XXVII.

RULE 39 - EXECUTION AND SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENTS

A. Kinds of Execution

1. Matter of right, ministerial (S-1): execution shall be issue as a

matter of right on motion, upon a judgement or order that disposes
of the action or proceeding upon the expiration of the period
therefrom if no appeal has been duly perfected.

If the appeal has been duly perfected and finally resolved, the
execution may forthwith be applied for in the court of origin,
on motion of the judgment obligee, submitting therewith certified
true copies of the judgement or jdugemnts or final order or orders
sought to be enforce and of the entry thereof, with notice to the
adverse party.

Requisites:
1. prevailing party must file a motion for execution with the court
of origin with notice to the adverse party.
2. upon rendition of jugement or order that completely disposes of
the action or proceeding,
3. no motion for reconsideration, new trial, or appeal of the
judgement or final order if filed within the reglementary period

GR: execution shall be issue as a matter of right on the party of the

prevailing party once the judgement becomes final and executory

XPN:
1. judgement turn out to be incomplete or conditional
2. judgement novated by subsequent agreement of the paties
3. equitable grounds like a change in situation of the parties which
makes execution inequitable
4. execution is enjoined
5. judgement has become dormant

2. Discretionary (S-2): court on its discretion, may order execution

of a judgment or final order even before the expiration of the
period of appeal.
 this is by motion of the prevailing party with notitice to adverse
partywhile it has jurisdiction over the case, in possession of the
original record or record n appeal.

a. stay of discretionary execution (S-3): a party against whom

an execution is directed, may file a sufficient supersedeas
bond to stay discretionary execution

Supersedeas bond: a bond executed by a party against

whom the execution was issued in favor of the prevailing
party conditioned upon the performance of the judgement
or order allowed to be executed in case it shall be finally
sustained in whole or in party by the appellate court

b. judgments not stayed by appeal (S-4):

Cases on execution pending appeal:
Banes vs. Banes, 374 SCRA 340
Santos vs. COMELEC, 399 SCRA 611
FEBTC vs. Toh, 404 SCRA- GOOD REASON: old
age
Stronghold Insurance vs. Felix, 508 SCRA
Abenion vs. Shell Petroleum, 816 SCRA (2017)
Ocampo vs. Enriquez, 835 SCRA484 (2017)

B. Mode of Execution
1. By motion (S-6)
Villareal vs. MWSS, 857 SCRA 162
RCBC vs. Sera, 701 SCRA 124
2. By independent action (S-6)
Davis vs. Davis, 858 SCRA 145
Panotes vs. Townhouse Dev. Corp., 512 SCRA

C. Manner of Execution
1. when party is dead (S-7)
2. when judgment is for money (S-6)
3. when judgment is for specific act (S-10)
4. when it is a special judgment (S-11)
D. Properties exempt from execution (S-13)
D’Armoured Security Agency vs. Orpia, 461 SCRA 312

E. Third Party Claim (S-16)

PSALM vs. Maunlad Homes, Inc., 817 SCRA (2/8/17)

F. Execution Sale (S-17 to 26)

G. Redemption:
1. The right of redemption vs equity of redemption
2. Who may redeem (S-27)
3. Effects of redemption (S-29)

H. Other remedies to fully satisfy judgment

1. Examination of judgment obligor (S-36)
2. Examination of obligor of judgment-obligor (S-37)
3. Appointment of receiver (S-41)
4. Sale of ascertainable interest (S-42)

I. Judgment: principal vs surety (S-46)

J. Effect of Judgment (S-47)

1. in rem
2. in personam
3. res judicata
City of Cebu vs. Dedamo, 689 SCRA

K. Effect of foreign judgment (S-48)

Fujiki vs. Marinay, 700 SCRA 69
BPI vs. Guevarra, 752 SCRA 342
Sarto vs. People, 856 SCRA 548
 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

ON JURISDICTION

A. Supreme Court:
1. No original Jurisdiction over criminal cases
2. Appellate jurisdiction: a) by petition for review b) by notice of appeal
B. Court of Appeals
1. No original jurisdiction
2. Appellate jurisdiction: a) by notice of appeal b) by petition for review
C. Sandiganbayan (PD 1601; PD 1861; RA 7975, 8249, 10660)

1. Original and exclusive jurisdiction under the ff. guidelines:

a. what offense or crime was committed
a) R.A. 3019 – Anti Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
b) R.A. 1379 – the law on Ill-gotten Wealth
c) Chap. II, Title VII, Bk. 2 of RPC – Bribery
d) Exec. Orders 1, 2, 14, 14-A – PCGG cases
e) Estafa under the Hannah Serana case, 542 SCRA, 1/22/08
f) Falsification under the Ramiscal vs Sandiganbayan, 630 SCRA
b. Who committed the offense/crime
b-1. Public officers in the executive, legislative and judicial branches
of the government with salary grade 27 according to R.A. 6758
The Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989
Read: Escobal vs. Garchitorena, 422 SCRA
b-2. Private individuals committing the offense/crime with public
officers, Read: People vs. Henry T. Go, March 25, 2014
Garcia vs. Sandiganbayan, 603 SCRA
People vs. Benipayo, 586 SCRA
c. How was the offense/crime committed

Read: Lacson vs. Executive Secretary, 301 SCRA

Sanchez vs. Demetriou, 227 SCRA
 Hannah Serana vs. Sandiganbayan, 542 SCRA
Sen. Leila M. De Lima vs. Hon. Juanita Guerrero
G.R. No. 229781, October 10, 2017, 843 SCRA (2017)

Other cases: Duncano vs. Sandiganbayan, 762 SCRA (2015)

Inocentes vs. People, 796 SCRA (2016)
Edgar Crisostomo vs. Sandiganbayan, 4/14/2005
Esteban vs. Sandiganbayan, 3/11/2005

2. Appellate Jurisdiction
All cases decided by the RTC in the exercise of original or appellate
jurisdiction over cases of public officers with salary grade less than 27
charged with offenses/crimes aforementioned

D. Regional Trial Courts

1. Original exclusive: all criminal cases which are not within the exclusive
jurisdiction of any court. The offense must carry a penalty of more than
six years or prision major
2. Appellate jurisdiction: all criminal cases from the MTC
Note: The ff. offenses are cognizable only by the RTC regardless of the
penalty impossible:
i. Violations of the Omnibus Election Code
ii. Violations of the Intellectual Property Law
iii. Violations of the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012
iv. Violations of the Anti- Money Laundering Law
v. Violations of the Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002
vi. Cases of Written Defamations

E. Family Courts (RA 8369)

1. Exclusive original:
a. where a party is a minor at the time of commission
b. violence against women and children
c. child abuse
d. drug cases
F. Metropolitan/Municipal Trial Court
1. All violations of city/municipal ordinances
2. All offenses punishable with imprisonment of not more than 6 years
3. Violations of traffic rules and regulations
4. Violations of the Bouncing Check Law
 5. Damage to property with fine of not more than P10,000.00
G. Courts of Muslim Mindanao (RA 6734 as amended by 9054)
1. Shari’ah Circuit courts
2. Shari’ah District courts
3. Shari’ah Appellate courts
- All personal, family and property relations cases between muslims residing
in the autonomous region of muslim mindanao
H. What are military courts? Only service-oriented cases…

Note: Read the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 (RA 10175)

Read Bonifacio vs. RTC of Makati, Br. 149, 620 SCRA
Read Disini Jr. vs. Secretary of Justice, Feb. 18, 2014, 716 SCRA

RULE 11O – Prosecution of Offenses

A. Institution of Criminal Actions (Sec. 1)

- how is criminal action instituted
- when is it deemed instituted
- who is qualified to institute it: a) by complaint, de parte
b) by information, de oficio
Read: Jimenez vs. Sorongon, 687 SCRA 151

B. Sufficiency of Complaint or Information (Sec. 6)

- name of accused
- name of offended party
- name of offense
- cause of accusation: qualifying and aggravating circumstances
- place of commission
- date of commission
Read: People vs. Valdez, 663 SCRA 272
Miguel vs. Sandiganbayan, 675 SCRA 560
People vs. Soria, 685 SCRA 483

C. Amendment vs. Substitution (Sec. 14)

- distinguish
- compare with rule 10
Read: Corpus Jr. vs. Pamular, 879 SCRA 187, Sept. 5, 2018
D. Place where action is to be instituted (Sec. 15)
- venue is jurisdictional in criminal cases
Read: Union Bank vs. People, 667 SCRA 113
E. Intervention of the offended party (Sec. 16); compare with rule 19

RULE 111 – Prosecution of Civil Action

A. Civil liability arising from the offense is deemed instituted (Sec. 1)

- Exceptions: waiver, reservation, prior institution (WaRP)
- on filing fees; counterclaim, cross-claim, 3rd party complaint
- compare with Secs. 7,8,11 of Rule 6
- peculiar nature of B.P. 22
Read: Solidum vs. People, 718 SCRA 263
Castillo vs. Salvador, July, 2014
Dy vs. People, 800 SCRA 39
B. Suspension of Civil Action (Sec. 2)
- when suspended; consolidated
- what is the Bar Rule in Amparo and Habeas Data
Read: Lim vs. Kou Co Ping, 679 SCRA 114

C. Independent Civil Action (Sec. 3)

- Articles 32,33,34 and 2176
Read: Casupanan vs. Laroya, 388 SCRA 28
Caterpillar, Inc. vs. Samson, 808 SCRA 309 (2016)

D. Effect of death on the Civil Action (Sec. 4)

- compare with Secs. 17, 18, an 20 of Rule 3
Read: People vs. Romero, 306 SCRA 90

E. Prejudicial Question (Secs. 6 and7)

Read: Magistrado vs. People, 527 SCRA 125
Pimentel vs. Pimentel, 630 SCRA 436
J.M. Dominguez vs. Liclican, July 28, 2015
Alsons Dev. & Invst. Corp. vs. Heirs of Romeo D. Confessor, 9/19/2018

RULE 112 – Preliminary Investigation

A. Definition/Description
 - when a matter of right
- distinguish from Preliminary Examination
Read: Fenequito vs. Vergara, Jr., 677 SCRA 113
Burgundy Realty Corporation vs. Reyes, 687 SCRA 524
B. Who may conduct P. I.
Read: Abanado vs. Bayona, 677 SCRA 595
Heirs of Nestor Tria vs. Obias, 635 SCRA 91
Memorandum Circular No. 58
1. offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua to death
2. new and material issues are raised
3. prescription of offenses not due to lapse in 6 months
4. filed within 30 days from said Notice
C. Procedure in Metro Manila vs. Outside Metro Manila
Read: Uy vs. Javellana, 680 SCRA 13
D. Inquest, what is
- when applied
- waiver of Art. 125 of RPC
Read: People vs. Valencia, 214 SCRA 89
E. Quantum of Evidence
- probable cause vs. prima facie
PCGG vs. Navarro-Gutierrez, 773 SCRA
De Lima vs. Reyes, 779 SCRA

RULE 113 - Arrest

A. Definition
- how made; when; time, method
- who may arrest

B. Warrantless Arrests (Sec. 5)

a. in flagrante delicto rule
b. hot pursuit rule
c. “escape” rule
d. “absconding” rule (sec. 23, par. 2, rule 114
Procedure: delivery to the nearest police station/precinct
Read: Luz vs. People, 667 SCRA 421
Antiquera vs. People, 712 SCRA, 12/11/2013
People vs. Vasquez, 714 SCRA, 1/15/2014
Read: RA 7438 – The Rights of Persons Arrested
RULE 114 - Bail

A. Definition/Description

B. Conditions/Requirements
- effective upon approval and shall remain in force at all stages of the
proceedings until promulgation of judgment by the RTC
- when appearance is required

C. When:
- bail is a matter of right; a matter of discretion;
- bail as a constitutional right

D. Kinds:
a. corporate surety
b. property bond
c. cash bond
d. recognizance: is an obligation of record entered into before some court
or magistrate duly authorized to take it, with the condition to do some
particular act particularly the appearance of the accused for trial

E. Amount of bail; guidelines

F. Where to file bail

- RTC; MTC exercising special jurisdiction

G. Forfeiture vs. Cancellation of Bail

- forfeiture: failure to appear; jumping bail
- cancellation: death; conviction; acquittal; dismissal

Read: 1. Zuno vs. Cabebe, 444 SCRA 382

2. Govt of HK Spec. Adm. Region vs. Olalia, 521 SCRA
3. Leviste vs. CA, 615 SCRA 619
4. Enrile vs. Sandiganbayan, 767 SCRA 282, August 18, 2015
5. Napoles vs. Sandiganbayan, 844 SCRA (2017)
6. Altobano-Ruiz vs. Judge Pichay, 856 SCRA (2018)
- What is the new policy/rule on Hold Departure Order, Watchlist Order?
RULE 115 – Rights of the Accused

- Distinguish the constitutional from statutory rights of the accused

1. Presumption of Innocence, Del Castillo vs. People, 664 SCRA

2. Right to be Heard, Miguel vs. Sandiganbayan, 675 SCRA
3. Right to Counsel, People vs. Lara, 678 SCRA; People vs. Espiritu, 302
4. Right Against Self-Incrimination, People vs. Ayson, 175 SCRA 216
5. Right to Speedy, Impartial and Public Trial, Villareal vs. People 664 SCRA