8/10/2019 CRIM pro page 80-82

1/99

!"!#$%&'! #)**&%%!!+!"#$%"& !%()*"+# ,-!%+.)* /012344 563728129/:; %*,$-* %*=>?%, 563728129/: @/2 353A1B759; *%&D$ &))563728129/: @/2 6/E14 /8123E7/:9; #"!F)*&G % %G> %GI% J%&&=*">% +-)0751H563728129/: @/2 91521E3273E; "%> !"+$)& ?)=>%>?% 0751H563728129/: @/2 @7:3:51; ?)&= .%(". 0751H563728129/: @/21415E2/:75 A3E3 82/51997:K; "%> &-"C %?-"&% 0751H563728129/: @/2 4/K79E759

,$-.!#% #)**&%%!!+

D">#G .L ()&=C= 9MNO15E 56372; #%!"&&) .)%>>) !L &%?%C+% 39979E3:E 9MNO15E 56372; %&GCC% .%D$>) !L %("&% 1A8; ?%F*")& DL=&%>.)C+% P %&%> $-F)*, DL +$- 57074 82/51AM21; *",% ,$)*)C) JL C%>,"%?= 9815734 57074 35E7/:9; $%>C)& DL !=*%Q% 981573482/511A7:K9; %>,=>"= +)%C%* *L !%>"&% 527B7:34 82/51AM21; % !=>"+% IL (%&)>I-)&% 107A1:51; !%*"C .=>>% ?L

#R=# 9815734 43S9

*!*-!/,+

!"#$#%&' )"*+,-.",0 /!*!1&23 324

SOURCES:1. Rules 110-127 of the Revised Rules of

Court;2. 1987 Constitution particularly those under

Rights of an accused under Article III (Bill

of rights);3. Various acts passed by the legislature like

B.P. Blg. 127;4. Presidential Decrees;5. Executive Orders;6. Decisions of the Supreme Court.

Criminal Procedure is the method prescribedby law for the apprehension and prosecutionof persons accused of any criminal offense,and for their punishment, in case of conviction.!" $%&'( )$(*+, -% .('/012%'+ %&' +%'3+ by whichone who committed a crime is to be punished

.4People v. Lacson, 400 SCRA 267).

In its generic sense, it describes the networkof laws and rules which governs theprocedural administration of criminal justice,that is, laws and court rules governing arrest,search and seizure, bail etc !"#$%&'( *$+Dictionary)..

Criminal Law Criminal Procedure

Substantive Remedial

It declares what actsare punishable.

It provides how the actis to be punished.

It defines crimes,treats of their natureand provides for theirpunishment.

It provides for themethod by which aperson accused of acrime is arrested, triedor punished.

Systems of Criminal Procedure1. Inquisitorial system - the detection and

prosecution of crimes are left to theinitiative of officials and agents of the law.The procedure is characterized by secrecyand the Judge is not limited to theevidence brought before him but could

proceed with his own inquiry which is notconfrontative.

2. Accusatorial system ! contemplates oftwo contending parties before the courtwhich hears them impartially and renders

judgment after trial. The procedure isconfrontative and the trial is publicly heldand ends with the magistrate rendering theverdict.

Adversarial/Accusatorial

Inquisitorial

The court shallconsider NO evidencewhich has not beenformally offered.

The courts play a veryactive role and arenot limited to theevidence presentedbefore it.

The court has apassive role andrelies largely on theevidence presentedby both sides to the

action in order toreach a verdict.

Judge/s activelyparticipate/s in thegathering of facts andevidence instead ofmerely passively

receiving informationor evidence from theparties.

3. Mixed System - It is a combination of theinquisitorial and the accusatorial system. Itcharacterizes the criminal proceduresobserved in the Philippines.

Liberal Interpretation of the RulesThe Rules on Criminal Procedure being part of%&' 501'+ $6 7$0(% +&211 8' .1-8'(2119 :$"+%(0'*in order to promote their objective of securing

a just, speedy and inexpensive disposition of';'(9 2:%-$" 2"* 3($:''*-"/< 4Sec. 6, Rule 1,Rules of Court).

Due process in Criminal Proceedings ! ismandatory and indispensable and cannot be='% )-%&$0% 2 .12) )&-:& &'2(+ 8'6$(' -%condemns and proceeds upon inquiry and('"*'(+ >0*/='"% $"19 26%'( %(-21?

8/10/2019 CRIM pro page 80-82

2/99

"#$ %&'# ()**&+& ), -#.WXYZX +)>,*%&"I). F%* =D)*%,"=>C

!

!"#$#%&' )"*+,-.",0 /!*!1&23 324

be heard; and4. That judgment is rendered only upon

lawful hearing (Alonte v. Savellano, Jr.,287 SCRA 245).

Criminal Jurisdiction is the authority to hearand try a particular offense and impose thepunishment for it (People v. Mariano, G.R. No.L-40527, June 30, 1976).

Jurisdiction over theSubject Matter

Jurisdiction over thePerson of the

Accused

Refers to the authorityof the court to hear anddetermine a particularcriminal case.

Requires that theperson charged with theoffense must have beenbrought in to its forumfor trial, forcibly bywarrant of arrest orupon his voluntarysubmission to the court.

Derived from the law.It can never be

acquired solely byconsent of theaccused.

May be acquired byconsent of the

accused or by waiverof objections.

Objection that thecourt has no

jurisdiction over thesubject matter may bemade at any stage ofthe proceeding, andthe right to make suchobjection is neverwaived.

If he fails to make hisobjection in time, hewill be deemed tohave waived it.

Requisites for a valid exercise of criminaljurisdiction1. Jurisdiction over the Subject Matter2. Jurisdiction over the Territory3. Jurisdiction Over the Person of the

Accused

JURISDICTION OVER THE SUBJECTMATTERThis refers to the authority of the court to hearand determine a particular criminal case. Theoffense, by virtue of the imposable penalty orits nature, is one which the court is by lawauthorized to take cognizance of.

How Jurisdiction over the Subject Matter isConferredIt is conferred by LAW. It is the law thatconfers jurisdiction and NOT THE RULES.

Jurisdiction cannot be fixed by the will of theparties nor can it be acquired or diminished byany act of the parties.

How Jurisdiction over the Subject Matter isDeterminedJurisdiction over criminal case is determinedby the ALLEGATIONS in the complaint orinformation. The elements of an offense mustappear in the complaint or information so as toascertain which court has jurisdiction over acase.

Statute Applicable to a Criminal ActionJurisdiction to try a criminal action isdetermined by the law in force at the time ofthe institution of the action and NOT:

a. The time of its commission; norb. During the arraignment.

Imposable PenaltyIn determining whether or not the court has

jurisdiction over the offense, the penalty whichmay be imposed upon the accused isconsidered and NOT the actual penaltyimposed after the trial.

Principle of Adherence of JurisdictionThe jurisdiction of the court is referred to as.:$"%-"0-"/< -" ;-') $6 %&' /'"'(21 3(-":-31'that once a court has acquired jurisdiction, that

jurisdiction continues until the court has doneall that it can do in the exercise of that

jurisdiction (20 Am. Jur. 2d, Courts, S 147,1965).

General Rule: The jurisdiction once vested,CANNOT be withdrawn or defeated by:

a. A subsequent amendment of theinformation;

b. A new law amending the rules ofjurisdiction

Exception: When the statute expressly soprovides, or is construed to the effect that it isintended to operate upon actions pendingbefore its enactment.

Objections to Jurisdiction

General Rule: The question of jurisdictionmay be raised at any stage of the proceedings(Lu v. Lu Ym, Sr., G.R. Nos., 153690, 157381,

170889, August 4, 2009)..

Exception:Where there has been estoppel bylaches on the party who raised the question(Tijam v. Sibonghanoy, G.R. No. L-21450,April 15, 1968).

If the lower court had jurisdiction, and the casewas heard and decided upon a given theory,such as for instance, as that the court had no

jurisdiction, the party who induced it to adoptsuch theory will not be permitted, on appeal, to

8/10/2019 CRIM pro page 80-82

3/99

"#$ %&'# ()**&+& ), -#.WXYZX +)>,*%&"I). F%* =D)*%,"=>C

#

!"#$#%&' )"*+,-.",0 /!*!1&23 324

assume an inconsistent position that the lowercourt had jurisdiction (Lozon v. NLRC, G.R.No. 107660, January 2, 1995).

JURISDICTION OVER THE TERRITORYIn criminal cases, VENUE is an essentialelement of jurisdiction. The offense shouldhave been committed or any one of itsessential ingredients should have taken place

within the territorial jurisdiction of the court.

It cannot be waived and where the place of thecommission was not specifically charged, theplace may be shown by evidence.

Subject to existing laws, the criminal actionmust be instituted and tried in the courts of themunicipality or territory where the offense wascommitted or any of its essential ingredientsoccurred. These are the EXCEPTIONS:1. Where an offense is committed on a

railroad train, in an aircraft, or in any otherpublic or private vehicle in the course of itstrip,The criminal action may be institutedand tried in the court of any municipality orterritory where such train, aircraft or othervehicle passed during such trip, includingthe place of departure and arrival;

2. Where an offense is committed on board avessel in the course of its voyage , Thecriminal action may be instituted and triedin the proper court of the first port of entryor of any municipality or territory throughwhich the vessel passed during suchvoyage subject to the generally acceptedprinciples of international law.

3. Felonies under Art. 2 of the Revised PenalCode , They shall be cognizable by theproper court where the criminal action wasfirst filed;

4. Piracy , The venue of piracy, unlike allother crimes, has no territorial limits. Itmay be tried anywhere.

5. Libel,The action may be instituted at theelection of the offended or suing party inthe province or city:a. Where the libelous article is printed

and first published;b. If one of the offended parties is a

private individual, where said privateindividual actually resides at thetime of the commission of theoffense;

c. If the offended party is a public official,where the latter holds office at thetime of the commission of the offense.

6. In exceptional circumstances@To ensurea fair trial and impartial inquiry. The SCshall have the power to order a change ofvenue or place of trial to avoid miscarriageof justice.

7. In cases filed under B.P. 22@The criminalaction shall be filed in the place where thecheck was dishonored or issued. In caseof crossed-check, in the place ofdepositary or collecting bank.

8. Where the case is cognizable by theSandiganbayan @ the jurisdiction of whichdepends upon the nature of the offenseand the position of the accused (Subido v.

Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 122641, Jan.20, 1997), the offense need not be tried inthe place where the act was committedbut where the court actually sits.

JURISDICTION OVER THE PERSON OFTHE ACCUSEDThe person charged with the offense must&2;' 8''" 8($0/&% %$ %&' :$0(%As presence fortrial, forcibly by warrant of arrest or upon hisvoluntary submission to the court.

As general rule, seeking affirmative relief isdeemed to be a submission to the jurisdictionof the court. The voluntary submission may beeffected by filing a motion to quash, appearingfor arraignment, participating in the trial or bygiving bail.

However, making a special appearance toquestion the jurisdiction of the court over theperson of the accused is NOT a voluntaryappearance as when a motion to quash is filedon that ground.

Criminal Jurisdiction of the Municipal TrialCourt, Metropolitan Trial Court and

Municipal Circuit Trial Court1. Over offenses punishable by imprisonment

for a period of 6 years and less.2. Over offenses where the fine is 4,000

pesosor less.3. Under P.D. 1606 as amended by R.A.

8249, the criminal cases of:a. Government officials.b. Offense punishable by

imprisonment of 6 years or lessor fine is 4,000 pesos or less.

c. Official is lower than salarygrade 27.

4. Damage to property through criminalnegligence (B.P. 129 as amended by RA7691).

Summary Procedure Criminal Cases underthe Jurisdiction of the MTC, MeTC andMCTCTo achieve an expeditious and inexpensivedetermination of the cases referred to herein,the Supreme Court resolved to promulgate theRevised Rule on Summary Procedure. In

8/10/2019 CRIM pro page 80-82

4/99

"#$ %&'# ()**&+& ), -#.WXYZX +)>,*%&"I). F%* =D)*%,"=>C

$

!"#$#%&' )"*+,-.",0 /!*!1&23 324

essence, there will only be filing of pleadingsand generally no need for a hearing.

Criminal jurisdiction of MTC, MeTC andMCTC on Summary Procedure are:1. Violations of traffic laws, rules and

regulations.2. Violations of the rental law.3. Violations of municipal or city ordinances.

4. All other criminal cases where the penaltyprescribed by law for the offense chargedis imprisonment not exceeding 6months, or a fine not exceeding P1,000,or both.

5. Offenses involving damage to propertythrough criminal negligence where theimposable fine does not exceed P10,000(1991 Revised Rule on SummaryProcedure).

6. B.P. 22 cases (A.M. No. 00-11-01-SC).

Criminal Jurisdiction of Regional TrialCourt1. Over offenses punishable by imprisonment

for a period of more than 6 years.2. Over offenses where the fine is more than

4,000 pesos.3. Under P.D. 1606 as amended by R.A.

8249, the criminal cases of:a. Government officials.b. Offense punishable by

imprisonment of more than 6years or fine is more than 4,000pesos.

c. Official is lower than salarygrade 27.

4. Violations of the ComprehensiveDangerous Drugs Act of 2002 (R.A. 9165).

5. Libel cases even though punishable byprision correctional (Art. 360 of RPC;People v. Eduarte, G.R. No. 88232,February 26, 1990).

6. Criminal violations of Intellectual PropertyCode (Samson v. Daway, G.R. Nos.160054-55, July 21, 2004; Sec. 27 of R.A.166).

7. Election criminal cases.8. Appellate jurisdiction over all cases

decided by MTC, MeTC, MCTC in their

respective territorial jurisdictions (Sec. 22of B.P. 129).

Jurisdiction over complex crimesJurisdiction over the whole complex crime islodged with the trial court having jurisdiction toimpose the maximum and most seriouspenalty imposable of an offense forming partof the complex crime. It must be prosecutedintegrally and must not be divided intocomponent offenses which may be madesubject of multiple information brought in

different courts (Cuyos v. Garcia, G.R. No. L-46934, April 15, 1988).

Jurisdiction over continuing crimesContinuing offenses are consummated in oneplace, yet by the nature of the offense, theviolation of the law is deemed continuing (e.g.estafa and libel). As such, the courts of theterritories where the essential ingredients of

the crime took place have concurrentjurisdiction. But the court which first acquiresjurisdiction excludes the other courts.

Jurisdiction over crimes punishable bydestierroWhere the imposable penalty is destierro, thecase falls within the exclusive jurisdiction ofthe Municipal Trial Court, considering that inthe hierarchy of penalties under Article 71 ofthe Revised Penal Code, destierro followsarresto mayor which involves imprisonment(People v. Eduarte, G.R. No. 88232, February26, 1990).

Note: Where the offense is within its exclusivecompetence by reason of the penaltyprescribed therefore, an inferior court shallhave jurisdiction to try and decide the caseirrespective of the kind and nature of the civilliability arising from the said offense

The additional penalty for HABITUALDELINQUENCY is not considered indetermining jurisdiction because suchdelinquency is not a crime (Legados v. deGuzman, G.R. No. 35285, Feb. 20, 1989).

Criminal jurisdiction of SandiganbayanThe Sandiganbayan shall exercise exclusiveoriginal jurisdiction in all cases involving:1. Violations of RA 3019 as amended (Anti

Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) and RA1379 (An Act Declaring Forfeiture in favorof the state any property found to havebeen unlawfully acquired by Public Officeror Employee).

2. Other offenses or felonies whether simpleor complexed with other crimes committedby public officials and employees

mentioned in Sec 4(a) PD 1606 asamended by RA 7975 in relation to theiroffice.

"#$ &''$()$ *) +,( -$./0*&( 0& 0#$Office1 2#$(3a. The offense is intimately connected

with the office of the offender andperpetrated while he was in theperformance of his official functions, or

b. The crime cannot exist without theoffice, or

8/10/2019 CRIM pro page 80-82

5/99

8/10/2019 CRIM pro page 80-82

6/99

"#$ %&'# ()**&+& ), -#.WXYZX +)>,*%&"I). F%* =D)*%,"=>C

&

!"#$#%&' )"*+,-.",0 /!*!1&23 324

a. Over appeals from thejudgments, resolutions ororders of the RTC in tax casesoriginally decided by them.

b. Over petitions for review ofthe judgments, resolutions ororders of the RTC in theexercise of their appellate

jurisdiction over tax cases

originally decided by the MTC,MeTC and MCTC. (R.A. 1125as amended by R.A. 9282).

Katarungang Pambarangay (Chapter 7,Title I, Book III of the Local GovernmentCode of 1991)

Pre-requisite to Filing of Complaint inCourt

General Rule: A confrontation between theparties before the lupon chairman or thepangkat ng tagapagkasundois needed beforea complaint, petition, action or proceeding maybe filed or instituted directly in court or anyother government office for adjudication. Theparties thereto may still go to the court either(1) when the lupon secretary or pangkatsecretary as attested to by the lupon orpangkatchairman certifies that no conciliationor settlement has been reached, or (2) whenthe parties repudiated the settlement.

Exceptions:1. Where the accused is under detention;2. Where a person has been deprived of

personal liberty calling for habeas corpusproceedings;

3. Where actions are coupled withprovisional remedies;

4. Where the action may be barred by thestatute of limitations.

Subject Matter of Amicable SettlementGeneral Rule:The luponshall have authorityto bring parties actually residing in the samecity or municipality for amicable settlement ofall disputes.

Exceptions: (GPIF-BORN)1. Where one party is the government, or

any subdivision or instrumentality thereof;2. Where one party is a public officer or

employee, and the dispute relates to theperformance of his official functions;

3. Offenses punishable by imprisonmentexceeding one (1) year or a fineexceeding Five thousand pesos(P5,000.00);

4. Offenses where there is no privateoffended party;

5. Where the dispute involves real propertieslocated in different cities or municipalitiesunless the parties thereto agree to submittheir differences to amicable settlement byan appropriate lupon;

6. Disputes involving parties who actuallyreside in barangays of different cities ormunicipalities, except where suchbarangay units adjoin each other and the

parties thereto agree to submit theirdifferences to amicable settlement by anappropriate lupon;

7. Such other classes of disputes which thePresident may determine in the interest of

justice or upon the recommendation of theSecretary of Justice.

Criminal Action is one by which the State

prosecutes a person for an act or omissionpunishable by law.

SECTION 1. INSTITUTION OF CRIMINALACTIONS

For offenses where a preliminaryinvestigation is required:

By filing the COMPLAINT with the .properofficer

8/10/2019 CRIM pro page 80-82

7/99

"#$ %&'# ()**&+& ), -#.WXYZX +)>,*%&"I). F%* =D)*%,"=>C

'

!"#$#%&' )"*+,-.",0 /!*!1&23 324

DOES NOT APPLY to offenses which aresubject to summary procedure.

Criminal action Criminalprosecution

Instituted once acomplaint has beenfiled in the properoffice or court as the

case may be.

Instituted once theinformation is filed bythe prosecutor incourt.

Generally bars therunning of theprescriptive period ofthe offense.

No such effect.

Effect of institution of the criminal action:It interrupts the running of the period ofprescription of the offense charged unlessotherwise provided by special laws.! Act No. 3326 governs the prescriptive

periods of violations of special laws, oroffenses other than those penalized under

the Revised Penal Code.

Note: With respect to offenses penalized byspecial laws, the filing of the complaint orinformation in court is the one that interruptsthe prescriptive period and not the filing of thecomplaint in the proper office for purposes ofconducting a preliminary investigation (Zaldiviav. Reyes, G.R. No. L-102342, July 3, 1992;Sec.2, Act No. 3326).

Suspension of prescriptive periods ofcases falling under the authority of the

Lupon

Under Sec. 410(c) of the Local GovernmentCode of 1991, while under mediation,conciliation, or arbitration, the prescriptiveperiod shall be suspended from the time of thefiling of complaint with the Punong Barangaywhich suspension shall not exceed 60 days.The prescriptive period shall resume uponreceipt of the certificate of repudiation orcertificate to file action.

Remedies of the offended party if theprosecutor refuses to file an information:(MANS-CCS)1. File an action for mandamus, in case of

grave abuse of discretion;

Mandamus to Compel ProsecutionThe writ of mandamus is not available tocontrol discretion. It is a matter ofdiscretion on the part of the prosecutor todetermine which persons appearresponsible for the commission of a crime.However, the moment he finds one to be

so liable, it becomes his inescapable dutyto charge him therewith and to prosecutehim for the same. In such a situation, therule loses its discretionary character andbecomes mandatory (Metropolitan Bankand Trust Company v. Rogelio Reynaldoand Jose C. Adrandea, G.R. No. 164538,August 9, 2010).

2. Lodge a new complaint before the courthaving jurisdiction over the offense wherethere is no double jeopardy;

3. Take up the matter with the Secretary ofJustice in accordance with the Revised

Administrative Code or with the Presidentin special cases;

4. Institute administrative charges against theerring prosecutor;

5. File criminal action against the prosecutorunder Art. 208 of RPC for negligence toprosecute or tolerance of the crime;

6. File civil action for damages under Art. 27of the New Civil Codefor failure to renderservice by a public officer;

7. Ask for a special prosecutor (Hoey v.Prov. Fiscal of Rizal, G.R. No. L-61323-24,June 29, 1984).

May Injunction Issue to Restrain CriminalProsecution?

General Rule:No. Criminal prosecutions mayNOT be restrained or stayed by injunction,preliminary or final. The reason being, publicinterest requires that criminal acts beimmediately investigated and prosecuted for

the protection of the society (Domingo v.Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 103276, April 14,1996).

Exceptions:1. To afford adequate protection to the

constitutional rights of the accused.(Hernandez v. Albano, G.R. No. L-19272,Jan. 25, 1967);

2. When necessary for the orderlyadministration of justice or to avoidoppression or multiplicity of actions.(Hernandez v. Albano, supra.)"

3. When there is a prejudicial question whichis subjudice"

4. When the acts of the officer are without orin excess of authority (Planas v. Gil, G.R.No. L-46440, January 18, 1939);

5. When the prosecution is under an invalidlaw, ordinance or regulation (Young v.Rafferty, G.R. No. L-10951, February 14,1916);

6. When double jeopardy is clearly apparent"7. When the court had no jurisdiction over

the offense (Lopez v. City Judge. G.R. No.

8/10/2019 CRIM pro page 80-82

8/99

"#$ %&'# ()**&+& ), -#.WXYZX +)>,*%&"I). F%* =D)*%,"=>C

(

!"#$#%&' )"*+,-.",0 /!*!1&23 324

L-25795, Oct. 29, 1966)"8. When it is a case of persecution rather

than prosecution;9. When the charges are manifestly false and

motivated by the lust for vengeance;10. When there is clearly no prima facie case

against the accused and a motion toquash on that ground has been denied(Salonga v. Pano, G.R. No. L-59524, Feb.

18, 1985)"and11. Prevent the threatened unlawful arrest of

petitioners (Brocka v. Enrile, G.R. Nos.69863-65, December 10, 1990).

SECTION 2. FORM OF THE COMPLAINT ORINFORMATION

Common Requisites as to the Form ofComplaint and of Information:1. In writing;2. In the name of the People of the

Philippines; and3. Against all persons who appear to be

responsible for the offense involved.

! The People of the Philippinesis the realoffended party but since the crime is alsoan outrage against the offended party, heis entitled to intervene in its prosecution incases where the civil action is impliedlyinstituted therein. However, when thecriminal action is instituted in the name ofthe offended party (not People of thePhilippines), the defect is merely of formand may be cured.

SECTION 3. COMPLAINT DEFINED

Complaint is a sworn written statementcharging a person with an offense subscribedby the offended party, any peace officer, orpublic officer charged with the enforcement ofthe law violated.

! The complaint as defined under Section 3is different from the complaint filed with theD($+':0%$(A+ E66-:'? The complaintmentioned in this section refers to onefiled in court for the commencement of a

criminal prosecution for violation of acrime, usually cognizable by municipal trialcourts as well as to a complaint filed by anoffended party in private crimes or thosewhich cannot be prosecuted de officio.

Requisites of a Complaint: (WO-PCS)1. It must be in writing and under oath;2. It must be in the name of the People of the

Philippines;3. It must charge a person with an offense;

and

4. It must be subscribed by the offendedparty, by any peace officer or public officercharged with the enforcement of the lawviolated.

Note: A complaint presented by a privateperson when not sworn to by him is notnecessarily void. The want of an oath is amere defect of form which does not affect the

substantial rights of the defendant on themerits (People v. Historillo, G.R. No. 130408,June 16, 2000).

The COMPLAINT FILED WITH THE4-56789"5-:6 5;;,87< '=&> 2#*?# 0#$latter may initiate a preliminaryinvestigation, refers to:1. Any written complaint;2. Filed by an offended party or not;3. Not necessarily under oath, except in 2

instances:a. Complaint for commission of an

offense which cannot be prosecutedde officioor is private in nature

b. Where the law requires that it is to bestarted by a complaint sworn to by theoffended party, or when it pertains tothose which need to be enforced byspecified public officers.

Persons who can file a complaint:1. Offended party @ is the person against

whom or against whose property the crimewas committed;

2. Any peace officer;3. Other public officer charged with the

enforcement of the law violated (e.g.Internal Revenue Officer for violation ofthe NIRC, custom agents with respect toviolations of the Tariff and Customs Code).

Under the Rule on Summary Procedure:A complaint may be directly filed in the MTC,provided that in Metro Manila and in charteredcities, the criminal action may only becommenced by the filing of information, whichmeans, only by the prosecutor, except whenthe offense cannot be prosecuted de officioasin private crimes.

SECTION 4. INFORMATION DEFINED

Information is an accusation in writingcharging a person with an offense, subscribedby the prosecutor and filed with the court.

Requisites: (WCSF)1. It must be in writing;2. It must charge a person with an offense;3. It must be subscribed by the fiscal; and4. It must be filed in court.

8/10/2019 CRIM pro page 80-82

9/99

"#$ %&'# ()**&+& ), -#.WXYZX +)>,*%&"I). F%* =D)*%,"=>C

)

!"#$#%&' )"*+,-.",0 /!*!1&23 324

Complaint Information

Subscribed by theoffended party, anypeace officer or otherofficer charged withthe enforcement ofthe law violated.

Subscribed by thefiscal.(Indispensablerequirement)

It may be filed either

in court or in the3($+':0%$(A+ $66-:'?

It is filed with thecourt.

It must be madeunder oath.

It need not be underoath. The fiscalwho files it isalready actingunder his oath ofoffice.

It usually refers toprivate crimes.

It usually refers topublic crimes.

Persons authorized to file information:1. City or provincial prosecutor and their

assistants; and2. Duly appointed special prosecutors.

Note: Prosecution in the RTC is alwayscommenced by information, except:

! In certain crimes against chastity(concubinage, adultery, seduction,abduction, acts of lasciviousness); and

! Defamations imputing any of the aforesaidoffenses wherein a sworn writtencomplaint is required in accordance withSection 5 of this Rule.

! In case of variance between the complaint

filed by the offended party and theinformation in crimes against chastity, thecomplaint controls (People v. Oso, G.R.No. L-42571, October 10, 1935).

! An information not properly signed cannotbe cured by silence, acquiescence or evenby express consent (Villa v. Ibanez, G.R.No. L-4313, March 20, 1951).

SECTION 5. WHO MUST PROSECUTECRIMINAL ACTIONS

Full discretion and control of the

prosecutorAll criminal actions commenced by a complaintor information shall be prosecuted under thedirection and control of the prosecutor.

Note: The institution of a criminal actiondepends upon the sound discretion of thefiscal. But once the case is already filed incourt, the same can no longer be withdrawn or*-+=-++'* )-%&$0% %&' :$0(%A+ 233($;21? F&$01*the fiscal find it proper to conduct areinvestigation of the case at such stage, the

permission of the Court must be secured(Crespo v. Mogul, G.R. No. l-53373, June 30,1987).

Conditions for a private prosecutor toprosecute a criminal action1. The public prosecutor has a heavy work

schedule, or there is no public prosecutorassigned in the province or city;

2. The private prosecutor is authorized inwriting by the Chief of the ProsecutorOffice or the Regional State Prosecutor(RSP);

3. The authority of the private prosecutormust be approved by the court;

4. The private prosecutor shall continue toprosecute the case until the end of the trialunless the authority is withdrawn orotherwise revoked (A.M. No. 02-2-07-SC,effective May 1, 2002);

5. In case of the withdrawal or revocation ofthe authority of the private prosecutor, thesame must be approved by court (MemoCirc. No. 25, April 26, 2002, RegardingAmendment to Sec. 5, Rule 110).

! In the case of Heirs of Federico C.Delgado v Luisito Q. Gonzalez (G.R. No.184337, August 7, 2009), the SupremeCourt held that xxx only the SolicitorGeneral may bring or defend actions inbehalf of the Republic of the Philippines,or represent the People or State incriminal proceedings before the SupremeCourt and the Court of Appeals. Except:1. When the State and the offended

party are deprived of due processbecause the prosecution is remiss inits duty to protect the interest of theState and the offended party AND

2. When the private offended partyquestions the civil aspect of a decisionof a lower court.

It is assumed that a decision on themerits had already been rendered bythe lower court and it is the civil aspectof the case which the offended party isappealing.

! In all cases elevated to theSandiganbayan and from theSandiganbayan to the SC, the Office ofthe Ombudsman, through its SpecialProsecutor shall represent the People ofthe Philippines, EXCEPT in cases filedpursuant to E.O. Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A,issued in 1986 as it is the PCGG that willprosecute such cases. (Sec. 4, RA 8249).

! In government service-related cases, the

8/10/2019 CRIM pro page 80-82

10/99

"#$ %&'# ()**&+& ), -#.WXYZX +)>,*%&"I). F%* =D)*%,"=>C

*+

!"#$#%&' )"*+,-.",0 /!*!1&23 324

prosecution of cases cognizable by theSandiganbayan shall be under theexclusive control and supervision of theOffice of the Ombudsman. In casescognizable by the regular courts, the lawrecognizes a concurrence of jurisdictionbetween the Office of the Ombudsmanand other investigative agencies ofgovernment in the prosecution of said

cases (Uy v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos.105965-70, March 20, 2001).

Matters falling within the control anddiscretion of the prosecution:1. What case to file. (People v. Pineda, G.R.

No. L-26222, July 21, 1967);2. Whom to prosecute. (People v. Devaras,

G.R. Nos. 100938-39, Dec. 15, 1993);3. Manner of prosecution. (People v.

Nazareno, G.R. No. 103964, Aug. 01,1996);

4. Right to withdraw information beforearraignment even without notice andhearing. (Galvez v. CA, G.R. No. 114046,October 24, 1994).

Matters within the control of the court aftercase is filed:1. Suspension of Arraignment (Crespo v.

Mogul, G.R. No. l-53373, June 30, 1987);2. Reinvestigation. (Velasquez v. Tuquero,

G.R. No. 88442, Feb. 15, 1990);3. Prosecution by Fiscal (Sta. Rosa Mining

Co. v. Zabala, G.R. No. L-44723, Aug. 31,1997);

4. Dismissal of the case (Dungog v. CA, G.R.

Nos. 77850-51, Mar. 25, 1988);5. Downgrading of offense or dropping of

accused even before plea (Rule 110, Sec.14)

Private Crimes are those which cannot beprosecuted exceptupon complaint filed by theoffended party. This legal requirement wasimposed out of consideration for the aggrievedparty who might prefer to suffer the outrage insilence rather than go through the scandal of apublic trial.

Note: The proper term is not private crime butrather a crime that cannot be prosecuted deofficio.

Prosecution of Private Crimes

Who may prosecute:1. Concubinage and adultery@only by the

offended spouse who should have thestatus, capacity, and legal representationat the time of filing of the complaint,regardless of age:

! When the complainant had alreadydivorced the accused, he can nolonger file the complaint (Pilapil v.Somera, G.R. No. 80116, June 30,1989).

! Reason:the complainant is not legallya spouse anymore at the time of theinstitution of the action, therefore, he

has no personality to file a complaintregardless of the fact that adulterywas indeed committed during theexistence of the marriage;

! Both guilty parties must be included inthe complaint;

! The offended party must neither gavehis consent to the offense norpardoned the offenders.

2. Seduction, Abduction and Acts ofLasciviousness@prosecuted exclusivelyand successively by the following persons

in this order:a. By the offended woman;b. By the parents, grandparents or

legal/judicial guardians in thatsuccessive order, if the offended partyis incompetent or incapable of doingso;

c. By the State pursuant to theDOCTRINE OF PARENS PATRIAE,when the offended party dies orbecomes incapacitated before shecould file the complaint and she hasno known parents, grandparents orguardian.

3. Defamation imputing to a person any ofthe foregoing crimes of concubinage,adultery, seduction, abduction or acts oflasciviousness can be prosecuted only bythe party or parties defamed (Article 360,last par., Revised Penal Code).

! If the offended party is of legal age anddoes not suffer from physical or mentaldisability, she alone can file the complaintto the exclusion of all regardless of the factthat he/she subsequently dies.

Pardon and ConsentIn some private crimes, the offended party cangiven his consent or pardon to the accused inorder to prevent the institution of any criminalaction

Pardon Consent

Refers to past acts. Refers to future acts.

In order to absolve theaccused from liability

In order to absolve theaccused from liability, it

8/10/2019 CRIM pro page 80-82

11/99

"#$ %&'# ()**&+& ), -#.WXYZX +)>,*%&"I). F%* =D)*%,"=>C

**

!"#$#%&' )"*+,-.",0 /!*!1&23 324

must be extended toboth offenders.

is sufficient even ifgranted only to theoffending spouse.

Given after thecommission of thecrime

Given before thecommission of thecrime

Who can give pardon or consent:1. Concubinage and adultery@ only the

offended spouse, not otherwiseincapacitated, can validly extend thepardon or consent contemplated therein.

! Must pardon both the erring spouseand mistress or concubine.

! Pardon, can either be expressed orimplied through the acts of theoffended spouse (Ligtas v. CA, G.R.No. L-47498 May 7, 1987).

! Consent, can only be expressedand never implied.

2. Seduction, abduction, and acts of

lasciviousness@a. The offended minor, if with sufficient

discretion, can validly pardon theaccused by herself if she has noparents or where the accused is herown father and her mother is dead;

b. The parents, grandparents or guardianof the offended minor, in that order,CANNOT extend a valid pardon insaid crimes WITHOUT the conformityof the offended party, even if the latteris a minor;

c. If the offended woman is of age and

not otherwise incapacitated, only shecan extend a valid pardon.

General rule: The pardon refers to a pardonBEFORE the filing of the criminal complaint incourt. Pardon effected after the filing of thecomplaint in court does NOT prohibit thecontinuance of the prosecution of the offense.

Exception: in case of marriage between theoffender and the offended party.

! The pardon in cases of seduction,

abduction, and acts of lasciviousnessmust only beEXPRESSED and cannot beimplied as contrast toadultery/concubinage (Art. 344, RPC)

! The offended party CANNOT GIVECONSENT on the crimes of seduction,abduction and acts of lasciviousnesstobar a complaint against the accused unlikein adultery/concubinage

! Reason: Art. 344 of the RPC states thatthe offended party can consent only to thecrimes of adultery and concubinage to

absolve the accused from the criminal1-28-1-%9? C&'(' -+ "$ ='"%-$" $6 .:$"+'"%,*%&"I). F%* =D)*%,"=>C

*$

!"#$#%&' )"*+,-.",0 /!*!1&23 324

exemption is omitted, then the indictment mustshow that the accused does not fall within theexemptions (For examples, see Book ofAgpalo in Criminal Procedure, 2004 ed. p. 59-60).

Complex CrimesWhere what is alleged in the information is acomplex crime and the evidence fails to

support the charge as to one of the componentoffenses, the defendant can be convicted ofthe offense proven.

Aggravating circumstanceAll aggravating circumstances, either genericor qualifying, must be alleged in theinformation. The failure to allege such cannotbe cured by an amendment of the informationafter the accused entered his plea (People v.Antonio, G.R. No. 144266, November 27,2002).

However, even though the aggravatingcircumstance cannot be considered to imposea graver penalty, it can still be a basis for theawarding of exemplary damages. (People v.Evina, G.R. Nos. 124830-31, June 27, 2003)

SECTION 10. PLACE OF COMMISSION OFTHE OFFENSE

Purpose: To show territorial jurisdiction.

General Rule: A complaint or information issufficient if it appears from the allegations thatthe offense was committed or some of its

essential ingredients occurred at some place,within the jurisdiction of the court.

Exception: When the place of commission isan essential element of the offense, the placeof commission must be alleged withparticularity (E.g. Trespass to dwelling,destructive arson, robbery in an inhabitedhouse, violation of domicile, penalty on thekeeper, watchman, visitor of opium den, andviolation of election law).

SECTION 11. DATE OF COMMISSION OF

THE OFFENSE

General Rule: It is NOT required that thecomplaint or information state with particularitythe DATE of the commission of the crime. Itsuffices that the allegation approximates or beas near the actual date when the offense wascommitted.

Exception: If the DATE of the commission ofthe offense constitutes an essential element ofthe offense (E.g. Infanticide, Abortion, Bigamy,

Violation of Sunday Statute (Election Law)).

! The remedy against an indictment thatfails to allege the time of commission ofthe offense with sufficient definiteness is aMotion for Bill of Particulars under Rule116 Sec. 10. The failure to move forspecification or the quashal of theinformation on any of the grounds

provided for in the Rules deprives theaccused of the right to object to evidencewhich could be lawfully introduced andadmitted under an information of more orless general terms but which sufficientlycharges the accused with a definite crime.Besides, the exact date of the commissionof the crime is not an essential element ofthe crime (People v. Elpedes, G.R. No.137106-07, 2001).

SECTION 12. NAME OF THE OFFENDEDPARTY

General Rule: The offended party must bedesignated by name and surname or any otherappellation or nickname by which he has beenor is known.

Exception: In crimes against property, if thename of the offended party is unknown, theproperty must be described with suchparticularity as to properly identify theparticular offense charged.

SECTION 13. DUPLICITY OF OFFENSE

Duplicity of Offense in information or complaintmeans the joinder of 2 or more SEPARATEand DISTINCT or DIFFERENT offenses in oneand the same information or complaint.

The FILING of a MOTION to QUASH is theremedy in case of duplicity of offense in aninformation(Section 3(f), Rule 117).

Purpose: The State should not heap upon thedefendant two or more charges which mightconfuse him in his defense.

General Rule: A complaint or informationmust charge only one offense.

Exceptions:1. Complex crimes;2. Special Complex crimes;3. Continuous crimes or delicto continuado;4. Crimes susceptible of being committed in

various modes;5. Crimes of which another offense is an

ingredient;

8/10/2019 CRIM pro page 80-82

15/99

"#$ %&'# ()**&+& ), -#.WXYZX +)>,*%&"I). F%* =D)*%,"=>C

*%

!"#$#%&' )"*+,-.",0 /!*!1&23 324

Note: The test to be applied to determinewhether there are two offenses or onlyone, is whether each provision requiresproof of a fact which the other does not(Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S.299 [1932]).

Requisites of Continuous Crime:1. Plurality of acts performed separately

during a period of time;2. Unity of penal provision infringed upon orviolated;

3. Unity of criminal intent which means thattwo or more violations of the same penalprovision are united on one and the sameintent leading to the perpetration of thesame criminal purpose or claim (People v.Ledesma, G.R. No. L-41522, September29, 1976).

Principle of AbsorptionActs committed in furtherance of rebellionthough crimes in themselves are deemedabsorbed in the single crime of rebellion. Thetest is whether or not the act was done infurtherance of a political end. The politicalmotive of the act should be conclusivelydemonstrated (Enrile v. Salazar, G.R. No.92163, June 05, 1990).

Mala in se felonies cannot absorb malaprohibita crimes (Loney v. People, G.R. No.152644, February 10, 2006).,

WaiverShould there be duplicity of offense in the

information, the accused must move for thequashal of the same BEFORE

ARRAIGNMENT. Otherwise, he is deemed tohave waived the objection and may be foundguilty of as many offenses as those chargedand proved during the trial.

Splitting of case not allowedOn the other hand, a defendant should not beharassed with various prosecutions basedupon the same act by splitting the same intovarious charges, all emanating from the samelaw violated when the prosecution could easily

and well embody them in a single information.

SECTION 14. AMENDMENT ORSUBSTITUTION

An Amendment refers to a change in either theform or substance of the same offensein the

information

Kinds of amendment:1. Formal amendment - merely states with

additional precision something which isalready contained in the originalinformation, and which, therefore, addsnothing essential for conviction for thecrime charged (Gabionza v. CA, G.R. No.140311, March 30, 2001).

Instances when an amendment is in form:a. Where it neither affects nor alters the

nature of the offense charged;b. Where the charge does not deprive

the accused of a fair opportunity topresent his defense;

c. Where it does not involve a change inthe basic theory of the prosecution(People v. Rivera, G.R. No. L-27825,June 30, 1970);

d. Additional allegation of conspiracy isonly a formal amendment providedthat it does not change the theory of

the prosecution (Buhat v. CA, G.R.No. 119601, December 17, 1996).

2. Substantial amendment @ consistschanging the recital of facts constitutingthe offense charged and determinative ofthe jurisdiction of the court (Almenda v.Villaluz, G.R. No. L-31665 August 6,1975).

Instances when an amendment issubstantial:a. An amended information stating forth

a different manner of committing thefelony;

b. Including conspiracy where it involvesa change in the basic theory of theprosecution (People v. Zulueta, G.R.No. L-4017, August 30, 1951);

c. Change in the date of the commissionof the offense that would be prejudicialto the accused (Wong v. Yatco, 99Phil. 791 [1956]).

Rules on Amendment1. Before the plea@The general rule is that

any amendment, formal or substantial,before the accused enters his plea may bedone without leave of court.

Exception: Any amendment before plea,

which downgrades the nature of the

offense charged or excludes any accused

from the complaint or information can be

made only:

a. Upon motion by the prosecutor;

b. With notice to the offended party; and

c. With LEAVE OF COURT.

8/10/2019 CRIM pro page 80-82

16/99

"#$ %&'# ()**&+& ), -#.WXYZX +)>,*%&"I). F%* =D)*%,"=>C

*&

!"#$#%&' )"*+,-.",0 /!*!1&23 324

Reason: To inform and protect the

offended party that there will be a change

in favour of the accused

Note: It must be clarified though that not

all defects in an information are curable by

amendment prior to entry of plea. Aninformation which is void ab initiocannot

be amended to obviate a ground for

quashal. An amendment which operates tovest jurisdiction upon the trial court islikewise impermissible (Leviste v.Alameda, G.R. No. 182677, August 3,2010).

2. After the plea @ covers only formalamendmentprovided that:

a. Leave of court is obtained;

b. Such amendment is not prejudicial to

the rights of the accused.

Note: Doctrine of supervening event -

When a fact supervenes which changes

the nature of the crime charged in the

information or upgrades it to a higher

crime, in which case, amendment may be

made but there is a need for another

arraignment of the accused under the

amended information.

In People v. Degamo, G.R. No. 121211April 30, 2003, an amendment due to a

supervening event is considered only as a

formal amendment as it did not adversely

affect any substantial right of appellant.

Test for propriety of amendment after pleaThe test as to whether an amendment is only ofform and an accused is not prejudiced by suchamendment is:

1. Whether or not a defense under theinformation as it originally stood would beequally available after the amendment ismade, and

2. Whether or not any evidence which theaccused might have would be equallyapplicable to the information in one form asin the other;

! If the answer is in the affirmative, theamendment is one of form and not of

substance (Teehankee, Jr. v. Madayag,207 SCRA 135, 142 [1992]).

There can be a formal amendment after theaccused enters his plea

Example of Formal Amendment: Aninformation was filed against the accused. Thedesignated offense stated in the information

was for the crime of Homicide. However, theacts constituting the offense written in theinformation clearly depicts the crime ofmurder. The accused enters his plea of notguilty. Can the prosecutor amend thedesignation of the offense and change it toMurder?YES, because it merely involves a formalamendment. The averments in the amended

information for murder are exactly the same asthose already alleged in the originalinformation for homicide, as there was not atall any change in the act imputed to accused(Pacoy v. Cajigal, G.R. No. 157472,September 28, 2007).

General Rule: There can be NO substantialamendment in the information after theplea.

Reasons:1. It violates the right to be informed of

the nature and cause of the accusationagainst him as the accused should beinformed during his plea (People v.Openia, 98 Phil 698, March 26, 1956).

2. It violates the rule on double jeopardy

as the previous case shall be dismissed

and a subsequent information containing

the same, attempted, frustrated,

necessarily includes or necessarilyincluded offense shall be filed (People v.Labatete, G.R. No. L-12917, April 27,1960; Teehankee, Jr. v. Madayag, supra).

! In a substantial amendment, the case

involving the original information willbe dismissed because the averments

stated in the original information are

insufficient to prove the guilt of the

accused beyond reasonable doubt for

the proper crime.! If there is merely a formal amendment,

even without such amendment, the

guilt of the accused for the proper

crime can still be established. Thus,

there is no need for the dismissal of

the case in formal amendments.

Requisites for Double Jeopardy underSection 7, Rule 117:

A previous case must be filed and mustcontain the following:1. The complaint or information or other

formal charge was sufficient in form andsubstance to sustain a conviction and thecourt had jurisdiction;

2. The accused had been arraigned and theaccused had entered a valid plea; and

3. There was a final judgmentof conviction

8/10/2019 CRIM pro page 80-82

17/99

"#$ %&'# ()**&+& ), -#.WXYZX +)>,*%&"I). F%* =D)*%,"=>C

*'

!"#$#%&' )"*+,-.",0 /!*!1&23 324

or acquitted or the case was dismissedwithout his express consent;

4. Then a subsequent complaint orinformation is filed containing a crime thatis: (SAF-Nis-Nid)a. The same offense; orb. An attempt to commit the said offense;

orc. A frustration of the said offense; or

d. Any offense which necessarilyincludesthe first offense charged ore. Any offense which necessarily

includedthe first offense charged.

Example of Substantial Amendment No. 1:

The accused was charged with Robbery in an

Inhabited Place and then the accused entered

a plea of not guilty. During trial the prosecutor

moved to amendment acts constituting the

offense in the information by changing the

charge to Robbery in an Uninhabited Place.

The court dismissed the original case without

consent of the accused and the prosecutorfiled the amended information. Was thesubstantial amendment proper?NO, because it violated the rule on double

jeopardy as the new information contains thesame crime. The amendment requires achange in the defense and available evidenceof the accused. Also, the accused areprejudiced as they are exposed to a higherpenalty (People v. Montenegro, G.R. No. L-45772, Mar. 25, 1988;).

Exception:

A substantial amendment after arraignment isallowed if the same is beneficial to theaccused(Fronda-Baggao v. People, G.R. No.151785, December 10, 2007).

Reason: Sec. 14, Rule 110 was crafted to

enshrine the constitutional right to be informed

of the nature of charges and to be accorded

due process. The rule aims to protect the

accused from prejudicial machinations that

changes the game in the midstream. In case

the amendment benefited the accused, such

amendment did not prejudice him or deprive

him of defenses available before theamendment. Thus, the reason for the rule was

not violated when there is a beneficialsubstantial amendment (People v. Janairo,G.R. No. 129254, July 22, 1999).

Example of Substantial Amendment No. 2:

The accused was charged with Murder with

the qualifying aggravating circumstance of

treachery and entered a plea of not guilty.

During the trial, it was discovered that the

crime was only homicide. Can the prosecutorsubstantially amend the acts constitutingthe offense in the information so as tochange the crime to Homicide only?

YES. Though the amendment refers to the

acts constituting the offense, the changebenefitted the accused (People v. Janairo,supra).

Note: in the above problem, amending theinformation is not indispensable because,

under Sec. 4 Rule 120, the court can render

judgment to a lesser crime necessarily

included in the original crime alleged therein

and does not require a substantial amendment

of the information.

SUBSTITUTIONIf it appears at any time before judgmentthat amistake has been made in charging the properoffense, the court shall dismiss the originalcomplaint or information upon the filing of a

new one charging the proper offense, providedthe accused shall not be placed in doublejeopardy.

Example: A was charged with robbery andthen he entered a plea of not guilty. Duringtrial, the prosecutor moved to substitute theinformation for the crime of libel. Will thesubstitution prosper? Yes, because it does notviolate the rule of double jeopardy.

In substitution, the information containing thecharge of the wrong crime should be

dismissed.

Reason: Same as substantial amendmentafter plea; the allegations contained in theinformation are insufficient to establish theguilt of the accused due to the wrongful crimecharged therein.

Note:Section 14applies only to original caseand not to appealed case.

Limitation to the rule on substitution:1. No judgment has yet been rendered;

2. The accused cannot be convicted of theoffense charged or of any other offensenecessarily included therein;

3. The accused would not be placed indouble jeopardy.

AmendmentSubstitution ofInformation or

Complaint

Involves the same,attempted, frustrated,

Involves differentoffenses

8/10/2019 CRIM pro page 80-82

18/99

"#$ %&'# ()**&+& ), -#.WXYZX +)>,*%&"I). F%* =D)*%,"=>C

*(

!"#$#%&' )"*+,-.",0 /!*!1&23 324

necessarily includesor necessarilyincluded offense

May involve eitherformal or substantialchanges.

Involves substantialchange from theoriginal charge.

Amendment beforethe plea has been

entered can beeffected without leaveof court.

Substitution ofinformation must bewith leave of courtasthe originalinformation has to bedismissed.

Amendment is onlyas to form, there isNO need for anotherpreliminaryinvestigation and theretaking of the plea ofthe accused.

Another preliminaryinvestigation isentailed and theaccused has to pleadanew to the newinformation.

An amendedinformation refers to

the same offensecharged in theoriginal information orto an offense whichnecessarily includesor is necessarilyincluded in theoriginal charge,hence substantialamendments to theinformation after theplea has been takencannot be made over

the objection of theaccused, for if theoriginal informationwould be withdrawn,the accused couldinvoke double

jeopardy.

Requires orpresupposes that thenew informationinvolves a differentoffense which doesnot include or is notnecessarily includedin the original charge;hence the accusedcannot claim double

jeopardy.

Variance between Allegation and Proof(situations contemplated)

1. When the offense proved is less serious

than, and is necessarily included in, the

offense charged, in which case the

defendant shall be convicted of theoffense proved;2. When the offense proved is more serious

than and includes the offense charged, in

which case the defendant shall beconvicted of the offense charged;

3. When the offense proved is neither

included in, nor does it include, the offense

charged and is different therefrom, in

which case the court should dismiss theaction and order the filing of new

information charging the proper offense.

Note: The first and second situation is

discussed in Section 4, Rule 120. The third

situation set forth above is substitution ofinformation under Section 14, Rule 110.

SECTION 15. PLACE WHERE ACTION ISTO BE INSTITUTED

Venue is Jurisdictional as the court has no

jurisdiction to try an offense committed outsideits territorial jurisdiction. It cannot be waived,or changed by agreement of the parties, or bythe consent of the defendant.

Purpose: The court should not compel the

defendant to move to, and appear in a

different court from that of the province where

the crime was committed, as it would cause

him great inconvenience in looking for his

witnesses and other evidence in another place(Beltran v. Ramos, G.R. No. L-6410,November 24, 1954).

General Rule:Subject to existing laws, in all

criminal prosecutions, the action must be

instituted and tried in the courts of the

municipality or territory where the offense was

committed or any of its essential ingredientsoccurred (Sec 15(a), Rule 110) (Principle ofTerritoriality).

Exceptions:

1. Felonies under Art. 2 of the RevisedPenal Code@Shall be cognizable by the

proper court where the criminal action wasfirst filed (Section 15(d), Rule 110);

2. Where an offense is committed on arailroad train, in an aircraft, or in anyother public or private vehicle in thecourse of its trip @ The criminal action

may be instituted and tried in the court of

any municipality or territory where such

train, aircraft or other vehicle passed

during such trip, including the place ofdeparture and arrival (Section 15(b), Rule

110);3. Where an offense is committed on board

a vessel in the course of its voyage @

The criminal action may be instituted and

tried in the proper court of the first port of

entry or of any municipality or territory

through which the vessel passed during

such voyage subject to the generally

accepted principles of international law(Section 15(c), Rule 110);

4. Piracy@ The venue of piracy, unlike all

8/10/2019 CRIM pro page 80-82

19/99

"#$ %&'# ()**&+& ), -#.WXYZX +)>,*%&"I). F%* =D)*%,"=>C

*)

!"#$#%&' )"*+,-.",0 /!*!1&23 324

other crimes, has no territorial limits. Itmay be tried anywhere (People v. Lol-lo,G.R. No. 17958, February 27, 1922);

5. Libel@The action may be instituted at the

election of the offended or suing party in

the province or city:

a. Where the libelous article is printed

and first published;

b. If one of the offended parties is a

private individual, where said privateindividual actually resides at the time

of the commission of the offense;

c. If the offended party is a public official,

where the latter holds office at the

time of the commission of the offense.6. In exceptional circumstances @ To

ensure a fair trial and impartial inquiry. The

SC shall have the power to order a change

of venue or place of trial to avoidmiscarriage of justice (Section 5[4], ArticleVIII, 1987 Constitution);

7. In cases filed under B.P. 22 @ The

criminal action shall be filed in the place

where the check was dishonored or

issued. In case of a crossed-check, in the

place of the depositary or collecting bank.

SECTION 16. INTERVENTION OF THEOFFENDED PARTY IN CRIMINAL ACTION

General Rule: The offended party has the

right to intervene by counsel in the prosecution

of the criminal action, where the civil action for

recovery of civil liability is instituted in the

criminal action pursuant to Rule 111.

Exceptions:1. Where from the nature of the crime and

the law defining and punishing it, NO civil

liability arises in favor of the offended

party;

2. Where the offended party has waived his

right to civil indemnity;

3. Where the offended party has expressly

reserved his right to institute a separate

civil action; OR

4. Where the offended party has already

instituted said action.

SECTION 1. INSTITUTION OF CRIMINALAND CIVIL ACTIONS

General Rule: When a criminal action isinstituted, the civil action for the recovery ofcivil liability arising from the offense shall be

deemed instituted with the criminal action (Sec1(a), Rule 111).

Exceptions:1. When the offended party WAIVES the civil

action;2. When the offended party RESERVES his

right to institute a separate civil action;3. When the offended party INSTITUTES A

CIVIL ACTION PRIOR to the criminalaction.

When reservation shall be made:1. Before the prosecution starts to present its

evidence; and2. Under circumstances affording the

offended party a reasonable opportunity tomake such reservation.

Purpose: The same is intended to preventdouble recovery (Yakult Philippines v. CA,G.R. No. 91856, Oct. 05, 1990).

Instances where reservation to file the civilaction separately shall NOT be allowed:1. BP 22 cases (Rule 111, Sec. 1 par. b);2. Cases cognizable by the Sandiganbayan.

(Sec. 4 of PD 1606 as amended by RA8249);

3. Tax cases (Sec. 7 par. b no.1, RA 9282).

Note: ONLY the civil liability arising from thecrime charged (cause of action arising fromdelict)as a felony is now deemed instituted.

! Civil liability arising from other sources of

obligations (law, contract, quasi-contractand quasi delict) are no longer deemedinstituted like those under Article 32, 33,34 and 2176 of the Civil Code. Thus, in allsuch cases, the prosecution of civil actionmay be made independently, even withoutreservation.

! The appearance of the offended party inthe criminal case through a privateprosecutor may not per se be consideredeither as an implied election to have hisclaim for damages determined in saidproceedings or a waiver of his right to

have it determined separately (Sarmiento,Jr. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 122502,December 27, 2002).

! If the judgment did not provide for theaward of civil damages, the judge may becompelled by MANDAMUS (Lontoc v.Jarantilla, G.R. No. 80194, March 21,1989).

Rules on Filing Fees of Civil Actiondeemed instituted with the Criminal Action:1. NO filing fees are required for amounts of

/$3! 888 !7/),!#$%&)6 ): #&'&3

2#%&)6,

8/10/2019 CRIM pro page 80-82

20/99

"#$ %&'# ()**&+& ), -#.WXYZX +)>,*%&"I). F%* =D)*%,"=>C

!+

!"#$#%&' )"*+,-.",0 /!*!1&23 324

ACTUAL DAMAGES, except with respectto criminal actions for violation of BP 22,inwhich case, the offended party shall pay infull the filing fees based on the face valueof the check as the actual damages;

Reason for the exception of BP 22: Beforethe amendment of Section 1, Rule 111,instead of instituting civil actions which

require filing fees, the creditors opt to file acriminal action to recover the value of thecheck as it did not require any filling fee.The court eventually became the collectingagents of the creditors without chargingany fee. The court dockets were cloggedwith BP 22 cases. Thus, amendment toSection 1, Rule 111 (b) was established(Florenz D. Regalado, Remedial LawCompendium, Vol. II. 9th revised ed. pp.293-294).

2. If damages, other than actual (moral,exemplary and other damages), areSPECIFIED in the complaint orinformation, the corresponding filing feesshall be paid;

3. Where moral, exemplary and otherdamages are NOT SPECIFIED in thecomplaint or information (the grant andamount thereof are left to the sounddiscretion of the trial court), thecorresponding filing fees need not be paidand shall simply constitute a first lien onthe judgment awarding such damages.

Note: Counterclaims, cross-claims, third party

complaints are NOT allowed in a criminalproceeding. Any claim which could have beenthe subject thereof may be litigated in aseparate civil action.

Reasons:1. The counterclaim of the accused will

unnecessarily complicate and confuse thecriminal proceedings;

2. The trial court should confine itself to thecriminal aspect and the possible civilliability of the accused arising out of thecrime.

! In an appeal of a criminal case, theappellate court may impose additionaldamages or increase or decrease theamounts of damages upon the accused-appellant. HOWEVER, additional penaltiescannot be imposed upon a co-accusedwho did not appeal, but modifications ofthe judgment beneficial to him areconsidered in his favor.

! The offended party in a criminal case mayappeal the civil aspect despite the

acquittal of the accused. Where the trialcourt convicted the accused, butdismissed the civil action instituted therein,the offended party may appeal thedismissal to the CA.

Compromise on Civil Aspect:The offended party may compromise the civilaspect of a crime (Art. 2034, Civil Code),

provided that it must be entered before orduring the litigation, and not after finaljudgment. A compromise on the civil aspect isvalid even if it turns out to be unsatisfactorilyeither to one or both of the parties (Republic v.Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 108292, 108368,108548-549, 108550).

SECTION 2. WHEN SEPARATE CIVILACTION IS SUSPENDED

Primacy of Criminal Action over CivilAction1. After the filing of the criminal action, the

civil action which has been reservedCANNOT be instituted until final judgmenthas been rendered in the criminal action;

2. If the civil action is instituted BEFORE thefiling of the criminal action and the criminalaction is subsequently commenced, thepending civil action shall be suspendedin whatever stage it may be found untilfinal judgment in the criminal action hasbeen rendered.

Exceptions:1. In cases of independent civil actions

based upon Arts. 32, 33, 34 and 2176 ofthe Civil Code;

2. In cases where the civil action presents aprejudicial question;

3. In cases where the civil action isconsolidated with the criminal action; and,

4. Where the civil action is not one intendedto enforce the civil liability arising from theoffense.

Consolidation of Criminal and Civil CasesUnder the present rule, before judgment onthe merit is rendered in the civil action, the

same may, upon motion of the offended party,be consolidated with the criminal action in thecourt trying the criminal action. This is amodification of the rule on primacy of acriminal action over civil action.

! The consolidation must be effected in thecriminal court, irrespective of the nature ofthe offense, the amount of civil claim orthe rank of the court trying the civil case.

! In cases where the consolidation is givendue course, the evidence presented and

8/10/2019 CRIM pro page 80-82

21/99

"#$ %&'# ()**&+& ), -#.WXYZX +)>,*%&"I). F%* =D)*%,"=>C

!*

!"#$#%&' )"*+,-.",0 /!*!1&23 324

admitted in the civil case shall be deemedautomatically reproduced in the criminalaction without prejudice to admission ofadditional evidence and right to cross-examination.

! The consolidated criminal and civil casesshall be tried and decided jointly.

Note: Article 29 of the Civil Code merely

emphasizes that a civil action for damages isnot precluded by the acquittal of an accusedfor the same criminal act or omission. It doesnot state that the remedy can be availed ofonly in a separate civil action.

Acquittal in a Criminal Case does NOT BARthe filing of the Civil Case:

Note:Extinction of the penal action does notcarry with it the extinction of the civil action,unless the extinction proceeds from aDECLARATION IN A FINAL JUDGMENT thatthe fact from which the civil liability might arisedid not exist.

! The extinction of the civil liability refersexclusively to civil liability arising fromcrime (delict); whereas, the civil liability forthe same act arising from other sources ofobligation (law, contract, quasi-contract,quasi-delict)is not extinguished EVEN BY

A DECLARATION in the criminal case thatthe criminal act charged has not happenedor has not been committed by theaccused.

! Where the criminal case was dismissedbefore trial because the offended partyexecuted an affidavit of desistance, thecivil action thereof is similarly dismissed.

Enforcement of Employ$=:) 8*@*. A*/B*.*0CThe employer may not be held civilly liable forthe quasi-delict since it is not deemedinstituted with the criminal action. If at all, theonly civil liability of the employer would be hissubsidiary liability under the Revised PenalCode. Noteworthy is the fact that thesubsidiary liability established in Articles 102and 103 of the Revised Penal Code may be

enforced in the same criminal case by filing insaid criminal action a motion for executionagainst the person subsidiarily liable (Maniagov. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 104392, Feb.20, 1996).

Instances when the extinguishment of thecriminal liability RESULTS in theextinguishment of the civil liability1. The court declares that the accused was

innocent

2. The acts or omissions giving rise to thecivil liability in the criminal action does notexist

3. Death of the accused

Instances when the extinguishment of thecriminal liability DOES NOT RESULT in theextinguishment of the civil liability1. The acquittal is based on reasonable

doubt, if the civil case has been reserved;2. The decision contains a declaration thatthe liability of the accused is not criminalbut only civil in nature; and

3. The civil liability is not derived from orbased on the criminal act of which theaccused is acquitted (Sapiera v. Court ofAppeals, G.R. No. 128927, September 14,1999).

4. The statute declares that there can be nocriminal liability but only civil liability (e.g.

Article 332, RPC - theft, estafa ormalicious mischief committed by a familymember)

5. Article 11(4) RPC @ Justifyingcircumstance

6. Article 12(1,2,3,5,6) RPC @ Someexempting circumstances

SECTION 3. WHEN CIVIL ACTION MAYPROCEED INDEPENDENTLY

The institution of an independent civil actionagainst the offender under Articles 32, 33, 34and 2176 of the Civil Code may proceedindependently of the criminal case and at thesame time without suspension of either

proceeding. The independent civil actionrequires only a preponderance of evidenceand the offended party may be entitled only tothe bigger award when the awards made inthe cases vary (Ace Haulers Corp. v. CA, G.R.No. 127934, Aug. 23, 2000).

Recovery of civil liability under Articles 32, 33,34 and 2176 of the Civil Code arising from thesame act or omission may be prosecutedseparately EVEN WITHOUT ARESERVATION.

Reason: The enactment of Article 32, 33, 34and 2176 implies that the State has alreadymade a reservation in favor of the offendedparty

Purposes of Article 32, 33, 34 and 2176:1. To prevent subtle or indirect violation of

the constitutional rights due to the lack ofpenal laws as not all unconstitutional actsare punishable

2. The prosecutor may be afraid orincompetent to establish the guilt of the

8/10/2019 CRIM pro page 80-82

22/99

8/10/2019 CRIM pro page 80-82

23/99

"#$ %&'# ()**&+& ), -#.WXYZX +)>,*%&"I). F%* =D)*%,"=>C

!#

!"#$#%&' )"*+,-.",0 /!*!1&23 324

General Rule: Preliminary Investigation isREQUIRED to be conducted BEFORE thefiling of a complaint or information for anoffense where the penalty prescribed by law isat least 4 years,2 months and 1 day(PC Med)without regard to the fine.

Exception: There is NO right of preliminaryinvestigation under Section 7, Rule 112 (now

Sec 6 under the SC circular) when a person isLAWFULLY arrested without a warrantexceptin cases provided under Section 6, Rule 112.

Instances when Preliminary Investigationmay be asked by the Accused1. If a person is arrested, he can ask for a

preliminary investigation BEFORE thefiling of the complaint/information BUThe must sign a waiver in accordance withArticle 125, RPC;

2. AFTER the filing of theinformation/complaint, the accused may,within 5 days from the time he learns of itsfiling ask for preliminary investigation.

Purposes of Preliminary Investigation:1. For the investigating prosecutor to

determine if a crime has been committed(Mercado v. CA, G.R. No. 109036, July 5,1995);

2. To protect the accused from theinconvenience, expense and burden ofdefending himself in a formal trial unlessthe reasonable probability of his guilt shallhave been first ascertained in a fairlysummary proceeding by a competent

officer;3. To secure the innocent against hasty,

malicious and oppressive prosecution andto protect him from an open and publicaccusation of a crime, from the trouble,expenses and anxiety of a public trial(Rodis v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos.71404-09, October 26, 1988);

4. To protect the state from having toconduct useless and expensive trials(Tandoc v. Resultan, G.R. No. L-69210,July 5, 1989).

Preliminary Investigation: A PersonalStatutory RightThe right to preliminary investigation is apersonal right covered by statute and may bewaived expressly or by implication. It is notmerely procedural but a substantive rightincluded in the due process of law (Go v. CA,G.R. No. 101837, Feb. 11, 1992).

The right to preliminary investigation isdeemed WAIVED by:1. Failure to claim it before the accused

pleaded;2. His silence;3. Failure to request it within 5 days from the

time he learns of the filing of the complaintor information, in those instances wherethe accused is lawfully arrested without awarrant.

! Absence of preliminary investigation does

not affect the jurisdiction of the court orinvalidate the information if no objectionwas raised by the accused.

! If an objection was raised, the court,instead of dismissing the complaint orinformation, should order the fiscal toconduct it (Doromal v. Sandiganbayan,G.R. No. 85468, Sept. 07, 1989).

Remedies of the Accused if there was noPreliminary Investigation1. Refuse to enter a plea upon arraignment

and object to further proceedings upon

such ground;2. Insist on a preliminary investigation;3. File a certiorari, if refused;4. Raise lack of preliminary investigation as

error on appeal (US v. Banzuela, G.R. No.10172, 1915);

5. File for prohibition (Conde v. CFI, G.R. No.L-21236, October 1, 1923);

Note:As preliminary investigation is NOT partof the trial, the dismissal of the case by theinvestigator will not constitute double jeopardyand will not bar the filing of another complaintfor the same offense, but if re-filed, the

accused is entitled to another preliminaryinvestigation.

Due process of law demands that nosubstantial amendment of an information maybe admitted without conducting another or anew preliminary investigation (Matalam v.Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 165751, April 12,2005).

SECTION 2. OFFICERS AUTHORIZED TOCONDUCT PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION

Persons authorized to conduct aPreliminary Investigation:1. Provincial or city fiscal and their

assistants;2. National and regional state prosecutors;

and3. Such other officers as may be authorized

by law such as: the COMELEC,Ombudsman and PCGG.

Their authority to conduct preliminaryinvestigation shall include all crimes

8/10/2019 CRIM pro page 80-82

24/99

"#$ %&'# ()**&+& ), -#.WXYZX +)>,*%&"I). F%* =D)*%,"=>C

!$

!"#$#%&' )"*+,-.",0 /!*!1&23 324

4. Clarificatory Hearing (optional). It shallbe held within 10 days from submission ofcounter-affidavits or from the expiration of

the eriod of their submission.

1. Filing of the complaint accompanied bythe affidavits and supporting documents

which must be executed under oath.

2. Within 10 days after the f iling,

investigating officer shall either dismiss orissue subpoena

3. If subpoena is issued, respondent shallsubmit a counter-affidavit and other

supporting documents within 10 days fromrecei t thereof.

cognizable by the proper court in theirrespective territorial jurisdiction.

Regarding offenses falling within theOriginal Jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan

! Prosecutors conducting PI of offensesfalling within the original jurisdiction of theSandiganbayan shall, after theirconclusion, transmit the record and their

resolutions to the Ombudsman or hisdeputy for appropriate action.

! Moreover, the prosecutor cannot dismissthe complaint without the prior writtenauthority of the Ombudsman or his deputy,nor can the prosecutor file an informationwith the Sandiganbayan without beingdeputized by, and without prior writtenauthority of, the Ombudsman or hisdeputy.

Authority of COMELECThe 1987 Constitution mandates the

COMELEC not only to investigate but also toprosecute cases of violation of election laws.This authority is exclusive but it may deputizeother officials to conduct the investigation andthe prosecution (People v. Basilla, G.R. Nos.83938-40, Nov. 06, 19897).

Authority of the OmbudsmanThe power of the Ombudsman to makeinvestigation extends to any illegal act oromission of any public official, whether or notthe same is committed in relation to his office.This however does not include administrativecases of court personnel because the 1987

Constitution exclusively vests in the SupremeCourt administrative supervision over all courtsand court personnel (Maceda v. Vasquez,G.R. No. 102781, Apr. 22, 1993).

5>BDE)>/(:) Jurisdiction in PreliminaryInvestigation1. If the preliminary investigation shall be

conducted for a crime cognizable inSandiganbayan, the Ombudsman hasprimary jurisdiction. Thus, theOmbudsman can over take anypreliminary investigation being performed

in such manner2. If the preliminary investigation is

conducted for a crime cognizable in anycourt other than the Sandiganbayan, theOmbudsman only has concurrentjurisdiction. Thus, if the Department ofJustice is already performing thepreliminary investigation, the Ombudsmancannot take over the investigation.

3. If preliminary investigation is finished andthe case is filed in court, the Ombudsmannow has exclusive jurisdiction to

prosecute the case

The Ombudsman DOES NOT have thefollowing powers:1. To prosecute before the Sandiganbayan

any impeachable officers with any offensewhich carries with it the penalty of removalfrom office, or any penalty service of whichwould amount to removal from office

because by constitutional mandate, theycan only be removed from office onimpeachment for, and conviction of,culpable violation of the Constitution,treason, bribery, graft and corruption,other high crimes, or betrayal of publictrust.

2. To prosecute public officers or employeeswho have committed election offenses.

3. To file an information for an offensecognizable by the regular courts.

Authority of the PCGGThe PCGG has the power to investigate andprosecute such ill-gotten wealth cases offormer President Marcos, his relatives andassociates, and graft and corrupt practicescases that may be assigned by the Presidentto the PCGG to be filed with theSandiganbayan (Zaldivar v. Sandiganbayan,G.R. Nos. 79690-79707, April 27, 1988).

Effects of an incomplete PreliminaryInvestigation:1. It does not warrant the quashal of the

information.2. !% *$'+ "$% 266':% %&' :$0(%A+ >0(-+*-:%-$" $(

the validity of the information.

SECTION 3. PROCEDURE

Ten (10) Steps of the PreliminaryInvestigation.

8/10/2019 CRIM pro page 80-82

25/99

"#$ %&'# ()**&+& ), -#.WXYZX +)>,*%&"I). F%* =D)*%,"=>C

!%

!"#$#%&' )"*+,-.",0 /!*!1&23 324

5. Resolution of investigating prosecutorwithin 10 days after the investigation

6. If there isprobable cause to

hold respondent fortrial, prepare

resolution andinformation.

If no probablecause exists,

issuerecommendationof dismissal of

the case.

8. Aggrieved party from the decision of thesuperior officer may file a petition for review to

the DOJ

7. Within 5 days from resolution orrecommendation of dismissal, forward the recordof the case to (1) Provincial or city prosecutor; (2)Chief state prosecutor; or (3) Ombudsman or his

deputy, in cases cognizable by theSandiganbayan in the exercise of its original

jurisdiction. They shall act on the resolution orrecommendation of dismissal within 10 days fromtheir receipt thereof and shall immediately inform

the parties of such action.

9. Information is filed in court if there isprobable cause

10. The court will determine whether there isprobable cause for the issuance for the

warrant of arrest (not technically part of PI)

(Step 1 to 5,Section 3; Step 6 to 9 ,Section4; Step 10,Section 5)

! The complaint is required to be swornunder oath so that the complainant can be

held liable for perjury if the situation arose! If respondent cannot be subpoenaed, or if

subpoenaed but does not submit hiscounter-affidavit within 10 days, theinvestigating officer shall resolve thecomplaint based on the evidencepresented by the complainant.

Note: The respondent shall not be allowed tofile a motion to dismiss in lieu of a counter-affidavit. The respondent also has no right tocross-examine the witnesses which the

complainant may present since this is not partof the trial.

Rights of the respondent duringPreliminary Investigation (SENS-C

2R

2-BQ)

1. Right to speedy trial2. Right to be notified of the allegations

against him3. Right to examine the evidence presented

in the investigation4. Right to submit his own evidence5. Right to file counter-affidavit to controvert

the allegations against him6. Opportunity to be present in the

Clarificatory Hearing7. Right to file a motion for reinvestigation8. Right to file a Petition for Review9. Right to file a Motion to Quash10. Right to Post Bail

! The Rules do not require the presence ofthe respondent in the PreliminaryInvestigation, what is required is that he begiven the opportunity to controvert theevidence of the complainant by submittingcounter-affidavits (Mercado v. CA, G.R.No. 109036, July 5, 1995).

SECTION 4. RESOLUTION OFINVESTIGATING PROSECUTOR AND ITSREVIEW

If the investigating prosecutor finds cause tohold the respondent for trial, he shall preparethe resolution and information.

Note: He shall certify under oath in theinformation that:1. He or an authorized officer personally

examined the complainant and hiswitnesses;

2. There is reasonable ground to believe thata crime has been committed and theaccused is probably guilty thereof;

3. The accused was informed of thecomplaint and of the evidence against him;and

4. He was given an opportunity to submitcontroverting evidence.

! No complaint or information may be filedor dismissed by an investigatingprosecutor without the prior writtenauthority or approval of the provincial orcity prosecutor or chief state prosecutor orthe Ombudsman or his deputy.

Effects of Exclusion of other persons fromthe information:1. If during the trial, evidence is shown that

such persons should have been charged,

8/10/2019 CRIM pro page 80-82

26/99

"#$ %&'# ()**&+& ), -#.WXYZX +)>,*%&"I). F%* =D)*%,"=>C

!&

!"#$#%&' )"*+,-.",0 /!*!1&23 324

the fact that they were not included in theinformation does not relieve them ofcriminal liability, and they can besubsequently prosecuted.

2. The accused who has been charged withthe offense is not allowed to escapepunishment merely because it develops inthe course of the trial that there were otherguilty participants in the crime.

3. It does not vitiate the validity of theinformation. Neither is the same a groundfor a motion to quash.

Effect if the Information is filed bysomeone NOT authorized by lawThe court does not acquire jurisdiction. The2::0+'*A+ 62-10('to assert lack of authority onthe part of the prosecutor in filing theinformation does not constitute a waiverthereof.

Determination of Assistant Fiscal or StateProsecutorThe determination made by the assistant fiscalor state prosecutor in his resolution is at bestRECOMMENDATORY. Their findings may bereversed or modified by the provincial or cityfiscal.

Where the investigating prosecutorrecommends the dismissal of the case but hisfindings are reversed by the provincial or cityprosecutor on the ground that a probablecause exists, the provincial or city prosecutormay himself file or direct another assistantprosecutor to file the corresponding

information, WITHOUT need of anotherpreliminary investigation.

Appeal to the Secretary of Justice (DOJCircular No. 70 dated July 3, 2000)

An aggrieved party may appeal by filing averified petition for review with the Secretary ofJustice, and by furnishing copies thereof to theadverse party and the Prosecution Officeissuing the appealed resolution (Section 4).

The appeal shall be taken within 15 daysfrom

receipt of the resolution, or of the denial of themotion for reconsideration or reinvestigation ifone has been filed within 15 days from receiptof the assailed resolution. Only one motion forreconsideration shall be allowed (Sec. 3).

Unless the Secretary directs otherwise, theappeal shall NOT STAY the filing of thecorresponding information in court on thebasis of the finding of probable cause in theappealed resolution.

The appellant and the trial prosecutor shallsee to it that, pending resolution of the appeal,the proceedings in court are held in abeyance(Sec. 9).

Note: Par. 2, Sec. 9 of the said circular isdirected specifically at the appellant and thetrial prosecutor, giving them latitude inchoosing a remedy to ensure that the

proceedings in court are held in abeyance.However,nowhere in the said provision does it

state that the court must hold the proceedingsin abeyance. Therefore, the discretion of thecourt whether or not to suspend theproceedings or the implementation of thewarrant of arrest, upon the motion of theappellant or the trial prosecutor, remainsunhindered (Viudez II v. Court of Appeals,G.R. No. 152889, June 5, 2009).

The Secretary may:a. Order for the reinvestigation of the case

(Sec. 11);b. Reverse, Modify or Affirm the appealed

resolution(Sec. 12);c. Act on a Motion for Reconsideration (Sec.

13)

Note: In the case of Roberts, Jr. v. Court ofAppeals (G.R. No. 113930, March 5, 1996),the Supreme Court emphasized that Crespo v.Mogul (G.R. No. l-53373, June 30, 1987)-='('19 2*;-+'* %&' HEG %$, K2+ 62( 2+practicable, refrain from entertaining a petitionfor review or appeal from the action of thefiscal, when the complaint or information has

already been filed in C$0(%?A

8/10/2019 CRIM pro page 80-82

27/99

"#$ %&'# ()**&+& ), -#.WXYZX +)>,*%&"I). F%* =D)*%,"=>C

!'

!"#$#%&' )"*+,-.",0 /!*!1&23 324

shall be in the discretion of the courtwhether or not to grant the p