C R I M P R O page 1 of 6

Provisional acquittal
dismissal
OVERVIEW: Criminal Procedure - d: double jeopardy
- p: Rule 65(certiorari)

R 113 R 118 & R 119

R 113, S5 CRIME R 110 - 111 R 112 R 110 Arrest ARRAIGNMENT Pre-trial & trial
Arrests without complaint P.I. Information warrant conviction
warrant - MFR
- appeal
R 117 - motion to reopen
Petition for R 126 Motion to Quash the - motion for new trial
R 112, S7 search warrant Search & Info (only before
Inquest (cf. Diagram E) seizure arraignment)
(c.f. Diagram B)

R 114
Exception: R 126 S13 Petition for bail (allowed until finality of order)
Warrantless search
incident to a lawful
arrest

DIAGRAM A: commission of an offense to the filing of a complaint or information

Probable cause information

R 113, S5 CRIME R 110 R 112

Arrests w/o warrant complaint Prelim Investigation
IFF all the elements (probable cause
are present diff from in R 126) Probable cause Dismissal of Appeal to DOJ SC
lacking complaint
R 126 Already a suspect
(search & seizures) RA 7438 & Art 3, Sec 12,
Const rights attach not
- gathering evidence R 115 (rights at trial)
- proceeds Who conducts PI?
- fruits
- subjects
look for probable cause
exclusionary rule
admissibility of evidence
(very important,
opportunity for dismissal

000
 C R I M P R O page 2 of 6

DIAGRAM B: arrests without warrant

Probable cause information
R 112 ART 125 RPC R 113, S5 R 112, S7
Prelim investigation waiver Arrests w/o warrant No waiver Inquest
arrests w/o warrant
IFF there is a waiver of If this is invalidated,
rights under Art 125, exclusionary rule comes In DOJ Circular Probable cause Dismissal of
RPC, one arrested under in Also search for probable lacking complaint
R112, S7 becomes Arrest by a private cause diff from that in
entitled to PI person in S9, 113 is also R 126
Q: what is the effect if warrantless; only a Note: diff of PI & inquest
above waiver is peace officer can enforce Within 12, 18 or 36 hours
revoked? an arrest warrant after warrantless arrest

DIAGRAM C: issuance of a warrant of arrest (AW)

Find PC Issue AW

R 110 COURT R 113

Information (RTC/MTC)
Question of WON to
arrest the person
effect: jurisdiction over
person of the accused (R
113; Art 3, Sec 2 Const)
See BP 129 for
jurisdiction of courts
how to determine: venue
for filing AW
arrest Doubt PC Request more
evidence
Determine PC (S6,
R112) for issuance of AW
to gain jurisdiction NO PC Dismiss info
Distinguish: PC in AW,
PC in SW, PC in info/PI
No need for personal
examination of witnesses

DIAGRAM D: issuance of AW to judgment (overview)

Acquittal
AW Arraignment Pre-trial trial Promulgation of
(plea) judgment

conviction
R 115 rights attach
Subject to MFRs or
Mandatory pre-trial in RA 8493 Motions for new trial
Court acquires jurisdiction: 1) filing of Information, 2) appearing before Judge
Within 30 days after Court acquires jurisdiction, ARRAIGNMENT, then PRE-TRIAL
Within 30 days after pre-trial, TRIAL
Within 30 days from finality of order, NEW TRIAL when granted motion
 C R I M P R O page 3 of 6

DIAGRAM E: issuance of a search warrant (SW)

BP 129, S19 R 126, S5 No PC Deny application

Application for a SW; No.6 - Personal
Venue R 126, S2 jurisdiction determination of
Only RTC may PC to issue SW
Gen rule: where crime was committed issue SW R 126, S 14
(territorial jurisdiction) There is PC Issue SW Remedies MTQ or MTS
When there is a criminal action
pending in that court Take note of requisites of a valid As to VENUE Malaloan rule: MTQ in
Compelling reasons any court within SW R 126, S2, S4 & S6 issuing court OR MTS in trial court;
judicial region Lifetime of Sw ROC: MTQ/MTS in trial court, if no
Note: form & content of application Note R 126, S 10 pending action, MTQ/MTS in issuing
Q: must it be verified? Procedure for SERVICE of SW court
R 126, S7, S8, S9, S11, S12 In People v. CA: these remedies are
alternative, but in PICOP v. Asuncion:
both motions were filed & granted

R 126, S13
Warrantless search lawful
when incident to a lawful arrest

Include as lawful warrantless

searches: consented search, stop-and-
frisk & less intrusive searches, hot
pursuit/moving vehicles, in plain sight,
private searches, extraordinary
circumstances
Consider: peaceful submission not
consent to search, effect of voluntary
surrender, effect of posting bail
 C R I M P R O page 4 of 6

DIAGRAM F: preliminary investigation of cases cognizable by MTC, etc/RTC

conducted by a prosecutor

Complaint for Offense PI Test for PC If none: dismiss

offense w/in required - S3, R 112
jurisdiction of - at least 4 yrs, 2
- S3b, par2, R 112 If present: Resp: counter- Within 10 WON respondent
MTC/RTC months & 1 day
subpoena affidavit days: should be held for
- S1, par 2, R112 respondent hearing trial
- note criminal offenses
under MTC, etc (Sec 32,
BP 129)
- note criminal offenses If cannot be Trial ex-
under RTC (Sec 20, BP subpoenaed or no parte
129) counter-affidavit
- S3, par (a) R112
contents; subscribed &
notarized Offense PI not
required
- see Diagram H

WON respondent If there is PC
should be held for
trial
If none: dismiss
- without prejudice to
City/Prov/Chief State
prosecs finding of PC (S4,
par 4, R 112)
Resolution & info Prov or city prosec Latters finding of DOJ Sec may information
or chief state PC or lack of it upon appeal or
prosec or prevails motu proprio
Ombudsman S4, par 4, R 112 reverse or modify
the latter dismiss
- for approval: - if investigating prosec
- S4, par 2&3, R 112 recommends dismissal, but - DOJ may direct prosec to
Chief State Prosec finds either file info w/o need for
PC may file info or direct PI or dismiss with notice to
another, no need for new PI parties

information MTC/RTC judge Find PC Issue AW

personal
Note: supporting affidavits
evaluation PC
must form part S8, R 112
S6, par (a), R 112
Doubt PC Request more
evidence

NO PC Dismiss info
 C R I M P R O page 5 of 6

DIAGRAM G: preliminary investigation cognizable by MTC/RTC

Conducted by MTC judge

Complaint for Offense PI Test for PC If none: dismiss

offense w/in required - S3, R 112
jurisdiction of - at least 4 yrs, 2
- S3b, par2, R 112 If present: Resp: counter- Within 10 WON respondent
MTC/RTC months & 1 day
subpoena affidavit days: should be held for
- S1, par 2, R112 respondent hearing trial
- note criminal offenses
under MTC, etc (Sec 32,
BP 129)
- note criminal offenses If cannot be Trial ex-
under RTC (Sec 20, BP subpoenaed or no parte
129) counter-affidavit
- S3, par (a) R112
contents; subscribed &
notarized Offense PI not
required
- see Diagram H

WON respondent If there is PC Resolution & info Prov or city prosec information
should be held for or chief state
trial - cf. contents of resolution prosec or
in S5, par 1, R 112 Ombudsman
If no PC: dismiss
If none: dismiss - above-named persons
info must review the resolution; - the last named officials
their ruling must state the may order the release of a
facts and the law on which detained accused
it is based

If MTC PI ruling Information + AW

affirmed by last by MTC judge
named officials
Note: supporting affidavits
S6, par (a), R 112
must form part S8, R 112

HOWEVER, before termination of PI, MTC judge may issue AW if upon examination in writing & under
oath & asking searching qs, he finds PC to detain: ISSUE AW
 C R I M P R O page 6 of 6

DIAGRAM H: When no Preliminary Investigation is Required

Filed with MTC, Complaint S3(a), R112

etc
S1, par (b), R 110

Complaint PI
not required
- S1, R 112

Filed with
prosecutor
S1, par (b), R 110