc Of Any Province In Which Any One Of The Essential Elements Of Such Complex Crime Had Been Committed Has Jurisdiction To Take Cognizance Of The Offense.Continuing Offense Vs. Local OffenseContinuing Offense Is One Where The Elements Of Which Occur In Several Places, Unlike A Local Offense - One Which Is Fully Consummated In One Place.Offenses Subject Of Special Venue From The Phrase Subject To Existing Laws:1) Cases Cognizable By Sandiganbayan Regardless Of The Place Of Commission As Long As It Involves Public Officer In Relation To His Office With A Grade Of 27 Or Higher; 2) Libel May Be Cognizable By The Court Of The Place Where (1) The First Articles Was Published (2) Residence Of Offended Party; 3) Transfer Of Venue To Avoid Miscarriage Of Justice Under The 1987 Constitution 4) Piracy Which Is Triable Anywhere (Us Vs. Lol-Lo 43 Phil 1)Piracy The Jurisdiction Of Piracy, Unlike All Other Crimes, Has No Territorial Limits.In Bp 22 Cases, File Case:1) Where Check Was Delivered2) Where Check Was Dishonored3) If Crossed-Check, Place Of Depository Or Collecting BankExamples Of Venue Of Crimes CrimeVenue

TheftPlace Where Taking Was Effected Or Consummated No The Place Of Recovery.

Falsification Place Where The Subject Documents Was Actually Falsified Not The Place Of Use.

Estafa Or MalversationPlace Where Deceit Was Actually Committed Or Where He Is Duty Bound To Account The Goods

Bp 22Place Where The Check Was Issued Or Where It Bounced

PerjuryPlace Where It Was Presented Not Where It Was Executed

Kidnapping Or Illegal Detention Place Where Person Was Deprived Of Liberty

Escape Or Evasion Of Service Of SentencePlace Where Prisoner Escaped Or Where He May Be Found

Violation Of Conditional PardonPlace Where Violation Was Committed

LibelPlace Where The Article Was Printed And Was First Published Or Where Offended Party Actually Resides Or Where A Public Officer Is Involve In Rtc Of That Place.

Section 16. Intervention Of The Offended Party In Criminal Action.*** It Is Axiomatic That The Prosecution Of A Criminal Case Is The Responsibility Of The Government Prosecutor And Must Always Be Under His Control. This Is True Even If A Private Prosecutor Is Allowed To Assist Him And Actually Handles The Examination Of The Witnesses And The Introduction Of Other Evidence. The Witness, Even If They Are The Complaining Witnesses, Cannot Act For The Prosecutor In The Handling Of The Case. Their Only Function Is To Testify.*** Where The Offended Party Withdrew A Reservation To File A Separate Civil Action, The Private Prosecutor May Still Intervene In The Prosecution Of The Criminal Case, By Conducting The Examination Of Witnesses Under The Control Of The Prosecutor. *** However: Once The Offended Party Has Filed A Separate Civil Action Arising From The Crime, He May Not Withdraw Such Civil Case In Order To Intervene In The Criminal Prosecution. He Loses The Right To Intervene. He No Longer Has Any Standing In The Criminal Case, Except To Be A Prosecution Witness.Where A Criminal Action Has Been Provisionally Dismissed Upon Motion Of The Prosecutor, Can The Case Be Revived Upon Motion Of The Offended Party? No, Because The Offended Party Or Complaining Witness Cannot Act For The Prosecutor. Rule 111Prosecution Of Civil ActionsLimited To Those Arising From The Offense Charged.2000 AmendmentSec. 1. Institution Of Criminal And Civil Actions. (A) When A Criminal Action Is Instituted, The Civil Action For The Recovery Of Civil Liability Arising From The Offense Charged Shall Be Deemed Instituted With The Criminal Action Unless The Offended Party Waives The Civil Action, Reserves His Right To Institute It Separately, Or Institutes The Civil Action Prior To The Criminal Action.* * *Except As Otherwise Provided In These Rules, No Filing Fees Shall Be Required For Actual Damages.No Counterclaim, Cross-Claim Or Third Party Complaint May Be Filed By The Accused In The Criminal Case, But Any Cause Of Action Which Could Have Been The Subject Thereof May Be Litigated In A Separate Civil Action.(B) The Criminal Action For Violation Of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 Shall Be Deemed To Include The Corresponding Civil Action. No Reservation To File Such Civil Action Separately Shall Be Allowed.Upon Filing Of The Aforesaid Joint Criminal And Civil Actions, The Offended Party Shall Pay In Full The Filing Fees Based On The Amount Of The Check Involved, Which Shall Be Considered As The Actual Damages Claimed. Where The Complaint Or Information Also Seeks To Recover Liquidated, Moral, Nominal, Temperate Or Exemplary Damages, The Offended Party Shall Pay Additional Filing Fees Based On The Amounts Alleged Therein. If The Amounts Are Not So Alleged But Any Of These Damages Are Subsequently Awarded By The Court, The Filing Fees Based On The Amount Awarded Shall Constitute A First Lien On The Judgment.Where The Civil Action Has Been Filed Separately And Trial Thereof Has Not Yet Commenced, It May Be Consolidated With The Criminal Action Upon Application With The Court Trying The Latter Case. If The Application Is Granted, The Trial Of Both Actions Shall Proceed In Accordance With Section 2 Of This Rule Governing Consolidation Of The Civil And Criminal Actions. (Circ. 57-97)________*** Under The Present Rule, Only The Civil Liability Arising From The Offense Charged Is Deemed Instituted With The Criminal; It May And Should Be Enforced Only In A Single Proceeding To Avoid Multiplicity Of Suits. *** The 1988 Amendments On Implied Institution Of Criminal And Civil Actions Arising From The Same Act Or Omission Including Damages Under Arts. 32,33,34 And 2176 Of The Civil Code No Longer Applies. They Are No Longer Deemed Impliedly Instituted With The Criminal Action Or Considered As Waived Even If There Is No Reservation. Quasi-Delict Is No Longer Deemed Instituted With The Criminal Action.*** The Present Rule Virtually Adopts The Ruling In Elcano Vs. Hill (77 Scra 98) Where It Was Expressly Held That The Extinction Of The Civil Liability Referred To In Paragraph C, Sec. 2 Of Rule 111, Refers Exclusively To Civil Liability Arising From Crime; Whereas, The Civil Liability For The Same Act Considered As A Quasi-Delict Is Not Extinguished Even By A Declaration In The Criminal Case That The Criminal Act Charged Has Not Happened Or Has Not Been Committed By The Accused.*** Both Actions May Proceed Separately; The Only Limitation Is The Prohibition To Recover Damages Twice Based On The Same Act Or Omission.*** Recovery Of Civil Liability Under Arts. 32, 33, 34 And 2176 Of The Civil Code Arising From The Same Act Or Omission May Be Prosecuted Separately Even Without A Reservation. The Reservation And Waiver Herein Refers Only To The Civil Action For The Recovery Of Civil Liability Arising From The Offense Charged.*** The Employer May Not Be Held Civilly Liable For Quasi-Delict In The Criminal Action As Ruled In Maniago V. Court Of Appeals Since Quasi-Delict Is Not Deemed Instituted With The Criminal. If At All, The Only Civil Liability Of The Employer In The Criminal Action Would Be His Subsidiary Liability Under The Revised Penal Code.Instances When Civil Liability Arising From Offense Charged Not Concurrently Determined In The Criminal Action:1. When The Offended Party Waives The Civil Action2. When The Offended Party Reserves His Right To Institute A Separate Civil Action 3. When The Offended Party Institutes A Civil Action Prior To The Criminal Action.When Reservation Shall Be Made: Reservation To Institute A Separate Civil Action Shall Be Made:1. Before The Prosecution Starts To Present Its Evidence 2. Under Circumstances Affording The Offended Party To A Reasonable Opportunity To Make Such Reservation.Purpose: To Prevent The Offended Party From Recovering Damages Twice For The Same Act Or Omission.*** The Reservation Applies Only To The Civil Liability Arising From The Offense Charged*** The Rule Requiring Reservation To File A Separate Civil Action Does Not Apply To Civil Actions Which Can Be Filed And Prosecuted Independently Of The Criminal Action, Namely, Those Provided In Arts. 32, 33, 34 And 2176 Of The Civil Code.Two Instances Where No Reservation Shall Be Allowed:1) A Criminal Action For Violation Of Bp 22 - Unless A Separate Civil Action Has Been Filed Before The Institution Of The Criminal Action, No Such Civil Action Can Be Instituted After The Criminal Action Has Been Filed As The Same Has Been Included Therein.2) A Claim Arising From An Offense Which Is Cognizable By The Sandiganbayan. - A Civil Action Filed Prior To The Criminal Action Has To Be Transferred To The Subsequently Filed Criminal Action For Joint Hearing (Sec. 4 Of Pd1606 As Amended By Ra 8249)Maniago Vs. Court Of Appeals (252 Scra 674)

If The Aggrieved Party Makes A Reservation Or Institutes A Separate Civil Action Against The Employer Under Art. 2180 Of The Ncc, Then, There Will Be No Civil Liability Against The Employee To Be Pronounced By The Court.

If There Is No Reservation And The Aggrieved Party Did Not File A Separate Civil Action Against The Employer And The Court Convicts The Employee, The Judgment Of The Court Is Binding On The Employer On The Latters Subsidiary Liability And Hence, If The Employee Is Found Involved, The Aggrieved Party May Be Issued A Writ Of Execution For The Enforcement Of The Civil Liability Against The Employer. This Is Without Prejudice To The Recovery Of The Employer Against The Employee.Acquittal In A Criminal Case Does Not Bar Continuation Of The Civil Case Where:1. The Acquittal Is Based On Reasonable Doubt 2. The Decision Contains A Declaration That The Liability Of The Accused Is Not Criminal But Only Civil3. The Civil Liability Is Not Derived From Or Based On The Criminal Act Of Which The Accused Is Acquitted.Important!: Section 1, Rule 111 Now Expressly Provides That No Counterclaim, Cross-Claim Or Third-Party Complaint May Be Filed By The Accused In The Criminal Case, But Any Cause Of Action Which Could Have Been Subject Thereof May Be Litigated In A Separate Civil Action. Reasons: 1) The Counterclaim Of The Accused Will Unnecessarily Complicate And Confuse The Criminal Proceedings; 2) The Trial Court Should Confine Itself To The Criminal Aspect And The Possible Civil Liability Of The Accused Arising Out Of The Crime.In Bp 22 Cases, The Civil Action Is Mandatorily Included In The Criminal Action. Filing Fee Shall Be Based On The Amount Of The Check Involved (Actual Damage). In Other Cases, No Filing Fees Shall Be Required For Actual Damages.Javier Vs. Intermediate Appellate Court (171 Scra 605)

On The Civil Action For The Civil Liability Of The Accused Is Impliedly Instituted With The Criminal Action. The Claim For Damages Of The Accused Against The Private Complainant Is Not Impliedly Reserved. The Court Must Limit The Determination Of The Criminal Liability Of The Accused And The Civil Liability Of The Accused Arising From The Criminal Case.*** Although The Criminal And Civil Actions May Be Joined In The Criminal Case, They Are Distinct From Each Other. The Plaintiffs In The Two Actions Are Different. Thus: Even If The Accused Started Serving His Sentence Within The 15-Day Period From The Promulgation Of The Judgment Of Conviction By The Lower Court, Thereby Making The Judgment Against Him Final, The Complainant May, Within The 15-Day Reglementary Period, Still Ask That The Civil Liability Be Fixed By The Court, If The Judgment Does Not Adjudicate Any Civil Liability, As The Judgment Regarding Civil Liability Has Not Become Final And The Court Still Has Jurisdiction To Adjudge The Civil Liability.*** The Offended Party In A Criminal Case May Appeal The Civil Aspect Despite The Acquittal Of The Accused. *** Where The Trial Court Convicted The Accused, But Dismissed The Civil Action Instituted Therein, The Offended Party May Appeal The Dismissal To The Ca.Compromise On Civil Aspect:* The Offended Party May Compromise The Civil Aspect Of A Crime, Provided That It Must Be Entered Before Or During The Litigation, And Not After Final Judgment. A Compromise On The Civil Aspect Is Valid Even If It Turns Out To Be Unsatisfactory Either To One Or Both Of The Parties.Rules On Filing Fees:No Filing Fees Are Required For Amounts Of Actual Damages.Exception: Criminal Action For Violation Of Bp 22 Which Is Deemed To Include The Corresponding Civil Action. The Offended Party Shall, Upon The Filing Of The Criminal And Civil Actions, Pay In Full The Filing Fees Based On The Face Value Of The Check As The Actual Damages. Purpose Of Exception: To Prevent The Offended Party From Using The Prosecutors Office And The Court As Vehicles For Recovery Of The Face Value Of The Check, Without Paying The Corresponding Filing Fees Therefor.With Respect To Damages Other Than Actual, If These Damages Are Specified In The Complaint Or Information, The Corresponding Filing Fees Should Be Paid, Otherwise, The Trial Court Will Not Acquire Jurisdiction Over Such Other Damages.Where Moral, Exemplary And Other Damages Are Not Specified In The Complaint Or Information, The Grant And Amount Thereof Are Left To The Sound Discretion Of The Trial Court, The Corresponding Filing Fees Need Not Be Paid And Shall Simply Constitute A First Lien On The Judgment.In An Appeal Of A Criminal Case: The Appellate Court May Impose Additional Damages Or Increase Or Decrease The Amounts Of Damages Upon The Accused-Appellant. However, Additional Penalties Cannot Be Imposed Upon A Co-Accused Who Did Not Appeal, But Modifications Of The Judgment Beneficial To Him Are Considered In His Favor.Section 2. When Separate Civil Action Is Suspended.2000 AmendmentDuring The Pendency Of The Criminal Action, The Period Of Prescription Of The Civil Action Which Cannot Be Instituted Separately Or Whose Proceeding Has Been Suspended Shall Not Run.______Effect Of Filing Of Criminal Action: Either 1) Suspension Of Civil Action In Whatever Stage Before Final Judgment, Until Final Judgment In The Criminal Action2) Consolidation With The Criminal Action Upon Application With The Court Trying The Criminal Action And If Granted: A. Evidence Presented/Admitted In Civil Action Shall Be Deemed Automatically Reproduced In The Criminal Action, Without Prejudice To The Admission Of Additional Evidence; + Right To Cross Examine B. Both The Criminal And The Civil Actions Shall Be Tried And Decided Jointly. *** The Amendment Refers To A Civil Action Arising From A Crime Which Is Reserved Or Filed Separately And Subsequently A Criminal Case Is Filed If It Has To Be Suspended To Await Final Judgment In The Criminal Action.*** The Period Of Prescription Of The Civil Actions Under Section 3 Of This Rule Shall Not Be Suspended Because They Can Be Instituted Separately. This Refers To Civil Actions Arising From The Offense Charged Which Has Not Been Reserved Or Civil Actions That Has Been Filed Ahead Of The Criminal But Has Been Suspended.Take Note: Article 29 Of The Civil Code Merely Emphasizes That A Civil Action For Damages Is Not Precluded By The Acquittal Of An Accused For The Same Criminal Act Or Omission. It Does Not State That The Remedy Can Be Availed Of Only In A Separate Civil Action.Effect Of Acquittal By The Accused:General Rule: Extinction Of The Penal Action Does Not Carry With It Extinction Of The Civil Action Arising From The Offense Charged. Exception: Civil Action Is Deemed Extinguished If There Is A Finding In A Final Judgment That The Fact From Which The Civil Liability May Arise Did Not Exist.Section 3. When Civil Action May Proceed Independently.*** The Institution Of An Independent Civil Action Against The Offender Under Arts. 32, 33, 34 And 2176 Of The Civil Code May Proceed Independently Of The Criminal Case And At The Same Time Without Suspension Of Either Proceedings.*** Independent Civil Action Require Only A Preponderance Of Evidence And May Proceed Simultaneously With The Criminal Action And Offended Party May Be Entitled In Such Eventuality Only To The Bigger Award Of The Two Assuming The Awards Made In The Two Cases Vary. But Not To Recover Twice. (Ace Haulers Corp. Vs. Ca Aug. 23, 2000)*** Prior Reservation Is Not Necessary To File Separate Civil Action Under Arts. 32, 33, 34 And 2176 Of The Civil Code. The Phrase Which Has Been Reserved That Has Caused Conflicting Rulings In The Past Has Now Been Deleted.*** Actions Based On Quasi-Delict May Be Filed Independently Of The Criminal Action Regardless Of The Result Of The Criminal Action, Except That A Plaintiff Cannot Recover Damages Twice For The Same Act Or Omission Of The Defendant.*** No Double Recovery The Offended Party Cannot Recover Damages Twice For The Same Act Or Omission Charged In The Criminal Action. *** Criminal Actions To Recover Civil Liability Arising From Delict And Civil Actions Based On A Quasi Delict May Proceed SimultaneouslyBut, Would Be Entitled Only To The Bigger Award Of The Two, Assuming The Awards Made In The Two Cases Vary*** The Judgment In Civil Actions Based On Article 32, 33, 34 And 2176 Absolving The Defendant From Civil Liability Does Not Bar The Criminal Action 2000 AmendmentSec. 4. Effect Of Death On Civil Actions. The Death Of The Accused After Arraignment And During The Pendency Of The Criminal Action Shall Extinguish The Civil Liability Arising From The Delict. However, The Independent Civil Action Instituted Under Section 3 Of This Rule Or Which Thereafter Is Instituted To Enforce Liability Arising From Other Sources Of Obligation May Be Continued Against The Estate Or Legal Representative Of The Accused After Proper Substitution Or Against Said Estate, As The Case May Be. The Heirs Of The Accused May Be Substituted For The Deceased Without Requiring The Appointment Of An Executor Or Administrator And The Court May Appoint A Guardian Ad Litem For The Minor Heirs.The Court Shall Forthwith Order Said Legal Representative Or Representatives To Appear And Be Substituted Within A Period Of Thirty (30) Days From Notice.A Final Judgment Entered In Favor Of The Offended Party Shall Be Enforced In The Manner Especially Provided In These Rules For Prosecuting Claims Against The Estate Of The Deceased.If The Accused Dies Before Arraignment, The Case Shall Be Dismissed Without Prejudice To Any Civil Action The Offended Party May File Against The Estate Of The Deceased. (N)------------------*** Under The Amendment In Section 1, The Independent Civil Action Under Section 3 May Be Consolidated With The Criminal Action. Since However, The Revised Rules On Criminal Procedure Limited The Civil Liability To What Is Deemed Impliedly Instituted With The Criminal Action To Civil Liability Arising From The Crime, There Would Have Been No Need For The Amendment As Death Of The Accused Would Only Extinguish Such Civil Liability. The Rule Was However Retained By The Court To Apply To The Civil Actions Under Section 3 Of The Rule. The Rule Would, However, Apply Only If Any Of The Civil Actions Under Section 3 Is Consolidated With The Criminal Action, Otherwise, Since The Actions Under Section 3 Are Purely Civil Actions, The Effects Of Death Of A Party Are To Be Governed By The Rules On Civil Procedure. (Rule 3, Section 16, 17 And 20, 1997 Rcp)After Arraignment And During The Pendency Of The Criminal Action:General Rule: Death Extinguishes The Civil Liability Arising From Delict Or The OffenseExcept: Where Civil Liability Is Predicated On Other Sources Of Obligations Such As Law, Contract, Quasi-Contract And Quasi-Delict. *** If Such Civil Action Which Survives Is Impliedly Instituted In The Criminal Action, The Legal Representative Or Heir Of The Deceased Shall Be Substituted For The Deceased. The Criminal Case Is Reduced To A Civil Action. *** However, If The Civil Action Has Been Reserved And Subsequently Filed Or Such Civil Action Has Been Instituted, When The Accused Died, Then Such Civil Action Will Proceed And Substitution Of Parties Shall Be Ordered By The Court Pursuant To Sec.16 Rule 3 Of The Rules Of Court. Before Arraignment:*** The Civil Action Impliedly Instituted In The Criminal Action Shall Be Dismissed Without Prejudice To The Offended Partys Filing A Civil Action Against The Administrator Of The Estate Of The Deceased.Pending Appeal Of His Conviction:*** Extinguishes His Criminal Liability As Well As The Civil Liability Based Solely Thereon. Prior To Final Judgment:*** Terminates His Criminal Liability And Only The Civil Liability Directly Arising From And Based Solely On The Offense Committed.People Vs. Bayotas (G.R. No. 102007 September 2, 1994)

Death Of The Accused Pending Appeal Of His Conviction Extinguishes His Criminal Liability As Well As The Civil Liability Based Solely Thereon. The Claim For Civil Liability Survives Notwithstanding The Death Of The Accused, If The Same May Also Be Predicated On A Source Of Obligation Other Than Delict.Sec. 5. Judgment In Civil Action Not A Bar*** The Judgment In Civil Actions Based On Arts. 32, 33, 34 And 2176 Absolving The Defendant From Civil Liability Does Not Bar The Criminal Action.Effect Of Judgment In Civil ActionGeneral Rule: Judgment In Civil Action Is Not A Bar To A Criminal Action For The Same Act Or Omission. Exception: Where The Judgment In The Civil Action Is Determinative Whether How The Criminal Action May Proceed (Prejudicial Question) And Determinative Of The Guilt Or Innocence Of The Accused. 2000 AmendmentSec. 7. Elements Of Prejudicial Question. - The Two (2) Essential Elements Of A Prejudicial Question Are: (A) The Previously Instituted Civil Action; Xxx Xxx Xxx_______*** That Which Arises In A Case, The Resolution Of Which Is The Logical Antecedent Of The Issue Involved Therein, And The Cognizance Of Which Pertains To Another Tribunal*** The Prejudicial Question Must Be Determinative Of The Case Before The Court But The Jurisdiction To Try And Resolve The Question Must Be Lodged In Another Court Or Tribunal. Elements Of A Prejudicial Question:1. The Civil Action Must Be Instituted Prior To The Criminal Action.2. The Civil Action Involves An Issue Similar Or Intimately Related To The Issue Raised In The Criminal Action.3. The Resolution Of Such Issue Determines Whether Or Not The Criminal Action May Proceed.Petition For Suspension On The Ground Of Prejudicial Question Is Filed With:1. Prosecutor Or Court Conducting The Preliminary Investigation2. Court, Before The Prosecutor Rests, If The Criminal Action Has Already Been Filed In Court.*** If A Petition To Suspend Is Filed With The Prosecutors Office, And The Same Was Denied, The Petition To Suspend May Again Be Filed Before The Court. *** This Section Limits A Prejudicial Question To A Previously Instituted Civil Action In Order To Minimize Possible Abuses By The Subsequent Filing Of A Civil Action As An After Thought For The Purpose Of Suspending The Criminal Action.*** The Suspension Of The Criminal Case Due To A Prejudicial Question Is Only A Procedural Matter, And Is Subject To A Waiver By Virtue Of Prior Acts Of The Accused.*** There Is No Prejudicial Question Where One Case Is Administrative And The Other Is Civil.Rule 112Preliminary Investigation2000 AmendmentSec. 1. Preliminary Investigation Defined; When Required. -- Was Broadened.Except As Provided In Section 7 Of This Rule, A Preliminary Investigation Is Required To Be Conducted Before The Filing Of A Complaint Or Information For An Offense Where The Penalty Prescribed By Law Is At Least Four (4) Years, Two (2) Months And One (1) Day Without Regard To The Fine.------------------Preliminary Investigation Is An Inquiry Or Proceeding To Determine Whether There Exists Sufficient Ground To Engender A Well-Founded Belief That A Crime Cognizable By The Rtc Has Been Committed And That The Respondent Is Probably Guilty Thereof, And Should Be Held For Trial. (Sec. 1, Rule 112)*** The Present Rule Includes Among Offenses Entitled To Preliminary Investigation Those Punishable By At Least Four (4) Years, Two (2) Months And One (1) Day, Even If The Same Is Cognizable By The Mtc.*** The Right To Preliminary Investigation Is A Personal Right Covered By Statute And May Be Waived.Preliminary Investigation Is: 1) Not Part Of The Trial Of The Criminal Action In Court. Nor Is Its Record Part Of The Record Of The Case In The Rtc. 2) Subject To The Requirements Of Both Substantive And Procedural Due Process.*** The Right Of An Accused To A Preliminary Investigation Is Not A Constitutional But Merely A Statutory Right. Nonetheless, It Is A Component Part Of Due Process In Criminal Justice And Is A Substantive Right. 3) A Personal Right And May Be Waived Expressly Or By Implication.*** Lack Of Pi Is Not A Ground To Quash Or Dismiss A Complaint Or Information, Nor Does It Affect The Courts Jurisdiction. When There Is No Preliminary Investigation, The Accused Must Invoke It At The First Opportunity And The Court Should Hold In Abeyance Or Suspend Proceedings And Remand The Case To The Office Of The Prosecutor For Him To Conduct Pi.*** Though Preliminary Investigation Is Not A Constitutional Right But Only A Statutory Right, Denial Of The Accused Of That Right, As Required By Law, Will Constitute Denial Of Criminal Due Process. (Patanao Vs. Enage 121 Scra 228)*** The Right To Preliminary Investigation Is Not A Constitutional Right But Only Statutory Right So That When The Law Or Rules Does Not Provide For It, It Cannot Be Invoked As A Matter Of Right. The Following Cases Do Not Require Pi:A) Instances Where There Is A Warrantless Arrest, In Flagrante Delicto Provided An Inquest Proceedings Was Conducted (Sec. 7 Rule 112);B) Cases Falling Under The Rules Of Summary Procedure; C) Offenses Involving Penalty Of Not More Than 4 Years, 2 Months 1 Day*** Failure To Object On The Ground That There Has Been No Preliminary Investigation Will Be Deemed To Be A Waiver Of The Accuseds Right Thereto And Such Objection Cannot Be Raised For The First Time On Appeal.*** During Preliminary Investigation, Searching Questions And Answers Are Asked.Remedies Of The Accused If There Was No Preliminary Investigation:1. Refuse To Enter A Plea Upon Arraignment And Object To Further Proceedings Upon Such Ground2 Insist On A Preliminary Investigation3. File A Certiorari, If Refused4. Raise Lack Of Preliminary Investigation As Error On Appeal5. File For Prohibition*** The Refusal Of The Court To Remand The Case For Pi Can Be Controlled By Certiorari And Prohibition To Prevent Trial.Purpose Of Preliminary Investigation:To Protect The Accused From The Inconvenience, Expenses And Burden Of Defending Himself In A Formal Trial Unless The Reasonable Probability Of His Guilt Shall Have Been First Ascertained In A Fairly Summary Proceeding By A Competent Officer. It Is Also Intended To Protect The State From Having To Conduct Useless And Expensive Trials.Section 2. Officers Authorized To Conduct Preliminary Investigation.Persons Authorized To Conduct A Preliminary Investigation:1. Provincial Or City Fiscal And Their Assistants2. Judges Of The Mtc And Mctc3. National And Regional State Prosecutors4. Such Other Officers As May Be Authorized By Law Such As: The Comelec, Ombudsman And PcggNo Longer Authorized To Conduct Pi:1) By Implication, Mtc Judges In Manila And In Chartered Cities Have Not Been Granted The Authority To Conduct Pi, As The Officers Authorized To Do So Are The Prosecutors.2) Judges Of RtcsTwo Types Of Offenses May Be Filed In The Mtc For Preliminary Investigation: 1) A Case Cognizable By The Rtc May Be Filed With The Mtc For Pi; 2) Even If It Is Cognizable By The Mtc Because It Is An Offense Where The Penalty Prescribed By Law Is At Least 4 Years 2 Months And 1 Day.Regarding Offenses Falling Within The Original Jurisdiction Of The Sandiganbayan:*** Prosecutors Or Municipal Trial Court Judges Conducting Pi Of Offenses Falling Within The Original Jurisdiction Of The Sandiganbayan Shall, After Their Conclusion, Transmit The Records And Their Resolutions To The Ombudsman Or His Deputy For Appropriate Action. *** Moreover, The Prosecutor Or Judge Cannot Dismiss The Complaint Without The Prior Written Authority Of The Ombudsman Or His Deputy, Nor Can The Prosecutor File An Information With The Sandiganbayan Without Being Deputized By, And Without Prior Written Authority Of, The Ombudsman Or His Deputy.Regarding Election Offenses:*** The Exclusive Jurisdiction Of The Comelec To Investigate And Prosecute Election Offenses Inheres Even If The Offender Is A Private Individual Or Public Officer Or Employee, And In The Latter Instance, Irrespective Of Whether The Offense Is Committed In Relation To His Official Duties Or Not. In Other Words, It Is The Nature Of The Offense, Namely, An Election Offense As Defined In The Omnibus Election Code And In Other Election Laws, And Not The Personality Of The Offender That Matters.Regarding The Ombudsman: *** The Power Of The Ombudsman To Make Investigation Extends To Any Illegal Act Or Omission Of Any Public Official, Whether Or Not The Same Is Committed In Relation To His Office.*** Preliminary Investigation By The Ombudsman Is Limited To Cases Cognizable By The Sandiganbayan And Must Be Conducted Pursuant To Rule 11 Of The Rules Of Procedure Of The Office Of The Ombudsman.*** Section 4(D) Of Administrative Order No. 07 Disallows The Filing Of A Motion To Quash Or Dismiss A Complaint Filed With The Ombudsman, Except On The Ground Of Lack Of Jurisdiction. Which Remedy May An Aggrieved Party Avail Of Against Resolutions Of The Ombudsman In Criminal Or Non-Administrative Cases? The Law Is Silent. Hence, Appeal Is Not Available As A Remedy Because The Right To Appeal Is A Statutory Privilege And May Be Availed Of Only If There Is A Statute To That Effect. However, An Aggrieved Party Is Not Without Remedy, As He Can Resort To The Special Civil Action Of Certiorari Under Rule 65.The Ombudsman Does Not Have The Power:1) To Prosecute Before The Sandiganbayan Any Impeachable Officers With Any Offense Which Carries With It The Penalty Of Removal From Office, Or Any Penalty Service Of Which Would Amount To Removal From Office Because By Constitutional Mandate, They Can Only Be Removed From Office On Impeachment For, And Conviction Of, Culpable Violation Of The Constitution, Treason, Bribery, Graft And Corruption, Other High Crimes, Or Betrayal Of Public Trust2) To Prosecute Public Officers Or Employees Who Have Committed Election Offenses.3) To File An Information For An Offense Cognizable By The Regular Courts.Effect Of An Incomplete Pi:1) Does Not Warrant The Quashal Of The Information2) Does Not Affect The Courts Jurisdiction Or The Validity Of The Information.2000 AmendmentSec. 3.Procedure. The Preliminary Investigation Shall Be Conducted In The Following Manner:(A)The Complaint Shall State The Address Of The Respondent And Shall Be Accompanied By Affidavits Of The Complainant And His Witnesses, As Well As Other Supporting Documents To Establish Probable Cause. They Shall Be In Such Number Of Copies As There Are Respondents, Plus Two (2) Copies For The Official File. The Affidavits Shall Be Subscribed And Sworn To Before Any Prosecutor Or Government Official Authorized To Administer Oath, Or, In Their Absence Or Unavailability, Before A Notary Public, Each Of Whom Must Certify That He Personally Examined The Affiants And That He Is Satisfied That They Voluntarily Executed And Understood Their Affidavits.(B)Within Ten (10) Days After The Filing Of The Complaint, The Investigating Officer Shall Either Dismiss It If He Finds No Ground To Continue With The Investigation, Or Issue A Subpoena To The Respondent, Attaching To It A Copy Of The Complaint And Its Supporting Affidavits And Documents. The Respondent Shall Have The Right To Examine The Evidence Submitted By The Complainant Which He May Not Have Been Furnished And To Copy Them At His Expense. If The Evidence Is Voluminous, The Complainant May Be Required To Specify Those Which He Intends To Present Against The Respondent, And These Shall Be Made Available For Examination Or Copying By The Respondent At His Expense.

Objects As Evidence Need Not Be Furnished A Party But Shall Be Made Available For Examination, Copying, Or Photographing At The Expense Of The Requesting Party.(C)Within Ten (10) Days From Receipt Of The Subpoena With The Complaint And Supporting Affidavits And Documents, The Respondent Shall Submit His Counter-Affidavit And That Of His Witnesses And Other Supporting Documents Relied Upon For His Defense. The Counter-Affidavits Shall Be Subscribed And Sworn To And Certified As Prescribed In Paragraph (A) Of This Section, With Copies Thereof Furnished By Him To The Complainant. The Respondent Shall Not Be Allowed To File A Motion To Dismiss In Lieu Of A Counter-Affidavit.(D)If The Respondent Cannot Be Subpoenaed, Or If Subpoenaed, Does Not Submit Counter-Affidavits Within The Ten (10) Day Period, The Investigating Officer Shall Resolve The Complaint Based On The Evidence Presented By The Complainant.(E)The Investigating Officer May Set A Hearing If There Are Facts And Issues To Be Clarified From A Party Or A Witness. The Parties Can Be Present At The Hearing But Without The Right To Examine Or Cross-Examine. They May, However, Submit To The Investigating Officer Questions Which May Be Asked To The Party Or Witness Concerned. The Hearing Shall Be Held Within Ten (10) Days From Submission Of The Counter-Affidavits And Other Documents Or From The Expiration Of The Period For Their Submission. It Shall Be Terminated Within Five (5) Days.(F)Within Ten (10) Days After The Investigation, The Investigating Officer Shall Determine Whether Or Not There Is Sufficient Ground To Hold The Respondent For Trial.-------------------------*** A Motion To Dismiss Is Now A Prohibited Pleading When The Case Is Under Preliminary Investigation And Requires That The Respondent Should Submit Counter-Affidavits Or Other Supporting Documents Relied Upon By Him For His Defense.*** By Reason Of The Abbreviated Nature Of Pi, A Dismissal Of The Charges As A Result Thereof Is Not Equivalent To A Judicial Pronouncement Of Acquittal.*** The Accused Or Respondent In A Criminal Prosecution May Avail Himself Of Discovery Remedies Either During Preliminary Investigation Or When The Information Has Already Been Filed In Court.*** The Respondent Is Now Required To Submit Counter-Affidavits And Other Supporting Documents Relied Upon By Him For His Defense.*** The Respondent Now Has The Right To Examine The Evidence Submitted By The Complainant Of Which He May Not Have Been Furnished And To Obtain Copies Thereof At His Expense.Effect Of An Incomplete Pi:1) Does Not Warrant The Quashal Of The Information 2) Does Not Affect The Courts Jurisdiction Or The Validity Of The Information 2000 AmendmentSec. 4.Resolution Of Investigating Prosecutor And Its Review. -- If The Investigating Prosecutor Finds Cause To Hold The Respondent For Trial, He Shall Prepare The Resolution And Information. He Shall Certify Under Oath In The Information That He, Or As Shown By The Record, An Authorized Officer, Has Personally Examined The Complainant And His Witnesses; That There Is Reasonable Ground To Believe That A Crime Has Been Committed And That The Accused Is Probably Guilty Thereof; That The Accused Was Informed Of The Complaint And Of The Evidence Submitted Against Him; And That He Was Given An Opportunity To Submit Controverting Evidence. Otherwise, He Shall Recommend Dismissal Of The Complaint.Within Five (5) Days From His Resolution, He Shall Forward The Records Of The Case To The Provincial Or City Prosecutor Or Chief State Prosecutor, Or To The Ombudsman Or His Deputy In Cases Of Offenses Cognizable By The Sandiganbayan In The Exercise Of Its Original Jurisdiction. They Shall Act On The Resolution Within Ten (10) Days From Their Receipt Thereof And Shall Immediately Inform The Parties Of Such Action. No Complaint Or Information May Be Filed Or Dismissed By An Investigating Prosecutor Without The Prior Written Authority Or Approval Of The Provincial Or City Prosecutor Or Chief State Prosecutor Or The Ombudsman Or His Deputy.Where The Investigating Prosecutor Recommends The Dismissal Of The Complaint But His Recommendation Is Disapproved By The Provincial Or City Prosecutor Or Chief State Prosecutor Or The Ombudsman Or His Deputy On The Ground That A Probable Cause Exists, The Latter May, By Himself, File The Information Against The Respondent, Or Direct Another Assistant Prosecutor Or State Prosecutor To Do So Without Conducting Another Preliminary Investigation.If Upon Petition By A Proper Party Under Such Rules As The Department Of Justice May Prescribe Or Motu Propio, The Secretary Of Justice Reverses Or Modifies The Resolution Of The Provincial Or City Prosecutor Or Chief State Prosecutor, He Shall Direct The Prosecutor Concerned To File The Corresponding Information Without Conducting Another Preliminary Investigation Or To Dismiss Or Move For Dismissal Of The Complaint Or Information With Notice To The Parties. The Same Rule Shall Apply In Preliminary Investigations Conducted By The Officers Of The Office Of The Ombudsman.--------------------*** The Prosecutor Is Required To Resolve The Complaint Based On The Evidence Presented By The Complainant In The Event That The Respondent Cannot Be Subpoenaed Or The Respondent, If Subpoenaed, Does Not Submit A Counter-Affidavit Within The 10-Day Period.*** Under The Amendment, Whether The Recommendation Of The Investigating Officer Is To File Or Dismiss The Case, He Shall, Within 5 Days From His Resolution, Forward The Records Of The Case To The Provincial Or City Prosecutor Or Chief State Prosecutor Or; For Offenses Cognizable By The Sandiganbayan In The Exercise Of Its Original Jurisdiction To The Ombudsman Or His Deputy The Latter Shall Take Appropriate Actions Thereon Within 10 Days From Receipt And Shall Immediately Inform The Parties Of Said Action.*** This Refers To A Petition For Review Of The Prosecutors Resolution Pending At Either The Department Of Justice Or The Office Of The President; Provided That The Period Of Suspension Shall Not Exceed 60 Days Counted From The Filing Of The Petition With The Reviewing Officer.*** The Determination Of The Probable Cause Which Would Merit The Filing Of The Case Is Merely Discretionary And Could Not Be Compelled By MandamusRemedy: Appeal To The Secretary Of JusticeRole Of Secretary Of Justice:*** The Secretary Of Justice Is Not Prevented From Entertaining An Appeal From The Accused Or From The Offended Party Even After The Information Has Been Filed And The Trial Court Has Arraigned The Accused. Section 4 Of Doj 223 Should Be Construed As Merely Enjoining The Secretary Of Justice To Refrain, As Far As Practicable, From Entertaining A Petition For Review Or Appeal From The Action Of The Prosecutor Once The Complaint Or Information Is Filed In Court. If The Secretary Reverses The Ruling Of The Prosecutor, The Latter Has To File The Necessary Motion To Dismiss The Complaint Or Information, The Grant Or Denial Of Which Is Subject To The Discretion Of The Trial Court.*** Once The Information Has Already Been Filed In Court, And The Secretary Of Justice Reversed The Prosecutors Finding Of Probable Cause, The Judge Must Make His Own Assessment Of The Evidence And Not Just Rely On The Conclusion Of The Prosecutor*** The Court Has Authority To Review The Secretary Of Justices Recommendation (On Petition For Review) And Reject It If There Is Gad*** If The Accused Allows Himself To Be Arraigned Without Asking For A Pi, He Is Deemed To Have Waived The Right To Such Pi*** By Reason Of The Abbreviated Nature Of Pi, A Dismissal Of The Charges As A Result Thereof Is Not Equivalent To A Judicial Pronouncement Of Acquittal *** It Is The Prosecutor Who Is Given By Law Direction And Control Of All Criminal Actions. This Function Is Executive, Not Judicial. Hence, When A Preliminary Investigation Is Conducted By A Judge, The Judge Performs A Non-Judicial Function, As An Exception To His Usual Judicial Duties.*** After Having Filed The Information, The Prosecutor Is Called Upon To Prosecute The Case In Court. It Has Been Said That At This Stage, Unlike Judges Who Are Mandated To Display Cold Neutrality In Hearing Cases, The Prosecutors Are Not Required To Divest Themselves Of Their Personal Convictions And Refrain From Exhibiting Partiality. But While He May Strike Hard Blows, He Is Not At Liberty To Strike Foul Ones.Effect Of Exclusion Of Other Persons From The Information:1) If During The Trial, Evidence Is Shown That Such Persons Should Have Been Charged, The Fact That They Were Not Included In The Information Does Not Relieve Them Of Criminal Liability, And They Can Be Subsequently Prosecuted. 2) The Accused Who Has Been Charged With The Offense Is Not Allowed To Escape Punishment Merely Because It Develops In The Course Of The Trial That There Were Other Guilty Participants In The Crime.3) It Does Not Vitiate The Validity Of The Information. Neither Is The Same A Ground For A Motion To Quash.Effect If The Information Is Filed By Someone Not Authorized By Law: *** The Court Does Not Acquire Jurisdiction. The Accuseds Failure To Assert Lack Of Authority On The Part Of The Prosecutor In Filing The Information Does Not Constitute A Waiver Thereof.Sec. 5. Resolution Of Investigating Judge And Its ReviewNon-Judicial Function: *** When A Municipal Judge Conducts Pi, He Performs A Non-Judicial Function. Consequently, The Findings Of The Investigating Judge Are Subject To Review By The Provincial Prosecutor Whose Findings In Turn May Also Be Reviewed By The Secretary Of Justice In Appropriate Cases.*** The Municipal Judge Conducting Preliminary Investigation Has No Authority To Determine The Character Of The Crime But Only To Determine Whether Or Not The Evidence Presented Supported Prima Facie The Allegation Of Fact Contained In The Complaint.Distinction Regarding Procedure:Investigating FiscalInvestigating Judge

- Forward Resolution Within 5 Days Thereof- Transmit Resolution Within 10 Days After P.I.

- Resolution Requires The Certification Of Fiscal- There Is No Need For Certification Of Judge But Must State Briefly The Findings Of Facts And The Law Supporting His Action

- Fiscal Shall Forward All The Records Of The Case- Judge Shall Transmit With The Entire Records Of The Case, Includes, The Warrant Of Arrest And Affidavits And Supporting Evidence, Undertaking Or Bail, Order Of Release And Cancellation Of Bail Bond, If For The Dismissal Of The Complaint

- Action Of Chief Of State Prosecutor Within 10 Days From Receipt Of Resolution - Action Of Chief Of State Prosecutor Within 30 Days From Receipt Of The Records

- Fiscals Acts Are Primarily An Executive Act, Subject To Supervision Of Chief State Pros. - Judge Acts As An Agent Of The Executive And Not Of One As Member Of The Judiciary, And The Finding Of Chief State Pros. Will Still Prevail Because Pi Is An Executive Function.

2000 AmendmentSec. 6.When Warrant Of Arrest May Issue. - (A)By The Regional Trial Court. Within Ten (10) Days From The Filing Of The Complaint Or Information, The Judge Shall Personally Evaluate The Resolution Of The Prosecutor And Its Supporting Evidence. He May Immediately Dismiss The Case If The Evidence On Record Clearly Fails To Establish Probable Cause. If He Finds Probable Cause, He Shall Issue A Warrant Of Arrest, Or A Commitment Order If The Accused Has Already Been Arrested Pursuant To A Warrant Issued By The Judge Who Conducted The Preliminary Investigation