RULE 111 Question No.
14: Where to file the petition to suspend
Question No. 1 Should criminal and civil action be jointly
instituted? Exceptions?
Question No. 2: What are types of civil liabilities?
Question No. 3: When should reservation to institute a
separate civil action be made?
Question no. 4: Are counterclaim, etcetera, allowed to be
filed in criminal cases?
Question No. 5: Can the accused file his counterclaim,
cross-claim or third party claim be filed in the same
criminal action?
Question no. 6: What are the aims in the institution of
criminal and civil actions?
Question no. 7: In the event of acquittal, can the offended
party file an appeal?
Question no. 8: When can exemplary damages awarded?
Question No. 9: Does acquittal extinguishes civil
liability?
Question No. 10: When is the separate civil action
deemed suspended, and until when? Reason?
Question no. 11: Supposing that the accused dies during
the pendency of the case, what are its effect?
Question No. 12:Supposing that the civil case filed
against A by B, arising from fraud, was dismissed, can
the latter file a case for Estafa?
Question No. 13: What is a prejudicial question, its
elements?
criminal action due to prejudicial question?
Question No. 15: Why the need to suspend criminal
action based on prejudicial question?
Question No. 16: Wife A filed a case for Bigamy against
husband B. During the pendency of the criminal
proceeding, husband B filed a petition to declare his first
marriage null and void. Later on, husband B
contemplated of filing a petition for the suspension of
criminal proceeding based on prejudicial question. Where
will husband B file his petition and will it prosper?
CASES FOR READING
1.Phil. Rabbit Bus Lines Inc. vs People, G.R. No147703,
14 April 2004
2.ABS CBD Broadcasting Corp vs. Ombudsman, G.R.
No 133747, 13 Oct 2008
3. People vs Wahiman, 758 SCRA 366
4. (Ricarze vs. CA. G.R. No. 160451, 9 February 2007)
5. Mobilia Products Inc. vs. Hajime Umezawa, G.R. No
149357, supra
8. People vs Alinao g. R. No. 191256, 18 September,
2013
9. Cristina B. Salvador v. Phillip Salvador, G.R. No
191240, July 30, 2014
10. People vs Bayotas
11. VILLEGAS VS. CA
G.R. No. 82562, 271 SCRA
148 (April 11, 1997
RULE 112 – PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION
Q-1: What is Preliminary Investigation (PI)?
Q-2: What quantum of evidence required for purposes of
PI?
Q-3: How to determine probable cause?
Q-4: What is the purpose of PI?
Q-5: Is double jeopardy applicable in PI?
Q-6:What are the natures of Preliminary investigation?
Q-7: What is the nature of PI a right?
Q-8: What is the coverage for PI?
Q-9: Who are the officers authorized to conduct PI?
Q-10: When does PI commence?
Q-11: What are the contents of a complaint for purposes
of PI, How many copies should be prepared, its
accompanying documents?
Q-12: After having obtained a complaint and its
accompanying documents, what could be the steps an
Investigating Officer might perform? When?
Q-13: In what manner should subpoenas be served?
Q-14: After having receipt of subpoena, what are the
options left to the respondent? When?
Q-15: is motion for extension of time to file Counter
Affidavit allowed?
Q-16: Is motion to dismiss allowed to be filed in lieu of
affidavit?
Q-17: What if respondent could not be subpoenaed, or
does not submit his counter affidavit?
Q-18: Is clarificatory hearing mandatory? What are the
dos and donts during clarificatory hearing?
Q-19: Is right to counsel observed during PI?
Q-20: When is case deemed submitted for Resolution?
Q-21: What is the period to conduct PI?
Q-22: Explain the confidentiality requirements for PI.
Q-23: What could be the possible courses of action of the
city/provincial/PROSGEN on the recommendatory
resolution?
. Q-6: What are the parameters for the judge’s issuance of
Q:24: What are the recourses of the complainant if case is
dismissed?
CASES FOR READING
1. De Lima vs Reyes, G.R. No 209330, Jan 11,
2016
2. WEBB VS. DE LEON
GR 12134, 247 SCRA
652 (Aug 23, 1995)
4, 247 SCRA 652 (Aug 23, 1995)
3. De Ocampo vs Secretary of Justice, G.R. No.
147932, 25 January 2006
4. Estrada v. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 212140-41,
January 21, 2015
5. People v. Inting G.R. No. 88919, July 25, 1990
QUESTIONS
Q-1: Is arrest a necessary part of criminal proceeding?
What is its purpose?
Q-2: What are the laws that govern arrest warrants (AR)?
Q-3: What are the types of Arrests?
Q-4: State the privilege of members of congress as far as
arrest is concerned? Does this legislative privilege mean
immunity from suit?
Q-5: Who are authorized to issue warrants of arrest?
a warrant of arrest?
Q-7: What is judicial determination of probable cause?
How does it differ from determination of probable cause
in the PI stage?
Q-8: What is meant by personal determination of
probable cause by the judge?
Q-9: Once a judge dismisses a case for lack of probable
cause, does res judicata set in?
Q-10: What is the rule on arrest in Summary Procedure?
Q-11: At what instance when issue regarding irregularity
of arrest be raised, what would be the effect in case of
failure to raise it?
Q-12: How should arrest be carried out?
Q-13: What are the duties of officers in the execution of
the warrant?
Q-14: When is it allowed for officers making the arrest to
break in into building and enclosure, and when is it
allowed to break out from building and enclosure?
Q-15: Who are authorized to implement the warrant of
arrest?
Q-16: What are the grounds for the quashal of Warrant of
Arrest?
Q-17: Are all arrests be made by virtue of an arrest
warrant?
Q-18: Is there an instance when arrest is superfluous?
CASES FOR READING
1. Ma. Gracia Hao and Danny Hao vs People, G.R. No.
183345, 17 Sept ’14
2. Mendoza vs. people and Juno Cars Inc., G.R. no.
197293, 21 April 2014
3. People vs Mejia
4. Ocampo vs Abando, G.R. No. 176830, 11 Feb ‘14
5. Office of Court Adminsitrator vs. Hon Rosabella
Tormis, A.M. No. MTJ-12-1817, 12 March 2013
6. Homar vs. People, 768 SCRA 584
7. Breis vs. People, 767 SCRA 40
8. Libnao vs. People. G.R. No. 136860, Jan. 20, 2003
Qs
1. What is bail, what are its the forms?
2. What is the purpose or objective of bail?
3. State the Constitutional basis for Right to Bail.
4. What conditions are set for the granting of bail?
5. When is the presence of the accused required?
6. Distinguish custody of the law different from
jurisdiction of the court?
7. What pleadings are exceptions to the rule that the
filing thereof seeking affirmative relief constitute
voluntary submission of one’s person to the court’s
jurisdiction?
8. Would an application for bail bar the accused from
questioning the validity or his arrest, the validity of
the warrant, or the manner of conducting the
preliminary investigation?
9. Can the governor who has administrative
supervision and control of members of the Provincial
Detention Reformatory Center (PDRC) order the
release of detention prisoners of the PDRC?
10. What is recognizance?
11. State the parameters in fixing the amount of bail
12. Where should bail be filed?
13. When is bail a matter of right?
14.Should the court grant bail for accused convicted
with imprisonment exceeding 6 years?
15. When is bail discretionary?
16. What is a capital offense?
17. When is a bail hearing compulsory?
18.Who has the burden of proving that the evidence of
guilt is strong?
19.May a petition for bail be granted without hearing.
20. Supposing that accused, who was charged for a
capital offense, was convicted on a non-capital offense,
can he, during appeal, file for bail?
CASES
1. Jose T. Obosa vs. CA and People of the phil,78 SCRA
17
2. PP vs. Engracio Valeriano y Tumahig, et al., 226
SCRA 695
3. Manotoc vs CA, L-62100, May 30, 1986, 142 SCRA
154
4. almeda vs Villaluz, 86 SCRA 38
5. Pico vs Judge Combong, Jr.
6. Feliciano v. Pasicolan
7. Jose C. Miranda vs. Virgilio Tuliao, G.R. No. 158763,
March 31, 2006
1. What are the rights of the accused in a criminal
proceeding?
The following are the rights accorded the accused:

1. To be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved
beyond
reasonable doubt.
 such fact. For example, an accountable public officer who
2. To be informed of the nature and cause of the
accusation
against him.
3. To be present and defend in person and by counsel at
every stage of the proceedings, from arraignment to
promulgation of the judgment.
4. To testify as a witness in his own behalf but subject to
cross- examination on matters covered by direct
examination. His silence shall not in any manner
prejudice him.
5. To be exempt from being compelled to be a witness
against himself.
6. To confront and cross-examine the witnesses against
him at the trial. Either party may utilize as part of its
evidence the testimony of a witness who is deceased, out
of or can not with due diligence be found in the
Philippines, unavailable, or otherwise unable to testify,
given in another case or proceeding, judicial or
administrative, involving the same parties and subject
matter, the adverse party having the opportunity to cross-
examine him.
7. To have compulsory process issued to secure the
attendance of witnesses and production of other evidence
in his behalf.
8. To have speedy, impartial and public trial.
9. To
appeal in all cases allowed and in the manner prescribed
by law.
2. Does presumption of innocence admit exemptions?
Yes
1. If there is a REASONABLE CONNECTION between
the fact presumed and the fact ultimately proven from
fails to account for funds or property that should be in his
custody is presumed to be guilty of malversation of public
funds; or that persons in possession of recently stolen
goods are presumed guilty of the offense in connection
with the goods
2. In cases of SELF-DEFENSE, the person who invokes
the self- defense is presumed guilty. The burden of
proving the elements of self-defense is incumbent upon
the accused.

3. When does right to counsel arise?
4.Is the client bound by his lawyer’s mistake?
As a rule, the mistake of counsel binds the
client
 Therefore, the client cannot question a
decision on the ground
that his counsel was an idiot
 However, an exception
to this if counsel misrepresents himself as
a lawyer, and he turns out to be a fake lawyer. In this
case, the accused is entitled to new trial because his right
to be represented by a member of the bar was violated.
He was thus denied of his right to counsel and due
process.
5.What is the difference between waiver or right to
counsel during custodial investigation and during trial?
Yes. During the trial, the right to counsel means the right
to effective counsel. During trial, the purpose of the
counsel is not so much to protect the accused from being
forced to confess, but rather is to defend the accused.
On the other hand, a custodial
investigation has stricter requirements. A
custodial investigation requires the presence of a
competent and independent counsel, who is
preferably the accused’s own choice.
Furthermore, the right to counsel could only be
waived in writing and in the presence of counsel.
A custodial investigation take
note is not done in public, hence the danger that
confessions will be extracted against the will of
the defendant during the custodial investigation.
This danger doesn't really exist during trial since
the latter is done in public.
6. Is the right to counsel absolute?
No since the right of choice must
be exercised in a reasonable manner within
reasonable time.
The accused cannot insist on
counsel that he cannot afford, one who is not a
member of the bar, or one who declines for a
valid reason.
Also the right of the accused to
choose counsel is subject to the right of the state
to due process and adequate justice.
7.Is right to counsel applicable in administrative
investigation?
8. What is meant by Silence in Rules of Evidence?
9.What is the extent of the right against self-
incrimination?
The right against self-incrimination covers
testimonial compulsion only
NOT the compulsion to produce real or physical evidence
using the body of the accused which may be material
10.Exceptions to right against self-incrimination?
The right cannot be invoked when the State has the rights
to inspect documents under its police power, such as
documents of corporations.
11.What is the purpose of right to confrontation
WHAT IS THE MEANING OF THE RIGHT OF
CONFRONTATION?
It means that the accused can only be tried using
those witnesses that meet him face to face at the
trial who give testimony in his presence, and
who may be subject to cross-examination 

WHAT ARE THE REASONS FOR THE RIGHT?


The right to confrontation is afforded the accused
to allow the court to observe the demeanor of the
witness while testifying and
to give the accused the opportunity to cross-examine
the witness in order to test their recollection and
credibility
12. In people vs Berdaje (99 SCRA 388), how was the
compulsory process to secure attendance of defense
witness stressed?
It is the right of the accused to have a subpoena and/or a
subpoena duces tecum issued in his behalf in order to
compel the attendance of witnesses and the production of
evidence
-ADELINO wanted to have Narita testify on his behalf,
and a subpoena had been issued to her. But instead of
taking effective steps to have Narita brought to Court, the
lower court gave responsibility for Narita's attendance
to the defense, expressly stating that, if the defense
was not able to bring her to the Court, her testimony
will be dispensed with
Considering that this case involved a prosecution for a
capital offense, the lower Court acted precipitously in not
having Narita brought to Court, by ordering her arrest if
necessary ADELINO was deprived of his right "to have
compulsory process issued to secure the attendance of
witnesses on his behalf."
13. What is the purpose of public trial?
The trial should be public in order to prevent abuses that
may be committed by the court to the prejudice of the
defendant. Moreover, the accused is entitled to the moral
support of his friends and relatives.

1. MGen Garcia vs Executive Secretary, G.R. No.

198554. July 30, 2012
14. Is there an exception to the requirement of public 2. Cadet Cudia vs. PMA
trial? 3. US vs Katigbak et al. 35 Phil 367
Yes. The court may bar the public in certain cases, such 4. Herrera v. Alba and Hon. Cuesta-Vilches, G.R.
as when the evidence to be presented may be offensive to No.148220
decency or public morals, or in rape cases, where the 5. JAIME D. DELA CRUZ vs.
purpose of some persons in attending is merely to ogle at PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, G.R. No. 200748,
the parties. July 23, 2014
6. Gutang vs People, 390 Phil. 805 (2000).
7. Garcia vs Domingo, 52 SCRA, 143)
8. Braza vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 195032,
15. In determining whether or not the right to the speedy February 20, 2013
disposition of cases has been violated what are the 9. Anita Ramirez vs people, G.R. 197832, October 2,
guidelines set under MGen Carlos Garcia vs. Executive 2013
Secretary (G.R. No. 198554, July 30, 2012)?

In determining whether or not the right to the speedy

disposition of cases has been violated, this Court has laid
down the following guidelines: (1) the length of the
delay; (2) the reasons for such delay; (3) the assertion or
failure to assert such right by the accused; and (4) the
prejudice caused by the delay.

16. When is the right of the accused to speedy trial

deemed violated? factors to consider (Braza vs
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 195032, February 20, 2013)?

the doctrinal rule is that in the determination of whether

that right has been violated, the factors that may be
considered and balanced are as follows: (1) the length of
the delay; (2) the reasons for the delay; (3) the assertion
or failure to assert such right by the accused; and (4) the
prejudice caused by the delay.

Using the foregoing yardstick, the Court finds that

Braza’s right to speedy disposition of the case has not
been infringed.

17. What is meant to the notion that right to appeal is not

a natural right but a statutory right?

Cases