Sec. 5. When warrant of arrest may issue. — (a) By the Regional Trial Court.

— Within
ten (10) days from the filing of the complaint or information, the judge shall personally
evaluate the resolution of the prosecutor and its supporting evidence. He may
immediately dismiss the case if the evidence on record clearly fails to establish probable
cause. If he finds probable cause, he shall issue a warrant of arrest, or a commitment
order if the accused has already been arrested pursuant to a warrant issued by the judge
who conducted the preliminary investigation or when the complaint or information was
filed pursuant to section 6 of this Rule. In case of doubt on the existence of probable
cause, the judge may order the prosecutor to present additional evidence within five (5)
days from notice and the issue must be resolved by the court within thirty (30) days from
the filing of the complaint of information.

(b) By the Municipal Trial Court. — When required pursuant to the second paragraph of
section 1 of this Rule, the preliminary investigation of cases falling under the original
jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Municipal Trial
Court, or Municipal Circuit Trial Court SHALL be conducted by the prosecutor. The
procedure for the issuance of a warrant or arrest by the judge shall be governed by
paragraph (a) of this section.

(c) When warrant of arrest not necessary. — A warrant of arrest shall not issue if the
accused is already under detention pursuant to a warrant issued by the municipal trial
court in accordance with paragraph (b) of this section, or if the complaint or information
was filed pursuant to section 6 of this Rule or is for an offense penalized by fine only. The
court shall then proceed in the exercise of its original jurisdiction.

NOTES:

What is a warrant of arrest?

A warrant of arrest is a legal process issued by competent authority, directing

the arrest of a person or persons upon grounds stated therein.

When can the court issue a warrant of arrest? What is the procedure for
the issuance of a warrant of arrest?

A. By the Regional Trial Court

For all RTC cases, a warrant of arrest will naturally issue if there is probable
cause.
1. Within 10 days from the filing of the complaint or information, the judge
shall personally evaluate the resolution of the prosecutor and its supporting
evidence.

2. He may immediately dismiss the case if the evidence on record clearly fails
to establish probable cause.

3. If he finds probable cause, he shall issue a warrant of arrest or a

commitment order if the accused is already under detention.

4. In case of doubt on the existence of probable cause, the judge may order
the prosecutor to present additional evidence within 5 days from notice and
the issue must be resolved within 30 days from the filing of the complaint or
information. (Sec. 5 (a), Rule 112, Rules of Court)

B. By the Municipal Trial Court

PI - For those cases that require preliminary investigation (offenses with a

penalty of at least 4 years 2 months and 1 day), follow the same procedure
above. (Sec. 5 (b), Rule 112, Rules of Court)

No PI - For cases not requiring a preliminary investigation and not falling under
Summary Procedure, the issuance of a warrant of arrest is subject to
the discretion of the court.

1. If within 10 days from the filing of the complaint or information, the judge
finds no probable cause after personally examining the evidence in writing and
under oath of the complainant and his witnesses in the form of searching
questions and answers, he shall dismiss the complaint or information.

2. He may require the submission or additional evidence within 10 days from

notice. If he still finds no probable cause, he shall dismiss the case within 10
days from its submission or expiration of said period.

3. If he finds probable cause, he shall issue a warrant of arrest or a

commitment order and hold him for trial. If he thinks that there is no necessity
for placing the accused under custody, he may issue summons instead of a
warrant of arrest. (Sec. 8 (b), Rule 112, Rules of Court)

Note: The procedure is basically the same except that the issuance of a warrant is subject
to the discretion of the court. The court may issue summons instead of a warrant of arrest.

When is a warrant of arrest not necessary? What are the instances

when the court need not issue a warrant of arrest?

1. When the accused is already under detention pursuant to a warrant issued

by the MTC in accordance with paragraph [b] of Section 5. - If the MTC issues a
warrant of arrest and later on the case reaches the RTC, there is no need for
the RTC to issue another warrant because there is already a warrant issued by
the MTC. And as a matter of fact, the accused has already been detained.

2. When the accused was arrested by virtue of a lawful arrest without

warrant. - If the accused was lawfully arrested without a warrant, the
prosecutor will only conduct an inquest proceedings. There is no need to issue a
warrant because the accused is already under detention. The court will just
issue a commitment order just to confirm the detention of the accused.

3. When the penalty is a fine only. - There are crimes where there is no penalty
for imprisonment but only fine like damage to property through reckless
imprudence. Based on the rules, there is no need for a warrant, just an order to
appear is sufficient.

4. In cases covered by summary procedure.

Are “John Doe” warrants valid?

Generally, John Doe warrants are void because they violate the constitutional
provision that requires that warrants of arrest should particularly describe the
person or persons to be arrested. But if there is sufficient description to identify
the person to be arrested, then the warrant is valid.

What are the remedies of a party against whom a warrant of arrest has
been issued?

1. post bail
2. ask for reinvestigation
3. petition for review
4. motion to quash the information
5. if denied, appeal the judgment after trial

Is the finding of a judge that probable cause exists for the purpose of
issuing a warrant of arrest subject to judicial review?

No. It would be asking the court to examine and assess such evidence as has
been submitted by the parties before trial and on the basis thereof, make a
conclusion as whether or not it suffices to establish the guilt of the accused.

What are the principles governing the finding of probable cause for the
issuance of a warrant of arrest?

1. There is a distinction between the objective of determining probable cause by

the prosecutor and by the judge. The prosecutor determines it for the purpose
of filing a complaint or information, while the judge determines it for the
purpose of issuing a warrant of arrest – whether there is a necessity of placing
him under immediate custody in order not to frustrate the ends of justice.

2. Since their objectives are different, the judge should not rely solely on the
report of the prosecutor in finding probable cause to justify the issuance of a
warrant of arrest. The judge must decide independently and must have
supporting evidence other than the prosecutor’s bare report.

3. It is not required that the complete or entire records of the case during the
preliminary investigation be submitted to and examined by the judge. He must
have sufficient supporting documents upon which to make his independent
judgment.

Will the MTC issue a warrant under the Rule on Summary Procedure?
NO. The MTC will only issue a warrant of arrest if despite notice, you repeatedly
absented yourself during the trial.

Can a prosecutor issue a warrant of arrest?

NO. Issuance of a warrant of arrest is a judicial function; it is not a function the

Executive branch.