criminal procedure part 1 procedure in trial courts

8/13/2019 Criminal Procedure Part 1 Procedure in Trial Courts

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/criminal-procedure-part-1-procedure-in-trial-courts 1/82

Criminal Procedure

Part 1 Procedure in Trial Courts

1. JURISDICTION IN CRIMINAL CASES

A. Introduction

1. Criminal Jurisdiction defined

Criminal jurisdiction is the authority to hear and try a particular offense and imposethe punishment for it.1

2. Elements

2.1 The nature of the offense and/or penalty attached thereto; and

2.2 Commission of the offense within the territorial jurisdiction of the court.

The non-concurrence of either of these two 2! elements may "echallen#ed "y an accused at any sta#e of the proceedin#s in the court"elow or on appeal. $ailin# in one of them% a jud#ment of con&iction is nulland &oid.2

'. (e)uisites for its &alid e*ercise+

1. Jurisdiction o&er the su"ject matter;,

hilippine courts ha&e no common law jurisdiction or power% "ut only those

e*pressly conferred "y the Constitution and statutes and those necessarily impliedto mae the e*press effecti&e.

The )uestion of jurisdiction of the court o&er the case filed "efore it is to "eresol&ed on the "asis of the law or statute pro&idin# for or definin# its jurisdiction.0

The jurisdiction of a court to try a criminal action is determined not "y the law inforce at the time of the commission of offense "ut "y the law in force at the time ofthe institution of the action.

nce &ested% jurisdiction cannot "e withdrawn or defeated "y a su"se)uent &alidamendment of the information.3

1 People v. Mariano, No. L-40527, June 30, 1976, 71 SCR 600.2 Manila Railroa! Co. v. ""orne# $eneral, 20 P%il. 523 &1911'( ). S. v. Ja#*e, 24 P%il. 90 &1913'.3 Re#e+ v. ia, 73 P%il. 44 &1941'.4 /elun"a v. C%ie, P%ilippine Con+"aular#, No. L-7155, Januar# 20, 19, 157 SCR 147.5 People v. Mariano, supra, no"e 1.6 e La Cru v. Mo#a, No. L-65192, pril 27, 19, 160 SCR 3.7 People v. C%upeo, $. R. L-1956, Mar% 31, 1964, 10 SCR 640.



2. Jurisdiction o&er the territory where the offense was committed; and

,. Jurisdiction o&er the person of the accused.

C. Jurisdiction 4etermined "y 5lle#ations of Complaint or Information

The a&erments in the complaint or information identify the crime char#ed and determine thecourt "efore which it must "e tried.6

To determine the jurisdiction of the court in a criminal case% the complaint or informationmust "e e*amined to ascertain if the facts set out therein and the penalty prescri"ed "y lawfall within the jurisdiction of the court re#ardless of the court7s findin#s after the trial.8

4. Jurisdiction &er Comple* Crimes

Jurisdiction o&er the whole comple* crime is lod#ed with the trial court ha&in# jurisdiction toimpose the ma*imum and most serious penalty imposa"le of an offense formin# part of thecomple* crime.19

:here the imposa"le penalty for the physical injuries char#ed would come within the jurisdiction of the municipal trial court% while the fine for the dama#e to the property% wouldfall on the Court of $irst Instance now the (e#ional Trial Court!% the jurisdiction of the courtto tae co#niance of the case must "e determined not "y the correspondin# penalty forthe physical injuries char#ed "ut "y the fine imposa"le for the dama#e to property resultin#from the recless imprudence.11

E. Crimes unisha"le "y Destierro

:here the imposa"le penalty is destierro such as that imposed in the case of concu"ina#ein the crime of concu"ina#e as defined in 5rticle ,, of the (e&ised enal Code% the casefalls within the e*clusi&e jurisdiction of the <unicipal Trial Court% considerin# that in the

hierarchy of penalties under 5rticle 31 of the (e&ised enal Code% destierro follows arrestomayor which in&ol&es imprisonment.12

People v. Maallane+, $. R. No. 11013-4, "oer 11, 1995, 249 SCR 212.9 ua#a v. Polo, $. R. No. 75079, Januar# 26, 199, 169 SCR 471.10 Cu#o+ v. $aria, $. R. No. 46934, pril 15, 19, 160 SCR 302.11 People v. Malaanan, No. L-1647, uu+" 31, 1961, 2 SCR 115.12 People v. !uar"e, $. R. No. 232, eruar# 26, 1990, 12 SCR 750.

- 2 -



2. TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION

1. General Rule

5 criminal case should "e instituted and tried in the place where the offense was committedor any of its essential in#redients too place.1,

E*ceptions+

1. =nder the 1863 Constitution% the >upreme Court may order a chan#e of &enueor place of trial to a&oid a miscarria#e of justice.1

2. :hen the law pro&ides otherwise ? e.g., residential 4ecree @o. 19% (e&isin#residential 4ecree @o. 16 Creatin# a >pecial Court to "e nown as

ASandiganbayanA and for other purposes% as amended "y residential 4ecree @o.161.

,. Case under the (e&ised (ules of Criminal rocedure% (ule 119% >ection 10 "!%c! and d!.

2. Juridic!ion O"er !#e Peron o$ Accued

Jurisdiction o&er the person of the accused is ac)uired either "y his/her arrest or &oluntaryappearance in court.10

%. Criminal Juridic!ion O$ Munici&al Trial Cour! 'Re&u(lic Ac! )*+1 Sec!ion 2

Amendin, Sec!ion %2 o$ -a!a -l,. 12+

1. Biolations of city or municipal ordinances committed within their respecti&e territorial jurisdictions

2. 5ll offenses punisha"le with imprisonment not e*ceedin# si* ! years irrespecti&e of theamount of the fine% and re#ardless of other imposa"le accessory or other penalties% includin#the ci&il lia"ility arisin# from such offenses or predicated thereon% irrespecti&e of ind% nature%&alue or amount thereof

,. ffenses in&ol&in# dama#e to property throu#h criminal ne#li#ence re#ardless of the &alueof the property

E*ceptions+

1. Cases fallin# within the e*clusi&e ori#inal jurisdiction of the a! (e#ional TrialCourt% and "! the Sandiganbayan

13 People v. Mera!o, 65 P%il. 665 &193'( Manila Railroa! Co. v. ""orne# $eneral, supra, no"e 2.14 r". /888, Se. 5 4:.15 Repuli v. Suna, No. L-3634, June 20, 19, 162 SCR 191 i"in Cre+po v. Moul, No. L-53373, June 30, 197, 151 SCR 462.

- 3 -



E*amples+

i! i"el is punisha"le "y prision corrreccional in its minimum and ma*imumperiod or fine or "ail (e&ised enal Code% 5rticle ,0!. 5rticle ,9%howe&er% of the same code as amended% pro&ides that the criminal andci&il action for dama#es in cases of written defamation shall "e filed in the

court of first instance% etc.1

ii! Jurisdiction o&er Election ffenses

>EC. 26. Jurisdiction of courts. — The re#ional trial court shall ha&e the e*clusi&eori#inal jurisdiction to try and decide any criminal action or proceedin#s for &iolation ofthis Code% e*cept those relatin# to the offense of failure to re#ister or failure to &ote whichshall "e under the jurisdiction of the metropolitan or municipal trial courts. $rom the

decision of the courts% appeal will l ie as in other criminal cases.13

iii! 5rticle D Jurisdiction &er 4an#erous 4ru#s Cases

>EC. ,8. Jurisdiction. — The Court of $irst Instance% Circuit Criminal Court% and Ju&enileand 4omestic (elations Court shall ha&e concurrent ori#inal jurisdiction o&er all casesin&ol&in# offenses punisha"le under this 5ct+ Provided % That in cities or pro&inces where

there are Ju&enile and 4omestic (elations Courts% the said courts shall tae e*clusi&e

co#niance of cases where the offenders are under si*teen years of a#e.16

Thus% the aforementioned e*ception refers not only to >ection 29 of 'atas'l#. 128 pro&idin# for the jurisdiction of (e#ional Trial Courts in criminalcases% "ut also to other laws which specifically lod#e in (e#ional TrialCourts e*clusi&e jurisdiction o&er specific criminal cases% e.g., a! 5rticle,9 of the (e&ised enal Code% as amended "y (epu"lic 5ct 1268 and,, on written defamation or li"el; "! Intellectual roperty Code (epu"ic

5ct @o. 628,!% which &ests upon (e#ional Trial Court e*clusi&e jurisdictiono&er the cases therein mentioned re#ardless of the imposa"le penalty; andc! more appropriately for the case at "ar% >ection ,8 of (epu"lic 5ct. @o.20% as amended "y residential 4ecree @o. % which &ests on Courts

of $irst Instance% Circuit Criminal Courts% and the Ju&enile and 4omestic(elations Courts concurrent e*clusi&e ori#inal jurisdiction o&er all casesin&ol&in# &iolations of said 5ct.18

2. Cases which fall under the ori#inal and e*clusi&e jurisdiction of the $amilyCourts (ep. 5ct @o. 6,8!

,. Cases which fall under the ori#inal and e*clusi&e jurisdiction of theSandiganbayan under (epu"lic 5ct 628

The Sandiganbayan has e*clusi&e and ori#inal jurisdiction cases where the accused arethose enumerated in su"section a, >ection and% #enerally% national and local officialsclassified as rade A23A and hi#her under the Compensation and osition Classification 5ct

of 1868 (ep. 5ct @o. 306!. Its jurisdiction o&er other offenses or felonies committed "ypu"lic officials and employees in relation to their office is no lon#er determined "y theprescri"ed penalty% viz., that which is hi#her than prision correccional or imprisonment forsi* ! years or a fine of hp %999; it is enou#h that they are committed "y those pu"licofficials and employees enumerated in su"section a, >ection a"o&e. Fowe&er% it retains

16 People v. Me"ropoli"an ;rial Cour" o <ueon Ci"#, r. 32, $.R. No. 12326, ee*er 16, 1996, 265 SCR 645.17 *niu+ le"ion Co!e, Se. 14.1 Morale+ v. Cour" o ppeal+, $. R. No. 126623, ee*er 12, 1997, 23 SCR 211.19 Morale+ v. Cour" o ppeal+, supra, no"e 1.

- 4 -



its e*clusi&e ori#inal jurisdiction o&er ci&il and criminal cases filed pursuant to or inconnection with E*ecuti&e rder @os. 1% Creatin# the residential Commission on oodo&ernment!; 2 (e#ardin# the $unds% <oneys% 5ssets% and roperties Ille#ally 5c)uiredor <isappropriated "y $ormer resident $erdinand E. <arcos% <rs. Imelda (. <arcos%Their Close (elati&es% >u"ordinates% 'usiness 5ssociates% 4ummies% 5#ents% or@ominees!; 1 4efinin# the jurisdiction &er Cases In&ol&in# the Ill-#otten :ealth of$ormer resident $erdinand E. <arcos% <rs. Imelda (. <arcos% <em"ers of TheirImmediate $amily% Close (elati&es% >u"ordinates% Close and/or 'usiness 5ssociates%4ummies% 5#ents% and @ominees; and 1-5 5mendin# E.. @o. 1!29

=nder (epu"lic 5ct @o. 628% the Sandiganbayan partly lost its e*clusi&e ori#inal jurisdiction in cases in&ol&in#+

1. Biolations of (epu"lic 5ct @o. ,918 5nti-raft and Corrupt ractices 5ct asamended!;

2. (epu"lic 5ct @o. 1,38 5n 5ct 4eclarin# $orfeiture in $a&or of the >tate 5nyroperty $ound to Fa&e 'een =nlawfully 5c)uired "y any u"lic fficer orEmployee and ro&idin# for the roceedin# Therefor!; and

,. Chapter II% >ection 2% Title BII of the (e&ised enal Code. 5rticle 219, 4irect'ri"ery; 5rticle 211% Indirect 'ri"ery; and 5rticle 212, Corruption of u"lic fficials!.

Admini!ra!i"e Circular No. /+0+

>u"ject+ uidelines in the implementation of (epu"lic 5ct @o. 381% Entitled A5n 5ct E*pandin# theJurisdiction of the <etropolitan Trial Courts% <unicipal Trial Courts and <unicipal Circuit TrialCourts% 5mendin# $or the urpose 'atas am"ansa 'l#. 128% therwise Gnown as the Judiciary(eor#aniation 5ct of 1869.A

$or the #uidance of the 'ench and the 'ar% the followin# #uidelines are to "e followed in theimplementation of (epu"lic 5ct @o. 381% entitled A5n 5ct E*pandin# the Jurisdiction of the<etropolitan Trial Courts% <unicipal Trial Courts% and <unicipal Circuit Trial Courts% 5mendin# forthe urpose Batas Pambansa Blg. 128% therwise Gnown as the HJudiciary (eor#aniation 5ct of1869)

* * *

,. The criminal jurisdiction of the <etropolitan Trial Courts% <unicipal Trial Courts% and <unicipalCircuit Trial Courts under >ection ,2 2! of '.. 'l#. 128% as amended "y (.5. 381% has "eenincreased to co&er offenses punisha"le with imprisonment not e*ceedin# si* ! years irrespecti&eof the amount of the fine. 5s a conse)uence% the (e#ional Trial Courts ha&e no more ori#inal jurisdiction o&er offenses committed "y pu"lic officers and employees in relation to their office%where the offense is punisha"le "y more than four ! years and two 2! months up to si* ! years.

. The pro&isions of >ection ,2 2! of '.. 'l#. 128% as amended "y (.5. @o. 381% apply only tooffenses punisha"le "y imprisonment or fine% or "oth% in which case the amount of the fine isdisre#arded in determinin# the jurisdiction of the court. Fowe&er% in cases where the only penaltypro&ided "y law is a fine% the amount thereof shall determine the jurisdiction of the court in

accordance with the ori#inal pro&isions of >ection ,2 2! of '.. 128 which fi*ed the ori#inale*clusi&e jurisdiction of the <etropolitan Trial Courts% <unicipal Trial Courts% and <unicipal CircuitTrial Courts o&er offenses punisha"le with a fine of not more than hp %999. If the amount of thefine e*ceeds hp %999% the (e#ional Trial Courts shall ha&e jurisdiction% includin# offensescommitted "y pu"lic officers and employees in relation to their office% where the amount of the finedoes not e*ceed hp %999.

Fowe&er% this rule does not apply to offenses in&ol&in# dama#e to property throu#h criminalne#li#ence which are under the e*clusi&e ori#inal jurisdiction of the <etropolitan Trial Courts%

20 People v. Maallane+, supra, no"e .

- 5 -



<unicipal Trial Courts% and <unicipal Circuit Trial Courts% irrespecti&e of the amount of theimposa"le fine.

. Cae Go"erned ( !#e Summar Rule 'Re"ied Rule on Summar Procedure

1. Biolations of traffic laws% rules and re#ulations;

2. Biolations of the (ental aw;

,. Biolations of the municipal or city ordinances;

. ffenses committed "y the pu"lic officers and employees in relation to theiroffice% includin# those employed in #o&ernment-owned-or-controlled corporations%where the penalty prescri"ed "y law is imprisonment of not e*ceedin# si* !months% or a fine of not e*ceedin# hp 1%999 or "oth;

0. 5ll other criminal cases where the penalty prescri"ed "y law for the offensechar#ed does not e*ceed si* ! months imprisonment% or a fine of not e*ceedin#hp 1%999% or "oth% irrespecti&e of other imposa"le penalties% accessory or

otherwise% or of the ci&il lia"ility arisin# therefrom.

. ffenses in&ol&in# dama#e to property throu#h criminal ne#li#ence where theimposa"le fine does not e*ceed hp 19%999.

3. Cae Go"erned ( !#e Re,ular Rule

1. The re#ular rules are as follows+

1.1 ffenses committed "y pu"lic officers and employees in relation to their office%includin# those employed in #o&ernment-owned-or-controlled corporations% whethersimple or comple*ed with other crimes% where the penalty prescri"ed "y law

imprisonment e*ceedin# si* ! years or a fine e*ceedin# hp %999 when theoffender7s position is "elow those enumerated a"o&e.

1.2 5ll other offenses where the imposa"le penalty prescri"ed "y law isimprisonment e*ceedin# si* ! years or a fine e*ceedin# hp 1%999 "ut no morethan hp %999 or "oth% re#ardless of other imposa"le accessory% or otherpenalties% includin# the ci&il lia"ilty arisin# from such offense or predicated thereon%irrespecti&e of ind% nature% &alue or amount thereof.21

1., ffenses in&ol&in# dama#e to property throu#h criminal ne#li#ence only% wherethe imposa"le fine e*ceeds hp 19%999.22

2. @otes

2.1 AImposa"le enaltiesA refers to the penalty prescri"ed "y law for the offenseschar#ed and not the penalty actually imposed on the accused after the plea of#uilty on trial.

21 P l. 129, Se. 32.22 Su**ar# Rule+, Se. 1., in rela"ion "o P l. 129, Se. 32.

- 6 -



2.2 5ny circumstances which may affect criminal lia"ility must not "e considered.The jurisdiction in court in a criminal case is determined "y the penalty imposa"le%not the penalty ultimately imposed.2,

E*amples+

i! Juan is char#ed with serious physical injuries resultin# in deformityunder 5rticle 2,% para#raph , of the (e&ised enal Code whichprescri"ed a penalty of prision correccional in its medium and ma*imumperiods ran#in# from si* ! months and one 1! day to four ! years andtwo 2! months. The fact that the <unicipal Court is of the opinion that thepenalty to "e imposed should only "e arresto mayor would not place thecase under the >ummary (ules.

ii! If Juan is char#ed under 5rticle 2, para#raph 2 of the (e&ised enalCode with the person injured ha&in# lost the use of an arm% the penaltyprescri"ed for such offense is prision correccional in its medium andma*imum periods ran#in# from two 2! years% four ! months and one 1!day to si* ! years. The case falls under the jurisdiction of the (e#ional

Trial Court. The fact that the (e#ional Trial Court Jud#e is of the opinionthat the penalty to "e actually imposed should only "e two 2! years andfour ! months would not di&est the (e#ional Trial Court of its jurisdictionsince it is the penalty prescri"ed "y law that determines jurisdiction.

2., AImposa"le accessory penaltiesA refers to the accessory penaltiesaccompanyin# 1! prision correccional prescri"ed in 5rticle 1% (e&ised enal Code(C!; 2! arresto mayor prescri"ed in 5rticle 2 and ,! confiscation and forfeitureof the proceeds and instruments of the crime prescri"ed in 5rticle 0% (C.

2. ther imposa"le penalties

The additional penalty for ha"itual delin)uency is not considered in determinin# which

court shall ha&e jurisdiction o&er a criminal case "ecause such delin)uency is not acrime.2

2.0 Ci&il lia"ility irrespecti&e of &alue or amount

:here the offense char#ed is within the e*clusi&e competence of the municipal trialcourt "y reason of the penalty imprisonment% etc.!% it shall ha&e jurisdiction to tryand decide the case e&en if the ci&il lia"ility such as actual% compensatory% etc.!claimed e*ceeds hp 29%999.20

2. Ci&il lia"ility irrespecti&e of ind of nature

:here the offense char#ed is within its e*clusi&e competence "y reason of thepenalty prescri"ed therefor% a municipal trial court shall ha&e jurisdiction to try anddecide the cases irrespecti&e of the ind or nature of the ci&il lia"ility arisin# fromthe said offense.

23 $uevarra v. l*o!ovar, $. R. No. 75256, Januar# 26, 199, 169 SCR 476.24 . P. l. 129; El Pueblo de Filipinas v. San Juan, 69 P%il. 347 &1940'.25 . P. l. 129, Se. 32( )ni"e! S"a"e+ v. ernar!o, 19 P%il. 265 &1911'( Lea!o+ v. e $u*an, $. R. No. 3525, eruar# 20, 199, 170

SCR 357.

- 7 -



E*ample+

5 municipal trial court has jurisdiction o&er a case of simple seductiondefined and penalied under 5rticle ,,6 of the (e&ised enal Code% asamended% with arresto mayor, re#ardless of the ci&il lia"ility% such assupport and acnowled#ment of the offsprin#% that may "e imposed under

5rticle ,0 of the same code.

*. Dama,e !o Pro&er! T#rou,# Criminal Ne,li,ence

5rticle ,0 of the (e&ised enal Code% as amended% pro&ides that when criminalne#li#ence shall ha&e resulted only in dama#e to property of another% the offender shall "epunished "y a fine ran#in# from an amount e)ual to the &alue of the said dama#es to three,! times such &alue% which shall in no case "e less than hp 20.

5ccordin#ly+

1. :here the amount or &alue of the dama#e to property alle#ed in the complaint orinformation does not e*ceed hp ,%,,,.,,% the municipal trial court shall try and

decide the case o"ser&in# the >ummary (ules.

@ote+ Three ,! times the said &alue does not e*ceed hp 19%999.

2. :here the amount or &alue of the dama#e to property alle#ed in the complaint orinformation is one ran#in# from hp ,%,, to hp %.% a municipal trial courtshall try and decide the case o"ser&in# (e#ular (ules.

@ote+ Three ,! times the said &alue e*ceeds hp 19%999.

The >ummary (ules are not applica"le to 'atas 'l#. 22 where the penalty of imprisonmentprescri"ed e*ceeds the procedural limit of si* ! months pro&ided in the >ummary (ules.

). S&ecial Juridic!ion in Cer!ain Cae

In the a"sence of all (e#ional Trial Jud#e in a pro&ince or city% any <etropolitan TrialJud#e% <unicipal Trial Jud#e% <unicipal Circuit Trial Jud#e may hear and decide petitionsfor a writ of habeas corpus or applications for "ail in criminal cases in the pro&ince or citywhere the a"sent (e#ional Trial Jud#es sit.2

26 P l. 129, Se. 35.

- 8 -



3. Prosecution o Oenses

1. In!i!u!ion O$ Criminal Ac!ion

1. rosecution of offenses is instituted either "y complaint or information.

The complaint or information shall "e in writin#% in the name of the eople of the hilippinesand a#ainst all persons who appear to "e responsi"le for the offense in&ol&ed.23 5complaint is a sworn written statement char#in# a person with an offense% su"scri"ed "ythe offended party% any peace officer% or other pu"lic officer char#ed with the enforcementof the law &iolated.26 5n information is an accusation in writin# char#in# a person with anoffense% su"scri"ed "y the prosecutor and filed with the court.28

2. Criminal actions shall "e instituted as follows+

2.1 $or offenses where a preliminary in&esti#ation is re)uired pursuant to section 1of (ule 112% "y filin# the complaint with the proper officer for the purpose ofconductin# the re)uisite preliminary in&esti#ation.,9 E*cept as pro&ided in section 3of (ule 119% a preliminary in&esti#ation is re)uired to "e conducted "efore the filin#of a complaint or information for an offense where the penalty prescri"ed "y law isat least four ! years% two 2! months and one 1! day without re#ard to the fine. ,1

2.2 $or all other offenses% "y filin# the complaint or information directly with the

<unicipal Trial Courts and <unicipal Circuit Trial Courts% or the complaint with theoffice of the prosecutor. In <anila and other chartered cities% the complaint shall "efiled with the office of the prosecutor unless otherwise pro&ided in their charters.,2

The institution of the criminal action shall interrupt the runnin# of the period ofprescription of the offense char#ed unless otherwise pro&ided in special laws.,,

,. :ho must prosecute criminal actions

5ll criminal actions commenced "y a complaint or information shall "e prosecutedunder the direction and control of the prosecutor. Fowe&er% in <unicipal TrialCourts or <unicipal Circuit Trial Courts when the prosecutor assi#ned thereto or tothe case is not a&aila"le% the offended party% any peace officer% or pu"lic officer

char#ed with the enforcement of the law &iolated may prosecute the case. This

27 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 110, Se. 2.2 Ibid, Se. 3.29 Ibid, Se. 4.30 Ibid, Se. 1.31 Ibid, Rule 112, Se. 1.32 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 110, Se. 1.33 Ibid.

- 9 -



authority shall cease upon actual inter&ention of the prosecutor or upon ele&ation ofthe case to the (e#ional Trial Court.,

. Inter&ention of ffended arty

:here the ci&il action for reco&ery of ci&il lia"ility is instituted in the criminal action

pursuant to (ule 111% the offended party may inter&ene "y counsel in theprosecution of the offense.,0

0. rosecution of ri&ate Crimes

The crimes of adultery and concu"ina#e shall not "e prosecuted e*cept upon acomplaint filed "y the offended spouse. The offended party cannot institute criminalprosecution without includin# the #uilty parties% if "oth are ali&e% nor% in any case% ifthe offended party has consented to the offense or pardoned the offenders.

The offenses of seduction% a"duction and acts of lasci&iousness shall not "eprosecuted e*cept upon a complaint filed "y the offended party or her parents%#randparents or #uardian% nor% in any case% if the offender has "een e*pressly

pardoned "y any of them. If the offended party dies or "ecomes incapacitated"efore she can file the complaint 4 and she has no nown parents% #randparents or#uardian% the >tate shall initiate the criminal action in her "ehalf.

The offended party% e&en if a minor% has the ri#ht to initiate the prosecution of theoffenses of seduction% a"duction and acts of lasci&iousness independently of herparents% #randparents% or #uardian% unless she is incompetent or incapa"le ofdoin# so. :here the offended party% who is a minor% fails to file the complaint% herparents% #randparents% or #uardian may file the same. The ri#ht to file the action#ranted to parents% #randparents% or #uardian shall "e e*clusi&e of all otherpersons and shall "e e*ercised successi&ely in the order herein pro&ided% e*ceptas stated in the precedin# para#raph.

@o criminal action for defamation which consists in the imputation of any of theoffenses mentioned a"o&e shall "e "rou#ht e*cept at the instance of and uponcomplaint filed "y the offended party.

The prosecution for &iolation of special laws shall "e #o&erned "y the pro&isionsthereof .,

2. Di!inc!ion (e!5een con!rol o$ &roecu!ion and con!rol o$ cour!

1. Control "y rosecution

1.1 :hat case to file,3

1.2 :hom to prosecute,6

34 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 110, Se. 5.35 Ibid, Se. 16.36 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 110, Se. 5.37 People v. Pine!a, No. L-26222, Jul# 21, 1967, 20 SCR 74.3 People v. evara+, $. R. No+. 10093-9, ee*er 15, 1993, 22 SCR 42.

- 10 -



1., <anner of prosecution,8

1. (i#ht of rosecution to withdraw Information "efore arrai#nment e&en withoutnotice and hearin#9

2. Control "y Court nce Case is $iled

2.1 >uspension of 5rrai#nment1

2.2 (ein&esti#ation2

2., rosecution "y $iscal,

2. 4ismissal

,. imitations on Control "y Court

,.1 rosecution entitled to notice of hearin#.0

,.2 Court must await result of petition for re&iew.

,., rosecution7s stand to maintain prosecution should "e respected "y court3

,. =ltimate test of court7s independence is where the fiscal files a motion todismiss or to withdraw information.6

,.0 Court has authority to re&iew power of judicial re&iew! the >ecretary7srecommendation and reject it if there is #ra&e a"use of discretion.8

The (esolution of the >ecretary of Justice may "e appealed to the ffice of the

resident only in offenses punisha"le "y death or reclusion perpetua.5

,. To reject or #rant motion to dismiss% the court must mae own independentassessment of e&idence.01

39 People v. Naareno, $. R. No. 103964, uu+" 1, 1996, 260 SCR 256.40 $alve v. Cour" o ppeal+, $. R. No. 114046, "oer 24, 1994, 237 SCR 65.41 Cre+po v. Moul, No. L-53373, June 30, 197, 151 SCR 462.42 /ela+=ue v. )n!er+ere"ar# o Ju+"ie, $. R. No. 442, eruar# 1, 1990, 12 SCR 3.43 S"a. Ro+a Minin Co. v. >aala, No. L-44723, uu+" 31, 197, 153 SCR 367.44 uno v. Cour" o ppeal+, No. L-7750-51, Mar% 25, 19, 159 SCR 145.45 Repuli v. Suna, No. L-3634, June 20, 19, 162 SCR 191.46 Marelo v. Cour" o ppeal+, $. R. No. 106695, uu+" 4, 1994, 235 SCR 39( Roer"+ v. Cour" o

ppeal+, $. R. No. 113930, Mar% 5, 1996, 254 SCR 307( i*a"ula v. /illon, $. R. No. 12707, "oer12, 199, 297 SCR 679( Solar ;ea* n"er"ain*en", 8n. v. ?o@, $. R. No. 14063, uu+" 22, 2000.47 People v. Mon"e+a, $. R. No. 114302, Sep"e*er 29, 1995, 24 SCR 641.4 Roer"+ v. Cour" o ppeal+, supra, no"e 45.49 Le!e+*a v. Cour" o ppeal+, $. R. No. 113216, Sep"e*er 5, 1997, 27 SCR 656( Solar ;ea*

n"er"ain*en", 8n. v. ?o@, supra, no"e 45.50 Pere v. ?aono# Rural anA, $. R. No. 126210, Mar% 9, 2000.51 Mar"ine v. Cour" o ppeal+, $. R. No. 11237, "oer 13, 1994, 237 SCR 575( Roer"+ v. Cour" o

ppeal+, supra, no"e 45( Le!e+*a v. Cour" o ppeal+, supra, no"e 4( Pere v. ?aono# Rural anA,

supra, no"e 50( Jalan!oni v. Sere"ar# o Ju+"ie, $. R. No+. 115239-40, Mar% 2, 2000.

- 11 -



,.3 Jud#ment is &oid if there is no independent assessment and findin# of #ra&ea"use of discretion02

%. Te!in, Su$$icienc O$ Com&lain! Or In$orma!ion

5 complaint or information is sufficient if it states the name of the accused;0, the desi#nation

of the offense #i&en "y the statute;0 the acts or omissions complained of as constitutin# theoffense;00 the name of the offended party;0 the appro*imate date of the commission of theoffense;03 and the place where the offense was committed.06

:hen an offense is committed "y more than one person% all of them shall "e included in thecomplaint or information.08

D. S!ric! Scru!in in 6einou Crime

1. Cause of the accusation

The acts or omissions complained of as constitutin# the offense and the )ualifyin# anda##ra&atin# circumstances must "e stated in ordinary and concise lan#ua#e and notnecessarily in the lan#ua#e used in the statute "ut in terms sufficient to ena"le a person ofcommon understandin# to now what offense is "ein# char#ed as well as its )ualifyin# anda##ra&atin# circumstances and for the court to pronounce jud#ment.9

". ursuant to >ection 11 of the amendatory statute% the death penalty may "e imposed in rape cases underthe last para#raph of 5rticle ,,0 of the (e&ised enal Code% when the rape is committed with any of thefollowin# attendant circumstances7

1. :hen the &ictim is less than ei#hteen 16! years of a#e and the offender is a parent% ascendant%step-parent% #uardian% relati&e "y consan#uinity or affinity within the third ci&il de#ree% or thecommon-law spouse of the parent of the &ictim.

2. :hen the &ictim is under the custody of the police or military authorities.

,. :hen the rape is committed in full &iew of the hus"and% parent% any of the children or otherrelati&e within the third de#ree of consan#uinity.

. :hen the &ictim is a reli#ious or a child "elow se&en 3! years old.

0. :hen the offender nows that he is afflicted with 5c)uired Immune 4eficiency >yndrome 5I4>!disease.

. :hen committed "y any mem"er of the 5rmed $orces of the hilippines or the hilippine@ational olice or any law enforcement a#ency.

3. :hen "y reason on the occasion of the rape% the &ictim has suffered permanent physical

mutilation.1

52 Le!e+*a v. Cour" o ppeal+, supra, no"e 49( Solar ;ea* n"er"ain*en" v. ?o@, supra, no"e 46.

53 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 110, Se. 7.54 Ibid, Se. .55 Ibid, Se. 9.56 Ibid, Se. 6.57 Ibid, Se. 11.5 Ibid.59 Ibid, Se. 6.60 Ibid, Se. 9.61 + a*en!e! # Rep. " No. 7659, Se. 11.

- 12 -



The need to alle#e )ualifyin# circumstances to justify findin# of )ualified rape and theimposition of death penalty was stressed in se&eral cases. The additional attendantcircumstances introduced "y (ep. 5ct @o. 308 should "e considered as special )ualifyin#circumstances distinctly applica"le to the crime of rape% and if not pleaded as such% couldonly "e appreciated as #eneric a##ra&atin# circumstances.2

:ithout alle#ation of relationship in cases of statutory rape% proof alone of relationshipunless specifically alle#ed in the information would not warrant imposition of the deathpenalty.,

Thus4 the concurrence of the minority of the &ictim and her relationship of the offender is aspecial )ualifyin# circumstance which should "oth "e alle#ed and pro&ed0 with certainty inorder to warrant the imposition of the death penalty. In these cases complainant ne&er saidshe was "elow ei#hteen 16! years of a#e when she was alle#edly raped "y her father onany of the dates stated in the complaint.

:here the information alle#ed the accused% who is the stepfather of complainant%succeeded in ha&in# carnal nowled#e of the latter who was then "elow ei#hteen 16!years of a#e% the e&idence shows that the accused is not the complainant7s stepfather

"ecause he and complainant7s mother were not really married "ut only li&ed in common lawrelationship. Thus% althou#h a hus"and is su"ject to punishment "y death in case hecommits rape a#ainst his wife7 s dau#hter% the death penalty cannot "e imposed "ecausethe relationship alle#ed in the information is different from that actually pro&en. 3

3. Du&lici! o$ !#e O$$ene and Con!inuin, Crime

1. Du&lici! o$ !#e o$$ene

5 complaint or information must char#e only one offense% e*cept when the law prescri"es asin#le punishment for &arious offenses.6

2. Con!inuin, Crime7 T#e Princi&le o$ Deli!o Con!inuado

San!ia,o ". Garc#i!orena

. (. @o. 1982% 4ecem"er 2% 188,% 226 >C(5 21

The ori#inal Information char#ed petitioner with performin# a sin#le criminal act ? that of her appro&in# theapplication for le#aliation of aliens not )ualified under the law to enjoy such pri&ile#e. The ,2 5mendedInformations reproduced verbatim the alle#ation of the ori#inal Information% e*cept that instead of the wordAaliensA in the ori#inal Information% each amended Information states the name of the indi&idual whose stay wasle#alied.

The ,2 5mended Informations char#e what is nown as delito continuado or Acontinued crimeA and sometimesreferred to as Acontinuous crimeA.

62 People v. $aria, $. R. No. 120093, Nove*er 6, 1997, 21 SCR 463.63 People v. Pere, $. R. No. 122764, Sep"e*er 24, 199, 296 SCR 17( People v. ola"e"e, $. R. No.127570, eruar# 13, 1999, 303 SCR 709( People v. !e la Cue+"a, $. R. No. 126134, Mar% 2, 1999, 304

SCR 3( People v. *ra#, $. R. No. 127177, eruar# 25, 1999, 303 SCR 697.64 People v. Can"o+, $. R. No. 12929, pril 14, 1999, 305 SCR 76.65 People v. Mana+in, $. R. No. 130599-60, pril 21, 1999, 306 SCR 22.66 People v. Malen"e, $. R. No+. 1124559-66, pril 30, 1999, 306 SCR 546.67 People v. Mana+in, supra, no"e 65.6 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 110, Se"ion 13

- 13 -

http://www.supremecourt.gov.ph/benchbook/Crim_Pro/bench_topframe.cfm@s=detail&nav=content&ID=382




$or !uello !alon, the delito continuado to e*ist there should "e a plurality of acts performed durin# a period oftime; unity of penal pro&ision &iolated; and unity of criminal intent or purpose% which means that two or more&iolations of the same penal pro&isions are united in one and the same intent or resolution leadin# to theperpetration of the same criminal purpose or aim.

5ccordin# to ue&arra% in appearance% a delito continuado consists of se&eral crimes "ut in reality there is onlyone crime in the mind of the perpetrator.

2.1 E*amples of 4elito Continuado

2.1.1 The sin#le larceny rule

a. The theft of 1, cows "elon#in# to two different owners committed "y theaccused at the same place and at the same period of time;8

". The theft of si* roosters "elon#in# to two different owners from thesame coop and at the same period of time;39

c. The theft of two roosters in the same place and on the same occasion;31

d. The ille#al char#in# of fees for ser&ices rendered "y a lawyer e&ery timehe collects &eterans7 "enefits on "ehalf of a client% who a#reed that theattorney7s fees shall "e paid out of said "enefits;32

e. Ille#al appro&al of the application for the le#aliation of stay of ,2 aliens%constitutes only one crime.3,

2.1.2 The concept of delito continuado was not applied in the followin# cases+

a. Two estafa cases% one of which was committed durin# the period fromJanuary 18 to 4ecem"er 1880 and the other from January 180 to July180. The said acts were committed on two different occasions.3

". >e&eral mal&ersations committed in <ay% June and July% 18,% andfalsifications to conceal the same offenses committed in 5u#ust andcto"er 18,. The mal&ersations and falsifications Awere not the result ofonly one purpose or of only one resolution to em"ele and falsify ***.A30

c. Two estafa cases% one committed in 4ecem"er 18, in&ol&in# the failureof the collector to turn o&er the installments for a radio and the other inJune 18 in&ol&in# the pocetin# of the installments for a sewin#machine.3

d. 30 estafa cases committed "y the con&ersion "y the a#ent of collectionsfrom customers of the employer made on different dates.33

69 People v. ;u*lo+, 67 P%il. 320 &1939'.70 People v. Jaranilla, No. L-2547, eruar# 22, 1974, 55 SCR 563.71 People v. e Leon, 49 P%il. 437 &1926'.72 People v. Saun, No. L-1510, Januar# 31, 1964, 10 SCR 156.73 San"iao v. $ar%i"orena, $. R. No. 109266, ee*er 2, 1993, 22 SCR 21474 People v. i%upa, 113 P%il. 306 &1961'.75 People v. Ci!, 66 P%il. 354 &193'.76 People v. Le!e+*a, No. L-415522, Sep"e*er 29, 1976, 73 SCR 77.77 $a*oa v. Cour" o ppeal+, No. L-41054, Nove*er 2, 1975, 6 SCR 30.

- 14 -






e. (o""ery and fencin# are two separate crimes. rinciple of Delito!ontinuado is not applica"le.36

f. In a sin#le Information for murder for shootin# three persons wheree&idence did not show that a sin#le shot had slain three different persons%the appellant was properly held lia"le for three separate murders and

sentenced to three separate penalties of reclusion perpetua."#

#. >e&eral &ictims dyin# from separate shots constitute separate offensesand if there is no o"jection for duplicity% the accused should "e con&icted ofall offenses char#ed in one Information.69

It is not the act of pressin# the tri##er lie a Thompson su"machine #un thatdetermines the num"er of felonies committed% "ut the num"er of "ullets whichactually produced them.61 The firin# of se&eral "ullets "y the accused althou#hresultin# from one continuous "urst of #unfire% constitutes se&eral acts. Eachperson fell "y different shots% is a &ictim of a separate crime of murder.62

%. E8ce&!ion !o Rule On Du&lici!

The rule on duplicity of offenses does not apply where the law prescri"es a sin#le penaltyfor &arious offenses such as a comple* crime under 5rticle 6 of the (e&ised enal Codeor special comple* crime such as (o""ery with Fomicide or with (ape or (ape withFomicide% or (e"ellion comple*ed with <urder% (o""ery and Gidnappin#.

. Rule on Com&le8 Crime

The precise lan#ua#e of the statute used in alle#in# the commission of the crime is notnecessary as lon# as in char#in# the commission of a comple* offense lie that of (o""erywith Fomicide% the information alle#es each element of the component offenses with thesame precision that would "e necessary if they were made the su"ject of a separateprosecution.6,

Thus% althou#h the phrase "y reason or on occasion of the ro""ery as pro&ided for "y the(e&ised enal Code% was not literally used in the recital of facts alle#in# the commission ofthe two crimes of (o""ery with Fomicide% the Information as filed sufficiently and distinctlyalle#es the commission of the two crimes of ro""ery and homicide and ade)uately informsthe accused of the crime char#ed.6

=nder 5rticle 6 of the (e&ised enal Code% when a sin#le act constitutes two or more#ra&e or less #ra&e felonies% or when an offense is a necessary means for committin# theother% the penalty for the most serious crime shall "e imposed% the same to "e applied in itsma*imum period.

7 Ibid.79 People v. ?uilo, $. R. No. 101741, Mar% 23, 1993, 220 SCR 39( People v. Coonan, $. R. No.9454, "oer 4, 1996, 262 SCR 6930 People v. ua#, $. R. No. 6939, uu+" 2, 1993, 225 SCR 1.1 People v. ;aao, $. R. No+. 10032-5, Mar% 19, 1997, 270 SCR 32 i"in Re#e+ 8 Revi+e! Penal

Co!e 655 &1993'.2 Ibid.3 People v. /i"or, $. R. No+. 75154-55, eruar# 6, 1990, 11 SCR 1.4 Ibid.

- 15 -



The throwin# of a hand #renade at the resident with the intention of illin# him resultin# inthe death and injuries of se&eral persons constitutes the comple* crime of <urder with

5ttempted <urder.60

$or a criminal complaint or Information to char#e the commission of a comple* crime% thealle#ations contained therein do not necessarily ha&e to char#e a comple* crime as defined

"y law. It is sufficient that the information contains alle#ations which state that one offensewas a necessary means to commit the other. The information in )uestion in the presentcase contains alle#ations properly char#in# the commission of the comple* crime ofincriminatory machinations throu#h unlawful arrest% and the court a $uo committed errorwhen it ordered its dismissal.6

3. No Du&lici! In Ra&e 9i!# 6omicide

There is no duplicity in an Information for (ape with Fomicide.63

:here se&en persons committed (ape with Fomicide in conspiracy with each other% e&eryone of the se&en accused may separately "e char#ed for rape with homicide.66

*. No Du&lici! In C#ar,e O$ Estafa

There is no duplicity in a char#e of estafa committed "y the accused for misappropriation ofthe purchase price of se&eral lots owned "y the Fometrust Corporation which werefraudulently recei&ed "y the accused a#ainst se&en lot "uyers on the prete*t that she wasauthoried to do so and which she misapplied to her personal use instead of remittin# themoney to the owner corporation. The crime of estafa committed a#ainst the corporation andthose committed a#ainst the lot "uyers are definitely separate felonies. They were dictated"y different criminal intents% committed under different modes of commission pro&ided "ythe law on estafa% perpetrated "y different acts% consummated on different occasions% andcaused injury to different parties.68

). Ille,al Poeion o$ :irearm and Unla5$ul ;illin, 5i!# !#e Ue T#ereo$

In case Fomicide or <urder is committed with the use of unlicensed firearm% such use ofunlicensed firearm shall "e merely considered as a##ra&atin#.89

(.5. 628 amended 4 @o. 16 a"andoned pre&ious rulin#s that )ualified use of firearmsand murder are separate offenses. =nder the present rule% the unauthoried use oflicensed or unlicensed firearm is simply an a##ra&atin# circumstance in the commission ofhomicide or murder and no lon#er a separate offense% effecti&ely modifyin# People v.%ui&ada and its pro#eny. 81

Thus% is has "een held that the principle of a"sorption does not apply to ille#al possessionof firearms in connection with the crime of >u"&ersion "ut simply descri"es the mode or

manner "y which the &iolation of >ection 1 of .4. 16 was committed so as to )ualify the

5 People v. $uillen 5 P%il. 307 &1950'.6 People v. laao, No. L-20721, pril 30, 1966, 16 SCR 79.7 San%e v. e*e"riou, $. R. No+. 111771-77, Nove*er 9, 1993, 227 SCR 627. Ibid.9 8laan v. Cour" o ppeal+, $. R. No. 119617, ee*er 29, 1994, 239 SCR 575.90 People v. elo"eo, $.R. No. 124212, June 5, 199, 290 +CR 627.91 $.R. No+. 11500-09, Jul# 24, 1996, 259 SCR 191 &1996'( People v. Molina, $.R. No. 11535-36, Jul#

22, 199, 292 +CR 742.

- 16 -



penalty of death.82 The char#e should therefore "e amended to simple Ille#al ossession of$irearm% and was accordin#ly deemed amended "y the >upreme Court.8, It should%howe&er% "e noted that under e*istin# laws (ep. 5ct no. 628!% if Fomicide or <urder iscommitted with the use of an unlicensed firearm% such use of unlicensed firearm shall "econsidered merely as an a##ra&atin# circumstance and cannot "e the su"ject of a separateprosecution.8

It does not% howe&er% mean that there can no lon#er "e any prosecution for the crime ofille#al possession of firearm. In #eneral% all pendin# cases in&ol&in# ille#al possession offirearm should continue to "e prosecuted and tried if no other crimes e*pressly indicated in(epu"lic 5ct @o. 628 are in&ol&ed murder or homicide under >ection 1 and re"ellion%insurrection% sedition or attempted coup d7etat under >ection ,!.80

<. Rec=le Im&rudence Cae

(ecless imprudence resultin# in sli#ht physical injuries and dama#e to property is not acomple* crime and cannot "e the su"ject of a sin#le information% they are separateoffenses su"ject to distinct penalties.8

The two offenses may% howe&er% "e consolidated since under the e*panded jurisdiction ofthe municipal trial courts% dama#e to property throu#h recless imprudence now falls underits jurisdiction.83

+. Amendmen! or Su(!i!u!ion

5 complaint or information may "e amended% in form or in su"stance% without lea&e ofcourt% at any time "efore the accused enters his/her plea. 5fter the plea and durin# the trial%a formal amendment may only "e made with lea&e of court and when it can "e donewithout causin# prejudice to the ri#hts of the accused.

Fowe&er% any amendment "efore plea% which down#rades the nature of the offensechar#ed in or e*cludes any accused from the complaint or information% can "e made onlyupon motion "y the prosecutor% with notice to the offended party and with lea&e of court.The court shall state its reasons in resol&in# the motion and copies of its order shall "efurnished all parties% especially the offended party.

If it appears at any time "efore jud#ment that a mistae has "een made in char#in# theproper offense% the court shall dismiss the ori#inal complaint or information upon the filin#of a new one char#in# the proper offense in accordance with section 18% (ule 118%pro&ided the accused shall not "e placed in dou"le jeopardy. The court may re)uire thewitnesses to #i&e "ail for their appearance at the trial.86

. Proecu!ion o$ Ci"il Ac!ion

92 Rep. " No. 1700 @a+ repeale! # Rep. " No. 7636.93 People v. Pi*en"el, $.R. No. 100210, pril 1, 199, 2 SCR 542.94 People v. Molina, supra, No"e 91.95 People v. /al!e, $.R. No. 127663, Mar% 11, 1999, 304 SCR 611.96 Reo!ia v. Cour" o ppeal+, $. R. No. 125066, Jul# , 199, 292 SCR 7 i"in Lon"oA v. $oronio,

Jr., No. L-37396, pril 30, 1979, 9 SCR 632.97 Rep. " No. 7691, Se. 2.9 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 110, Se. 14.

- 17 -



1. -aic Rule

Rule o$ Cour!4 Rule 111

'nstitution of criminal and civil actions. ?

a! :hen a criminal action is instituted% the ci&il action for the reco&ery of ci&il lia"ility arisin# from the offensechar#ed shall "e deemed instituted with the criminal action unless the offended party wai&es the ci&il action%reser&es the ri#ht to institute it separately or institutes the ci&il action prior to the criminal action.

The reser&ation of the ri#ht to institute separately the ci&il action shall "e made "efore the prosecution startspresentin# its e&idence and under circumstances affordin# the offended party a reasona"le opportunity to maesuch reser&ation.

:hen the offended party sees to enforce ci&il lia"ility a#ainst the accused "y way of moral% nominal%temperate% or e*emplary dama#es without specifyin# the amount thereof in the complaint or information% thefilin# fees therefore shall constitute a first lien on the jud#ment awardin# such dama#es.

:here the amount of dama#es% other than actual% is specified in the complaint or information% thecorrespondin# filin# fees shall "e paid "y the offended party upon the filin# thereof in court.

E*cept as otherwise pro&ided in these (ules% no fil in# fees shall "e re)uired for actual dama#es.

@o counterclaim% cross-claim or third-party complaint may "e filed "y the accused in the criminal case% "ut anycause of action which could ha&e "een the su"ject thereof may "e liti#ated in a separate ci&il action.

"! The criminal action for &iolation of 'atas am"ansa 'l#. 22 shall "e deemed to include the correspondin#ci&il action. @o reser&ation to fi le such ci&il action separately shall "e allowed.

=pon filin# of the aforesaid joint criminal and ci&il actions% the offended party shall pay in full the filin# fees"ased on the amount of the chec in&ol&ed% which shall "e considered as the actual dama#es claimed. :herethe complaint or information also sees to reco&er li)uidated% moral% nominal% temperate or e*emplarydama#es% the offended party shall pay additional fil in# fees "ased on the amounts alle#ed therein. If theamounts are not so alle#ed "ut any of these dama#es are su"se)uently awarded "y the court% the filin# fees"ased on the amount awarded shall constitute a fi rst lien on the jud#ment.

:here the ci&il action has "een filed separately and trial thereof has not yet commenced% it may "econsolidated with the criminal action upon application with the court tryin# the latter case. If the application is#ranted% the trial of "oth actions shall proceed in accordance with in section 2 of this (ule #o&ernin#consolidation of the ci&il and criminal actions.

The 2999 (ules on Criminal rocedure deems as instituted with the criminal action only theci&il lia"ility arisin# from the offense char#ed. The ci&il lia"ility is deemed instituted ? notmerely AimpliedlyA instituted ? with the institution of the criminal action. The independent ci&ilactions under 5rticles ,2% ,,,% , and 213 of the Ci&il Code are no lon#er deemed orimpliedly instituted with the criminal action or considered as wai&ed e&en if there is noreser&ation. The reser&ation applies only to the ci&il lia"ility arisin# from the offensechar#ed. The employer may no lon#er "e held ci&illy lia"le for $uasi(delict in the criminalaction as ruled in )aniago v. !ourt of *ppeals,## San 'ldefonso +ines, 'nc. v. !ourt of

*ppeals and all other similar cases% since $uasi(delict is not deemed instituted with the

criminal. If at all% the only ci&il lia"ility of the employer in the criminal action would "e his/hersu"sidiary lia"ility under the (e&ised enal Code. The rule has also done away with thirdparty complaints and counterclaims in criminal actions. Third-party complaints andcounterclaims in criminal actions ha&e to "e &entilated in a separate ci&il action.

2. Ci"il Ac!ion No! -aed on Crime No! E8!in,ui#ed

99 $.R. No. 104392, eruar# 20, 1996, 253 SCR 674.100 $.R. No. 119771, pril 24, 199, 29 SCR 56.

- 18 -



5c)uittal in a criminal action "ars the ci&il action arisin# therefrom where the jud#ment ofac)uittal holds that the accused did not commit the criminal acts imputed to him.191

The ci&il lia"ility that is deemed e*tin#uished is the ci&il lia"ility "ased on crime. 'ut not theci&il lia"ility "ased on sources of o"li#ation other than the criminal offense althou#h arisin#from the same act or omission. 5rticle 28 of the Ci&il Code e*pressly pro&ides that when the

accused in a criminal prosecution is ac)uitted on the #round that his/her #uilt has not "eenpro&ed "eyond reasona"le dou"t% a ci&il action for dama#es for the same act or omissionmay "e instituted. >uch action re)uires only a preponderance of e&idence.

The ci&il lia"ility therefor under 5rticles ,2% ,, , and 213 of the Ci&il Code or those wherethe source of ci&il o"li#ation is not "ased on the criminal offense is not affected "y the resultof the criminal action.

In other words% the e*tinction of the ci&il lia"ility referred to in par. e! of >ection ,% (ule 111%18 (ules! refers e*clusi&ely to the ci&il lia"ility founded on 5rticle 199 of the (e&isedenal Code whereas the ci&il lia"ility for the same act considered as a )uasi-delict only andnot as a crime is not e*tin#uished e&en "y a declaration in the criminal case that thecriminal act char#ed has not happened or has not "een committed "y the accused. 'riefly

stated% culpa a$uiliana includes &oluntary and ne#li#ent acts which may "e punisha"le "ylaw. It results% therefore% that the ac)uittal of (e#inald Fill in the criminal case has note*tin#uished his/her lia"ility for $uasi(delict, hence that ac)uittal is not a "ar to the instantaction a#ainst him.192

The only ci&il lia"ility that may thus "e imposed in a criminal action is that arisin# from andconse)uent to the criminal lia"ility of the accused on the principle that e&ery personcriminally lia"le is also ci&illy lia"le.19, This includes restitution% reparation of dama#escaused and indemnification of conse)uential dama#es.19 Complementary thereto% are thesu"sidiary ci&il lia"ility of inneepers% ta&ern eepers and proprietor of esta"lishments%190 employers% teachers% persons and corporations en#a#ed in any ind of industry% for feloniescommitted "y their ser&ants% pupils% wormen% apprentices% employees in the dischar#e oftheir duties.19

%. Criminal Ac!ion To Reco"er Ci"il Lia(ili! Ariin, :rom Delict and Ci"il Ac!ion -aedon Quasi-Delict Ma Proceed Simul!aneoul

5 separate ci&il action for dama#es lies a#ainst the offender in a criminal act% whether or nothe is criminally prosecuted and found #uilty or ac)uitted% pro&ided that the offended party isnot allowed% if he is actually char#ed also criminally% to reco&er dama#es on "oth sides% andwould "e entitled in such e&entuality only to the "i##er award of the two% assumin# theawards made in the two cases &ary.193

. E8!inc!ion O$ T#e Penal Doe No! Carr 9i!# I! E8!inc!ion O$ T#e Ci"il

'ut while e&ery person criminally lia"le is also ci&illy lia"le% the con&erse is not true.E*tinction of the penal does not carry with it e*tinction of the ci&il unless the e*tinction

101 Be+"ern 8n+"i"u"e o ;e%nolo# v. Sala+, $. R. No. 113032, uu+" 21, 1997, 27 SCR 216.102 lano v. ?ill, No. L-2403, Ma# 26, 1977, 77 SCR 9.103 Revi+e! Penal Co!e, r". 100.104 Ibid, r". 104.105 Ibid, r". 102.106 Ibid, r". 103.107 lano v. ?ill, supra, no"e 102( Jaran"illa v. Cour" o ppeal+, $. R. No. 0194, Mar% 21, 199, 171

SCR 429( e ?auler+ Corpora"ion v. Cour" o ppeal+, $. R. No. 127934, uu+" 23, 2000.

- 19 -







proceeds from a declaration in a final jud#ment that the fact from which the ci&il mi#ht arisedid not e*ist.196 >imilarly% a final jud#ment rendered in a ci&il action a"sol&in# the defendantfrom the ci&il lia"ility is no "ar to a criminal action198 unless the ci&il action is a prejudicial)uestion which in&ol&es an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in thecriminal% the resolution of which determines whether or not the criminal action mayproceed.119

. PROCEDURAL C6EC;LISTS ON CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

10 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 111, Se. 2:.109 Ibid, Se. 5.110 Ibid, Se+. 6 an! 7.

- 20 -



1. :or Cae Co,ni>a(le - T#e Munici&al Trial Cour!

C#ec=li! I

Thin#s To Chec/4o =pon (eceipt f Complaint r Information

1. Chec if the offense char#ed is within court7s jurisdiction.

2. If the offense is not within the court7s jurisdiction% dismiss complaint/information% unlessthe complaint presents a case for preliminary in&esti#ation "y the <unicipal Trial Court.

-hen !ase is for Preliminary 'nvestigation

1. :hen the case is for preliminary in&esti#ation "y the <unicipal Trial Court% chec thecomplaint as well as accompanyin# affida&its and other supportin# documents if there is#round to continue with the in)uiry.

1.1 If there is no such #round% dismiss the complaint.

1.2 If there is such #round% conduct preliminary in&esti#ation followin# theprocedure in (ule 112% >ection ,.

2. :ithout waitin# for the conclusion of the preliminary in&esti#ation% the in&esti#atin# jud#emay issue a warrant of arrest% after conductin# an e*amination under oath of thecomplainant and his/her witnesses in the form of searchin# )uestions and answers todetermine e*istence of pro"a"le cause and the necessity of placin# the respondent underimmediate custody so as not to frustrate the ends of justice.

@ote+ $or purposes of issuin# a warrant of arrest durin# preliminary in&esti#ation% it ismandatory that an e*amination in writin# and under oath "y searchin# )uestions andanswers should "e conducted "y the in&esti#atin# jud#e.111

2.1 If there is pro"a"le cause "ut no such Anecessity%A do not issue arrest warrant;only issue the subpoena to respondent% attachin# thereto a copy of the complaint%affida&its% and other supportin# documents with the directi&e to su"mit counteraffida&its within ten 19! days from receipt of order.

2.1.1 Illustrati&e case+ :here no such AnecessityA e*ists

The issuance of warrant of arrest "y the <unicipal Jud#e conductin#preliminary in&esti#ation is left to his/her sound jud#ment and discretion.The >upreme Court sustained Jud#e >amulde7s refusal to issue an arrestwarrant% holdin# that under the applica"le rule% it is not o"li#atory% "utmerely discretionary% upon the in&esti#atin# jud#e to issue a warrant for thearrest of the accused% for the determination of whether a pro"a"le causee*ists and whether it is necessary to arrest the accused in order not tofrustrate the ends of justice% is left to his/her sound jud#ment or discretion.In this particular case% since the ro""ery char#e was offshoot of a"oundary dispute "etween the two property owners% the in&esti#atin# jud#edid not "elie&e there was any dan#er of the accused a"scondin# "efore

111 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 112, Se. 6 :( r"i v. Pala#pa#on, . M. No. M;J-93-23, Jul# 25, 1994, 234

SCR 391.

- 21 -



the filin# of the information a#ainst him "y the fiscal% hence% he found noneed to place him under immediate custody.112

2.2 If% howe&er% his/her findin#s and recommendations are affirmed "y thepro&incial fiscal or city prosecutor or "y the m"udsman or his/her deputy% and thecorrespondin# information is filed% he shall issue a warrant of arrest.11,

,. If there is possi"le cause and such AnecessityA% issue arrest warrant.

-hen !ase is for rial on the )erits

1. If the case presented "y complaint or information is within the jurisdiction of the<unicipal Trial Court% chec if case is for Asummary procedureA or Are#ular procedure.A

1.1 >ummary rocedure Cases

1.1.1 <ae preliminary determination whether to dismiss case outri#ht for"ein# patently without "asis or merit or to re)uire further proceedin#s to "etaen.

1.1.2 :hen further proceedin#s are re)uired% set the case for immediatearrai#nment of the accused who is under custody and if he pleads not#uilty% render jud#ment forthwith; if he pleads not #uilty% he shall "ereleased without "ail unless he is a recidi&ist% fu#iti&e from justice% ischar#ed with physical injuries% does not reside in the place where the&iolation of the law or ordinance was committed% or has no nownresidence.

1.2 (e#ular rocedure Cases

1.2.1 If the case is commenced "y complaint or information% the procedure

in section , a!% (ule 112 shall "e o"ser&ed;

1.2.2 If within ten 19! days from the filin# of the complaint or information%the jud#e after e&aluatin# the e&idence or after personally e*aminin# inwritin# and under oath the complainant and his/her witnesses% the jud#efinds no pro"a"le cause he shall dismiss the case unless it is deemednecessary to re)uire su"mission of affida&its of witnesses to aid him inarri&in# at the conclusion as to the e*istence of pro"a"le cause whichshould "e done within ten 19! days from notice.

1.2., If the case is commenced "y complaint% the court may either e&aluatethe supportin# affida&its or personally e*amine in writin# and under oaththe complainant and his/her witnesses in the form of searchin# )uestions

and answers to determine if there is pro"a"le cause; if there is% issuearrest warrant; otherwise% dismiss the case outri#ht.

1.2. The court may% howe&er% opt not to issue a warrant of arrest or acommitment order if the accused had already "een arrested% and hold himfor trial. Fowe&er% if the jud#e is satisfied that there is no necessity forplacin# the accused under custody% he may issue a summons instead of a

112 Sa*ul!e v. Salvani. Jr., No. L-7606, Sep"e*er 26, 19, 165 SCR 734.113 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 113, Se. 5 :.

- 22 -






warrant of arrest. This refers only to cases which do not re)uire preliminaryin&esti#ation.11

1.2.0 A>earchin# uestions and 5nswersA means only% tain# intoconsideration the purpose of the preliminary e*amination which is todetermine whether there is a reasona"le #round to "elie&e that an offense

has "een committed and the accused is pro"a"ly #uilty thereof so that awarrant of arrest may "e issued and the accused held for trial% such)uestions as ha&e tendency to show the commission of a crime and theperpetrator thereof. :hat would "e searchin# )uestions would depend onwhat is sou#ht to "e in)uired into% such as+ the nature of the offense% thedate% time% and the place of its commission% the possi"le moti&es for itscommission; the su"ject% his/her a#e% education% status% financial andsocial circumstances% his/her attitude toward the in&esti#ation% socialattitudes% opportunities to commit the offense; the &ictim% his/her a#e%status% family responsi"ilities% financial and social circumstances%characteristics% etc. The points that are su"ject of in)uiry may differ fromcase to case. The )uestions% therefore% must to a #reat de#ree dependupon the jud#e main# the in&esti#ation.

1.2. $orm of >earchin# uestions for >imple Theft

The witness is duly sworn to and #i&es his/her name and otherpersonal circumstances!

. - 5re you the same complainant in this complaint for simple theft

5. -

. - 4escri"e the rin# alle#edly stolen from you.

5. -

. ? :hen and how did you learn that your rin# was stolen

5. ?

. ? :hen and how did you come to now the accused

5. ?

. ? :here does the accused reside

5. ?

. ? 4o you now the accused7s present wherea"outs

5. ?

114 Ibid, Rule 112, Se. 9 :.

- 23 -



. ? Is the accused related to you "y "lood or marria#e

5. ?

. ? 4id you ha&e any ind of dealin# with the accused "efore thedate in )uestion If so% what

5. ?

. ? 4o you now of any reason why the accused would tae yourrin# without your consent

5. ?

. ? 4o you owe the accused anythin#

5. ?

. ? :hen and how did you ac)uire the rin#

5. ?

. ? :hat is the appro*imate &alue of the rin#

5. ?

. ? 4id you actually witness the tain# of your rin#

5. ?

. ? >tate the name or names of the person or persons% if any% whonow the alle#ed theft.

5. ?

. ? 4o you wish to state anythin# else

5. -

If the jud#e still finds no pro"a"le cause despite the additional e&idence% he shall% within ten

19! days from its su"mission or e*piration of said period% dismiss the case. :hen he findspro"a"le cause% he shall issue a warrant of arrest% or a commitment order if the accusedhad already "een arrested% and hold him for trial. Fowe&er% if the jud#e is satisfied thatthere is no necessity for placin# the accused under custody% he may issue summonsinstead of a warrant of arrest.

C#ec=li! II

Thin#s To Chec/4o 5fter The Issuance f 5rrest :arrant 5nd 'efore Trial >ta#e

- 24 -



1. If arrest warrant was properly released and a report has "een properly su"mitted "utaccused could not "e apprehended for a considera"le len#th of time% issue alias arrestwarrant and order for archi&in# of case.

1.1 If report is su"mitted with accused "ein# arrested and he does not post "ailforthwith% issue correspondin# commitment pendin# trial and ha&e it ser&ed on

warden or head of the jail or place of detention% alon# with the correspondin# noticeto produce the accused "efore the court for arrai#nment on the date and timealready fi*ed "y the court.

1.2 In case of a summary procedure case and accused is arrested under an arrestwarrant issued for failure of accused to appear when re)uired per secondpara#raph >ection 19 of the >ummary (ule!% set case for immediate arrai#nment%the warden or head of the jail or place of detention liewise "ein# ser&ed withcorrespondin# commitment pendin# trial and notice to produce the accused forarrai#nment "efore the court.

1., If accused files "ail "ond% cash "ond deposit% or reco#niance% checsufficiency of documentation% particularly the correspondin# si#natures on the

re)uisite documents% and if in order% appro&e it and issue correspondin# releaseorder for immediate ser&ice on officer concerned.

2. 5t the scheduled arrai#nment% jud#e shall inform accused who appears without counselof his/her ri#ht to counsel and shall as accused if he desires to ha&e one.

2.1 In proper cases% appoint counsel de oficio for the accused who appears withoutcounsel.

,. 5rrai#nment must "e in open court; accused must "e furnished a copy of the complaintor information; accused must "e present at the arrai#nment and plea must "e made ofrecord; if accused refuses to plead% or he maes a conditional plea of #uilty e.g., enterin# aplea of #uilt pro&ided the penalty to "e meted shall only "e a fine!% then enter a plea of not

#uilty for the accused.

. If accused wants to plead #uilty to lesser offense% "oth prosecutor and offended partymust consent thereto.

0. If accused pleads #uilty% impose correspondin# sentence% unless court desires to recei&ee&idence to determine penalty to "e imposed% includin# ci&il indemnity in the proper cases.

. If the plea is not #uilty% set case for trial.

3. 5fter arrai#nment% as a measure to e*pedite the trial% where the accused and counsela#ree% conduct a pre-trial conference% without impairin# the ri#hts of the accused% on the

followin# matters% to wit+ a! plea "ar#ainin#; "! stipulation of facts; c! marin# foridentification of parties e&idence; d! wai&er of o"jections to admissi"ility of e&idence; and%e! such other matters as will promote a fair and e*peditious trial.

3.1 5fter pre-trial% issue order recitin# the actions taen% the facts stipulated% ande&idence mared.

- 25 -



3.2 Chec if a#reement/s or admission/s made entered durin# pre-trial wereproperly reduced to writin# and duly si#ned "y the parties char#ed and theircounsel.

-. :or Cae Co,ni>a(le - T#e Re,ional Trial Cour!

C#ec=li! I

- 26 -



Thin#s To 4o =pon (eceipt f Complaint r Information =p To Issuance f The :arrant f 5rrest

1. Chec if% on the face of the information/complaint% the court has jurisdiction o&er thecase; otherwise% dismiss it and order the release of the accused if under detention insofaras the case is concerned.

2. Chec if a claim for dama#es other than actual alle#ed in the information/complaint% andif in the affirmati&e% ascertain whether appropriate filin#/docet fee for said claim has "eenpaid to the cler of court. If the re)uisite filin#/docet fees ha&e not "een paid at the time ofthe filin# of the information/complaint% issue an order to the offended party to pay there)uisite filin#/docet fees within a reasona"le time.

,. If accused is detained% issue a commitment/detention order to the warden/jailers; if theaccused is at lar#e% issue a warrant for his/her arrest% in accordance with the succeedin#steps.

. :hen warrant of arrest may issue

:ithin ten 19! days from the filin# of the complaint or information% the jud#e shallpersonally e&aluate the resolution of the prosecutor and its supportin# e&idence. Fe mayimmediately dismiss the case if the e&idence on record clearly fails to esta"lish pro"a"lecause. If he finds pro"a"le cause% he shall issue a warrant of arrest% or a commitment orderif the accused has already "een arrested pursuant to a warrant issued "y the jud#e whoconducted the preliminary in&esti#ation or when the Complaint or Information was filedpursuant to section 3 of the (ule. In case of dou"t on the e*istence of pro"a"le cause% the

jud#e may order the prosecutor to present additional e&idence within fi&e 0! days fromnotice and the issue must "e resol&ed "y the court within thirty ,9! days from the filin# ofthe complaint of information.

0. If not satisfied upon the filin# of information/complaint that pro"a"le cause e*ists% orderthe prosecutor to su"mit the records of the case and if "ased thereon% there is pro"a"le

cause% issue a warrant of arrest. therwise% dismiss the case.

. If the char#e is "aila"le% fi* the amount of "ail either in the commitment/detention orderor warrant of arrest.

C#ec=li! II

Incidents 5fter Issuance f :arrant f 5rrest r Commitment rder

1. nce the accused is arrested or otherwise taen into custody% issue a commitment orderand set the case for arrai#nment.

2. :hen the accused is under pre&enti&e detention% his/her case shall "e raffled and itsrecords transmitted to the jud#e to whom the case was raffled within three ,! days fromthe filin# of the information or complaint. The accused shall "e arrai#ned within ten 19!days from the date of the raffle. The pre-trial conference shall "e held within ten 19! daysafter arrai#nment.110

,. =nless a shorter period is pro&ided "y special law or >upreme Court circular% thearrai#nment shall "e held within thirty ,9! days from the date the court ac)uires jurisdiction

115 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 116, Se. 1 e:.

- 27 -



o&er the person of the accused. The time of the pendency of a motion to )uash or for a "illof particulars or other causes justifyin# suspension of the arrai#nment shall "e e*cluded incomputin# the period.11

. If there is failure to e*ecute the warrant of arrest or no report is made within ten 19!days from receipt of the warrant "y the e*ecutin# officer% issue an alias arrest warrant and

order the archi&in# of the case% furnishin# a copy of the said order to the complainant.

0. If "ail is a matter of ri#ht% and the accused files "ail% ascertain if all the re)uirements forthe "ail are complied with% as follows+

0.1 Cash 'ond

0.1.1 The official receipt or certificate of deposit of the amount of "ail fi*ed"y the court who filed the information/complaint% issued "y the #o&ernmentofficer concerned% is attached to records of the case.

0.1.2 The written undertain#% e*ecuted "y the accused containin# all theconditions contained in >ection 2 of (ule 11 of the (e&ised (ules on

Criminal rocedure% as amended% is attached to the records of the case.

0.2 Corporate >urety

0.2.1 hotocopy of the Certification issued "y the >upreme Court%accompanied "y the photocopies of receipts of payment "y the suretycompany of the re)uisite fees to the >upreme Court is attached to the"ond.

0.2.2 Certificate of the Cler of Court of the (e#ional Trial Court where thecase is filed and pendin# showin# that the "ondin# company does notha&e any pendin# o"li#ations/lia"ilities to the #o&ernment% consistin# of

writs of e*ecution and/or confiscated "onds in criminal cases and that"ondin# company was issued a Certificate of 5uthority "y the InsuranceCommission and presently updatin# its o"li#ation.

0.2., Certificate of 5uthority issued "y the Insurance Commission.

0., roperty 'ond

0.,.1 5ffida&it of surety/ sureties taen "efore the jud#e or su"mitted to the jud#e% statin# therein that each of the sureties possesses the )ualificationsas pro&ided for in >ection 12 of (ule 11 of the 2999 (ules on Criminalrocedure and descri"in# the property offered as "ond for the accused%the nature of the title of the property% the encum"rances thereon% the

num"er and amount of other "onds entered into "y him/them andremainin# undischar#ed% and his/her/their other lia"ilities% if any.

0.,.2 wner7s duplicate of the ori#inal Certificate of Title of thesurety/sureties co&erin# the property offered as "ond% if re#istered underthe Torrens system or% the wner7s copy of the declaration of (ealroperty% if unre#istered.

116 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 116, Se. 1 :( SC Cirular No. 3-9.

- 28 -



0.,., Certificates of ayment of (ealty Ta*es on the property offered as"ond. If the property is sufficient% and the re)uisite affida&it is su"mitted tothe court% appro&e the "ond and order the accused to cause the annotationof the lien% within ten 19! days from the receipt "y the accused of thecourt% at the "ac of the title to the property% if re#istered% or in the(e#istration 'oo% if unre#istered% and on the correspondin# ta*declaration in the ffice of the ro&incial and <unicipal 5ssessorconcerned.

=pon compliance "y the accused of order of the court% issue an order releasin# theaccused from detention.

. In either case% the accused should su"mit photo#raphs passport sie! taen within thelast si* ! months showin# the face% the left and ri#ht profiles of the accused and attachedto the records% and the written undertain# containin# the conditions set forth in >ection 2of (ule 11 of the 2999 (ules on Criminal rocedure% as amended.

3. If the accused fails to comply with the order of the court for the annotation of the lien andfor the re#istration of the annotation% cancel the property "ond.

6. If the accused applies for release on reco#niance% set the hearin# of the application and#i&e reasona"le notice of the hearin# to the prosecutor with the re)uirement to su"mit thecomment and recommendation in the application.

6.1 4efinition of (eco#niance

5n o"li#ation of record% entered into "efore some court or ma#istrate dulyauthoried to tae it% with the condition to do some particular act% the most usualcondition in criminal cases "ein# the appearance of the accused for trial; a contract"etween the sureties and the >tate for the production of the principal at there)uired time.113

6.2 (eco#niance may "e allowed in the followin# instances+

6.2.1 The char#e a#ainst the accused is for &iolation of a municipal or cityordinance% a li#ht felony and/or a criminal offense prescri"ed penalty forwhich is not hi#her than si* ! months imprisonment and/or a fine of hp2%999% or "oth% pro&ided the accused has esta"lished% to the satisfaction ofthe court% the ina"ility to post the re)uired cash or "ail "ond.

6.2.2 :hen the accused has "een in custody for a period e)ual to or morethan the possi"le ma*imum imprisonment of the offense char#ed to whichhe/she may "e sentenced. Fowe&er% if the ma*imum penalty to which theaccused is sentenced is destierro, he shall "e released after thirty ,9!

days of pre&enti&e imprisonment.

6.2., 5t the discretion of the Court% if the accused has "een in custody fora period e)ual to or more than the minimum of the principal penaltyprescri"ed for the offense char#ed% without applyin# the Indeterminate>entence aw or any modifyin# circumstances.

117 People v. ner 7 P%il. 566 &1950'.

- 29 -



6.2. 5t the discretion of the court% and% upon recommendation of the4epartment of >ocial :elfare and 4e&elopment 4>:4! or other a#encyor a#encies% if the accused is a youthful offender o&er nine 8! "ut underei#hteen 16! years at the same time of the commission of the offensechar#ed% in which case% the accused may "e released on his/her ownco#niance or to the custody of his/her parents or of a suita"le person whoshall "e punisha"le for the appearance of the accused when re)uired.

8. :here the accused is char#ed with a capital offense which% under the law at the time ofthe application for "ail is punisha"le "y death or reclusion perpetua, and the accused filesan application for "ail% #i&e reasona"le notice of the hearin# to the prosecutor or re)uirehim to su"mit his/her recommendation.

19. If the prosecutor% where "ail is a matter of discretion% o"jects to the application of theaccused for "ail% hold in a"eyance resolution of the application until the arrai#nment of theaccused.

11. If the case is not dismissed and the accused is under arrest% order the 'ranch Cler ofCourt to schedule the arrai#nment of the accused with notice to the complainant.

%. Common Procedure in :ir! and Second Le"el Cour!

C#ec=li! I

Thin#s To 4o 5t The 5rrai#nment f The 5ccused116

11 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 116.

- 30 -



1. The accused must "e arrai#ned "efore the court where the Complaint or Information wasfiled or assi#ned for trial. The arrai#nment shall "e made in open court "y the jud#e or cler"y furnishin# the accused with a copy of the Complaint or Information% readin# the same inthe lan#ua#e or dialect nown to him% and asin# him whether he pleads #uilty or not #uilty.The prosecution may call at the trial witnesses other than those named in the Complaint orInformation.

2. The accused must "e present at the arrai#nment and must personally enter his/her plea.'oth arrai#nment and plea shall "e made of record% "ut failure to do so shall not affect the&alidity of the proceedin#s.

,. 'efore the readin# of the Information% where the accused is not assisted "y counsel de parte, inform him/her of his/her ri#ht to counsel of his own choice and in)uire from him ifhe/she desires to en#a#e his/her own counsel. =nless the accused is allowed to defendhimself in person% and the accused is amena"le to a counsel de oficio, appoint a competentand responsi"le counsel de oficio for him.

. :hene&er a counsel de oficio is appointed "y the court to defend the accused at thearrai#nment% he shall "e #i&en a reasona"le time to consult with the accused as to his/her

plea "efore proceedin# with the arrai#nment.

0. :hen the accused refuses to plead or maes a conditional plea% a plea of not #uilty shall"e entered for him.

. :hen the accused pleads #uilty "ut presents e*culpatory e&idence% his/her plea shall "edeemed withdrawn and a plea of not #uilty shall "e entered for him.

3. The pri&ate offended party shall "e re)uired to appear at the arrai#nment for purposes ofplea-"ar#ainin#% determination of ci&il lia"ility% and other matters re)uirin# his/her presence.In case of failure of the offended party to appear despite due notice% the court may allowthe accused to enter a plea of #uilty to a lesser offense which is necessarily included in theoffense char#ed with the conformity of the trial prosecutor alone.118 =nless the ci&il action

has "een reser&ed% wai&ed or otherwise instituted ahead% reset the case for the reception ofe&idence to determine the ci&il lia"ility and the imposa"le penalty.

6. lea of #uilty to a lesser offense

5t arrai#nment% the accused% with the consent of the offended party and the prosecutor%may "e allowed "y the trial court to plead #uilty to a lesser offense which is necessarilyincluded in the offense char#ed. 5fter arrai#nment "ut "efore trial% the accused may still "eallowed to plead #uilty to said lesser offense after withdrawin# his/her plea of not #uilty. @oamendment of the complaint or information is necessary.129

8. lea of #uilty to capital offense; reception of e&idence

:hen the accused pleads #uilty to a capital offense% the court a! shall conduct a searchin#in)uiry into the &oluntariness and full comprehension of the conse)uences of his/her pleaand "! shall re)uire the prosecution to pro&e his/her #uilt and the precise de#ree ofculpa"ility. The accused may present e&idence in his/her "ehalf.

19. lea of #uilty to non-capital offense; reception of e&idence% discretionary

119 SC Cirular No. 1-9.120 SC Cirular No. 3-9, Se. 4.

- 31 -



:hen the accused pleads #uilty to a non-capital offense% the court may recei&e e&idencefrom the parties to determine the penalty to "e imposed.

11. :ithdrawal of impro&ident plea of #uilty

5t any time "efore the jud#ment of con&iction "ecomes final% the court may permit an

impro&ident plea of #uilty to "e withdrawn and "e su"stituted "y a plea of not #uilty.

12. If a A@ot uiltyA plea is entered% schedule the pre-trial of the case with due notice to theoffended party/arrestin# officer.

1,. If the accused is under pre&enti&e detention% the pre-trial conference of the case shall"e held within ten 19! days after arrai#nment.

1. In other cases% unless a shorter period is pro&ided "y special law or >upreme Courtcircular% the arrai#nment shall "e held within thirty ,9! days from the date the courtac)uires jurisdiction o&er the person of the accused. The time of the pendency of a motionto )uash or for a "ill of particulars or other causes justifyin# suspension of the arrai#nmentshall "e e*cluded in computin# the period.121

10. If the accused appears to "e sufferin# from an unsound mental condition whicheffecti&ely renders him/her una"le to fully understand the char#e a#ainst him/her and toplead intelli#ently thereto% suspend the arrai#nment and order the accused7s mentale*amination; and if necessary% accused7s confinement for such purpose.

1. =pon motion of the accused% suspension of his/her arrai#nment may "e allowed on anyof the followin# #rounds+

1.1 The accused appears to "e sufferin# from an unsound mental condition whicheffecti&ely renders him una"le to fully understand the char#e a#ainst him and toplead intelli#ently thereto. In such case% the court shall order his/her mental

e*amination and% if necessary% his/her confinement for such purpose.

1.2 There e*ists a prejudicial )uestion.

1., 5 petition for re&iew of the resolution of the prosecutor is pendin# at either the4epartment of Justice% or the ffice of the resident; provided, that the period ofsuspension shall not e*ceed si*ty 9! days counted from the filin# of the petitionwith the re&iewin# office.

@ote+ In People v. *licando,/ / the >upreme Court held that a con&iction in capital offensescannot rest alone on a plea of #uilt. The trial court must re)uire the prosecution to pro&e the#uilt of the appellant and the precise de#ree of his/her culpa"ility "eyond reasona"le dou"t.

121 SC Cirular No. 3-9, Se. 2.122 People v lian!o, $. R. No. 11747, ee*er 12, 1995, 251 SCR 293.

- 32 -





C#ec=li! II

re-Trial

Pre(trial0 mandatory in criminal cases. ? In all criminal cases co#nia"le "y theSandiganbayan, (e#ional Trial Court% <etropolitan Trial Court% <unicipal Trial Court inCities% <unicipal Trial Court and <unicipal Circuit Trial Court% the court shall% afterarrai#nment and within thirty ,9! days from the date the court ac)uires jurisdiction o&er theperson of the accused% unless a shorter period is pro&ided for in special laws or circulars ofthe >upreme Court% order a pre-trial conference to consider the followin#+

- 33 -



a! plea "ar#ainin#;

"! stipulation of facts;

c! marin# for identification of e&idence of the parties;

d! wai&er of o"jections to admissi"ility of e&idence;

e! modification of the order of trial if the accused admits the char#e "ut interposesa lawful defense; and

f! such matters as will promote a fair and e*peditious trial of the criminal and ci&ilaspects of the case.12,

Thin#s To 4o 4urin# The re-Trial Conference

1. 4etermine and consider with the parties and counsel mutually satisfactory plea-"ar#ainin# arran#ements% such% as for e*ample% the followin#+

1.1 for the accused to chan#e his/her plea to a lesser or different offense in returnfor the dismissal of other count/s with or without credit% for the plea of #uilty as amiti#atin# circumstance; or

1.2 for the accused to chan#e his/her plea of not #uilty to that of #uilty to one orsome of the counts of a multi-count indictment in return for the dismissal of othercount/s with or without credit for the plea of #uilty as a miti#atin# circumstance; or

1., for the accused to chan#e his/her plea of not #uilty to that of #uilty to theoffense char#ed% in return for the offended party7s wai&er of the whole or part of theci&il lia"ility or dama#es; or

1. for the accused to chan#e his/her plea of not #uilty to that of #uilty plea to theoffense char#ed% in return for the elimination of one% some% or all of the #enerica##ra&atin# circumstances alle#ed in the information/complaint; or

1.0 for the accused to plea "ar#ain on the nature% duration or the amount of theimposa"le penalty within the allowa"le ran#e.

-hen here 's Plea Bargaining

1. The accused and his/her counsel shall manifest that they a#ree to enter into plea"ar#ainin# on any of the forms a"o&e-descri"ed. If the prosecution and offendedparty a#ree to the plea offered "y the accused% the court issues an order main# on

record the plea "ar#ainin# arri&ed at and duly implemented.

2. In case of any such chan#e of plea to one of #uilty% proceed to recei&e e&idenceon the ci&il aspect "efore renderin# jud#ment% unless the offended party wai&esci&il action or his/her claim for ci&il lia"ility or dama#es% reser&es the ri#ht toinstitute the ci&il action separately% or has instituted the ci&il action "efore thecriminal action.

123 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 11, Se. 1( SC Cirular No. 3-9, Se+. 2 an! 3.

- 34 -



,. (ender and promul#ate jud#ment of con&iction% includin# therein% in the propercase% the ci&il lia"ility or dama#es duly esta"lished "y the e&idence.

-hen here 's 1o Plea Bargaining

1. Cause the marin# for identification of the parties respecti&e e*hi"it/s% if any%

2. 4etermine and consider with the parties and counsel such stipulation of facts%admission% and/or a#reement as may "e feasi"le% such as% for e*ample+

2.1 the identity of the accused;

2.2 the court7s territorial jurisdiction relati&e to the offense/s char#ed;

2., the )ualification of e*pert-witness/es;

2. the amount of dama#es;

2.0 the #enuineness and due e*ecution of documents; and/or%

2. the cause of death or injury in proper cases.

2. If con&enient% forthwith cause to "e reduced into writin# and duly si#ned "y the parties%particularly "y the accused and his/her counsel% such stipulation% admission% and/ora#reement as may "e directly related to any essential element of the offense/s char#ed.therwise% incorporate admissions% a#reements% stipulations in the pre-trial order to "eissued after the pre-trial conference% and re)uire the parties and counsel to si#n the same.

,. 4etermine and consider with the parties and counsel the followin# and such othermatters as will promote a fair and e*peditious trial% to wit+

,.1 the num"er of witnesses to "e presented;

,.2 the appro*imate num"er of hours that will "e re)uired "y the parties for thepresentation of their respecti&e e&idence; and

,., the specific trial dates needed to complete e&idence presentation "y all theparties which must "e within a period of three ,! months from the first trial.

. $i* the trial dates for the parties7 presentation of their respecti&e e&idence inclusi&e ofe&idence in-chief and re"uttin# e&idence% and cause the parties and their respecti&ecounsel to affi* their si#natures in the minutes to si#nify their a&aila"ility on the scheduleddates.

0. (e)uire the parties to su"mit to the "ranch cler "efore lea&in# the court premises thenames and addresses of witnesses that need to "e summoned "y subpoena, so that thenecessary subpoena may "e issued on time. Counsel or their representati&es may "eallowed to ser&e the subpoenas to insure ser&ice thereof and the su"mission of the returnson time.

. re-trial a#reement

- 35 -



2.1 >et the petition for hearin# and re)uire the prosecutor to comment thereon%either "y way of recommendation or opposition. >uch notice of hearin# should also"e ser&ed upon all other accused% if any.

2.2 If the prosecutor opposes the petition% allow him to present his/her e&idence toshow that the prosecution7s a&aila"le e&idence is stron#. Fearin# may "e summary

or otherwise. Cross-e*amination "y the petitioner and any other accused shall "eallowed. etitioner shall also "e allowed to offer and present e&idence. >ummaryhearin# is one that focuses on )uantity and character of proof in anticipation of thatto "e presented at the re#ular trial% "ut not to "e mere sham or pretense.123

2., E&en if the prosecutor recommends "ail or interposes no o"jection to thepetition for "ail% the court must still set the case for hearin#.

2. (esol&e the petition for "ail with a narration of the e&idence collecti&elydeemed either stron# or wea to justify the conclusion made.

2.0 Indispensa"le re)uirements

There must "e a hearin#.126 E&idence of #uilt must "e stron#. rosecution must "e#i&en full opportunity to present e&idence.128

@ote+ The Court may not #rant "ail simply for non-appearance of the prosecution"ut should as the prosecution such )uestions as would ascertain the stren#th ofthe state in e&idence and jud#e the ade)uacy of the "ail.1,9

2.. 4uties of a Jud#e in case an application for "ail for crimes punisha"le "yreclusion perpetua or hi#her

In the li#ht of the applica"le rules on "ail and the jurisprudential principles justenunciated% the Court laid down the duties of the trial jud#e in case an application

for "ail is filed+

2..1 @otify the prosecutor of the hearin# of the application for "ail orre)uire him to su"mit his/her recommendation;1,1

2..2 Conduct a hearin# of the application for "ail re#ardless of whether ornot the prosecution refuses to present e&idence to show that the #uilt of the

127 a*po v. ernae, 77 P%il. 55 &1946'.12 a+o v. Rapa"ala, . M. No. R;J-96-1335, Mar% 5, 1997, 269 SCR 230.129 People v. au!ao, $. R. No. 139, eruar# 21, 199, 170 SCR 49( People v. San ieo, No. L-

29676, ee*er 24, 196, 26 SCR 522( People v. Calo, $. R. No. 531, June 1, 1990, 16 SCR

620( Mora!o v. ;a#ao, . M. No. 93--1204R;C, eruar# 7, 1994, 229 SCR 723( Corpu+ v. Malalan,$. R. No. 7162, pril 19, 1991, 196 SCR 41( l*eron v. San!i!o, . M. No. M;J-97-1142, Nove*er

6, 1997, 21 SCR 415.130 Lirario+ v. aalo+, . M. No. R;J-9-26, Jul# 11, 1991, 199 SCR 4 i"e! in orinaa v. ;a*in,

. M. No. R;J-93-936, Sep"e*er 10, 1993, 226 SCR 206( urillo v. rani+o, . M. R;J-93-1097,

uu+" 12, 1994, 235 SCR 23( uirre v. el*on"e, . M. No. R;J-93-1052, "oer 27, 1994, 237

SCR 77( San"o+ v. "ili!a, . M. No. R;J-94-1217, June 16, 1995, 245 SCR 56( e lo+ San"o+-Re#e+

v. Mon"e+a, . M. No. R;J-93-93, uu+" 7, 1995, 247 SCR 5( ;aao v. +pina, R;J-96-13447, June

14, 1996, 257 SCR 29.131 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 114, Se. 1.

- 37 -





accused is stron# for the purpose of ena"lin# the court to e*ercise itssound discretion;1,2

2.., 4ecide whether the e&idence of #uilt of the accused is stron# "asedon the summary of e&idence of the prosecution;1,,

2.. If the #uilt of the accused is not stron#% dischar#e the accused uponthe appro&al of the "ail"ond.1, therwise% petition should "e denied.1,0

TEN COMMANDMENTS :OR A JUDGE ON APPLICATIONS :OR -AIL

1. 4o not #rant "ail unless the accused is in le#al custody.1,

2. 4o not act on an application for "ail or set it for hearin# unless you ha&e jurisdiction o&erthe person of the accused and of the case. 1,3

,. 4o not #rant "ail in non-"aila"le offenses without application and notice to the prosecutorand in "aila"le offenses without notice to or recommendation of prosecutor.1,6

. 4o not #rant "ail in non-"aila"le offenses without a hearin#.1,8 E&en if the in&esti#atin# jud#e had #ranted "ail or the prosecutor in filin# the Information had recommended "ail.!

0. 4o not #rant "ail in non-"aila"le offenses without #i&in# the prosecution full opportunityto present its e&idence.19

. 4o not #rant "ail in non-"aila"le offenses simply "ecause of the prosecution7s non-appearance. 11

132 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 114, Se+. 7 an! .133 a#lon v. Si+on, . M. No. 92-7-360-0, pril 6, 1995, 243 SCR 24.134 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 114, Se. 19.135 a+o v. Rapa"alo, . M. No. 96-1335, Mar% 5, 1997, 269 SCR 220 rei"era"e! in People v. Caral, $.

R. No. 131909, eruar# 1, 1999, 303 SCR 361.136 eliiano v. Pa+iolan, No. L-14567, Jul# 31, 1967, 2 SCR ( Men!oa v. C8 o <ueon, No+. L-

35612-14, June 27, 1973, 51 SCR 369( Pa!erana v. Cour" o ppeal+, $. R. No. 115407, uu+" 2,

1995, 247 SCR 741( uirre v. el*on"e, supra, no"e 130( e lo+ San"o+-Re#e+ v. Mon"e+a 247 SCR

5.137 inapol v. al!a!o, . M. No. R;J-92-9, uu+" 5, 1993, 225 SCR 110( orinaa v. ;a*in, supra,

no"e 130( uirre v. el*on"e, supra, no"e 130.13 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 114, Se. 1( C%in v. $u+"ilo, .M. No. R;J-94-1243, uu+" 11, 1995, 247 SCR

175.139 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 114, Se. 1( orinaa v. ;a*in, supra, no"e 130, $o v. Cour" o ppeal+, pril 7,

1993, 221 SCR 397( People v. au!ao, $. R. No. 139, eruar# 21, 199, 170 SCR 49( People v.Ca+inal, $. R. No. 7163, Mar% 29, 1995, 243 SCR 37( Lar!iaal v. Re#e+, . M. No. M;J-94-77,

ee*er 5, 1994, 23 SCR 640( ;aao v. +pina, supra, no"e 130( San"o+ v. "ili!a supra, no"e 131.140 People v. au!ao, supra, no"e 129( orinaa v. ;a*in, supra, no"e 130( $uiller*o v. Re#e+, 240

SCR 154( Ma*olo, Sr. v. Nari+*a, . M. No. M;J-96-1072, Januar# 31, 1996, 252 SCR 613( People v.

Calo, $. R. No. 531, June 1, 1990, 16 SCR 620.141 orinaa v. ;a*in , supra, no"e 130( Liario+ v. aalo+, . M. No. R;J-9-26, Jul# 11, 1991, 199

SCR 4( uirre v. el*on"e, supra, no"e 130( a#lon v. Si+on, supra, no"e 133( ;ua# v. o*aa+, .

M. No. R;J-95-126, Mar% 2,1995, 242 SCR 110( Pa!erana v. Cour" o ppeal+, $. R. No. 115407,

uu+" 2, 1995, 247 SCR 741.

- 38 -



3. 4o not #rant "ail on appeal after the accused ha&e "een con&icted of a non-"aila"leoffense12 or from a non-"aila"le offense to a "aila"le offense. This should "e addressed tothe appellate court.1,

6. 4o not #rant "ail when the penalty imposed "y the (e#ional Trial Court e*ceeds si* !years "ut not more than twenty 29! years where any of the circumstances mentioned in

>ection 0% (ule 11 are present.1

8. 4o not #rant "ail after the jud#ment has "ecome final unless the accused has applied forpro"ation "efore commencin# to ser&e sentence% the penalty and the offense "ein# withinthe pur&iew of the pro"ation law.10

19. 4o not #rant "ail after the accused had commenced to ser&e sentence.1

C#ec=li! I?

Incidents 4urin# Trial

What To Do When There Is Application To Discharge Accused To Be State Witness

1. 5pplica"le (ule+ >ection 13% (ule 118.

2. :hen applica"le

142 !*. Cirular No. 2-92( People v. ivina, $. R. No+. 930-09, pril 7, 1993( 221 SCR 209( People

v. uer"e+, $. R. No. 90643, June 25, 1993, 223 SCR 619( People v. Ni"%a, $. R. No. 113517, Januar#

19, 1995, 240 SCR 23.143 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 114, Se. 5.144 Ibid .145 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 114, Se. 24.146 Ibid.

- 39 -



Two or more persons jointly char#ed with the commission of the offense.

:hether to dischar#e more than one depends upon the need of the prosecutor andthe discretion of the Jud#e.13

,. :hen to apply

=pon motion of the prosecution "efore restin# its case.16

. Thin#s the Court should do

.1 re)uire prosecution to present e&idence. Trial court should hold in a"eyance ordefer its resolution on the motion until the prosecution had presented all itse&idence.18

.2 re)uire su"mission of sworn statement of each proposed witness at a hearin#in support of the dischar#e and ascertain if the conditions fi*ed "y >ection 13 of(ule 118 are complied with% namely+

.2.1 there is a"solute necessity for the testimony of the defendant whosedischar#e is re)uested.109

The prosecutor must show that there is a"solute necessity for thetestimony of the defendant whose dischar#e he sees% in order to "e awitness for the prosecution101 or the accused is the only one who hasnowled#e of the crime and not when his/her testimony would simplycorro"orate or otherwise stren#then the e&idence in the hands of theprosecution.102

E*ample+ :here the prosecution itself admitted that one of the #o&ernmentwitnesses% named <ichael Ku testified that he saw and reco#nied the

accused% 4omin#o Can as one of those who committed the ro""ery% suchtestimony is direct e&idence of Can7s participation and clearly ne#ates thea"solute necessity of 4aria7s testimony in identifyin# Can as one of theperpetrators of the crime. If at all% 4aria7s testimony would "e merelycorro"orati&e and not essential.10,

.2.2 there is no other direct e&idence a&aila"le for the proper prosecutionof the offense committed% e*cept the testimony of said defendant.10

.2., the testimony of said accused can "e su"stantially corro"orated in itsmaterial points.100

147 People v. ae+a, 104 P%il. 136 &195'.

14 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 119, Se. 17.149 lore+ v. San!iana#an , No. L-63677, uu+" 12, 193, 124 SCR 409.150 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 119, Se. 17 a:.151 lore+ v. San!iana#an , supra, no"e 149.152 lore+ v. San!iana#an , supra, no"e 149; People v. nion, No. L-3903, Mar% 16, 19, 15 SCR

701( Lu"u v. Cour" o ppeal+, $. R. No. 42037, Mar% 21, 1990, 13 SCR 3.153 Can v. $alin, $. R. No. 5425, Nove*er 27, 197, 155 SCR 663.154 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 119, Se. 17 :( People v. nion, supra, no"e 152.155 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 119, Se. 17:.

- 40 -



1. E&idence adduced in support of the dischar#e shall automatically form part of the trial.139If the court denies the motion to dischar#e of the accused as state witness% his/her swornstatement shall "e inadmissi"le in e&idence. 131

2. 4ischar#e of accused operates as an ac)uittal and "ar to further prosecution for thesame offense132 e*cept in the followin# cases+

2.1 =nless accused fails or refused to testify a#ainst his/her co-accused inaccordance with his/her sworn statement constitutin# the "asis of his/herdischar#e. 13,

2.2 $ailure to testify refers e*clusi&ely to defendant7s will or fault. 13

2., E*trajudicial Confession+ 5dmissi"ility; where an accused who turns >tate7se&idence on a promise of immunity "ut later retracts and fails to eep his/her partof the a#reement% his/her confession of his/her participation in the commission ofthe crime is admissi"le as e&idence a#ainst him. 130

,. Erroneous or improper dischar#e of state witness does not affect the competency and

)uality of the testimony of the dischar#ed defendant. 13

When A Motion/Petition To Suspend A Criinal Action Based !pon The AllegedPendenc" #f A Pre$udicial Question In A Ci%il Action Is &iled In The Criinal Action

1. 5t the hearin# of the motion% as the ad&erse party to comment on the motion if no suchcomment or opposition has not yet "een filed.

2. Thereafter% determine if a prejudicial )uestion e*ists. 5 prejudicial )uestion is a )uestion"ased on a fact distinct and separate from the crime "ut so intimately connected with it thatit determines the #uilt or innocence of the accused. 133Its essential elements are+ a! the ci&ilaction in&ol&es an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the criminal

action; "! the resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action mayproceed; and c! the co#niance of the prejudicial )uestion pertains to another tri"unal. 136

2.1 E*amples

:here a man was char#ed with "i#amy "y his second wife% a ci&il action filed "yhim a#ainst her for the annulment of their marria#e on the #round that he wasforced to contract said su"se)uent marria#e is a prejudicial )uestion to the criminalaction. 138The )uestion of &alidity of said marria#e cannot ordinarily "e decided inthe criminal action for "i#amy "ut in the ci&il action for annulment. The annulment

170 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 119, Se. 17.171 Ibid .1

72 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 119, Se. 1.173 Ibid .174 People v. Men!iola 2 P%il. 740 &1949'.175 People v. eerino, No. L-23092, "oer 29, 1977, 79 SCR 694.176 People v. Ja*ero, supra, no"e 165( Manua" v. San!iana#an, No. L-60613, pril 20, 195, 135

SCR 732( Ra*o+ v. San!iana#an, $. R. No. 576, Nove*er 27, 1990, 191 SCR 671.177 Men!iola v. Maa!ae, No. L-1674, eruar# 27, 1961, 1 SCR 593( eni"e v. Conepion, 112 P%il.

105 &1961'.17 People v. raon 94 P%il 357 &1954'.179 >apan"a v. Mon"e+a No. L-14534, eruar# 2, 1962, 4 SCR 510.

- 42 -



on the aforesaid #round would pro&e that his act of contractin# that marria#e wasin&oluntary; hence% no criminal lia"ility would attach.

In a ci&il action "rou#ht "y plaintiff to annul the sale of land "y defendant to a thirdparty ? the plaintiff alle#in# that the same land was pre&iously sold "y thedefendant to him% "ut defendant raised the defense that his si#nature appearin# on

the deed of sale to plaintiff has "een for#ed ? the )uestion of &alidity of the sale toplaintiff% to "e determined in the ci&il action% is prejudicial to the criminal action for2stafa filed "y plaintiff a#ainst said defendant. 169

2.2 Elements of prejudicial )uestion

The elements of a prejudicial )uestion are+ a! the pre&iously instituted ci&il actionin&ol&es an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the su"se)uentcriminal action% and "! the resolution of such issue determines whether or not thecriminal action may proceed. 161

The law limits a prejudicial )uestion to a pre&iously instituted ci&il action not to asu"se)uent one.

2., @ote also althou#h the present (ule does not specify who may file the motionor petition for suspension of the criminal proceedin#s on the #round of pendency ofa prejudicial )uestion% any party ? the prosecutor% the accused% or the pri&ateprosecutor ? may file the petition. 162

2. $inally% note that while such petition to suspend may "e filed in the office of theprosecutor or the court conductin# the preliminary in&esti#ation% it may "e filed"efore the court tryin# the criminal action only A"efore the prosecution rests.A16, 5ccordin#ly% the petition should "e denied if it is filed after the prosecution hasrested.

If a petition to suspend is filed with the rosecutor7s ffice% and the same is denied%the petition to suspend may "e a#ain filed "efore the Court. The determination ofits finality is only pro&isional.

What A 'udge Should Do If Accused Is (eported To )a%e Died *+,

1. 5scertain &eracity of report with su"mission of 4eath Certificate and Comment fromprosecution.

2. If the accused dies "efore arrai#nment% the case shall "e dismissed without prejudice toany ci&il action the offended party may file a#ainst the estate of the deceased. 160

,. The death of the accused after arrai#nment and durin# the pendency of the criminal

action shall e*tin#uish the ci&il lia"ility arisin# from the delict .

10 Ra+ v. Ra+ul, No+. L-50441-42, Sep"e*er 1, 190, 100 SCR 125.11 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 111, Se. 7.12 or"i%-Cel!ran v. Cel!ran, No. L-22677, eruar# 2, 1967, 19 SCR 502.13 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 111, Se. 6.14 Revi+e! Penal Co!e, r". 9 1:.15 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 111, Se. 4.

- 43 -



>ec. 1. Dis$ualification of &udges. ? @o jud#e or judicial officer shall sit in any case in which he% orhis wife or child% is pecuniarily interested as heir% le#atee% creditor or otherwise% in which he isrelated to either party within the si*th de#ree of consan#uinity or affinity% or to counsel within thefourth de#ree% computed accordin# to the rules of the ci&il law% or in which he has "een e*ecutor%administrator% #uardian% trustee or counsel% or in which he has presided in any inferior court whenhis rulin# or decision is the su"ject of re&iew% without the written consent of all parties in interest%

si#ned "y them and entered upon the record.

5 jud#e may% in the e*ercise of the sound discretion% dis)ualify himself from sittin# in a case% for justor &alid reasons other than those mentioned a"o&e.

>ec. 2. 4b&ection that &udge dis$ualified, ho made and effect . ? If it "e claimed that an official isdis)ualified from sittin# as a"o&e pro&ided% the party o"jectin# to his competency may% in writin#% filewith the official his o"jection% statin# the #rounds therefor% and the official shall thereupon proceedwith the trial% or withdraw therefrom in accordance with his determination of the )uestion of hisdis)ualification. Fis decision shall "e forthwith made in writin# and filed with the other papers in thecase% "ut no appeal or stay shall "e allowed from% or "y reason of% his decision in fa&or of his owncompetence until after final jud#ment in the case.

'. 4istinction 'etween round $or 4is)ualification r Inhi"ition

5 #round for dis)ualification #i&es the jud#e no discretion% while #round forinhi"ition is addressed to the sound discretion of the jud#e. 163

C. If the jud#e dis)ualifies or inhi"its himself% the inhi"ition is a judicial matter which doesnot re)uire administrati&e action "y the >upreme Court e*cept under the situationdiscussed "elow+

1. The jud#e should send the copy of his/her rder of Inhi"ition or 4is)ualificationto the E*ecuti&e Jud#e for re-raffle of the case. 166

2. There should "e no e*chan#e of cases "etween the recusin# jud#e and the jud#e to whom the case is re-raffled. Fowe&er% appropriate adjustments must "emade in the raffle of cases so that the jud#e to whom the case is re-raffled should"e credited with one new case. 5nd the recusin# jud#e should "e assi#ned oneadditional case to offset the case that he re-raffled.

4. >u"mission for appro&al or notation to the >upreme Court of order of inhi"ition isre)uired where+

1. The jud#e is in a sin#le sala seat and another jud#e from another seat has to "edesi#nated.

2. The jud#e is in a multiple sala seat and there is a conflict of opinion "etween therecusin# jud#e and the jud#e desi#nated on the propriety of inhi"ition ordis)ualification. 168

If the situation is not as descri"ed a"o&e% then the jud#e should merely send

his/her order to the E*ecuti&e Jud#e for re-raffle in a multiple sala court.

E. >i#nificant (ulin#s

17 Pi*en"el v. Salana, No. L-29734, Sep"e*er 1, 1967, 21 SCR 160.1 SC Cirular No. 10, Ma# 22, 197.19 !*. Cirular No. 1, Januar# 2, 19.

- 45 -



1. Test in inhi"ition is whether the parties can "e assured that the case can "e heard withthe cold neutrality of an impartial jud#e. 189

2. Jud#e must either recuse himself or proceed with the case; he cannot do "oth "y firstdisposin# of the case and then inhi"itin# himself. 181In sin#le sala courts% jud#es shoulde*ercise prudence and discretion to a&oid unnecessary pro"lems and waste of time

resultin# in the transfer of the case to another sala. #/

,. The mere filin# of an administrati&e case a#ainst respondent jud#e is not a #round fordis)ualifyin# him from hearin# the case% for if on e&ery occasion the party apparentlya##rie&ed would "e allowed to either stop the proceedin#s in order to await the finaldecision on the desired dis)ualification% or demand the immediate inhi"ition of the jud#e onthe "asis of his/her "ein# so char#ed% many cases would ha&e to "e ept pendin# orperhaps there would not "e enou#h jud#es to handle all the cases pendin# in all the courts.18,

. 5 jud#e cannot sit any case in which he was a counsel without the written consent of allthe parties in interest% si#ned "y them and entered upon the record. Fe cannot proceed just"ecause there was no o"jection from any of the parties. The rule is e*plicit that he must

secure the written consent of all the parties% not a mere &er"al consent much less a tacitac)uiescence. 18

0. The fact that the jud#e issued a writ of preliminary prohi"itory injunction on the )uestionof whether the carousel was an attracti&e nuisance% does not dis)ualify the jud#e fromhearin# the case on the merits "ecause this is not yet a final determination. 5n ad&ersepro&isional rulin# does not dis)ualify a jud#e. 180

190 $u"ierre v. San"o+ 112 P%il. 14 &1961'.191 ?aien!a eni"o v. Cour" o ppeal+, L-75297, uu+" 12, 197, 153 SCR 46.192 !*. Ma""er No. 90--163R;C, "oer 4, 1990, Minu"e Re+olu"ion.193 pariio v. n!al, $. R. No+. 657-93, Jul# 25, 199, 175 SCR 659.194 Loreno v. Mar=ue, . M. No. M;J-7-123, June 27, 19, 162 SCR 546.195 Monal!E+ Corpora"ion v. Cour" o ppeal+, $. R. No. 9699, Jul# 15, 1991. Minu"e Re+olu"ion, ir+"

ivi+ion:

- 46 -



*. CONDUCTING T6E TRIAL

1. >upreme Court Circulars

Circular %0++

5. rial

1. =nless the docet of the court re)uires otherwise% not more than four ! cases shall "e scheduled for trialdaily.

2. The residin# Jud#e shall mae arran#ements with the prosecutor and the u"lic 5ttorney7s ffice 5! sothat a relief prosecutor and a 5 attorney are always a&aila"le in case the re#ular prosecutor or 5attorneys are a"sent.

,. Contin#ency measures must liewise "e taen for any une*pected a"sence of the steno#rapher and othersupport staff assistin# in the trial.

. The issuance and ser&ice of subpoenae shall "e done in accordance with 5dministrati&e Circular @o. dated 22 >eptem"er 1866.

0. The jud#e shall conduct trial with utmost dispatch% with judicious e*ercise of the court7s power to control trialproceedin#s to a&oid delay.

. The jud#e must tae notes of the material and rele&ant testimonies of witnesses to facilitate his decision-main#.

- 47 -



3. The trial shall "e terminated within ninety 89! days from initial hearin#. 5ppropriate disciplinary sanctionsmay "e imposed on the jud#e and the lawyers for failure to comply with the re)uirement due to causesattri"uta"le to them.

6. Each party is "ound to complete the presentation of his e&idence within the t rial dates assi#ned to him. 5fterthe lapse of said dates% the party is deemed to ha&e completed the presentation of e&idence. Fowe&er% upon&erified motion "ased on compellin# reasons% the jud#e may allow a party additional trial dates in theafternoon; pro&ided that said e*tension will not #o "eyond the three-month limit computed from the first trial

date e*cept when authoried in writin# "y the Court 5dministrator% >upreme Court.

5ll trial jud#es must strictly comply with Circular @o. ,6-86% entitled AImplementin# thero&isions of (epu"lic 5ct @o. 68, 5n 5ct to Ensure a >peedy Trial of 5ll Cases 'eforethe >andi#an"ayan% (e#ional Trial Court% <etropolitan Trial Court% <unicipal Trial Court inCities% <unicipal Trial Court% and <unicipal Circuit Trial Court% 5ppropriatin# $undsTherefor% and for ther urposes!A issued "y the Fonora"le Chief Justice 5ndres (.@ar&asa on >eptem"er 10% 1886.

2. Com&liance 9i!# Period

1. 5s a constant reminder of what cases must "e decided or resol&ed% the jud#e must eepa calendar of cases su"mitted for decision% notin# therein the e*act day% month and year

when the 89-day period is to e*pire. 5s soon as a case is su"mitted for decision% it must "enoted in the calendar of the jud#e; moreo&er% the records shall "e duly collated with thee*hi"its and transcripts of steno#raphic notes% as well as the trial notes of the jud#e% andplaced in the jud#e7s cham"er.

2. In criminal cases% the jud#e will do well to announce in open court at the termination ofthe trial the date of the promul#ation of the decision% which should "e set within 89 daysfrom the su"mission of the case for decision.

,. 5ll Jud#es must scrupulously o"ser&e the period prescri"ed in >ection 10% 5rticle BIII ofthe Constitution.

%. Per!inen! Rule

1. Time to prepare for trial

5fter a plea of not #uilty is entered% the accused shall ha&e at least fifteen 10! days to preparefor trial. The trial shall commence within thirty ,9! days from receipt of the pre-trial order. 18

2. Continuous trial until terminated; postponements

Trial once commenced shall continue from day to day as far as practica"le until terminated.It may "e postponed for a reasona"le period of time for #ood cause.

The court shall% after consultation with the prosecutor and defense counsel% set the case for

continuous trial on a weely or other short-term trial calendar at the earliest possi"le timeso as to ensure speedy trial. In no case shall the entire trial period e*ceed one hundredei#hty 169! days from the first day of trial% e*cept as otherwise authoried "y the >upremeCourt. 183

196 SC Cirular 3-9, Se. 6.197 Cirular 3-9, Se. .

- 48 -



The time limitations pro&ided under this section and the precedin# section shall not applywhere special laws or circulars of the >upreme Court pro&ide for a shorter period of trial.

,. E*clusions

The followin# periods of delay shall "e e*cluded in computin# the time within which trial

must commence+

,.1 5ny period of delay resultin# from other proceedin#s concernin# the accused%includin# "ut not limited to the followin#+

1! delay resultin# from an e*amination of the physical and mentalcondition of the accused;

2! delay resultin# from proceedin#s with respect to other criminal char#esa#ainst the accused;

,! delay resultin# from e*traordinary remedies a#ainst interlocutoryorders;

! delay resultin# from pre-trial proceedin#s; Provided, that the delay doesnot e*ceed thirty ,9! days;

0! delay resultin# from orders of inhi"ition% or proceedin#s relatin# tochan#e of &enue of cases or transfer from other courts;

! delay resultin# from a findin# of the e*istence of a prejudicial )uestion;and

3! delay reasona"ly attri"uta"le to any period% not to e*ceed thirty ,9!days% durin# which any proceedin# concernin# the accused is actually

under ad&isement.

,.2 5ny period of delay% resultin# from the a"sence or una&aila"ility of an essentialwitness.

$or purposes of this su"para#raph% an essential witness shall "e considereda"sent when his wherea"outs are unnown or his wherea"outs cannot "edetermined "y due dili#ence. Fe shall "e considered una&aila"le whene&er hiswherea"outs are nown "ut his presence for trial cannot "e o"tained "y duedili#ence.

,., 5ny period of delay resultin# from the mental incompetence or physical ina"ilityof the accused to stand trial.

,. If the information is dismissed upon motion of the prosecution and thereafter achar#e is filed a#ainst the accused for the same offense% any period of delay fromthe date the char#e was dismissed to the date the time limitation would commenceto run as to the su"se)uent char#e had there "een no pre&ious char#e.

,.0 5 reasona"le period of delay when the accused is joined for trial with a co-accused o&er whom the court has not ac)uired jurisdiction% or as to whom the timefor trial has not run and no motion for separate trial has "een #ranted.

- 49 -



,. 5ny period of delay resultin# from a continuance #ranted "y any court motu proprio% or on motion of either the accused or his counsel or the prosecution% if thecourt #ranted the continuance on the "asis of his findin#s set forth in the order thatthe ends of justice ser&ed "y tain# such action outwei#h the "est interest of thepu"lic and the accused in a speedy trial. 186

. $actors for #rantin# continuance

The followin# factors% amon# others% shall "e considered "y a court in determinin# whetherto #rant a continuance under su"para#raph f! of >ection 8 of >C Circular ,6-86.

.1 :hether or not the failure to #rant a continuance in the proceedin# would "eliely to mae a continuation of such proceedin# impossi"le or result in amiscarria#e of justice; and

.2 :hether or not the case taen as a whole is so no&el% unusual and comple*%due to the num"er of accused or the nature of the prosecution or otherwise% that itis unreasona"le to e*pect ade)uate preparation within the periods of timeesta"lished therein.

In addition% no continuance under section ,f! of this (ule shall "e #ranted "ecause ofcon#estion of the court7s calendar or lac of dili#ent preparation or failure to o"taina&aila"le witnesses on the part of the prosecutor. 188

0. Time limit followin# an order for new trial

If the accused is to "e tried a#ain pursuant to an order for a new trial% the trial shallcommence within thirty ,9! days from notice of the order% pro&ided that if the period"ecomes impractical due to una&aila"ility of witnesses and other factors% the court maye*tend it "ut not to e*ceed one hundred ei#hty 169! days from notice of said order for anew trial. 299

. E*tended time limit

@otwithstandin# the pro&isions of section 1#!% (ule 11 and >ection 1% >C Circular @o. ,6-86 for the first twel&e-calendar-month period followin# its effecti&ity on >eptem"er 10% 1886%the time limit with respect to the period from arrai#nment to trial imposed "y said pro&isionshall "e one hundred ei#hty 169! days. $or the second twel&e-month period% the time limitshall "e one hundred twenty 129! days% and for the third twel&e-month period% the timelimit shall "e ei#hty 69! days. 291

3. u"lic attorney7s duties where accused is imprisoned

If the pu"lic attorney assi#ned to defend a person char#ed with a crime nows that the

latter is pre&enti&ely detained% either "ecause he is char#ed with a "aila"le crime and hasno means to post "ail% or is char#ed with a non-"aila"le crime% or is ser&in# a term ofimprisonment in any penal institution% it shall "e his duty to do the followin#+

19 SC Cirular 3-9, Se. 9.199 Ibid, Se. 10.200 SC Cirular 3-9., Se. 11.201 Ibid, Se. 7.

- 50 -



ha&e the "urden of pro&in# the motion "ut the prosecution shall ha&e the "urden of #oin#forward with the e&idence to esta"lish the e*clusion of time under section , of this rule. Thedismissal shall "e su"ject to the rules on dou"le jeopardy.

$ailure of the accused to mo&e for dismissal prior to trial shall constitute a wai&er of theri#ht to dismiss under this section. 29

19. aw on speedy trial not a "ar to pro&ision on speedy trial in the Constitution

@o pro&ision of law on speedy trial and no rule implementin# the same shall "e interpretedas a "ar to any char#e of denial of the ri#ht to speedy trial #uaranteed "y section 12!%article III% of the 1863 Constitution. 290

11. rder of trial

The trial shall proceed in the followin# order+

1! The prosecution shall present e&idence to pro&e the char#e and% in the propercase% the ci&il lia"ility.

2! The accused may present e&idence to pro&e his defense and dama#es% if any%arisin# from the issuance of a pro&isional remedy in the case.

,! The prosecution and the defense may% in that order% present re"uttal and sur-re"uttal e&idence unless the court% in furtherance of justice% permits them topresent additional e&idence "earin# upon the main issue.

! =pon admission of the e&idence of the parties% the case shall "e deemedsu"mitted for decision unless the court directs them to ar#ue orally or to su"mitwritten memoranda.

0! :hen the accused admits the act or omission char#ed in the complaint orinformation "ut interposes a lawful defense% the order of trial may "e modified.

. 6o5 To Deal 9i!# Accued@ Mo!ion :or E8amina!ion O$ 6i6er 9i!ne -e$oreTrial

1. Chec sufficiency of the motion% particularly as re#ards notice and ser&ice thereof% andthe contents of the motion% eepin# in mind that the #o&ernin# rule29 re)uires the followin#+

1.1 that there "e notice to all other parties+

1.2 that the motion shall state+ 1! the name and residence of the witness; 2! the

su"stance of his/her testimony; and ,! that the witness is so sic or infirm as toafford reasona"le #round for "elie&in# that he will not "e a"le to attend the trial% orresides more than 199 ilometers from the place of trial and has no means toattend the same% or that% apart from the fore#oin#% other similar circumstances e*istthat would mae him una&aila"le or pre&ent him from attendin# the trial; and

204 Cirular 3-9, Se. 14.205 Cirular 3-9, Se. 15.206 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 119, Se. 4 .

- 52 -



1., that the motion shall "e supported "y affida&it of the accused and such othere&idence as the court may re)uire.

2. If the motion does not comply with the notice re)uirement% issue an order re)uirin#compliance "y mo&ant with the notice re)uirement with the warnin# that the motion shall "edisallowed if not complied with.

,. If the motion complied with the notice re)uirement% hear the motion at the time settherefor.

. If the motion is found to "e unmeritorious% issue an order denyin# it% with a concisestatement of the reasons! for the denial.

0. If satisfied that the e*amination of the witness is necessary% issue an order directin# andpro&idin#% conforma"ly with the #o&ernin# rule293 as follows+

0.1 that the witness "e e*amined at a specified time and place "efore the jud#eorderin# the e*amination or "efore any other jud#e or if not practica"le% anymem"er of the 'ar in #ood standin# so desi#nated "y the jud#e in the order% or% if

the order "e #ranted "y a court of superior jurisdiction% "efore an inferior courtdesi#nated in the order!;

0.2 that a copy of the order "e ser&ed on the prosecutor within a #i&en time prior tothat fi*ed for the e*amination;

0., that the e*amination shall proceed notwithstandin# the prosecutor7s a"sence% ifit appears that he was duly notified of the hearin#; and

0. that a written record of the testimony shall "e taen.

3. 6o5 To Deal 9i!# Proecu!ion@ Mo!ion :or E8amina!ion O$ I! 9i!ne -e$ore

Trial

1. Chec sufficiency of the motion% particularly as re#ards notice and ser&ice thereof% andthe contents of the motion% eepin# in mind that the #o&ernin# rule296 re)uires a! that there"e notice to the accused and "! that there "e a showin# that the witness is too sic orinfirm to appear at the trial or has to lea&e the hilippines with no definite date of returnin#thereto.

1.1 If the motion does not comply with the notice re)uirement% issue an orderin#re)uirin# compliance "y mo&ant with the notice re)uirement% with warnin# that themotion shall "e disallowed if not complied with.

1.2 If the motion complied with the notice re)uirement% hear the motion at the time

set therefor.

2. If the motion is found to "e unmeritorious% issue an order denyin# it% with a concisestatement of the reasons! for the denial.

207 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 119, Se. 5 .20 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 119, Se. 7 .

- 53 -



,. If the motion is found to "e meritorious% issue an order directin# and pro&idin#%conforma"ly with the said #o&ernin# rule% as follows+

,.1 that the witness "e e*amined "efore the court at a specified time% suche*amination to "e conducted in the same manner as an e*amination at the trial;

,.2 that a copy of the order "e ser&ed on the accused within a #i&en time prior tothat fi*ed for the e*amination;

,., that the accused shall attend the said e*amination and his/her failure or refusalto do so despite due notice shall "e deemed a wai&er; and

,. that the statement thus taen may "e admitted in "ehalf of or a#ainst theaccused.

. 5t the same time set therefor% hold the hearin# for the e*amination of the witness% thesame to "e conducted in the same manner as an e*amination at the trial% in the presenceof the accused or notwithstandin# his/her a"sence% if it appears that he was duly notified ofthe hearin#.

*. I$ A Mo!ion :or Con$inemen! O$ An Accued In A Men!al 6o&i!al I :iled

1. >et the motion for hearin# on the date su##ested "y the mo&ant or fi*ed "y the court%with notice to the parties% their counsel% the prosecutor and the person ha&in# char#e of theaccused or his/her relati&es.

2. If the accused appears to "e sufferin# from an unsound mental condition whicheffecti&ely renders him una"le to fully comprehend or stand trial+

2.1 >uspend the proceedin# and order his/her mental e*amination and/orconfinement in the @ational Centre for <ental Fealth or any mental institution in the

locality reco#nied "y the #o&ernment% with a directi&e to the 4irector of thehospital or mental institution to su"mit a )uarterly report on the accused7s mentalcondition.

2.2 n the "asis of the report that the accused has fully reco&ered and can standtrial% order his/her immediate dischar#e and set the case for the continuation of theproceedin#s. 298

). Demurrer !o E"idence

1. 5 demurrer to e&idence is a motion to dismiss the case on the #round of insufficiency ofe&idence after the prosecution has rested its case

2. 5fter the prosecution rests its case% the court may dismiss the action on the #round ofinsufficiency of e&idence 1! on its own initiati&e after #i&in# the prosecution the opportunityto "e heard or 2! upon demurrer to e&idence filed "y the accused with or without lea&e ofcourt. 219

209 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 101 .210 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 119, Se. 23.

- 54 -



,. The motion for lea&e of court to file demurrer to e&idence shall specifically state its#rounds and shall "e filed within a non-e*tendi"le period of fi&e 0! days after theprosecution rests its case. The prosecution may oppose the motion within a non-e*tendi"leperiod of fi&e 0! days from its receipt.

C#ec=li!

>teps To Tae :hen 4emurrer To E&idence Is $iled

1. 4etermine whether the filin# of the demurrer to e&idence is made after the prosecutionhas rested its case% otherwise% deny the motion for "ein# prematurely filed. 211

2. If the demurrer to e&idence is properly filed after the prosecution has rested its case% #i&ethe prosecution an opportunity to "e heard whether in oral ar#ument or in writin#.

,. If lea&e of court is #ranted% the accused shall file the demurrer to e&idence within a non-e*tendi"le period of ten 19! days from notice. The prosecution may oppose the demurrerto e&idence within a similar period from its receipt.

. Court7s discretion in the #rant or denial of demurrer to e&idence

Judicial action on a demurrer to e&idence or motion to dismiss is left to the e*ercise ofsound judicial discretion. In the a"sence of a clear showin# of #ra&e a"use thereof%amountin# to lac of jurisdiction% the trial court7s denial of the motion may not "e distur"edand may only "e re&iewed in the ordinary courts of law "y an appeal from the jud#mentafter trial. !ertiorari does not lie to challen#e the trial court7s interlocutory order denyin# theaccused7s motion to dismiss. !ertiorari is not the proper remedy% for the error% if any% of thetrial court% is an error of jud#ment and not of jurisdiction. The appellate court will not re&iewin such special ci&il action the prosecution7s e&idence and decide in ad&ance that suche&idence has or has not yet esta"lished the #uilt of the accused "eyond reasona"le dou"t.

0. :hen demurrer to e&idence is denied

If the court denies the demurrer to e&idence filed with lea&e of court% the accused mayadduce e&idence in his/her defense. :hen the demurrer to e&idence is filed without lea&eof court% the accused wai&es the ri#ht to present e&idence and su"mits the case for

jud#ment on the "asis of the e&idence for the prosecution.

. The order denyin# the motion for lea&e of court to file demurrer to e&idence or thedemurrer itself shall not "e re&iewa"le "y appeal or "y certiorari "efore jud#ment.

3. :hen demurrer to e&idence is #ranted

The dismissal is one on the merits which is e)ui&alent to an ac)uittal; hence% the

prosecution cannot appeal as it would place the accused in dou"le jeopardy. 212

6. (eopenin#

211 =uino v. Si+on, $. R. No. 6025, Nove*er 2, 199, 179 SCR 64( $o!o# v. Cour" o ppeal+, No.

L-014, uu+" 30, 19, 165 SCR 14.212 People v. ;%e Ci"# Cour" o Sila#, L-43790, ee*er 9, 1976, 74 SCR 247.

- 55 -



5t any time "efore finality of the jud#ment of con&iction% the jud#e may% motu proprio orupon motion% with hearin# in either case% reopen the proceedin#s to a&oid a miscarria#e of

justice. The proceedin#s shall "e terminated within thirty ,9! days from the order #rantin#it. 21,

). JUDGMENT

1. 4efinition

Jud#ment means that adjudication "y the court that the accused is #uilty or is not #uilty ofthe offense char#ed% and the imposition of the proper penalty and ci&il lia"ility pro&ided for

"y law on the accused. 21

C#ec=li!

>teps To Tae In (enderin# Jud#ment

(ules of Court% (ule 129% >ec. 2

1. repare the jud#ment personally and directly in the official lan#ua#e and si#n the same.210This holds true with orders of dismissal;

2. >ee to it that the jud#ment contains a clear and distinct statement of facts pro&ed or

admitted "y the accused and the law upon which the jud#ment is "ased+ 21

,. If it is of con&iction% state+

213 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 119, Se. 24.214 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 120, Se. 1 .215 a# v. $aria, $. R. No. 66132, June 27, 19, 162 SCR 665.216 People v. +oar, $. R. No. 69564, Januar# 29, 19, 157 SCR 541.

- 56 -



The court should% howe&er% specify how much is the indemnity for death and how much isfor moral dama#es and not lump the whole amount. 22Ci&il indemnity is separate from moraldama#es. 220

In rape cases a ci&il indemnity of hp 09%999 is mandatory. 22In addition% moral dama#es inrape is automatic without the need of pleadin# or any proof. 223

Ci&il indemnity or actual and compensatory dama#es if committed or effecti&ely )ualified "yany of the circumstances under which the death penalty is authoried "y law% the indemnityfor the &ictim shall "e increased to the amount of hp 30%999. 226

5ctual dama#es should "e supported "y receipts. 228

To justify a #rant of actual or compensatory dama#es% it is necessary to pro&e with areasona"le de#ree of certainty% premised upon competent proof and on the "est e&idenceo"taina"le "y the injured party% the actual amount of loss. 2,9

:here there are no a##ra&atin# circumstances% e*emplary dama#es should not "eawarded. >o also actual dama#es if not supported "y e&idence may not "e awarded. 2,1

5c)uittal does not necessarily preclude ci&il lia"ility% as in the followin# cases+

a! :here the ac)uittal is "ased on reasona"le dou"t2,2 as only preponderance ofe&idence is re)uired in ci&il cases;

"! :here there is a findin# that the accused7s lia"ility is not criminal "ut only ci&il innature; 2,,and

c! :here there is a findin# that the ci&il lia"ility does not arise from or is not "asedupon the criminal act of which the accused was ac)uitted2, as where the accusedwas ac)uitted of mal&ersation "ut was held lia"le for the funds which were spent

for unauthoried purposes.

224 People v. Ca+"illo, $. R. No. 116122, Sep"e*er 6, 1996, 261 SCR 493.225 People v. Manila, $. R. No+. 130203-4, eruar# 15, 2000.226 People v. Marailla+, $. R. No. 127494, eruar# 1, 1999, 303 SCR 352( People v. Mo+"rale+, $. R.

No. 125397, uu+" 2, 199, 294 SCR 701( People v. 8lao, $. R. No. 129529, Sep"e*er 20, 199, 296

SCR 65.227 People v. Pra!e+, $. R. No. 127569, Jul# 30, 199, 293 SCR 411( People v. Malapo, $. R. No. 123115,

uu+" 25, 199, 294 SCR 579( People v. Loano, $. R. No. 12500, Sep"e*er 25, 199, 296 SCR

403( People v. Pa!illa, $. R. No. 126124, Januar# 30, 1999.22 People v. /i"or, $. R. No. 127903, Jul# 9, 199, 292 SCR 16( People v. Pra!e+, supra, no"e 227(

People v. Malapo, supra, no"e 227( People v. Pere, $. R. No. 122764, Sep"e*er 24, 199, 296 SCR 17.2

29 People v. Cor!ero, $. R. No. 10919, "oer 11, 1996, 263 SCR 122( People v. Ca#a#a, $. R. No.123073, June 19, 1997, 274 SCR 37( People v. Morollano, $. R. No. 105004, Jul# 24, 1997, 276 SCR

4( Su*alpon v. Cour" o ppeal+, $. R. No. 123404, eruar# 26, 1997, 26 SCR 764.230 Su*alpon v. Cour" o ppeal+, supra, no"e 229.231 People v. Mana+in, $. R. No. 130599-600, pril 21, 1999, 306 SCR 22.232 Pa!illa v. Cour" o ppeal+, No. 39999, Ma# 31, 1994, 129 SCR 55( People v. Jalan!oni, No. L-

57555, uu+" 2, 194, 131 SCR 454.233 e $u*an v. lvia, 96 P%il 55 &1955'( People v. Pan"i, 97 P%il. 74.234 Ca+"ro v. Colle"or o 8n"ernal Revenue, L-12174, pril 26, 1962, 4 SCR 1093( Repuli v. ello, No.

L-34906, Januar# 27, 193, 120 SCR 203.

- 58 -



%. Promul,a!ion O$ Jud,men!

1. :hat to do (ule 129% >ection % (ules of Court!.

1.1 4irect the cler of court/"ranch cler of court to #i&e notice to the accusedpersonally or throu#h his/her "ondsman if "onded% or throu#h the warden if

detained% or throu#h the custodian if out on reco#niance.

1.2 To promul#ate the jud#ment% direct the cler of court/"ranch cler of court toread the same in the presence of the accused and counsel de(parte or de officio.

1., If the con&iction is for a li#ht offense% the jud#ment may "e read in the presenceof the accused7s counsel or representati&e.

1. :hen the jud#e is a"sent or outside of the pro&ince or city% direct the cler ofcourt/"ranch cler of court to promul#ate the jud#ment.

1.0 If the accused is confined or detained in another pro&ince or city% re)uest thee*ecuti&e jud#e of the (e#ional Trial Court ha&in# jurisdiction o&er the place ofconfinement or detention to promul#ate the jud#ment. The court promul#atin# the

jud#ment shall ha&e authority to accept the notice of appeal and to appro&e the "ail"ond pendin# appeal pro&ided% that if the decision of the trial court con&ictin# theaccused chan#ed the nature of the offense from non-"aila"le to "aila"le% theapplication for "ail can only "e filed and resol&ed "y the appellate court.

1. The proper cler of court shall #i&e notice to the accused personally or throu#hhis/her "ondsman or warden and counsel% re)uirin# him/her to "e present at thepromul#ation of the decision. If the accused was tried in absentia "ecause s/he

jumped "ail or escaped from prison% the notice to him/her shall "e ser&ed at his/herlast nown address.

1.3 In case the accused fails to appear at the scheduled date of promul#ation of jud#ment despite notice% the promul#ation shall "e made "y recordin# the jud#ment in the criminal docet and ser&in# him/her a copy thereof at his/her lastnown address or thru his/her counsel.

1.6 If the jud#ment is for con&iction and the failure of the accused to appear waswithout justifia"le cause% he shall lose the remedies a&aila"le in these rules a#ainstthe jud#ment and the court shall order his/her arrest. :ithin fifteen 10! days frompromul#ation of jud#ment% howe&er% the accused may surrender and file a motionfor lea&e of court to a&ail of these remedies. >/he shall state the reasons for his/hera"sence at the scheduled promul#ation and if s/he pro&es that his/her a"sencewas for a justifia"le cause% s/he shall "e allowed to a&ail of said remedies withinfifteen 10! days from notice.

. Modi$ica!ion o$ Jud,men!2%3

1. <odify or set aside a jud#ment of con&iction only

1.1 =pon motion of the accused and

235 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 120, Se"ion 7.

- 59 -



2. Ground :or Reconidera!ion2%

1. Errors of law or fact in the jud#ment.

%. :orm O$ Mo!ion :or A Ne5 Trial Or Reconidera!ion2

1. The motion shall "e in writin# and filed with the court. 20

2. It shall state the #rounds on which it is "ased.

,. If "ased on newly disco&ered e&idence% it must "e supported "y affida&its of witnesses"y whom such e&idence is e*pected to "e #i&en or "y duly authenticated copies ofdocuments which it is proposed to introduce in e&idence.

. S!e& !o !a=e

1. 5scertain whether motion is seasona"ly filed with notice to the prosecutor and in dueform;

2. :here a motion for the decision of any )uestion of fact+ hear e&idence of such motion "yaffida&its or otherwise; 2

,. :hen a new trial on the #round of errors of law or irre#ularities committed durin# the trialis #ranted% see to it that all the proceedin#s and e&idence not affected "y the commission ofsuch errors and irre#ularities remain+ set aside those affected there"y. In the interest of

justice% allow the introduction of additional e&idence;

. :hen a new trial is #ranted on the #round of newly disco&ered e&idence% let thee&idence already taen stand; tae and consider to#ether with the e&idence already in therecord the newly disco&ered and such other e&idence allowed to "e introduced% in theinterest of justice;

0. In all cases% when a new trial or reconsideration is #ranted% set aside the ori#inal jud#ment and render a new jud#ment accordin#ly. 23

243 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 121, Se. 3.244 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 121, Se. 4.245 8n ri*inal a+e+, "%e laA o ai!avi"+ o *eri" in a *o"ion or ne@ "rial i+ no" a a"al !ee" an! an e

ure! # "%e "e+"i*on# pre+en"e! a" "%e ne@ "rial. Pare!e+ v. orDa, L-15559, Nove*er 29, 1961, 3 SCR

495.246 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 121, Se. 5 .247 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 121, Se. 6 .

- 61 -



2. If the application does not appear to "e meritorious% issue rder denyin# due course tothe application. (efer to the copy of ro"ation Court form for use as a #uide in draftin# therder.

,. If the application appears meritorious% issue rder #i&in# due course to the application.(efer to the copy of ro"ation Court form for use as a #uide in draftin# the rder.

. In the a"sence of any showin# that the applicant may not "e placed on pro"ation undere*istin# laws% issue rder for post-sentence in&esti#ation to "e conducted "y the pro"ationofficer of the territory where the court sits. (efer to the copy of ro"ation Court form% foruse as a #uide in draftin# the rder.

Sam&le 1

(E='IC $ TFE FIII@E>

(EI@5 T(I5 C=(T $ LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

'ranch LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL Judicial 4istrict

Criminal Case @o. LLLLLLLLLLLLLL

$or+ LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

Crime!

*----------------------------------*

(4E(

It appearin# from the records that the accused% name! % isdis)ualified for pro"ation for the reason that state reason% e.#. sentencedto suffer imprisonment of more than si* ! years% his/her A5pplication forro"ationA filed with this Court on LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL is here"ydenied due course.

The 'ranch Cler of Court is here"y instructed to issue correspondin#notices to "ondsman/custodian to produce the accused or to the accusedhimself for the e*ecution of sentence.

If the accused is detained% direct 'ranch Cler of Court to issuecorrespondin# commitment order!.

> (4E(E4

Jud#e LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

- 63 -



r other appropriate court

Sam&le 2







Crime!

*----------------------------------*

(4E(

It appearin# from the A5pplication for ro"ationA dated LLLLLLLLLL filedwith this Court on LLLLLLLLLLL that the applicant name! %may "e placed on pro"ation under e*istin# laws% the application is here"y#i&en due course.

et a copy of this rder "e ser&ed upon the rosecutin# fficer! whomay tae appropriate action or su"mit his/her comments on theapplication within ten 19! days from receipt thereof.

endin# consideration of his/her application% the accused% name!shall remain under confinement at the LLLLLLLLLLLL/or is allowedtemporary li"erty under his/her "ail "ond/or is released to thecustody name! on the latter7s reco#niance.

> (4E(E4.

---------------------------------- ---------------------------------

lace! 4ate!


- 64 -




Sam&le %







Crime!

*----------------------------------*

(4E(

The ro"ation fficer of LLLLLLLLLLLLro&ince/City!LLLLLLLLLL ishere"y directed to conduct an in&esti#ation on the application forpro"ation of the accused name! and to su"mit his/her report

thereon within 9 days from receipt hereof in accordance with >ection 0and 3 .4. 86% as amended.

The Cler of Court is here"y ordered to furnish said ro"ation fficer witha copy of the decision% as well as the necessary data pertinent to thecase.

The accused% name! is here"y ordered to report to theaforesaid ro"ation fficer within se&enty-two 32! hours from receipt of

- 65 -



this rder.

> (4E(E4.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

lace! 4ate!



C#ec=li! II

>teps $rom (eceipt f ost->entence In&esti#ation

(eport To Issuance f ro"ation rder

- 66 -



1. E*amine and consider the pro"ation officer7s post-sentence in&esti#ation report uponreceipt thereof% 202eepin# in mind the criteria for placin# an offender on pro"ationesta"lished in >ec. 6 of the ro"ation aw% to wit+ that in determinin# whether an offendermay "e placed on pro"ation% the court shall consider all information relati&e to thecharacter% antecedents% en&ironment; mental and physical condition of the offender% anda&aila"le institutional and community resources; and% that pro"ation shall "e denied if thecourt finds that+ a! the offender is in need of correctional treatment that can "e pro&idedmost effecti&ely "y his/her commitment to an institution; or "! there is an undue ris thatdurin# the period of pro"ation% the offender will commit another crime; or c! pro"ation willdepreciate the seriousness of the offense committed.

2. 4etermine after such e*amination and consideration of said report whether to deny or#rant the application for pro"ation% eepin# in mind that the court must resol&e the saidapplication not later than fifteen 10! days after receipt of the post-sentence in&esti#ationreport from the pro"ation officer. 20,

2.1 If you resol&e to deny the pro"ation application% issue rder denyin# theapplication% settin# forth a concise statement of the reason/s for the denial.

2.2 If you resol&e to #rant the pro"ation application% issue rder referred to in thero"ation aw as the Apro"ation orderA! 20#rantin# the application see attachedcopy of such order for use as a #uide in draftin# the pro"ation order!% eepin# inmind the followin# particulars re)uired "y the #o&ernin# law% to wit+ a! that thepro"ation order shall contain the followin# mandatory conditions% namely+ 1! thatthe pro"ationer shall present himself to the pro"ation officer desi#nated toundertae his/her super&ision at such place as may "e specified in the order within32 hours from receipt of said order; and 2! that the pro"ationer shall report to thepro"ation officer at least once a month at such time and place as specified "y saidofficer; "! that the pro"ation order shall state the period of pro"ation; 200and c! thatthe court may impose other conditions pro&ided the same are related to thereha"ilitation of the pro"ationer and not unduly restricti&e of his/her li"erty orincompati"le with his/her freedom of conscience. 20

,. Issue pro"ation order to the accused% at the same time informin# him of theconse)uences of said rder such as% that the rder does not set aside or otherwise doaway with the jud#ment of con&iction and that it merely suspends the e*ecution of thesentence to #i&e way to the pro"ation! and e*plainin# that upon his/her failure to complywith any of the conditions prescri"ed in the rder or his/her commission of another offense%he shall ser&e the penalty imposed in the said jud#ment. 203

C#ec=li! III

Fow To 4eal :ith Incidents 4urin# ro"ation

I. Modi$ica!ion o$ Pro(a!ion Condi!ion or Period

252 ;%e po+"-+en"ene inve+"ia"ion repor" *u+" e +u*i""e! # "%e proa"ion oier "o "%e Cour" @i"%in 60

a#+ ro* reeip" o "%e our"E+ or!er "o on!u" "%e inve+"ia"ion.253 n or!er ran"in or !en#in proa"ion +%all no" e appealale. La+" para., +e. 4, P 96, a+ a*en!e!.254 P 96, Se. 4.255 P 96, Se+. 10 an! 14.256 P 96, Se. 10 A:.257 P 96, Se. 11.

- 67 -



Crime!

*----------------------------------*

(4E(

=pon the recommendation dated LLLLLLLLLLLLLL of the ro"ationfficer assi#ned to this case and findin# the same to "e well taen% thesame is appro&ed and the pro"ation #ranted to the accused%name! % is here"y re&oed.

The e*ecution of the sentence ori#inally imposed upon the said accusedis here"y set for 4ate! at lace! .

et copies of this rder "e furnished the pro"ationer and the pro"ationofficer.

> (4E(E4

-------------------------------- -------------------------------------

lace! 4ate!



Pro(a!ion Cour! :orm No.

'Order Modi$in, !#e Condi!ion o$ Pro(a!ion







Crime!

- 70 -



*----------------------------------*

(4E(

=pon the recommendation dated LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL of the ro"ationfficer assi#ned to this case and findin# the same to "e well taen% thepro"ation is here"y modified as follows+

et copies of this rder "e furnished the pro"ation and the pro"ationofficer.

> (4E(E4

-------------------------------- -------------------------------------

lace! 4ate!



Pro(a!ion Cour! :orm No.

'Order Modi$in, !#e Condi!ion o$ Pro(a!ion







Crime!

*----------------------------------*

(4E(

=pon the recommendation dated LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL of the ro"ationfficer assi#ned to this case and findin# the same to "e well taen% the

- 71 -



pro"ation is here"y modified as follows+

et copies of this rder "e furnished the pro"ation and the pro"ationofficer.

> (4E(E4

-------------------------------- -------------------------------------

lace! 4ate!



?III. ISSUANCE O: SEARC6 9ARRANTS

Rule o$ Cour!

Rule 12*

- 72 -



>ec. 2. !ourt here application for search arrant shall be filed . ? 5n applicationfor search warrant shall "e filed with the followin#+

a! 5ny court within whose territorial jurisdiction a crime was committed.

"! $or compellin# reasons stated in the application% any court within the judicial

re#ion where the crime was committed if the place of the commission of the crimeis nown% or any court within the judicial re#ion where the warrant shall "eenforced.

Fowe&er% if the criminal action has already "een filed% the application shall only "emade in the court where the criminal action is pendin#.

1. Rule on :orum S#o&&in,

5 search warrant was )uashed "ecause the applicant had "een #uilty of forum shoppin# asthe applicant sou#ht the search warrant from a <anila (e#ional Trial Court after wasdenied "y the courts of ampan#a. 26

The (ules of Court% howe&er% re)uires only initiatory pleadin# to "e accompanied with acertificate of non-forum shoppin# omittin# any mention of AapplicationsA as in >upremeCourt Circular @o. 9-8. Fence% the a"sence of such certification will not result in thedismissal of the application for search warrant. 28

Rule o$ Cour!

Rule 12*

>ec. ,. Personal property to be seized .M 5 search warrant may "e issued for thesearch and seiure of personal property+

a! >u"ject of the offense;

"! >tolen or em"eled and other proceeds% or fruits of the offense; or

c! =sed or intended to "e used as the means of committin# an offense.

>ec. . 6e$uisites for issuing search arrant .M 5 search warrant shall not issuee*cept upon pro"a"le cause in connection with one specific offense to "edetermined personally "y the jud#e after e*amination under oath or affirmation ofthe complainant and the witnesses he may produce% and particularly descri"in# theplace to "e searched and the thin#s to "e seied which may "e anywhere in thehilippines.

>ec. 0. 27amination of complainant0 record .M The jud#e must% "efore issuin# thewarrant% personally e*amine in the form of searchin# )uestions and answers% inwritin# and under oath% the complainant and the witnesses he may produce onfacts personally nown to them and attach to the record their sworn statements%to#ether with the affida&its su"mitted.

26 Ba+%in"on i+"iller+ v. Cour" o ppeal+, $. R. No. 11151, uu+" 22, 1996, 260 SCR 21.269 Savae v. ;a#pin, $. R. No. 134217, Ma# 11, 2000.

- 73 -



-. Meanin, o$ Pro(a(le Caue

ro"a"le cause for a search is defined as such facts and circumstances which could lead areasona"ly discreet and prudent man to "elie&e that an offense has "een committed andthat the o"jects sou#ht in connection with the offense are in the place sou#ht to "esearched. 239

%. -ai o$ Pro(a(le CaueB Peronal ;no5led,e

This pro"a"le cause must "e shown to "e within the personal nowled#e of thecomplainant or the witnesses he may produce and not "ased on mere hearsay% 231in orderto con&ince the jud#e% not the indi&idual main# the affida&it and seein# the issuance ofthe warrant of the e*istence of a pro"a"le cause. 232

1. <eanin# of nowled#e; test is lia"ility for perjury

The followin# test was laid in determinin# whether the alle#ations in an application forsearch warrant or in supportin# deposition% are "ased on personal nowled#e or not M

The true test of sufficiency of a deposition or affida&it to warrant issuance of asearch warrant is whether it has "een drawn in a manner that perjury could "echar#ed thereon and the affiant "e held lia"le for dama#e caused. The oathre)uired must refer to the truth of the facts within the personal nowled#e of theapplicant for search warrant% and/or his/her witnesses% not of the facts merelyreported "y a person whom one considers to "e relia"le. 23,

2. Insufficiency of 5ffida&its

<ere affida&its of the complainant and his/her witnesses are not sufficient. The e*aminin#Jud#e has to tae depositions in writin# of the complainant and the witnesses he mayproduce and to attach them to the record. >uch written deposition is necessary in order that

the Jud#e may "e a"le to properly determine the e*istence or non-e*istence of thepro"a"le cause% to hold lia"le for perjury the person #i&in# it if it will "e found later thathis/her declarations are false. 23

>earch warrants are not issued on loose% &a#ue or dou"tful "asis of fact% nor on meresuspicion or "elief. The facts recited in an affida&it supportin# the application for a searchwarrant must "e stated with sufficient definiteness% so that% if they are false% perjury may "eassi#ned on the affiant. Fence% affida&its which #o no further than to alle#e conclusions oflaw% or of fact% are insufficient. 230

270 uro+, Sr. v. C%ie o S"a, No. L-64261, ee*er 26, 194, 133 SCR 15( <uin"ero v. Na"ional

ureau o 8nve+"ia"ion, No. L-35149, June 23, 19, 162 SCR 43( Pen!on v. Cour" o ppeal+, $. R.

No. 473, Nove*er 16, 1990, 191 SCR 429( Manalili v. Cour" o ppeal+, $. R. No. 113447, "oer9, 1997, 20 SCR 400( People v. Mon"illa, $. R. No. 12372, Januar# 30, 199, 25 SCR 703.271 Pru!en"e v. a#ri", $. R. No. 270, ee*er 14, 199, 10 SCR 69.272 lvare v. Cour" o ir+" 8n+"ane o ;a#aa+ 64 P%il. 33 &1937'( uro+, Sr. v. C%ie o S"a, supra,

no"e 269( 20"% Cen"ur# oF il* Corpora"ion v. Cour" o ppeal+, No+. L-76649-51, uu+" 19, 19, 164

SCR 655( Silva v. Reional ;rial Cour" o Nero+ rien"al, $. R. No. 1756, "oer 21, 1991, 203

SCR 140.273 lvare v. Cour" o ir+" 8n+"ane, supra, no"e 272.274 Ma"a v. a#ona, No. L-50720, Mar% 26, 194, 12 SCR 3275 <uin"ero v. Na"ional ureau o 8nve+"ia"ion, supra, no"e 270( uro+ v. C%ie o S"a, supra, no"e 270.

- 74 -






E)ually insufficient as a "asis for the determination of pro"a"le cause is a statementcontained in a joint affida&it Athat the e&idence #athered and collated "y our unit clearlyshows that the premises a"o&e-mentioned and the articles and thin#s a"o&e-prescri"edwere used and are continuously "ein# used for su"&ersi&e acti&ities in conspiracy with andto promote the o"jecti&e of% ille#al or#aniations such as the i#ht-5-$ire <o&ement%<o&ement for $ree hilippines% and 5pril <o&ement.A

,. Prudente v. he 8on. 27ecutive Judge *.). Dayrit

In his/her application for search warrant% /<ajor 5lladin 4ima#maliw stated that Ahe has"een informedA that @emesio rudente Ahas in his control and possessionA the firearms ande*plosi&es descri"ed therein% and that he Ahas &erified the report and found it to "e a fact.An the other hand% in his supportin# deposition% /t. $lorencio C. 5n#eles declared that%as a result of their continuous sur&eillance for se&eral days% they gathered informationsfrom verified sources that the holders of the said firearms and e*plosi&es are not licensedto possess them. In other words% the applicant and his witness had no personal nowled#eof the facts and circumstances which "ecame the "asis for issuin# the )uestioned searchwarrant% "ut ac)uired nowled#e thereof only throu#h information from other sources orpersons.

:hile it is true that in his application for search warrant% applicant /<ajor 4ima#maliwstated that he verified the information he had earlier recei&ed that petitioner had in hispossession and custody the firearms and e*plosi&es descri"ed in the application% and thathe found it to "e a fact% yet there is nothin# in the record to show or indicate ho and hensaid applicant verified the earlier information ac)uired "y him as to justify his conclusionthat he found such information to "e a fact. Fe mi#ht ha&e clarified this point if there had"een searchin# )uestions and answers% "ut there were none. In fact% the records yield no)uestions and answers% whether searchin# or not% &is-N-&is the said applicant.

:hat the records show is the deposition of witness% /t. 5n#eles% as the only support to/<ajor 4ima#maliw7s application% and the said deposition is "ased on hearsay. $or ita&ers that they presuma"ly% the police authorities! had conducted continuous sur&eillance

for se&eral days of the suspected premises and% as a result thereof% they A#atheredinformation from &erified sourcesA that the holders of the su"ject firearms and e*plosi&esare not licensed to possess them.

E&idently% the alle#ations contained in the application of /<ajor 5lladin 4ima#maliw andthe declaration of /t $lorencio C. 5n#eles in his deposition were insufficient "asis for theissuance of a &alid search warrant. 5s held in the Prudente case+

The oath re)uired must refer to the truth of the facts within the personal nowled#eof the petitioner or his witnesses% "ecause the purpose thereof is to con&ince thecommittin# ma#istrate% not the indi&idual main# the affida&it and seein# theissuance of the warrant% of the e*istence of pro"a"le cause. 23

. $actors that may "e considered in determination of pro"a"le cause+ time of application inrelation to alle#ed offense considered in determination of pro"a"le cause

The >upreme Court o"ser&ed+

It has liewise "een o"ser&ed that the offenses alle#ed too place from 181 to18% and the application for search warrant was made on cto"er 23% 180. The

276 Pru!en"e v. a#ri", supra, no"e 271.

- 75 -



time of the application is so far remote in time as to mae the pro"a"le cause ofdou"tful &eracity and the warrant &itally defecti&e. Thus% <r. Joseph Baron% aneminent authority on >earches% >eiures and Immunities% has this to say on thispoint+ su"ject% the followin# #eneral rules are said to apply to affida&its for searchwarrants+

1! * * *

2! >uch statement as to the time of the alle#ed offense must "e clear anddefinite and must not "e too remote from the time of the main# of theaffida&it and issuance of the search warrant.

,! There is no ri#id rule for determinin# whether the stated time ofo"ser&ation of the offense is too remote from the time when the affida&it ismade or the search warrant issued% "ut% #enerally speain#% a lapse oftime of less than three wees will "e held not to in&alidate the searchwarrant% while a lapse of four wees will "e held to "e so.

5 #ood and practical rule of thum" to measure the nearness of time #i&en in the

affida&it as to the date of the alle#ed offense% and the time of main# the affida&it isthus e*pressed+ 9he nearer the time at hich the observation of the offense isalleged to have been made, the more reasonable the conclusion of establishmentof probable cause9./ "" Italics ours.!

The >upreme Court o"ser&ed that had the respondent jud#e "een cautious in issuin# the)uestioned search warrants he would ha&e wondered% and therefor ased the affiant whythe said incident was reported only on <ay ,1% 1832 when he alle#edly witnessed it on <ay28% 1832. 236

0. The @eed of Competent roof of articular 5cts or >pecific missions

The >upreme Court in the cele"rated case of Stonehill v. Dio:no pointed to the need ofcompetent proof of particular acts or specific omissions in the ascertainment of pro"a"lecause+

Two points must "e stressed in connection with this constitutional mandate%namely+ 1! that no warrant shall issue "ut upon pro"a"le cause% to "e determined"y the jud#e in the manner set forth in said pro&ision% and 2! that the warrant shallparticularly descri"e the thin#s to "e seied.

@one of these re)uirements has "een complied with in the contested warrants.Indeed% the same were issued upon applications statin# that the natural and

juridical persons therein named had committed a A&iolation of Central 'an aws%Tariff and Customs aws% Internal (e&enue Code and (e&ised enal Code.A In

other words% no specific offense had "een alle#ed in said applications. Thea&erments thereof with respect to the offense committed were a"stract. 5s aconse)uence% it was impossi"le for the jud#es who issued the warrants to ha&efound the e*istence of pro"a"le cause for the same presuppose the introduction ofcompetent proof that the party a#ainst whom it is sou#ht has performed particularacts or committed specific omissions% &iolatin# a #i&en pro&ision of our criminallaws. 5s a matter of fact% the applications in&ol&ed in this case do not alle#e any

277 +ian Sure"# an! 8n+urane Co. v. ?errera, No. L-25232, ee*er 20, 1973, 54 SCR 312.27 <uin"ero v. Na"ional ureau o 8nve+"ia"ion, supra, no"e 270.

- 76 -





specific acts performed "y herein petitioners. It would "e a le#al heresy% of thehi#hest order% to con&ict any"ody of a A&iolation of Central 'an aws% Tariff andCustoms aws% Internal (e&enue Code! and (e&ised enal Code.A M as alle#edin the aforementioned applications M without reference to any determinatepro&ision of said laws or codes. 238

. ro"a"le Cause to "e 4etermined only "y Jud#e

5 nota"le inno&ation in this #uarantee is found in the Constitution in that it specificallypro&ides that the pro"a"le cause upon which a warrant of arrest may "e issued% must "edetermined "y the jud#e after e*amination under oath% etc.% of the complainant and thewitnesses he may produce. This re)uirement M Ato "e determined "y the jud#eA M is notfound in the $ourth 5mendment of the =.>. Constitution% in the hilippine 'ill or in theJones 5ct% all of which do not specify who will determine the e*istence of a pro"a"le cause.Fence% under their pro&isions% any pu"lic officer may "e authoried "y the e#islature tomae such determination% and thereafter issue the warrant of arrest. =nder the e*pressterms of the Constitution% it is% therefore% e&en dou"tful whether the arrest of an indi&idualmay "e ordered "y any authority other than the jud#e if the purpose is merely to determinethe e*istence of a pro"a"le cause% leadin# to an administrati&e in&esti#ation. The

Constitution does not distin#uish "etween warrants in administrati&e proceedin#s. 5nd% ifone suspected of ha&in# committed a crime is entitled to a determination of the pro"a"lecause a#ainst him% "y a jud#e% why should one suspected of a &iolation of an administrati&enature deser&e less #uarantee f course it is different if the order of arrest is issued tocarry out a final findin# of a &iolation% either "y an e*ecuti&e or le#islati&e officer or a#encyduly authoried for the purpose% as then the warrant is not that mentioned in theConstitution which is issua"le only on pro"a"le cause. >uch% for e*ample% would "e awarrant of arrest to carry out a final order of deportation% or to effect compliance of an orderof contempt. 269

3. <anner of e*amination

In determinin# the e*istence of pro"a"le cause% it is re)uired that+ 1! the jud#e must

e*amine the witnesses personally; 2! the e*amination must "e under oath; and ,! thee*amination must "e reduced to writin# in the form of searchin# )uestions and answers.261These re)uirements are pro&ided under >ection 0% (ule 12 of the (ules of Court. It has"een ruled that the e*istence of pro"a"le cause depends to a lar#e de#ree upon the findin#or opinion of the jud#e conductin# the e*amination; 262howe&er% the opinion or findin# ofpro"a"le cause must% to a certain de#ree% "e su"stantiated or supported "y the record. 26,

6. E*amination is heard e*-parte and may "e done in cham"ers "ut action must "ee*pedited

5n application for a search warrant is heard e7(parte. It is neither a trial nor a part of thetrial. 26The e*amination or in&esti#ation which must "e under oath may not "e in pu"lic. Itmay "e e&en held in the secrecy of the cham"ers. It must "e under oath and must "e in

279 S"one%ill v. ioAno, No. L-19550, June 19, 1967, 20 SCR 33( La C%e*i+e Lao+"e, S. . v.ernan!e, No. L-63796-7, Ma# 21, 194, 129 SCR 373.20 <ua C%ee $an v. epor"a"ion oar!, No. L-1020, Sep"e*er 30, 1963, 9 SCR 27.21 Marina+ v. Sio%i, No+. L-25707 an! 25753-4, Ma# 14, 191,104 SCR 423( Pon+ia v. 8nalaa, $. R.

No. 72301, Jul# 31, 197, 152 SCR 647.22 Luna v. Plaa, $. R. No. L-27511, Nove*er 29, 196, 26 SCR 310.23 Pen!on v. Cour" o ppeal+, $. R. No. 473, Nove*er 16, 1990, 191 SCR 429.24 La C%e*i+e Lao+"e, S. . v. ernan!e, supra, no"e, 279.

- 77 -






writin#. 260 5ction on these applications must% "e e*pedited for time is of the essence. reatreliance has to "e accorded "y the jud#e to the testimonies under oath of the complainantand the witnesses. 26The e*amination or in&esti#ation must not% howe&er% "e merelyroutinary "ut one that is thorou#h and elicit the re)uired information. 263

The searchin# )uestions propounded to the applicants of the search warrant and his/her

witnesses must depend to a lar#e e*tent upon the discretion of the Jud#e just as lon# asthe answers esta"lish a reasona"le #round to "elie&e the commission of a specific offenseand that the applicant is one authoried "y law% and said answers particularly descri"e withcertainty the place to "e searched and the persons or thin#s to "e seied. The e*aminationor in&esti#ation which must "e under oath may not "e in pu"lic. It may "e e&en "e held inthe secrecy of his/her cham"ers. $ar more important is that the e*amination orin&esti#ation is not merely routinary "ut one that is thorou#h and elicit the re)uiredinformation. To repeat% it must "e under oath and must "e in writin#. 266

8. The need for searchin# )uestions and answers "y the jud#e

<ore emphatic and detailed is the implementin# rule of the constitutional injunction% >ection of (ule 12 which pro&ides that the jud#e "efore issuin# the warrant personally e*amine

on oath or affirmation the complainant and any witnesses he may produce and tae theirdepositions in writin# and attach them to the record in addition to any affida&its presentedto him. 268

The e*amination must "e pro"in# and e*hausti&e% not merely routinary or pro forma, if theclaimed pro"a"le cause is to "e esta"lished. The e*aminin# ma#istrate must not simplyrehash the contents of the affida&its "ut must tae his/her own in)uiry on the intent and

justification of the application. 289

5sin# of leadin# )uestions to the deponent in an application for search warrant% andconductin# of e*amination in a #eneral manner% would not satisfy the re)uirements forissuance of a &alid search warrant. 281

ersonal e*amination "y the jud#e of the complainant and his/her witnesses is necessaryto ena"le him to determine the e*istence or non-e*istence of a pro"a"le cause% pursuant to

5rt. III% >ec. 1% par. ,% of the Constitution% and (ule 12% >ec. of the (ules of Court% "othof which prohi"it the issuance of warrants e*cept Aupon pro"a"le cause.A The determinationof whether or not a pro"a"le cause e*ists calls for the e*ercise of jud#ment after a judicialappraisal of facts and should not "e allowed to "e dele#ated in the a"sence of any rule tothe contrary. 282

19. (e)uisite of particular description of thin#s to "e seied

25 Ma"a v. a#ona, supra, no"e 274.26 La C%e*i+e Lao+"e v. ernan!e, supra, no"e 27.27 Ma"a v. a#ona, supra, no"e 274.2 Ma"a v. a#ona, supra, no"e 274.29 Ma"a v. a#ona, supra, no"e 274.290 Roan v. $onale+, L-71410, Nove*er 25, 196, 145 SCR 66.291 Nola+o v. Pao, $. R. No. 6903, "oer , 195, 139 SCR 132( <uin"ero v. N8, supra, no"e 270(

Silva v. Reional ;rial Cour" o Nero+ rien"al, supra, no"e 272.292 a%e v. Rui, No. L-32409, eruar# 27, 1971, 37 SCR 23.

- 78 -



The description Ais re)uired to "e specific only in so far as the circumstances will ordinarilyallowA and Awhere "y the nature of the #oods to "e seied their descriptions must rather "e#eneral% as this would mean that no warrant would issue.A 28,

Thus% the description Afraudulent "oos% in&oices and recordsA was found sufficient. 28

>o also was the description A"oos% documents% receipts% lists% chits and other papers used"y him in connection with his/her acti&ities as moneylender% char#in# a usurious rate ofinterest% in &iolation of the law.O 280Justifyin# the sufficiency of the later description% the Courtsaid+

Tain# into consideration the nature of the articles so descri"ed% it is clear that noother more ade)uate and detailed description could ha&e "een #i&en% particularly"ecause it is difficult to #i&e a particular description of the contents thereof. Thedescription so made su"stantially complies with the le#al pro&isions "ecause theofficer of the law who e*ecuted the warrant was there"y placed in a positionena"lin# him to identify the articles% which he did. 28

It was% howe&er% held in a much later case that search warrants descri"in# the effects to "e

seied as follows+

'oos of accounts% financial records% &ouchers% journals% correspondence% receipts%led#ers% portfolios% credit journals% typewriters% and other documents and/or papersshowin# all "usiness transactions includin# dis"ursements receipts% "alancesheets and related profit and loss statements.

thus authoriin# the seiure of "oos of accounts and records Ashowin# all the "usinesstransactionsA of certain persons% re#ardless of whether the transactions were le#al or ille#al%contra&ene the e*plicit command of the 'ill of (i#hts that the thin#s to "e seied should "eparticularly descri"ed and defeat its major o"jecti&e of eliminatin# #eneral warrants. 283

11. Tests to 4etermine articularity

5 search warrant may "e said to particularly descri"e the thin#s to "e seied+

1! :hen the description therein is as specific as the circumstances will ordinarilyallow; 286or

2! :hen the description e*presses a conclusion of fact - not of law "y which thewarrant officer may "e #uided in main# the search and seiure; 288or

,! :hen the thin#s descri"ed are limited to those which "ear direct relation to theoffense for which the warrant is "ein# issued. ,99

293 People v. Ruio, 57 P%il. 34 &1932'.294 People v. Ruio, supra, 293.295 lvare v. Cour" o ir+" 8n+"ane o ;a#aa+, supra, 272.296 lvare v. C8, supra, no"e 272.297 S"one%ill v. ioAno, +upra, no"e 279.29 People v. Ruio, +upra, no"e 293.299 8i!., !i++en" o J. a! San"o+.300 Rule+ o Cour", Rule 126, Se. 2.

- 79 -



Thus% if the articles desired to "e seied ha&e any direct relation to an offense committed%the applicant must necessarily ha&e some e&idence% other than those articles% to pro&e thesaid offense; and the articles su"ject of search and seiure should come in handy merely tostren#then such e&idence. In this e&ent% the description contained in the disputed warrantshould ha&e mentioned% at least% the dates% amounts% persons% and other pertinent datare#ardin# the receipts of payments% certificates of stocs and securities% contracts%promissory notes% deeds of sale% messa#es and communication% checs% "an depositsand withdrawals% records of forei#n remittances% amon# others% enumerated in the warrant.,91

12. 4escription of place to "e seied

It does not suffice% for a search warrant to "e deemed &alid% that it "e "ased on pro"a"lecause% personally determined "y the jud#e% it is essential% too% that it particularly describesthe place to be searched, the manifest intention "ein# that the search "e confined strictly tothe place also descri"ed. ,92

:here the affida&it for the search warrant and the search warrant itself descri"ed the"uildin# to "e searched as Athe "uildin# @o. 12 Calle 5ro"ispo% City of <anila% hilippine

Islands%A this is a sufficient desi#nation of the premises to "e searched. It is the pre&ailin#rule that a description of a place to "e searched is sufficient if the officer with the warrantcan% with reasona"le effort% ascertain and identify the place intended. ,9,The police officerswere accordin#ly authoried to "rea down the door and enter the premises of the "uildin#occupied "y the so-called arliamentary Clu". :hen inside% they then had the ri#ht toarrest the persons presuma"ly en#a#ed in a prohi"ited #ame% and to confiscate thee&idence of the commission of the crime. It has "een held that an officer main# an arrestmay tae from the person arrested any money or property found upon his/her person%which was used in the commission of the crime or was the fruit of the crime% or which mayfurnish the person arrested with the means of committin# &iolence or of escapin#% or whichmay "e used as e&idence on the trial of the case% "ut not otherwise. ,9

1,. 4etermination of :hether >earch :arrant 4escri"es remises with articularity

In the determination of whether a search warrant descri"es the premises to "e searchedwith sufficient particularity% it has "een held Athat the e*ecutin# officer7s prior nowled#e asto the place intended in the warrant is rele&ant. This would seem to "e especially truewhere the e*ecutin# officer is the affiant on whose affida&it the warrant had issued% andwhen he nows that the jud#e who issued the warrant intended the "uildin# descri"ed inthe affida&it. 5nd it has also "een said that the e*ecutin# officer may loo to the affida&it inthe official court file to resol&e an am"i#uity in the warrant as to the place to "e searched.A,90

The principle does not apply where there is no am"i#uity on the face of the search warrantas to the description of the place to "e searched. The place to "e searched as set out in thewarrant cannot "e amplified or modified "y the officer7s own personal nowled#e of the

premises% or the e&idence they adduced in support of their application for the warrant. * * *The particulariation of the description of the place to "e searched may properly "e done

301 a%e v. Rui, supra, no"e 292( Colu*ia Pi"ure+ v. Cour" o ppeal+, $. R. No. 111267, Sep"e*er

20, 1996, 262 SCR 219.302 People v. Cour" o ppeal+, $. R. No. 126379, June 26, 199, 291 SCR 400.303 S"eele v+. ).S. &1925', ).S. Supre*e Cour" !vane pinion+, 1924-1925( 69 La@. e!., 757.304 People v. /elo+o, 4 P%il. 169 &1925'.305 uro+ v. C%ie o S"a, r*e! ore+ o "%e P%ilippine+, supra, no"e 272.

- 80 -






only "y the Jud#e% and only in the warrant itself; it cannot "e left to the discretion of thepolice officers conductin# the search. ,9

I! PRO"ISIONAL RE#EDIES

Rules o Court

Rule 12$

Pro%isional Re&edies In Cri&inal Cases

306 People v. Cour" o ppeal+, supra, no"e 302.

- 81 -



Se. 1. Availability of provisional remedies. – ;%e provi+ional re*e!ie+ in ivil a"ion+, in+oar a+ "%e# are

appliale, *a# e availe! o in onne"ion @i"% "%e ivil a"ion !ee*e! in+"i"u"e! @i"% "%e ri*inal a"ion.

Se. 2. Attachment.- B%en "%e ivil a"ion+ i+ properl# in+"i"u"e! in "%e ri*inal a"ion a+ provi!e! in Rule111, "%e oen!e! par"# *a# %ave "%e proper"# o "%e au+e! a""a%e! a+ +euri"# or "%e +a"i+a"ion o an#

Du!*en" "%a" *a# e reovere! ro* "%e au+e! in "%e ollo@in a+e+Ga: B%en "%e au+e! i+ aou" "o a+on! ro* "%e P%ilippine+(

: B%en "%e ri*inal a"ion i+ a+e! on a lai* or *one# or proper"# e*ele! or rau!ulen"l#

*i+applie! or onver"e! "o "%e u+e o "%e au+e! @%o i+ a puli oier, oier o a orpora"ion, a""orne#,

a"or, roAer, aen" or lerA, in "%e our+e o %i+ e*plo#*en" a+ +u%, or # an# o"%er per+on in a i!uiar#

apai"#, or a @illul viola"ion o !u"#(

: B%en "%e au+e! %a+ oneale!, re*ove!, or !i+po+e! o %i+ proper"#, or i+ aou" "o !o +o(an!

!: B%en "%e au+e! re+i!e+ ou"+i!e "%e P%ilippine+.

criminal procedure part 1 procedure in trial courts

Documents