Rule 113  Arrest à  Warrantless arrest anytime for a

1.  Arrest – taking a person into custody in continuing offense like rebellion, subversion
order that he may be bound to answer for (Umil vs. Ramos)
the commission of some offense, made by an à The continuing crime, not the crime finally
actual restraint of the person or by his charged, needs only be the cause of the
submission to custody arrest (Umil vs. Ramos)

2.    General Rule: No person may be c.   When person to be arrested is an escaped
arrested without a warrant. detainee (either serving sentence or with
case pending)
à  Not all persons detained are arrested; only
those detained to answer for an offense. 1. When a person lawfully arrested
escapes
à  “Invitations” are not arrests and are 2. Bondsman, for purpose of surrendering
usually not unconstitutional, but in some the accused
cases may be taken as commands (Babst vs. 3. Accused attempts to leave country
NBI); however, the practice of issuing an without court permission
“invitation” to a person who is investigated
4.  Procedure
in connection with an offense he is suspected
to have committed is considered as placing
a.   With warrant
him under “custodial investigation.”  (RA
7438) 1. Complainant files application with
affidavits attached
à Warrants of arrest remain valid until arrest 2. Judge conducts ex parte preliminary
is effected, or the warrant is lifted examination to determine probable
cause
à Arrest may be made at any time of the day
or night à  In determining probable cause, judge
must:
3.  Warrantless arrests by a peace officer or
a private person (1)  Personally examine witness

a.   When person to be arrested is (2)  Witness must be under oath

committing, attempting or has committed an
offense (3)  Examination must be reduced to writing
(Luna vs. Plaza)
b.  When an offense has just been committed à  In determining probable cause, the judge
and the person making the arrest has may rely on findings by responsible officer
personal knowledge that the person to be (Lim vs. Felix)
arrested committed it
iii.   Judge issues warrant of arrest
à  If without preliminary examination, 1. Fiscal files info
considered irregular (Bagcal vs. Villaraza)
5.    Requisites for a warrant of arrest:
iv. If peace officer is unable to serve warrant
1. Probable cause
10 days after issuance, he must file a report
2. Signed by judge
and explanation with judge within 10 days
3. Specifically naming or particularly and
sufficiently describing person to be
v.  If warrant served
arrested
(1)  Person informed that he is being arrested à  John Doe warrants are void for being
general warrants (Pangandaman vs. Cesar)
(2)  Informed of cause of his arrest
6.  Remedies
(3)  Officer may break door or window if
admission to building is refused a.   Petition for writ of habeas corpus

(4) Person physically restrained à  Filed with any court, to effect immediate
release of the person detained
à  For private citizens making an arrest
à  Filed when a person is being illegally
à  May not do so except to do some service to detained (without judicial process), or was
humanity or justice illegally arrested (void warrant or unlawful
warrantless arrest, or warrantless arrest
(5)  No violence or unnecessary force may be beyond period with no information filed)
used
à  Habeas corpus is not allowed when:
(6)  Officer may summon assistance 1. The person is in custody of an officer
under process of law, and
(7)  Person who escapes after arrest may be 2. The court had jurisdiction to issue the
immediately pursued process (Luna vs. Plaza)
à  If an arrest is improper, the remedy is a
vi.        Person arrested is brought to nearest
motion for quashal of the warrant of arrest
police station or jail
and/or a motion to quash the information,
b.   Without warrant: not habeas corpus (Ilagan vs. Enrile)
à  Habeas corpus is no longer available after
1. Person is arrested an information has been filed, the
1. Person arrested may waive information being the judicial process
right to Art. 125, RPC and ask for required by law (Ilagan vs. Enrile)
preliminary investigation or à  Habeas corpus is proper when a person is
inquest being restrained illegally, e.g., imprisoned
à  Fiscal is not judicial authority past maximum penalty allowed by law
contemplated under Art. 125 (Sayo vs. Chief (Gumabon vs. Director of Prisons)
of Police)
b.   Quashal of warrant of arrest 1. Miranda rule:  the
accused must be informed
à  Filed with court which issued the warrant of his rights
of arrest when the warrant of arrest is fatally 1. To remain
flawed silent
2. Against self-
c.  Motion to quash information incrimination
3. To counsel
à  Filed with court when information against 4. Definition of
the person arrested has been filed custodial
investigation
à  Must be made in a “special appearance” questioned
before the court questioning only its lack of 1. It
jurisdiction over the person of the accused begins only
after arrest
à  Otherwise, the voluntary appearance of 2. Police
the person arrested by filing a motion before investigations
the court would be deemed a submission to prior to arrest
the authority of the court, thus granting it are not
whatever jurisdiction it lacked over the covered
person 3. The
rights may be
à  Any irregularity in the arrest is cured when waived, but
the petitioner submits himself to the the rights to
jurisdiction of the court, e.g., by filing for be informed
of these
bail (Bagcal vs. Villaraza)
rights, i.e., to
7.   V.V. Mendoza, “Rights to Counsel in
warning, may
Custodial Investigation”
not be waived
4. Warnin
à  Evolution of rights of the accused under
g must not
custodial investigation
only be said,
officer must
1. All involuntary confession were
make sure the
inadmissible; accused had to prove
person
involuntariness
arrested
1. Involuntary confessions were
understands
inadmissible only if they were
them
false
specifically
2. Revert to exclusionary rule: 
5. Present
any involuntary confession is
rules
inadmissible
1. V
oluntar
y
 confessi 2. Accused shall appear before court when
ons are required
admissi 3. Failure to appear despite notice to him
ble or the bondsman will waive his right to
2. T be present and trial shall proceed in
est of absentia
volunta 4. Bondsman shall surrender accused for
riness execution of judgment
determi à  Bail applies to all persons detained, not
ned on just to those charged with the offense
a case- (Herras vs. Teehankee)
to-case à  Court has power to prohibit person out on
basis
bail from leaving the country (Manotoc, Jr.
3. W
vs. CA)
aiver of
à  Bail implies delivery of the accused to the
rights
sureties who, though not holding him
must
not prisoner, may seize him and imprison him
only be until they can deliver him to court (US vs.
with Bonoan)
counsel 2.  General Rule: All persons are entitled to
but bail as a matter of right, except those
must be charged with capital offenses.
in à  Right to bail traditionally unavailable to
writing military personnel facing court martial, who
à  Confessions made without assistance of are not in the same class as civilians
counsel are inadmissible as evidence to (Comendador vs. de Villa)
incriminate the accused, but they may be à  Bail should be available regardless of other
used to impeach the credibility of the circumstances or the merits of the case, if
accused, or they may be treated as verbal the health or the life of the detainee is in
admission of the accused through the danger (Dela Rama vs. People’s Court)
testimony of the witnesses (People vs. Molas) à  Excessive bail is tantamount to denial of
Rule 114  Bail bail, which is unconstitutional (Dela Camara
1.  Bail – security given for the release of a vs. Enage)
person in custody of law, furnished by him or
a bondsman, conditioned upon his 3.  When bail is a matter of right
appearance before any court as required
under the following conditions: à  Before or after conviction by MTC, MCTC,
1. Undertaking effective upon approval MJC
and remains in force at all stages until
promulgation of judgment, unless sooner
à  Before conviction by the RTC of an offense
cancelled not punishable by death, reclusion
perpetua or life imprisonment
4.    When bail is discretionary (application 2. Judge sets hearing to determine
filed with court where case is pending) whether evidence of guilt is strong
à  Ex-parte hearing on bail is arbitrary and
1. Upon conviction by RTC of an offense unacceptable (Herras vs. Teehankee)
not punishable by death, reclusion 1. Prosecution presents evidence
perpetua or life imprisonment 1. Court may not force fiscal to
2. Provisional liberty under same circs. produce evidence (Herras vs.
but during period to appeal subject to Teehankee)
consent of bondsman 2. If evidence is strong, bail is
3. In case he has applied for probation denied
after final judgment, he may be allowed 1. Otherwise, judge sets
temporary liberty under his bail or bail and procedure for non-
recognizance capital offense is followed
à  In capital crimes, judge’s discretion is
5.  Procedure
limited to determining strength of evidence
and does not cover determining whether bail
a.    Offense charged is not capital:
should be allowed (Herras vs. Teehankee)
i.    Accused applies for bail à Evidence must be strong that the accused
is guilty of the capital offense charged, not
(1)  Where information against him was filed just of any offense (Bernardez vs. Valera)
or where case is pending 6.    Bail bond –   an obligation under seal
given by accused with one or more sureties
(2)  Absent (1), in another branch of the
and made payable to proper officer with the
same court within the province or city where
condition to be void upon performance by
he is held
the accused of such acts as he may legally be
required to perform
(3)  If arrested in another province, city or
municipality, file with the RTC
7.  Recognizance

(4)  Absent (3), with the MTC 1. Obligation of record entered into
before some court of magistrate duly
1. Judge sets bail
authorized to take it, with the condition
1. Accused may move to reduce
to do some particular act, the most usual
bail, and hearing will be set
condition in criminal cases being the
2. Accused posts bail and deposits
appearance of the accused for trial
the same with the
2. Does not require signature of accused
Municipal/City/Provincial
for trial
Treasurer or, if cash, with the
3. Does not require signature of accused
Collector of Internal Revenue
to be valid
3. Accused is released
8.  Prosecution witnesses may be required to
b.   Offense charged is capital: post bail to ensure their appearance at the
trial, except:
1. Accused petitions for bail 1. Substitution of info (see R110, §14)
 2. Court believes that material witness 3. Accused has applied for probation and
may not appear at the trial before the same has been resolved, but
NO BAIL was filed or accused is incapable
9.  When bail required under RA 6036  of filing one
(violation of ordinance, light felony, criminal 4. Youthful offender held for physical and
offense – not higher that 6 month mental examination, trial or appeal, if
imprisonment and/or P2000 fine, or both) unable to furnish bail

1. a.    Caught in flagrante 11. Cancellation of bail

2. Confessed to commission of offense
unless repudiated (force and a.   Upon application with the court and due
intimidation) notice to the fiscal
3. Previously escaped, evaded sentence or
jumped bail 1. Accused surrenders back to custody
4. Violation of Sec. 2 (fails to report to 1. Accused dies
clerk of court periodically under his
b.   Automatic cancellation
recognizance)
5. Recidivist, habitual delinquent
1. Case is dismissed
previously convicted for an offense to
1. Accused is acquitted
which the law or ordinance attaches an
2. Accused is convicted and
equal or greater penalty or for 2 or more
surrenders for execution of
offenses to which it attaches a lighter
judgment
penalty
6. Committed offense while on parole or 12. When bail cancelled or denied: after RTC
under conditional pardon
imposes imprisonment exceeding 6 years, but
7. Previously pardoned by municipal or
not more than 20 years, and:
city mayor for violation of ordinance for
at least 2 times 1. Accused is a recidivist, quasi-recidivist,
habitual delinquent or guilty of the
10.  Instances when accused may be released
aggravating circumstance of reiteration;
on recognizance:
2. Provisionally escaped, evaded
sentence, violated provisions of bail;
1. Offense charged is a violation of an
3. Committed offense while on probation,
ordinance, a light felony or criminal
parole, or conditional pardon;
offense the imposable penalty to which
4. Probability of flight; or
does not exceed 6 months and or P2000
5. Undue risk that during appeal, he may
fine
commit another crime
2. Person has been in custody for a period
equal to or more than the minimum of
13. When bail is forfeited
the imposable principal penalty, without
application of the Indeterminate a.   Accused fails to appear before court
Sentence Law or any modifying
when required
circumstance
à  30 days for bondsman to show cause why 7. Probability of accused appearing for
judgment should not be rendered against him trial;
8. Forfeiture of other bonds;
b.  Bondsman fails to produce him within 30 9. Fact that accused was a fugitive from
days justice when arrested; and
10. Pendency of other cases in which the
c.  Bondsman fails to satisfactorily explain to accused is under bond
the court why accused did not appear when
first required to do so 17.  Notes:

à  Sureties guarantee only appearance of the 1. Posting bail waives the right to
question any irregularity attending the
accused, not his conduct (US vs. Bonoan)
arrest of a person (Callanta vs.
à  Sureties exonerated if appearance made
Villanueva).  However, this does not
impossible by an act of God, the obligee or
result in waiver of the inadmissibility of
the law (US vs. Bonoan)
the articles seized incidentally to such
illegal arrest.
14. Provisional forfeiture
2. Accused waived the right to question
any irregularity in the conduct of the
1. Within 30 days, produce the body or
preliminary investigation when he failed
give reason for non-production AND
to do so before entering his plea (People
2. Explain satisfactorily the absence of
vs. Dela Cerna)
the accused when first required to
3. Accused out on bail may be re-arrested
appear
if he attempts to depart from the
15. Remedies Philippines without prior court
permission (warrantless arrest allowed).
1. Application for bail, when bail can be Rule 115  Rights of Accused
availed of as a matter of right
2. Petition for bail, when the offense 1.  Right of the accused under the Rules
charged is a capital offense
a.  To be presumed innocent until proven
à  For judge to set hearing for the guilty beyond reasonable doubt
determination of strength of evidence of
guilt à  In an appeal from a conviction, the
accused shall again be presumed innocent
16.  Circumstances to be considered in fixing until and unless his conviction is affirmed
amount of bail: (Castillo vs. Felix)

1. Financial ability of accused to give bail; b.   To be informed of the nature and cause
2. Nature and circumstances of offense; of charges
3. Penalty of offense charged;
4. Character and reputation of accused; à  The right must be substantially complied
5. Age and health of accused with; arraignment and later proceedings
6. Weight of evidence against accused
must be in a language the accused compel dismissal of the case, or to habeas
understands (People vs. Crisologo) corpus if he is detained

c.   To be present at every stage of i.    To have the right of appeal

proceedings, subject to waiver by bail
2.  Rights of the accused under the
à  If an accused escapes, he waives this right Constitution
and merits a trial in absentia;  the accused
forfeits his rights to be notified of a.   To due process
proceedings in the future and to adduce
b.   Against self-incrimination
evidence in his behalf (People vs. Salas)
1. To testify as witness on his own behalf,
à  Right is limited to testimonies; ocular
subject to cross-examination on matters
inspection of the body may be allowed
covered by direct examination; not to be
(Villaflor vs. Summers)
prejudiced by his silence
à  Being informed of rights means a
2. Not to be compelled to be a witness
against himself meaningful transmission of information,
3. To confront and examine the witnesses without which confession made by the
against him, including the right to use in accused is inadmissible (People vs. Nicandro)
evidence testimony of a witness à  Confessions obtained through coercion are
4. Who is deceased, out of or cannot with inadmissible (People vs. Opida)
due diligence be found in the RP à  Right against self-incrimination and to
1. Given in another proceeding counsel do not apply during custodial
2. With the same parties investigation (People vs. Ayson)
3. Same subject matter
4. Opportunity to cross-examine à  During trial, the right against self-
à  Prosecution has no privilege to withhold incrimination takes the following form:
the identity of informers when such informer
was crucial in the operation itself; failure to 1. Accused may refuse to testify
present the informer is a denial of the right 2. If he testifies, he may refuse to answer
those questions which may incriminate
to confront the witness which merits the
him in ANOTHER offense
reversal of the conviction (People vs.
Bagano)
c.  Against double jeopardy

g.   To have compulsory process to secure

d.  To be heard by himself and counsel
witnesses and evidence in his behalf
3.  Double jeopardy
h.   To have a speedy, impartial and public
trial 1. First jeopardy must have attached prior
to the first
à  Unreasonable postponements of trial 2. First jeopardy attached and terminated
amounts to a denial of the right to a speedy 3. Valid complaint or information
trial, entitling the accused to mandamus to
 1. Competent court with c.   Plea of guilty to a lesser offense without
jurisdiction the consent of the fiscal and the offended
2. Accused had pleaded party
3. Action ended in conviction,
acquittal or termination without 5.  Remedies
the consent of the accused
1. Motion to quash
c.       Offense charged in later case is: 2. Motion to dismiss

1. Same as that in previous case à  Both filed on the ground of violation of

1. Necessarily includes or is accused’s rights, thereby ousting the court of
included in the previous case jurisdiction
2. An attempt or frustration of the
offense in previous case 6.   NOTES:
1. An offense lesser than
that charged to which the à   Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 1
accused pleaded guilty with
the consent of the fiscal No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or
and the offended party property without due process of law, nor
shall any person be denied the equal
4.  Exceptions to double jeopardy protection of the laws.

1. The offense was made graver by

à   Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 14
supervening events
2. The facts constituting the graver 1. No person shall be held to answer for a
offense were only discovered after the criminal offense without due process of
filing of the earlier information law.
à  No double jeopardy if the new fact which 2. In all criminal prosecutions, the
justified the new charge arose only after accused shall be presumed innocent until
arraignment and conviction (People vs. City the contrary is proved, and shall enjoy
Court) the right to be informed of the nature
à  No double jeopardy where the trial was a and cause of the accusations against
sham since there was no competent court him, to have a speedy, impartial and
public trial, to meet the witnesses face
(Galman vs. Sandiganbayan)
to face, and to have compulsory process
à  No double jeopardy if first case was
to secure the attendance of witnesses
dismissed with consent of the accused (Caes
and the production of evidence in his
vs. IAC)
behalf.
à  There is double jeopardy if a person is
charged twice under different penal statutes However, after arraignment, trial may
for the same acts (People vs. Relova) proceed notwithstanding the absence of the
accused provided that he has been duly
notified and that his failure to appear is
unjustifiable.
à   Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 16 1. Accused given a copy of the
information, which is read to him in a
All persons shall have the right to a speedy language he understands
disposition of their cases before all judicial, 2. Accused is asked whether he pleads
quasi-judicial, or administrative bodies. guilty or not guilty
3. Accused files a motion to quash or
à   Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 17 makes plea
4. Accused personally makes his plea
No person shall be compelled to be a witness 5. Plea is entered into record
against himself. 6. If accused makes plea of not guilty,
counsel has at least 2 days to prepare for
à   Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 21 trial
à People vs. Agbayani – the right for 2 days
No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of
to prepare must be expressly demanded. 
punishment for the same offense.
Only when so demanded does denial thereof
constitute reversible error and ground for
If an act is punished by a law or ordinance,
new trial.  Further, such right may be
conviction or acquittal under either shall
waived, expressly or impliedly.
constitute a bar to another prosecution for
the same act.
à NOTE, HOWEVER, under SC Circular 38-98
(implementing “Speedy Trial Act of 1997”),
Rule 116  Arraignment and Plea
accused must be given at least 15 days to
1.  Procedure prepare for trial, which shall commence
within 30 days from receipt of Pre-Trial
1. Court informs accused of his right to Order.
counsel and asks him if he wants one
2. Court appoints counsel de oficio if j.    Case proceeds to pre-trial, trial or
accused has none hearing, depending on the plea

à  If no such member of the available, any à  Statement in the judgment that the
person who is a resident of the province, of accused was arraigned and pleaded is
good repute for probity and ability to defend sufficient; the manner of statement of such
accused fact is immaterial (People vs. Cariaga)

c.   Court gives counsel time to confer with 2.  Kinds of plea
accused at least an hour before arraignment
1. No plea – a plea of not guilty shall be
à  Period allowed for counsel de oficio to entered
confer with accused must be substantially 2. Conditional plea of guilt – a plea of not
complied with; if not, case may be remanded guilty shall be entered
for re-arraignment (People vs. Gonzaga) 3. Not guilty – case proceeds to trial or
pre-trial
 4. Guilty to a lesser offense – if fiscal and 1. Right to question illegality of the arrest
offended party consents, conviction 2. Right to question any irregularity in the
under offense charged for purposes of preliminary investigation
double jeopardy 3. Right to file a motion to quash
5. Info may be amended
1. Case goes to trial b.   Improvident plea of guilty may be
2. Even if info is not amended, changed to not guilty any time before
and even if lesser offense is not judgment is rendered
included in offense charged, court
may still find the accused guilty of c.   A plea of not guilty may not be changed
that lesser offense to guilty, as doing so would only spare the
prosecution of presenting evidence and still
e.   Guilty to a capital offense result in the conviction of the accused.

à  Court conducts searching inquiry to 4.  Remedies

determine if accused was aware of the
charges, of his plea, and its consequences a.   Motion for specification

à  Court requires prosecution to present à  May be filed any time before plea, even
evidence to prove guilt of accused and after a MTQ
determine his degree of culpability, and
accused may still establish presence of à  Filed when the information is insufficient
mitigating circumstances in his favor in form or is generally worded, that a Bill of
Particulars is necessary to clarify the acts for
f.    Guilty to a non-capital offense which the accused is being charged

à  Court receives evidence from the parties b.  Motion to quash

to determine penalty to impose
à  May be filed at anytime before plea is
à Plea of guilty not necessarily followed by entered
conviction.  Upon receipt of exculpatory
evidence (if accused pleaded guilty), trial à  Based on grounds provided by the rules
court should consider the plea withdrawn and
c.   Motion to suspend arraignment
in its place, order the plea of not guilty
à  Filed when the accused seems mentally
à Plea of guilty waives only defects which
unsound or if there is a prejudicial question
may be taken advantage of by motion to
in a pending civil case
quash or by plea in abatement; cannot cure
jurisdictional defects. d.   Motion to withdraw an improvident plea
of guilt
3.  Effects
à  May be filed at any time before judgment
a.   Entry of plea will waive
of conviction becomes final, when it can be
shown that the accused was not aware of the à  The court gained jurisdiction over the
significance of pleading guilty to the charges person of the accused when he voluntarily
appeared for the pre-suspension hearing
Rule 117  Motion to Quash (Layosa vs. Rodriguez)
1.     Motion to quash –   a hypothetical
admission that even if all the facts alleged c.   Accused would be put in double jeopardy
were true, the accused still cannot be
convicted due to other reasons à  Bars another prosecution

2.  When to file Motion to Quash à  No waiver

General Rule:  Before entering plea; all à  No double jeopardy if first case was
grounds not raised deemed waived dismissed with the consent of the accused
(Que vs. Cosico), unless ground for dismissal
Exception:  The following grounds may be is: (a) denial of right to speedy trial; or (b)
used in MTQ even after plea insufficiency of evidence.
1. No offense charged à  If the first case was dismissed due to a
2. Lack of jurisdiction over the offense deficient information, then there was no
charged valid information and there could be no
3. Extinction of the offense or of the double jeopardy (Caniza vs. People)
penalty
à  Cudia vs CA – it should be the Provincial
4. Double jeopardy
Prosecutor of Pampanga, not the City
Prosecutor, who should prepare informations
3.  Grounds
for offenses committed within Pampanga but
a.   Information does not conform to outside Angeles City.  An information must
prescribed form be prepared and presented by the
prosecuting attorney or someone authorized
à  For the info to charge a complex crime, it by law.  If not, the court does not acquire
is not necessary that it be defined by law, jurisdiction.  Although failure to file a motion
only that it alleges that one offense was to quash the information is a waiver of all
necessary to commit the other (People vs. objections to it insofar as formal objections
Alagao) to pleadings are concerned, questions
relating to want of jurisdiction may be raised
b.   Court has no jurisdiction
at any stage of the proceedings.  Moreover,
1. No territorial jurisdiction
since the complaint or information was
2. No jurisdiction  over  offense  charged  insufficient because it was so defective in
may  be  raised  at  any  time; no waiver form or substance that conviction upon it
considered even upon failure to move to could not have been sustained, its dismissal
quash on such ground without the consent of the accused cannot
3. No jurisdiction over person of the be pleaded as prior jeopardy, and will not be
accused a bar to a second prosecution.
d.   More than one offense was charged, the same ‘must exist as a matter of law, and
EXCEPT where law prescribes single may not be conferred by consent of the
punishment for various offenses parties or by estoppel’.  However, if the
lower court had jurisdiction, and the case
e.   Facts alleged do not constitute an was heard and decided upon a given theory,
offense such, for instance, as that the court had no
jurisdiction, the party who induced it to
à  May be raised at any time
adopt such theory will not be permitted, on
à  No waiver appeal, to assume an inconsistent position —
that the lower court had jurisdiction. Here,
à  For charge to be complete, it is necessary the principle of estoppel applies. The rule
to state that it was exempted from any that jurisdiction is conferred by law, and
amnesty existing at the time does not depend upon the will of the parties,
has no bearing thereon.
f.    Criminal action or liability has been
extinguished c.   Accused had pleaded

g.   Information contains allegations which, if d.   Conviction, acquittal, or dismissal or

true, would be a legal excuse or justification termination of case without consent of
accused
h.   Officer who filed the information had no
authority e.   Bar to offense charged, attempt to
commit the same or necessarily includes or is
à  Presentation of evidence cannot cure an necessarily included
invalid information (People vs. Asuncion)
NOTE:  Court will consider no other grounds à Conviction for physical injuries through
other than those raised, EXCEPT lack of reckless imprudence constitutes double
jurisdiction over offense charged. jeopardy to the charge of damage to
property through reckless imprudence.
4.  Requisites of Double jeopardy
5.  Procedure
a.  Valid information or complaint, sufficient
in form and substance 1. MTQ filed
2. If based on defect in info which can be
b.   Before court of competent jurisdiction cured, court shall order its amendment
3. Quashing the info shall NOT be a bar to
à  Doctrine of “Jurisdiction by Estoppel”: subsequent prosecution (accused has not
depends upon whether the lower court pleaded yet), EXCEPT when the ground
actually had jurisdiction or not. If it had no is:
jurisdiction, but the case was tried and 1. Double jeopardy OR
decided upon the theory that it had 2. Extinction of criminal liability
jurisdiction, the parties are not barred on
6.  Remedies
appeal, from assailing such jurisdiction, for
 1. Motion to dismiss – if certain grounds 2.  Stipulation of facts
were not raised or denied in a MTQ
2. Trial à  Facts which both parties and respective
counsels agree on as evidenced by their
à  If there was really no basis for the info, signatures; these facts need not be proved by
then such could be proved in the trial evidence in trial

à  Upon denial of a MTQ, the proper remedy à  Stipulation is inadmissible if unsigned by

is to go on trial and later to appeal, if either accused or counsel; a later memo of
necessary; mandamus or certiorari will only confirmation, signed only by counsel, cannot
be granted if there is not other plain, simple cure defect (Fule vs. CA)
and adequate remedy
7.  Failure to move to quash or to allege any 3.  Pre-trial order – binds the parties, limits
ground therefor deemed a waiver of such the trial to matters not yet disposed of, and
grounds, except: controls the course of action during the trial
1. Failure to charge an offense
2. Lack of jurisdiction over the offense 4.  Procedure
charged
3. Extinction of the offense or of the 1. Judge must calendar pre-trial
penalty 2. Either party may waive the pre-trial
4. Double jeopardy 3. If court appoints counsel de oficio,
counsel has at least 2 days to prepare
Rule 118  Pre-Trial
4. In the pre-trial conference
1.  Plea bargaining –   process whereby the
5. Plea bargaining
accused and the prosecution in a criminal
6. Stipulation of facts
case work out a mutually satisfactory
7. Marking of evidence (does not imply
disposition of the case subject to court conceding to its admissibility or
approval.  It usually involves the defendant’s credibility)
pleading guilty to a lesser offense or to only 8. Waiver of objections to admissibility of
some of the counts of a multi-count evidence
indictment in return for a lighter sentence 9. Other matters which will promote a fair
than that for the greater charge. and expeditious trial

à  Under “Speedy Trial Act of 1997”, in all e.   Judge issues pre-trial order
criminal cases cognizable by the MTC, MCTC,
MeTC, RTC and Sandiganbayan, pretrial is Rule 119  Trial
mandatory.
1.  In trial, the defense tries
à  Under SC Circular 38-98, implementing the
1. To assail the admissibility of evidence
“Speedy Trial Act of 1997”, an accused may which prove the elements of the offense
plea guilty to a lesser offense only if said charged
offense is necessarily included in the offense 2. To assail the credibility of such
charged. evidence
 3. To prove another version, possibly 3. Defense may, with or without leave of
admitting certain evidence of the court, file a demurrer to evidence
prosecution and adding other evidence 4. Defense presents evidence
to cast reasonable doubt 5. Defense rests
à  Even in summary procedure, the judge 6. Prosecution presents rebuttal evidence
cannot base his decision simply on affidavits; 7. Defense presents rebuttal evidence
he must give the defendant the chance to 8. Trial is closed; case is submitted for
cross-examine (Combate vs. San Jose) judgment

2.  Procedure 3.  When mistake made in charging proper

offense
a.   Parties notified of date of trial 2 days
1. If Accused cannot be convicted of
before trial date (R119, §1)
offense charged or offense necessarily
à HOWEVER, under SC Circular 38-98, included therein
accused must be given at least 15 days to 2. Accused detained, not discharged
3. Original case dismissed upon filing of
prepare for trial, which shall commence
proper information
within 30 days from receipt of Pre-Trial
à  Example: Charged with theft.  At trial,
Order.
appears that offense is estafa.  The
1. Accused may move that his witnesses prosecution can ask for the dismissal of the
be examined info in order to file a new one for estafa.  No
2. Defense witnesses examined by any Double Jeopardy because no valid info in the
judge or lawyer first case.
3. Prosecution witnesses, if they would be
unable to attend trial, may be examined 4.  Application for examination of witnesses
by the judge handling the case for accused before trial
4. Trial continues from day to day, unless
postponed for a just cause 1. Sick or infirm; unable to attend trial
5. Prosecution presents evidence 2. Resides more than 100 km. from means
of trial; no means to attend
à  Presentation
5.    Application (prosecution)
à  Testimonies: direct examination
1. Sick or infirm
à  Cross-examination 2. Has to leave the RP with indefinite date
of returning
à  Re-cross
6.  Requisites for postponement due to
à  Offer absence of a witness

1. Accused may move for discharge 1. Witness is really material and appears
2. Prosecution rests to the court to be so
 2. Party who applies for postponement à  Court allowed consolidation of rape cases
has not been guilty of neglect substantially committed in the same manner
3. Witness can be had at the time to (People vs. David)
which the trial has been deferred
4. No similar evidence could be obtained c.   Motion for continuance – filed to
postpone trial for just cause
7.  Requisites to discharge of an accused as
State Witness d.   Motion to exclude public

1. Testimony of accused absolutely à  Excluding parties, counsels and court

needed personnel
2. No other direct evidence available
EXCEPT his testimony à  May also be ordered by court motu proprio
3. Testimony can be corroborated on
material points e.  Motion for discharge
4. Accused does not appear to be most
guilty à  Filed before the prosecution rests
5. Accused has never been convicted of
offense involving moral turpitude à  Hearing to determine existence of
à  Discharge of accused, when not all the requisites for discharge
requisites were met, cannot be revoked as
à  Prosecution will present evidence and the
long as he testified according to what was
sworn statement of the proposed state
expected of him (People vs. Aninon)
witness
8.  Remedies
à  Evidence adduced in this said hearing
a.   Motion for separate trials automatically form part of trial; however, if
court denies motion for discharge, his sworn
à  Filed by the fiscal to try several accused statement shall be inadmissible in evidence.
separately
à  Discharge of the accused has the effect of
à  Granted at the court’s discretion acquittal, unless accused fails or refuses to
testify against his co-accused in accordance
à  May also be ordered by the court motu
with his statement (which formed the basis
proprio for his discharge)

b.   Motion to consolidate

f.    Demurrer to evidence

à  Upon the court’s discretion, separate à  May be made after the prosecution rests
charges may be tried in one single case if the
its case
offenses charged arise form the same facts or
form part of a series of similar offenses à  If the court finds the prosecution’s
evidence insufficient, the case will be
dismissed
à  Otherwise, if demurrer denied 2. A lesser offense necessarily included in
the offense charged
1. If the demurrer was made with leave of à  Accused cannot be convicted for an
court, defense gets to present evidence offense graver than that charged (People vs.
2. If the demurrer was made without Guevarra)
leave of court, defense is deemed to
have waived the right to present 4.  Contents
evidence and the case is submitted for
judgment 1. Written in official language
à  Case may also be dismissed motu proprio 2. Personally prepared and signed by the
judge
g.   Motion to reopen 3. Contains facts proved
4. Contains law upon which judgment is
à  Filed after the case is submitted for based
judgment but before judgment is actually à  In case of conviction, judgment must
rendered state:
1. Legal qualification of offense and
à  To allow either side to present additional aggravating and mitigating
evidence, if such could not be found before circumstances
2. Level of participation
à  Granted on discretion of the judge 3. Penalty imposed
4. Civil liability for damages, unless right
à  The accused cannot move to reopen the
to separate civil action has been
case to allow him to adduce evidence in his reserved
behalf when his failure to adduce them à  In case of acquittal, judgment must state:
during the trial was his own fault (People vs. 1. Civil liability for damages, unless acts
Cruz) alleged clearly did not exist
Rule 120  Judgment 2. Basis of liability
1.  Judgment – adjudication by the court that
the accused is guilty or not guilty of the 5.  Procedure
offense charged, and the imposition of the
1. Judge reads judgment in presence of
proper penalty and civil liability provided by
accused
law on the accused
2. If judgment is of acquittal
3. It becomes final and executory
2.  General Rule:  If the accused is found not
4. It bars subsequent prosecution for the
guilty, he will be acquitted and the acquittal
same offense
immediately becomes final and executory.  If
the accused is found guilty, penalty and civil c.   If judgment is of conviction, remedy is to
liability will be imposed on him. file:

3.  Accused may be convicted of 1. Motion for reconsideration

2. Motion for new trial
1. The offense charged 3. Notice of appeal
à  Or else, judgment becomes final and is à  Notice should be given to the fiscal
entered in the book of Judgments
c.  Motion for new trial
6.    When judgment in a criminal case
becomes final: à  Notice should be given to the fiscal

1. After lapse of period for perfecting an à  Filed on the following grounds:

appeal; or
1. Error of law or irregularities have been
2. When sentence partially or totally
made during trial which are prejudicial
satisfied or served; or
to the substantial rights of the accused
3. Accused has expressly waived in writing
his right to appeal, EXCEPT in cases of
ii. New evidence has been found which could
automatic review where death penalty is
not have been found before and which could
imposed
4. Accused has applied for probation change the judgment

7.   Only a judgment in conviction can be 9.  Procedure for new trial

modified or set aside
1. Hearing shall be set and held
2. All evidence not alleged to be in error
1. Before judgment had been final
shall stand
(otherwise double jeopardy);
3. New evidence will be introduced
2. Before appeal had been perfected; or
4. Old judgment may be set aside and a
3. To correct clerical errors in the
new one rendered
judgment
10. Notes:
8.  Remedies à Suspension of sentence for youthful
offenders – after conviction, minor is
a.   Appeal committed to custody and care of DSWD or
any training institution until reaches 21 years
à  Filed within 15 days of promulgation of
of age, or a shorter period
judgment
à Probation –   disposition under which a
defendant after conviction and sentences, is
à  Period is interrupted by filing of a motion
released subject to conditions imposed by
for new trial or reconsideration
the court and to the supervision of a
à  On motion of accused or at its own probation officer
instance with consent of the accused à Parole – the conditional release of an
offender from a penal or correctional
b.   Motion for reconsideration institution after he has served the minimum
period of his prison sentence under the
à  Filed when there are errors of law or fact continued custody of the state and under
in the judgment conditions that permit his reincarceration if
he violated the conditions of his release
à  Shall require no further proceedings
Rule 121  New Trial or Reconsideration
1.  Reopening of the case asked to reopen the case for further
proceedings, but to reconsider its findings or
1. Made by the court before judgment is conclusions of law and make them
rendered in the exercise of sound
conformable to the law applicable to the
discretion
case on the judgment the court has to render
2. Does not require consent of accused
anew.
3. May be made at the instance of either
party who can thereafter present
5.   New Trial vs. Modification of Judgment
additional evidence
à  In New Trial, irregularities are expunged
2.  Motion for new trial
from the record and/or new evidence is
1. Filed after judgment is rendered but introduced.  In modification of judgment, no
before the finality thereof new hearings or proceedings of any kind or
2. At the instance or with the consent of change in the record or evidence.  A simple
the accused modification is made on the basis of what is
3. The prosecution can move only for the on the record.
reconsideration of the judgment but
cannot present additional evidence 6.   New Trial vs. Reopening of the Case

3.    Motion for New Trial is denied if: à  New trial presupposes that existence of a
judgment to be set aside upon the granting
1. Only impeaching evidence is sought to of a new trial
be introduced as the court had already
passed upon issue of credibility à  In reopening, no judgment has yet been
2. Only corroborative evidence is offered rendered, although the hearing may have
3. Prisoner admits commission of crime already been closed
with which accused is charged (facility
with which such confession can be 7.  Motion for Reconsideration
obtained and fabricated)
4. Alleged new evidence is inherently à  Grounds are errors of law or fact in
improbable and could easily be judgment, which require no further
concocted proceedings.
5. Alleged new evidence consists of
recantations of prosecution witness, due 8.  Effects of Granting Motion for New Trial
to unreliability of such recantations, or Reconsideration
EXCEPT if no other evidence to sustain
conviction aside from recanted a.   Based on error of law or irregularities
testimony during trial:

4.  New Trial vs. Reconsideration à  Proceedings and evidence not affected by
irregularities stand, and those affected are
à  Motion for recon is based on the grounds of
set aside.  Court may allow introduction of
errors of law in the judgment is court is not
new evidence
b.   Based on newly discovered evidence: à  If death penalty, automatic review

à Evidence already taken shall stand; new iii.   Withdrawal of appeal

evidence taken with the old
à  May be made at any time before judgment
Rule 122  Appeal on the appeal is rendered

1.  Procedure à  Lower court judgment becomes final

a.   Filed with RTC, if original case was with à  Case remanded for execution of judgment
MTC
à Once notice of appeal is filed, cannot be
à  Notice served to lower court and to validly withdrawn to give way for a Motion
adverse party for Recon or a Motion for New Trial, since
the filing of the notice perfected the appeal,
b.   Filed with the CA or SC, if original case and the trial court loses its power to modify
was with RTC or set aside the judgment.  The only valid
withdrawal of an appeal is where the
i.    With CA: notice of appeal with court,
accused decides to serve his sentence.
and with copy on adverse party
2.  Effect of appeal by any of several accused
à  If CA is of opinion that penalty should
be reclusion perpetua or higher, it shall 1. Shall not affect those who did not
render judgment imposing said penalty, but appeal, EXCEPT if favorable and
refrain from entering judgment and then applicable to them
certify the case and the entire record 2. Civil appeal by offended party shall not
thereof to the SC for review (R124, §13) affect criminal aspect of judgment
3. Execution of judgment on appellant
à  CA may reverse, affirm, or modify will be stayed upon perfection of appeal
judgment of RTC, or remand case for new
trial or re-trial, or dismiss the case 3.  When appeal by prosecution from order of
dismissal of criminal case will not result in
à  If RTC decided case in appellate double jeopardy
jurisdiction:  Petition for Review
1. Dismissal made upon motion or with
ii.    With SC: notice of appeal where penalty express consent of the accused
imposed is life imprisonment, or lesser 2. Dismissal  is  not  an  acquittal nor
penalty involving offenses committed on the based upon consideration of the
evidence or merits of the case
same occasion, or arising out of same
3. Question to be passed upon by the
occurrence where graver penalty of death is
appellate court is purely legal so that if
available but life imprisonment is imposed;
the dismissal is found incorrect, the case
all other cases, by petition for review on
has to be remanded to the court of
certiorari
 origin to determine the guilt or 2. General Rule: No search or seizure can be
innocence of the accused conducted unless it is authorized by a search
4.  When serving sentence, remedy is to warrant. Evidence gathered from an illegal
petition for habeas corpus search and seizure is inadmissible.
1. Filed when the law under which the
accused was convicted is repealed or à  Warrantless searches are illegal,
declared unconstitutional unreasonable and unconstitutional (Alvarez
2. When a later judgment is rendered vs. CFI)
acquitting others for similar à  It is not the police action which is
circumstances impermissible, but the procedure and
unreasonable character by which it is
à  Otherwise, equal protection is violated
exercised (Guazon vs. de Villa)
1. When penalty is lowered and convict à  Court gains jurisdiction over items seized
has already served more than the by a valid search warrant and returned to it,
maximum period of the new penalty and such is not an unconstitutional
à  Habeas corpus is available when a person deprivation of property (Villanueva vs.
is imprisoned beyond the maximum penalty Querubin)
imposed by law (Gumabon vs. Dir. of Prisons) à  Evidence from an illegal search may be
NOTE: When dismissal is used as evidence, if no objection is raised
capricious, certiorari lies and no double (Stonehill vs. Diokno)
jeopardy since validity and not correctness of
dismissal is being challenged. à  Right against unreasonable search and
Rule 126  Search and Seizure seizure may be waived, but for the waiver to
1.   Search warrant – an order in writing be effective:
issued in the name of the People of the
1. The right must exist
Philippines, signed by a judge and directed
2. Person must be aware of the right
to a peace officer, commanding him to 3. Person clearly shows the intent to
search for personal property described relinquish such right
therein and bring it before the court à  No waiver against unreasonable search and
à  Cannot be issued to look for evidence (Uy seizure when one compromises the criminal
Khetin vs. Villareal) proceedings (Alvarez vs. CFI)
à  Seizing objects to be used as evidence is à  There is no waiver of right when evidence
equivalent to forcing one to be a witness of coercion is present (Roan vs. Gonzales)
against himself (Uy Khetin vs. Villareal)
à  For a warrant to be valid, it must meet the 3.  Requisites of a valid search warrant
requirements set by law (Burgos vs. Chief of
Staff) a.   Issued upon probable cause
à  Tapping conversations is equivalent to a
à  Probable cause – such facts and
search and seizure (US vs. Katz)
circumstances which would lead a reasonably
prudent man to believe that a crime has
been committed and the thing to be h.   Indicates time, if to be served at night
searched for and seized is in the place to be
searched 4.  When a search warrant may be said to
particularly describe the thing to be seized
b.   Probable cause is personally determined
by the issuing judge 1. Description is as specific as
circumstances allow
à  Hence, signed by him 2. Expresses a conclusion of fact by which
the warrant officer may be guided
à  By any RTC, to be served anywhere in the 3. Things described are limited to those
country, for an offense which occurred which bear a direct relation to the
anywhere in the country (Malaloan vs. CA) offense for which the warrant is issued

c.   Issuing judge personally examined, in the 5.  Procedure

form of searching questions, the appellant
a.   Complainant files application, attaches
and his witness and took down their written
affidavits
depositions
à  Oath requires that the person taking it
d.   Search warrant particularly describes or
personally knows the facts of the case
identifies the property to be seized
(People vs. Sy Juco)
à  Property which men may lawfully possess à  Affidavits submitted must state that the
may not be the object of a search warrant premises is occupied by the person against
(Uy Khetin vs. Villareal) whom the warrant is issued, that the objects
à  Nature of goods may allow description to to be seized are fruits or means of
be general or not too technical (Alvarez vs. committing a crime, and that they belong to
CFI) the same person, thus, not affecting third
persons (People vs. Sy Juco)
e.   Particularly describes the place to be à  When complainant’s knowledge is hearsay,
searched affidavits of witnesses are necessary (Alvarez
vs. CFI)
f.    It shall issue only for one specific offense b.   Judge conducts ex parte preliminary
examination of complainant and witnesses
à  Otherwise, cannot be said to have issued
under oath to determine probable cause
upon probable cause (Asian Surety vs.
à  Judge must ask probing questions, not just
Herrera)
repeat facts in the affidavit (Roan vs.
à  Absence of specific offense makes
Gonzales)
impossible determination of probable cause
(Stonehill vs. Diokno) c.   Judge issues search warrant good for 10
days
g.   Was not issued for more than 10 days
prior to a search made pursuant thereto d.   Peace officer in presence of occupant,
(search warrant becomes void after 10 days) members of the family OR 2 witnesses of
sufficient age and discretion residing in the iii.   Subject in an offense which is mala
same locality prohibita cannot be summarily seized (Roan
vs. Gonzales)
à  Search may last for more than a day as
long as it is part of the same search for the iv.  May extend beyond arrestee to include
same purpose and of the same place (Uy premises and surrounding under his
Khetin vs. Villareal) immediate control

e.   Peace officer leaves receipt with 1. Border searches (customs, mail and
occupant at place searched airport)
2. Vessels and aircrafts for violation of
f.    Peace officer files return of search Tariff and Customs Code, EXCEPT
warrant and inventory, and surrenders items dwelling houses
seized to receiving court (not necessarily 3. Plain view
court which issued the warrant) 4. Moving vehicle
5. Hot pursuit
à  Items seized illegally must remain 6. Stop-and-frisk, reasonable check-points
in custodia legis pending resolution of the 7. Private searches with no state action
case (Roan vs. Gonzales) (People vs. Marti)
8. Inspection of building and premises for
6.  Remedies from an unlawful search enforcement of fire, sanitary and
building regulations
1. MTQ the warrant
2. Motion to suppress as evidence the 8.  Person making the arrest may take from
objects illegally taken the arrestee
3. Return of property illegally seized
1. Properties used in the commission of
7.  When a search may be validly conducted the crime
without a warrant 2. Fruits or proceeds thereof
3. Property which may furnish the
1. Without consent of person searched arrestee with a weapon against the
2. When the search is incident to a lawful arresting person
arrest 4. Property which may be used as
3. Personal knowledge of the arresting evidence at the trial
person (Posadas vs. CA) 9.   NOTES:
4. Limited to:
à   Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 2
(1)  Immediate time of arrest
The right of the people to be secure in their
(2)  Immediate vicinity of the arrest persons, papers, houses and effects against
unreasonable searches and seizures of
(3)  Weapons and things which may be used
whatever nature and for any purpose shall be
as proof of offense charged (Nolasco vs.
inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant
Pano)
of arrest shall issue except upon probable
cause to be determined personally by the
judge after examination under oath or
affirmation of the complainant and the
witnesses he may produce, and particularly
describing the place to be searched and the
persons or things to be seized.

à   Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 3

1. The privacy of communication and

correspondence shall be inviolable
except upon lawful order of the court, or
when public safety or order requires
otherwise as prescribed by law.
2. Any evidence obtained in violation of
this or the preceding section shall be
inadmissible for any purpose in the
proceeding.
Rule 127  Provisional Remedies in Criminal
Cases

1.   Attachment as provisional remedy in

criminal cases

1. Accused is about to abscond from RP

2. Criminal action is based on a claim for
money or property embezzled or
fraudulently misapplied or converted to
the use of the accused who is a public
officer, or any officer of a corporation,
or an attorney, factor, broker, agent or
clerk in a fiduciary capacity, in willful
violation of duty
3. Accused has concealed, removed or
disposed of his property, or is about to
do so
4. Accused resides outside the RP