CHAPTER I: PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS

BASIC CONCEPTS
Criminal Procedure

Series of processes by which criminal

laws are enforced and by which the
State prosecutes persons who violate
the penal laws
Regulates the steps by which one who
committed a crime is to be punished
Procedural administration of justice

System of procedure in our jurisdiction:

ACCUSATORIAL/ ADVERSARIAL
Accusatorial/
adversarial

two
contending parties (prosecution &
defense) before the court which hears
them impartially and renders judgment
only after trial

Inquisitorial system court may utilize

evidence gathered outside the court and a
judge/ group of judges actively participates
in the gathering of facts & evidence
instead of mere passively receiving
evidence from the parties

Rules of criminal procedure are liberally

construed in order to promote their objective
of securing a just, speedy and inexpensive
disposition of every action and proceeding.
Cariaga v. People: Petitioners former counsel
erroneously appealed her conviction to the CA
instead of to the Sandiganbayan. Petitioner
pleaded that the rule which mandates the
dismissal of cases erroneously appealed to the CA
be relaxed. The SC granted the petitioners prayer
and held that since the appeal involved a criminal
case and the possibility of a person being deprived
of liberty due to a procedural lapse is great, a
relaxation of the Rules was warranted.

Due process
mandatory.

in

criminal

proceedings

is

Requirements of due process in criminal

proceedings (Alonte v. Savellano, Jr.):

The court/ tribunal trying the case is

properly clothed with judicial power to hear
& determine the matter before it
Jurisdiction is lawfully acquired by it over
the person of the accused
Accused is given opportunity to be heard
Judgment is rendered only upon lawful
hearing

***

***

***

***
***

***

***

REQUISITES FOR THE EXERCISE OF

CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
A. Jurisdiction over the subject
matter
Refers to the authority of the court
to hear and determine a particular
criminal case
Jurisdiction of the class of cases to
which the particular case belongs
How it is conferred:

Conferred by law
Cannot be presumed
Cannot be fixed by the will of the
parties nor can it be acquired or
diminished by any act of the parties
Not conferred by mere administrative
policy of any trial court

How it is determined:

Determined by the allegations in the

complaint/ information
Sandiganbayan cases = both nature of
offense & position occupied by
accused are conditions sine qua non
before the Sandiganbayan can validly
take cognizance of the case
Complex crimes = jurisdiction is with
the court having jurisdiction to impose
the maximum & most serious penalty
imposable on the offense forming part
of the complex crime

Jurisdiction is determined by the law in

force at the time of the institution of
the action and not during arraignment, or
at the time of its commission.
What is considered is the penalty which
may be imposed and not the actual
penalty imposed after trial.
Jurisdiction of the court is continuing
Once
a
court
has
acquired
jurisdiction,
that
jurisdiction
continues
Cannot be withdrawn or defeated
by subsequent valid amendment of
the information
Cannot be lost by a new law
o Exception: when the statute
expressly so provides, or is
construed to the effect that
it is intended to operate
upon actions pending before
its enactment
An objection based on the ground that the
court lacks jurisdiction over the subject
matter may be raised/ considered motu
proprio at any stage of the proceedings or on
appeal.
A party may be estopped from questioning
the jurisdiction for reasons of public policy as
when he initially invokes the jurisdiction of the
court and then later on repudiates it
exception to the general rule that jurisdiction
is vested by law and cannot be conferred or
waived by the parties

B. Jurisdiction over the territory

Requires that the offense must
have been committed within the
courts territorial jurisdiction

To be determined by the facts

alleged in the complaint or
information
The offense should have been
committed or any one of its
essential ingredients should have
taken place within the territorial
jurisdiction of the court
If the evidence adduced during the
trial shows that the offense was
committed somewhere else, the
court should dismiss the action for
want of jurisdiction

held office at the time of commission

of offense

C. Jurisdiction over the person of the

accused
Refers to the authority of the court
over the person charged
Acquired upon:
o Arrest or apprehension,
with or without warrant
o Voluntary appearance or
submission

General rule: The offense must be prosecuted

and tried in the place where the same was
committed.

Exceptions:

Art. 2 of the RPC = offenses cognizable

before Philippine courts even if committed
outside of the territory of the Philippines
(offense shall be cognizable by the court
where the criminal action is first filed)
o
o

Committed on a Philippine ship/ airship

Forge/ counterfeit currency of the
Philippines or obligations & securities
issued by the government
Acts connected with the introduction
into the country of the obligations &
securities mentioned above
While
being
public
officers
&
employees, should commit an offense
in the exercise of their functions
Crimes against national security & the
law of nations

Where the SC, pursuant to its constitutional

powers, orders a change of venue to avoid
a miscarriage of justice
Offense committed in a train, aircraft, or
other public/ private vehicle in the course
of its trip may be instituted in any place
where said vehicle passed during its trip
(including place of departure and arrival)
Offense committed on board a vessel in the
course of its voyage instituted in court of
first port of entry, or any place where the
vessel passed during the voyage
Case cognizable by the Sandiganbayan
Written defamation may be filed in the
province/ city where the offended party
held office at the time of commission of
offense (if public officer), or in the province
or city where he actually resided at the
time of commission of offense (if private
individual)

Rules for written defamation:

If public official/ private person: RTC of

province/ city where libellous article is
printed
&
first
published
(information
must
allege
with
particularity where the defamatory
article was printed & published)
If private individual: RTC of province
where he actually resided at the
time of commission of offense
Public officer in Manila at the time of
the commission of offense: RTC of
Manila
Public officer holding office outside
Manila RTC of province/ city where he

Filing motion to quash

Appearing for
arraignment
Participating in trial
Giving bail

Not a voluntary submission:

Making
special
appearance
to
question jurisdiction of the court over
the person of the accused
When accused files a motion to
quash the warrant of arrest

Being in the custody of the law is not

necessarily being under the jurisdiction of the
court.

Injunction
Prosecution

to

Restrain

Criminal

General rule: Court will not issue writs of

prohibition/ injunction preliminary or final, to
enjoin/ restrain criminal prosecution.
Exceptions:

When injunction is necessary to afford

adequate protection to the constitutional
rights of accused
When it is necessary for the orderly
administration of justice or to avoid
oppression or multiplicity of actions
When there is a prejudicial question which
is subjudice
When the acts of the officer are without or
in excess of authority
When prosecution is under an invalid law,
ordinance or regulation
Double jeopardy
Court has no jurisdiction over the offense
Case
of
persecution
rather
than
prosecution
Charges are manifestly false and motivated
by lust for vengeance
When there is clearly no prima facie case
against the accused and a motion to quash
on that ground has been denied

Mandamus to Compel Prosecution

Matter of discretion (prosecutor): to
determine which persons appear responsible
for a crime
Mandatory: the moment he finds one to be
so liable it becomes his inescapable duty to
charge him and to prosecute him

If despite sufficiency of evidence, prosecutor

refuses to file information, he abuses his
discretion tantamount to a deliberate
refusal to perform a duty enjoined by law
Judicial review is allowed when it has been
clearly established that the prosecutor
committed grave abuse of discretion.

2. APPELLATE JURISDICTION over all

cases decided by the MTC within its
territorial jurisdiction
3. SPECIAL JURISDICTION to handle
exclusively
criminal
cases
as
designated by the SC
4. Jurisdiction over criminal cases under
specific laws:
a.
b.

CRIMINAL JURISDICTION OF COURTS

MTC, MCTC, Metropolitan Trial Court
Except in cases falling within the
exclusive jurisdiction of the RTC & the
Sandiganbayan, the MTC shall exercise the
following criminal jurisdiction:
1. EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
over all violations of city/ municipal
ordinances committed within their
respective territorial jurisdiction
2. EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
over all offenses punishable with
imprisonment not exceeding 6
years irrespective of amount of fine
(prision correcional)

There are offenses which even if

punishable by prision correcional are
not cognizable by the MTC (libel RTC,
some forms of direct bribery
Sandiganbayan)
3. Where only penalty provided for by law is a
fine:

4.

5.
6.

7.

EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

over offenses punishable with a fine
not more than P4,000.00
EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
over offenses involving damage to
property
through
criminal
negligence
Violations of BP 22
SUMMARY PROCEDURE:
a. Violations of traffic laws, rules &
regulations; violations of rental law;
violations
of
municipal/
city
ordinances
b. All other criminal cases where
penalty prescribed by law is
imprisonment not exceeding 6
months or a fine not exceeding
P1,000.00 or both
c. Offenses involving damage to
property
through
criminal
negligence where imposable fine
does not exceed P10,000.00
SPECIAL JURISDICTION to decide on
applications for bail in criminal cases in
the absence of all RTC judges in a
province/ city
Regional Trial Court

1. EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION in

all criminal cases not within the
exclusive jurisdiction of any court/
tribunal/ body (EXCEPT those falling
under the exclusive and concurrent
jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan)

c.

Written defamation
Jurisdiction of designated courts
over cases in violation of the
Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs
Act
Violations of intellectual property
rights

5. Money Laundering cases

Sandiganbayan
Sec. 4. Jurisdiction. The Sandiganbayan shall
exercise original jurisdiction in all cases involving:
a.

Violations of Republic Act No. 3019, as

amended, otherwise known as the AntiGraft and Corrupt Practices Act, Republic
Act No. 1379, and Chapter II, Section 2,
Title VII of the Revised Penal Code, where
one or more of the principal accused are
officials occupying the following positions
in the government, whether in permanent,
acting or interim capacity, at the time of
the commission of the offense:
(1) Officials of the executive branch
occupying the positions of regional
director
and
higher,
otherwise
classified as grade 27 and higher, of
the
Compensation
and
Position
Classification Act of 1989 (Republic Act
No. 6758), specifically including:
(a) Provincial governors, vice-governors,
members
of
the
sangguniang
panlalawigan, and provincial treasurers,
assessors,
engineers,
and
other
provincial department heads;
(b) City mayors, vice-mayors, members of
the sangguniang panlungsod, city
treasurers, assessors, engineers, and
other city department heads;
(c) Officials of the diplomatic service
occupying the position of consul and
higher;
(d) Philippine army and air force colonels,
naval captains, and all officers of higher
rank;
(e) PNP chief superintendent and PNP
officers of higher rank;
(f) City and provincial prosecutors and
their assistants, and officials and
prosecutors in the Office of the
Ombudsman and special prosecutor;
(g) Presidents, directors or trustees, or
managers of government-owned or
controlled
corporations,
state
universities or educational institutions
or foundations;

(2) Members of Congress and officials

thereof classified as Grade "27" and up
under the Compensation and Position
Classification Act of 1989;
(3) Members of the judiciary without
prejudice to the provisions of the
Constitution;
(4) Chairmen
and
members
of
Constitutional Commissions, without
prejudice to the provisions of the
Constitution; and
(5) All other national and local officials
classified as Grade "27" and higher

under the Compensation and Position

Classification Act of 1989
Other offenses or felonies committed by
the
public
officials
and
employees
mentioned in subsection (a) of this section
in relation to their office.
Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to
and in connection with Executive Order
Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A.

Facts: Records showed that although petitioner

was a director of Region VI Philhealth she was not
occupying the position of Regional Director but that
of Department Manager A. She contended that it is
classified under salary grade 26.

in cases where none of the accused are

occupying positions of SG27, or military & PNP
officers mentioned above, EOJ vested in
proper RTC, MTC, or MCTC.

Ruling: The court found that petitioner held the

position of Department Director at the time of the
commission of the offense and that position is
among those enumerated in RA 8249 (presidents,
directors or trustees, or managers of GOCCs, state
universities
or
educational
institutions
or
foundations). Officials whose positions may not
be of grade 27 and higher but are included
by express provision of law are placed under
the jurisdiction of said court.

b.

c.

Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction where one

or more of the accused are officials occupying
the positions enumerated in the law
Sandiganbayan shall exercise:

EXCLUSIVE APPELLATE JURISDICTION

over final judgments, resolutions,
orders of RTCs
EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
over petitions for issuance of writs of
mandamus,
prohibition,
certiorari,
habeas corpus, injunctions and other
ancillary writs and processes in aid of
its appellate jurisdiction and over
petitions of similar nature, including
quo warranto, arising or that may arise
in cases filed or which may be filed
under EO 1, 2, 14, 14-A.

Offenses subject to the jurisdiction of the

Sandiganbayan:
1. Violations of Anti-Graft and Corrupt
Practices Act (RA 3019)
2. Act Declaring Forfeiture in Favor of
the State Any Property Found to Have
Been Unlawfully Acquired by Any
Public Officer or Employee (RA 1379)
3. Violations of Chapter II, Section 2,
Title VII, Book II, RPC (bribery)
4. Other
offenses
or
felonies,
whether simple or complexed,
committed
by
public
officials
mentioned in (a) of Sec 4 in relation
to their office
5. Civil and criminal offenses filed
pursuant to and in connection with
Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and
14-a (sequestration cases)

Should one or more of the officials charged

have SG 27 or higher for the Sandiganbayan
to have jurisdiction?
No. The law mentions SG 27 only in relation to
the following officials:

Officials of the executive branch, occupying

position of regional director & higher
Members of Congress or officials thereof
All other national and local officials

Those others who were enumerated are

subject
to
the
jurisdiction
of
the
Sandiganbayan regardless of salary grade.
Geduspan v. People

Issue: Whether or not the Sandiganbayan has

jurisdiction over a regional director/ manager of
GOCCs organized under the Corporation Code

Salary grade alone does not determine

jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan.
Serana v. Sandiganbayan
Facts: Petitioner claimed that as student regent
she was not a public officer since she merely
represented the students of the institution. She
added that she did not receive any salary thus
could not fall under any salary grade.
Issue: Whether Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction
over a student regent
Ruling: Yes. The petitioner is a public officer whose
position is covered by the law vesting jurisdiction
over the Sandiganbayan presidents, directors or
trustees,
or
managers
of
GOCCs,
state
universities or educational institutions or
foundations. Petitioner falls under this category.
The board of Regents of UP performs functions
similar to those of a board of trustees of a nonstock corporation. By express mandate of the
law, petitioner is a public officer as
contemplated by PD 1606. Compensation is not an
essential element of a public office and is merely
incidental.

Offenses committed in relation to the office

The relation has to be such that, in the

legal sense, the offense cannot exist
without the office
The office must be a constituent
element of the crime as defined by
statute

Sanchez v. Demetriou: Even if the position is not

an essential ingredient of the offense charged, if
the information avers the intimate connection
between the office and the offense, this would
bring the offense within the definition of an offense
committed in relation to the public office.

An offense may be said to have been

committed in relation to the office if the
offense is intimately connected with the
office of the offender and perpetrated
while he was in the performance of his

official functions even if public office is not

an element of the offense charge.
Esteban v. Sandiganbayan
Facts: Accused filed motion to quash the two
informations filed against him for acts of
lasciviousness against a female casual employee
assigned to his office. He argued that the
Sandiganbayan has no jurisdiction since the
alleged acts were not committed in relation to his
office as a judge.
Ruling: SC sustained the Sandiganbayan. The
information alleged with clarity that the accused
used his official position to commit the acts
charged. He could not have committed the crimes
charged were it not for his being the judge of the
court where victim was working. He had the
authority to recommend appointment of victim.

People v. Montejo
Facts: A city mayor was accused of murder.
Issue: Whether accused committed the murder in
relation to his office
Ruling: Yes. The information sufficiently indicated
the existence of acts and events intimately
connected to the public office of the accused. It
alleged that the murder was a consequence of his
act as a mayor, that he organized armed patrols
and civilian commandos and provided them with
arms. He ordered the arrest and maltreatment of
the victim while acting as city mayor and leader of
the patrols.

Information must contain the specific

factual allegations that would indicate the
close intimacy between the discharge of
the official duties of the accused and the
commission of the offense, in order to
qualify the crime as having been committed
in relation to public office (requirement is not
complied with if information merely alleges
because such allegation is merely a
conclusion of law)
No need to allege intimacy between offense
and official duties if public office is a
constituent element of the crime charged as
provided for by statute

Forfeiture case all that the court needs to

determine, by preponderance of evidence, is the
disproportion of respondents properties to his
legitimate income (unnecessary to prove how he
acquired such properties)

Summary procedure in criminal cases

Cases subject to summary proceedings:
a.

Violations of traffic laws, rules and

regulations
b. Violations of the rental law and BP 22
c. Violations
of
municipal
or
city
ordinances
d. All other criminal cases where the penalty
prescribed by law is imprisonment not
exceeding 6 months or a fine not
exceeding P1,000.00 or both
e. Offenses involving damage to property
through criminal negligence where the
imposable fine does not exceed
P10,000.00

Summary proceedings:

o
o

Offense is deemed to be committed in relation

to public office of accused when:
a.
b.

Such office is an element of the crime

charged
When the offense charged is intimately
connected with the discharge of the
official functions of the accused

In Anti-Money Laundering cases those

committed by public officers and private persons
who are in conspiracy with the public officers shall
be under the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan

Crime of plunder does not absorb forfeiture

cases
Plunder what is sought to be established is the
commission of the criminal acts in furtherance of
the acquisition of ill-gotten wealth

Filing may either be by complaint or

information
In Metro Manila and other chartered
cities, filing shall be by information
except when the offense is one which
cannot be prosecuted de officio
If no cause/ ground to hold accused
dismissed
Before conducting trial, court shall call
the
parties
to
a
preliminary
conference
during
which
the
following may be done

Any admission accused makes during

preliminary
conference
must
be
reduced to writing and signed by
accused & counsel
Actual direct examination of witnesses
not required (affidavits constitute their
testimonies) but they can be subjected
to cross, re-direct, re-cross
Court cannot order arrest of accused
except where ground is failure to
appear when required
o

Enter into a stipulation of facts

Consider the propriety of allowing
the accused to enter a plea of
guilty to a lesser offense
Take up such other matters to
clarify the issues & ensure a
speedy disposition of the case

If arrested, may be released on bail

or recognizance

Court shall promulgate judgment not

later
than
30
days
after
termination of trial

Prohibited pleadings, motions and petitions in

summary procedure:
1. Motion to quash complaint/ information
Exceptions:

Lack of jurisdiction over subject matter

Failure to comply with the barangay
conciliation proceedings

2. Motion for bill of particulars

3. Motion
for
new
trial,
or
for
consideration of a judgment, or for
reopening of trial
4. Petition for relief from judgment
5. Motion for extension of time to file
pleadings, affidavits, or any other
paper
6. Memoranda
7. Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or
prohibition against any interlocutory
order issued by the court
8. Motion to declare the defendant in
default
9. Dilatory motions for postponement
10. Reply
11. Third-party complaints
12. Interventions

when arrest was made after a crime has

just been committed and person making
the arrest has personal knowledge of facts
and circumstances which makes him
believe that there is probable cause that
the person to be arrested has committed
the offense

When accused lawfully arrested without

warrant, no preliminary investigation only
inquest

SYNOPSIS OF THE CRIMINAL LITIGATION

PROCESS
Criminal litigation process:

BUT person arrested can ask for PI

after validly signing a waiver of Art.
125 RPC (Delay in the delivery of
detained persons to the proper judicial
authorities)
may apply for bail even before he is
charged in court
even
after
filing
of
complaint/
information, person arrested can ask
for PI within 5 days from the time he
learns of the complaint/ information
being filed

Presupposes prior commission of a

crime
Or at least the perception that a crime
has been committed

If no inquest prosecutor complaint may be

filed by offended party or peace officer
directly with the court on the basis of the
affidavit of the party or arresting officer or
person

Mere commission of a crime does not

automatically trigger the application of the
rules of criminal procedure!

Filing of the information or complaint

and other processes

Rules of criminal procedure only come into

operation only when acts are initiated that
would put the offender in contact with the law
when the criminal act is brought to the
attention of duly constituted authorities

Criminal action

Barangay conciliation proceedings

There
are
violations
of
laws/
ordinances which require compliance
with this
Referral of a case to the Lupon for
conciliation/ settlement is required
before a complaint, petition or action is
filed in court
Cases
not
requiring
barangay
conciliation
o

Commenced by the filing of a

complaint or information in court
Under the control and direction of the
public prosecutor

Complaint/ information

Required to be in writing
Contains at least 2 names People of
the Philippines & person named as
offender
Must state:
o
o
o
o

Penalty is at least 4 years, 2 months, 1

day

Ways of instituting criminal action:

Barangay conciliation proceedings

Filing complaint for purpose of PI
Filing directly with first level courts
When a person is lawfully arrested without
warrant either by peace officer or private
person
When law enforcement officers are in
possession of information on possible
criminal activities

Arrest deemed lawful:

when person arrested has committed, was

actually committing, was attempting to
commit a crime in the presence of person
arresting

Name of accused
Name of offended party
Designation of offense
Acts/ omissions constituting the
offense
Specific qualifying and aggravating
circumstances involved

Must also state cause of accusation

Implied institution of the civil action

Civil action (for recovery of civil liability
arising from the offense charged) is deemed
instituted with the criminal action.
Exceptions:

Waiver
Reserving the right
Institution of civil action prior to
criminal action

Independent civil actions are not deemed

instituted they do not legally arise from the

offense charged and are independent sources

of liability
After criminal action has commenced,
separate civil action (arising from offense)
cannot be instituted until final judgment in the
criminal action.

accused is suffering from unsound mental

condition)

Independent civil actions can proceed

independently of the criminal action.

Pre-trial
conferenceconference

Can apply for bail before or after he is

formally charged
Application shall be made in the court
where his case is pending
No bail shall be allowed after a
judgment of conviction has become
final
Person in custody who is not yet
charged in court may apply for bail
Application for bail shall not bar
accused from challenging validity of
arrest
Bail can be a matter of right/ matter of
judicial discretion
o

Even person charged with capital

offense may be allowed bail when
evidence of guilt is not strong

Corporate surety
Property bond
Cash deposit
Recognizance

No trial in absentia if accused

escapes before arraignment

He then pleads guilty or not guilty

Options of accused before arraignment &

plea:

Bill of particulars if there are

defects in the information/ complaint
which prevent him from properly
pleading to the charge and preparing
for trial

Plea bargaining
Stipulation of facts
Marking of evidence
Waiver of objections to admissibility
Possible modification of order of trial

Commences within 30 days from

receipt of pre-trial order
Normally begins with the prosecution
presenting its evidence
o

Made in open court by judge/ clerk and

consists of furnishing accused with
copy of the complaint/ information and
the reading of the same in a language
he understands
o

trial

Trial

Formal
mode
and
manner
of
implementing the constitutional right
of an accused to be informed of the
nature and cause of the accusation
against him
o

mandatory

All agreements reduced in writing and signed

by accused and counsel (otherwise they
cannot be used against the accused).

Arraignment

dismiss

The pre-trial order shall bind the parties, limit

the trial to matters not disposed of, and
control the course of the action during trial,
unless modified to prevent manifest injustice.

Bail may be given in the form of:

o
o
o
o

to

Purpose is to consider certain matters such

as:

Bail

Move to quash
complaint/ information

Grounds:

Facts charged do not constitute an

offense

Court has no jurisdiction

If criminal action filed after civil action civil

action will be suspended.
Suspension of civil action when the criminal
action is commenced does not apply to
prejudicial questions in this case, it is the
criminal action which is suspended upon
proper petition.

Suspension of the arraignment

when justifiable reason exists (ex.

Exception: when accused admits

the act/ omission charged but
interposes a lawful defense

After prosecutions evidence, accused

may now present evidence
o Instead of presenting evidence,
accused may opt to move to
dismiss
by
presenting
a
demurrer to evidence on the
ground of insufficiency of
evidence may be presented
with or without leave of court
o Court can also dismiss case on
its own initiative after giving
prosecution opportunity to be
heard
o If demurrer filed with leave of
court is denied accused my
present evidence
o If demurrer filed without leave
of court is denied presenting
of evidence by accused is
waived

Judgment

Adjudication by the court on the guilt

or innocence of the accused
Imposition on accused of the proper
penalty and civil liability, if any

Promulgated by reading it in presence

of accused
o

Except for light offense in which it

may be pronounced in presence of
counsel or representative

Post-judgment remedies

Motion
for
modification
of
judgment/ setting aside of the same
Move
for
new
trial/
reconsideration
o Motion
for
new
trial

predicated upon errors of law or

irregularities during trial and
the discovery of new/ material
evidence
o Motion for reconsideration
filed on grounds of errors of law
or fact in the judgment
o Court can grant new trial/
reconsideration on its own
motion with consent of accused
Appeal
from
judgment
of
conviction
o Appellant can withdraw appeal
before record has been forward
to the proper appellate court
o Can also be withdrawn before
rendition of the judgment
judgment of court of origin
becomes final and case shall be
remanded to the latter court for
execution of judgment

Cases from MTC, MTCC, MCTC appealed to the

RTC
Cases from RTC appealed to CA or SC
Cases from CA or Sandiganbayan appealed to SC
Appeal to CA of cases decided by RTC in exercise of
its appellate jurisdiction = petition for review under
Rule 42 (first level courts RTC CA)
Appeal in cases where penalty imposed by RTC is
reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment shall be by
notice of appeal to the CA = Rule 122

Review by CA is necessary before it is

elevated to the SC

Decisions and final orders of the Sandiganbayan

appealable to SC = petition for review on certiorari
under Rule 45