PHILIPPINE LAW REVIEWERS

HOME DIGESTS REVIEWERS JOKES CONTACT ME

Blog Archives SEARCH HERE

GO
Criminal Procedure Memory Aid
JAN 24 Posted by Magz
SUBSCRIBE

Join 1,089 other followers

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Enter your email address

Rule 110 PROSECUTION of Offenses

Subscribe by email

1. General Rule: MTC and RTC courts gain jurisdiction over the offense upon the filing of
complaint by a complainant or an information by the prosecuting officer
RECENT POSTS
à Court gains jurisdiction over the person of the accused upon arrest or surrender; such
jurisdiction once gained cannot be lost even if accused escapes (Gimenez vs. Nazareno)
Legal Ethics Case Digests – Imposition of
Proper Penalty
à Jurisdiction of the court over the offense is determined at the time of the institution of the
Legal Ethics Case Digests – Grant of a Motion
action and is retained even if the penalty for the offense is later lowered or raised (People vs.
for Reconsideration
Lagon)
Legal Ethics Case Digests – Issuance of an Order
of Release
2. Complaint – sworn written statement charging a person with an offense, subscribed by the
Legal Ethics Case Digests – Granting of Bail
offended party, any peace officer or other public official charged with the enforcement of the
Legal Ethics Case Digests – Payment of Docket
law violated
Fees in Election Cases
Information – accusation in writing charging a person with an offense, subscribed by the fiscal Legal Ethics Case Digests – Improper Imposition
of the Punishment of Contempt
and filed with the court
Legal Ethics Case Digests – Misrepresentation
3. Complaint and Information distinguished: and Non-payment of IBP Dues
Legal Ethics Case Digests – Duty of Lawyer to
Complaint Information Client/Proper Conduct
Legal Ethics Case Digests – Duty to
A sworn statement Need not be sworn to
Client/Accounting of Client’s Money/Negligence
Subscribed by the offended party, any peace Subscribed to by the fiscal Legal Ethics Case Digests – Duty to the
officer or other officer charged with the
Court/Negligence of a Lawyer
enforcement of the law violated
Jokes Part IV
May be filed either with the court or in the Filed with the court Jokes Part III
fiscal’s office generally to commence the
Jokes Part II
preliminary investigation of the charges made
Jokes Part I
4. Cases where civil courts of equal rank are vested with concurrent jurisdiction: 2014 Bar Examinations set in October
Civil Law – Property
1. Features stated in Art. 2, RPC Civil Law – Land Titles
Pre-Bar Quizzer in Political Law – PART 2:
à Cognizable by proper court in which charge is first filed Constitution of Liberty 101 – 120
Pre-Bar Quizzer in Political Law – PART 2:
1. Continuing crimes committed in different judicial regions
Constitution of Liberty 91 – 100
2. Offenses wherein any of the essential elements were committed in different territorial
Pre-Bar Quizzer in Political Law – PART 2:
jurisdictions
Constitution of Liberty 81 – 90
3. Offenses committed aboard a train, vehicle, aircraft or vessel (see R110, §15)

i. Railroad, train, aircraft

PAGES
(1) Territory or municipality where vehicle passed
Home
(2) Place of departure Digests
Legal Ethics Case Digests
(3) Place of arrival
Criminal Law Case Digests

ii. Vessel Reviewers

Administrative Law
(1) First port of entry Civil Law
Civil Procedure
(2) Thru which it passed during voyage Commercial Law
Constitutional Law
e. Libel and written defamation
Criminal Law
Criminal Procedure
5. Remedies of offended party when fiscal unreasonably refuses to file an information or
Election Law
include a person therein as an accused
Insurance Code
1. In case of grave abuse of discretion, action for mandamus Legal Ethics
2. Lodge a new complaint against the offenders Negotiable Instruments Law
3. Take up matter with the Secretary of Justice Political Law
4. Institute administrative charges against the erring fiscal Jokes
5. File criminal charges under Art. 208, RPC (prosecution of offenses) Contact Me
6. File civil action under Art. 27, NCC for damages (PO refuses or neglects to perform official duty)
7. Secure appointment of another fiscal
8. Institute another criminal action if no double jeopardy is involved CATEGORIES

6. Writs of injunction or prohibition to restrain a criminal prosecution are not available, Administrative Law
EXCEPT BAR Exam
Civil Law
1. To afford adequate protection to constitutional rights of accused
Civil Procedure
2. Necessary for the orderly administration of justice or to avoid oppression or multiplicity of
actions Commercial Law
3. Pre-judicial question which is sub judice Constitutional Law
4. Acts of the officer are without or in excess of authority Criminal Law
5. Prosecution is under an invalid law, ordinance or regulation Digests
6. Double jeopardy is clearly apparent Insurance Code
7. Court has no jurisdiction over the case Jokes
8. Case of persecution rather than prosecution Legal Ethics
9. Charges are manifestly false and motivated by lust for vengeance Negotiable Instruments Law
10. Clearly no prima facie case against the accused and MTQ on that ground had been denied Political Law
Remedial Law
7. Institution of Criminal Actions:

a. In RTC: ARCHIVES
à By filing a complaint with the appropriate officer for the purpose of conducting requisite
September 2014
preliminary investigation therein.
August 2014
b. In Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts: July 2014
June 2014
à By filing the complaint or information directly with said courts, or a complaint with the January 2012
fiscal’s office December 2011
October 2011
c. In Metropolitan Trial Courts September 2011
July 2011
à By filing the complaint ONLY with the office of the fiscal
June 2011
à In all 3 above cases, such institution shall interrupt the period of prescription of the offense May 2011
charged (Rule 110, §1)
ABOUT ME
d. Offenses subject to summary procedure

[i.e. (1) violation of traffic laws; (2) violation of rental laws; (3) violation of municipal or city
ordinances; and (4) criminal cases where the penalty does not exceed 6 months or fine of
P1000 or both, irrespective of other imposable penalties and civil liabilities]

à The complaint or information shall be filed directly in court without need of a prior
preliminary examination or preliminary investigation.

à Zaldivia vs. Reyes – since a criminal case covered by the Rules of Summary Procedure shall be
deemed commenced only when it is filed in court, then the running of the prescriptive period
shall be halted on the date the case is actually filed in court and not on any date before that.

à Reodica vs. CA – [clarifies Zaldivia above] Under Art. 91 of the RPC, the period of
prescription shall be interrupted by the filing of the complaint or information. It does not
distinguish whether the complaint is filed for preliminary examination or investigation only, or
for an action on the merits. Thus, the filing of the complaint even with the fiscal’s office
should suspend the running of the Statute of Limitations. The ruling in Zaldivia is not
applicable to all cases subject to the Rules on Summary Procedure, since that particular case Magz
involved a violation of an ordinance. Therefore, the applicable law therein was not Art. 91 of
First of all, I am not a lawyer. I'm a graduate of AB
the RPC, but Act No. 3326 (“An Act to Establish Periods of Prescription for Violations Penalized
Political Science and went to the College of Law
by Special Acts and Municipal Ordinances and to Provide when Prescription Shall Begin to but stopped going to law school for some reasons.
Run”), §2 of which provides that period of prescription is suspended only when judicial I'm a passionate teacher who has been teaching
proceedings are instituted against the guilty party. English to speakers of other languages and a
person who likes writing and blogging. I lost some
8. Contents of information important files and software when my computer
broke down so the reason I created this website is
a. Name of the accused
to preserve the notes, reviewers and digests I
collected when I was at the law school and at the
à Information may be amended as to the name of the accused, but such amendment cannot be
same time, I want to help out law students who do
questioned for the first time on appeal (People vs. Guevarra)
not have enough time to go and read books in the
library.
à Error of name of the offended party: if material to the case, it necessarily affects the
identification of the act charged. Conviction for robbery cannot be sustained if there is a View Full Profile →
variance between the allegation and the proof as to the ownership of the property stolen.

b. Designation of offense by statute (or of section/subsection of statute violated) META

à Only one offense charged, EXCEPT where law prescribes a single punishment for various
Register
offenses.
Log in
à If facts do not completely allege all the elements of the crime charged, the info may be Entries RSS
quashed; however, the prosecution is allowed to amend the info to include the necessary facts Comments RSS
(People vs. Purisima) WordPress.com

c. Acts or omissions complained of constituting the offense Advertisements

à Information need only allege facts, not include all the evidence which may be used to prove
such facts (Balitaan vs. CFI)

d. Name of offended party

e. Approximate time of commission

à Approximation of time is sufficient; amendment as to time is only a formal amendment; no

need to dismiss case (People vs. Molero)

à A significant discrepancy in the time alleged cannot be sustained since such would allow the
prosecution to prove an offense distantly removed from the alleged date, thus substantially
impairing the rights of the accused to be informed of the charges against him (People vs. REPORT THIS AD

Reyes)

f. Place of commission

à Conviction may be had even if it appears that the crime was committed not at the place
alleged, provided that the place of actual commission was within the court’s jurisdiction and
accused was not surprised by the variance between the proof and the information

à Qualifying and inherent aggravating circumstances need to be alleged as they are integral
parts of the crime. If proved, but not alleged, become only generic aggravating circumstances.

9. Amendment of information and Substitution of information, distinguished

Amendment Substitution
Involves either formal or substantial changes Necessarily involves a substantial change

Without leave of court if before plea Needs leave of court as original information has
to be dismissed

Where only as to form, there is no need for Another preliminary investigation is entailed
another preliminary investigation and retaking and accused has to plead anew
of plea of accused

Refers to the same offense charged or which Requires or presupposes that new info involves
necessarily includes or is necessarily included a different offense which does not include or is
in original charges, hence, substantial not included in the original charge, hence,
amendments to info after plea taken cannot be accused cannot claim double jeopardy
made over objections of accused for if original
info is withdrawn, accused could invoke double
jeopardy

10. After plea, amendment only as to matters of form, provided

1. Leave of court is obtained; and

2. Amendment is not prejudicial to rights of accused

11. When amendment is only as to form

1. Neither affects or alters nature of offense charged

2. Charge does not deprive accused of a fair opportunity to present his defense
3. Does not involve a change in basic theory of prosecution

12. Exceptions to rule on venue

1. Felonies in Art. 2, RPC (cognizable by proper court in which charge is first filed)
2. Continuing offenses
3. Piracy which is triable anywhere
4. Libel (residence; or where first published)
5. In exceptional cases, to ensure fair trial and impartial inquiry

13. Special cases (who may prosecute)

a. Adultery and concubinage

à Only offended spouse can be complainant

à Both guilty parties must be included in complaint

b. Crimes against chastity

à With consent of the offended party, offended spouse, grandparents, guardian, or state as
parens patriae, in that order

à Offended party, even if minor, has right to initiate the prosecution of the case independently
of parents, grandparents or guardian, unless she is incompetent/incapable on grounds other
than minority.

à If offended party who is a minor fails to file the complaint, her parents, grandparents or
guardian may do so.

à In crimes against chastity, the consent of the victim is a jurisdictional requirement–

retraction renders the information void (People vs. Ocapan)

à If complexed with a public crime, the provincial fiscal may sign the complaint on his own

c. Defamation (consisting of imputation of offenses in [a] or [b])

à Complainant must be offended party

à The offended party may intervene in the prosecution of the criminal case because of her
interest in it (Banal vs. Tadeo)

14. Procedure

1. Complaint filed in MTC or info filed in RTC where an essential ingredient of the crime took place
(territorial jurisdiction)
1. Amendment as a matter of right before plea
2. Amendment upon discretion of the court after plea

à Inclusion of other accused is only a formal amendment which would not be prejudicial to the
accused and should be allowed (People vs. CA)

d. After plea and before judgment, if it appears there was a mistake in charging proper
offense, court shall dismiss original info upon the filing of a corrected one, provided that the
accused will not be placed in double jeopardy (substitution)

à Fiscal determines direction of prosecution; complainant must ask fiscal if he wants to

dismiss the case; the motion to dismiss must be addressed to the court which has discretion
over the disposition of the case (Republic vs. Sunga)

à Objection to the amendment of an information or complaint must be raised at the time the
amendment is made; otherwise, deemed to have consented thereto.

15. Remedies

a. Motion to quash

à May be filed after arraignment but before plea on the grounds provided by the rules
(generally, a flaw in the info)

à If duplicity of offense charged is not raised in trial through a motion to quash info, the right
to question it is waived (People vs. Ocapan)

b. Motion to dismiss

à May be filed after plea but before judgment on most of grounds for motion to quash

16. Duplicity of Offense (in information or complaint)

à Defined as the joinder of separate and distinct offenses in one and the same
information/complaint

à Remedy: file a motion to quash; failure is equivalent to a waiver

à Exception: when existing laws prescribe a single punishment (complex crimes)

Rule 111 Prosecution of Civil Action

1. General Rule: The injured party may file a civil action independent of the criminal
proceeding to recover damages from the offender.

à Article 32 is a valid cause of a civil action for damages against public officers who impair the
Constitutional rights of citizens (Aberca vs. Ver)

à Even if the private prosecutor participates in the prosecution, if he is not given the chance
to prove damages, the offended party is not barred from filing a separate civil action

2. Civil action for recovery of civil liability impliedly instituted, EXCEPT

1. Waiver
2. Reservation of right to institute separate action
3. Institution of civil action prior to criminal action

à NOTE: Under SC Circular 57-97, all criminal actions for violations of BP Blg. 22 shall be
deemed to necessarily include the corresponding civil action, and no reservation to file such
civil action separately shall be allowed or recognized.

à San Ildefonso Lines vs. CA – past pronouncements of the SC that the requirement in Rule 111
that a reservation be made prior to the institution of an independent civil action is an
“unauthorized amendment” to substantive law is now no longer controlling. Far from altering
substantive rights, the primary purpose of the reservation requirement is to avoid multiplicity
of suits, to prevent delays, to clear congested dockets, to simplify the work of the trial court,
and in short, the attainment of justice with the least expense and vexation to parties-litigants.

3. Civil action suspended when criminal action filed, EXCEPT

1. Independent civil action (Arts. 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of NCC)

2. Prejudicial civil action
3. Civil case consolidated with criminal action
4. Civil action not one intended to enforce civil liability arising from the offense (e.g., action for
legal separation against a spouse who committed concubinage)

4. Prejudicial question arises when

1. The civil action involves an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the criminal
action
2. The resolution of such issue will determine whether the criminal action will proceed or not

à Requisites for a prejudicial question:

1. The civil action involves an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the criminal
action: and
2. The resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action may proceed

à Petition for suspension of criminal action is to be filed at any time before prosecution rests.

5. Remedies

a. Reservation of right to institute separate civil proceedings to recover civil liability arising
from crime

à Must be made before prosecution presents evidence

à Action instituted only after final judgment in criminal action

b. Petition to suspend the criminal action

à May be filed upon existence of a prejudicial question in a pending civil action

à Filed at any time before the prosecution rests

6. Extinction of penal action does not carry with it extinction of the civil unless the extinction
proceeds from a declaration in a final judgment that the fact from which the civil might arise
did not exist.

à Final judgment in civil absolving defendant from civil liability not a bar to criminal action

7. Filing fees:

1. Actual or compensatory damages – filing fees not required

2. Moral, temperate and exemplary – filing fees required

1. If alleged, fees must be paid by offended party upon filing of complaint or information
1. If not alleged, filing fees considered a first lien on the judgment

Rule 112 Preliminary Investigation

1. Preliminary investigation – inquiry or proceeding to determine if there is sufficient ground

to engender a well-founded belief that a crime cognizable by the RTC has been committed,
and that the respondent is probably guilty thereof, and should be held for trial

à A preliminary investigation is only necessary for an information to be filed with the RTC;
complaints may be filed with the MTC without need of an information, which is merely
recommendatory (Tandoc vs. Resultan)

à Absence of a preliminary investigation is NOT a ground for a motion to quash the

information; an information filed without a preliminary investigation is defective but not fatal;
in its absence, the accused may ask for one; it is the fiscal’s refusal to conduct a preliminary
investigation when the accused demands one which is a violation of the rights of the accused
(Doromal vs. Sandiganbayan). Court should not dismiss the info, but hold the case in abeyance
and either: (1) conduct its own investigation; or (2) require the fiscal to hold a reinvestigation.

2. GENERAL RULE: The fiscal conducts the preliminary investigation before filing an
information with the RTC, EXCEPT where the accused is lawfully arrested without a warrant
and an inquest is conducted.

3. Right to Preliminary Investigation

à A personal right and may be waived

à Waived by failure to invoke the right prior to or at least at the time of the plea

4. Who conducts Preliminary Investigation

1. Provincial or city fiscals and their assistants

2. Judges of MTC and MCTC
3. National and regional state prosecutors
4. Such other officers as may be authorized by law
5. Duly authorized legal officers of COMELEC
1. The Ombudsman
2. The PCGG, in cases of ill-gotten wealth

5. Procedure

a. If conducted prior to arrest

i. Complainant files complaint with

(a) Provincial or city fiscal

(b) Regional or state prosecutor

(c) MTC or MCTC judge, excluding MTC judge of Metro Manila or chartered cities

(d) Other offices authorized by law

1. Investigating officer either dismisses complaint or asks by subpoena complainant and respondent
to submit affidavits and counter-affidavits
1. If the investigating officer finds prima facie evidence, he prepares an information and a
resolution

à i.e., if fiscal finds reasonable ground to believe that a crime has been committed and
accused is probably guilty thereof

à Prima facie evidence is that evidence which, standing alone, unexplained and
uncontradicted, would be enough to merit a conviction of the accused

iv. Otherwise, he recommends the dismissal of the complaint

à If the investigating officer is an MTC judge, and he finds that probable cause exists and that
there is a need to place the accused under custody, then he may issue a warrant of arrest

à Flores vs. Sumaling – What differentiates the present rule from the previous one is that
while before, it was mandatory for the investigating judge to issue a warrant for the arrest of
the accused if he found probable cause, the rule now is that the investigating judge’s power to
order the arrest of the accused is limited to instances in which there is a necessity for placing
him in custody “in order not to frustrate the ends of justice.” It is therefore error for the
investigating judge to order the issuance of a warrant of arrest solely on his finding of probable
cause, without making any finding of a necessity to place the accused in immediate custody to
prevent a frustration of justice.

1. Investigating officer forwards records to the city fiscal or chief state prosecutor
1. City fiscal or state prosecutor either dismisses the complaint or files the information in
court

à Decision prevails over decision of the MTC judge

vii. Records will not form records of the case proper

à Court on its own or on motion may order production of record

b. If conducted after warrantless arrest

1. If accused waives Art. 125, RPC and asks for a preliminary investigation, with the assistance of
counsel, then the procedure for one prior to arrest is followed
1. Inquest conducted as follows

(a) Fiscal determines the validity of the arrest

(b) Fiscal determines existence of prima facie evidence based on the statements of the
complainant, arresting officer and witnesses

(c) Fiscal either dismisses the complaint and orders the immediate release of the accused, OR
prepares and files an information

à While fiscal has quasi-judicial discretion whether or not to file an information, once it is
filed with the court, the court acquires jurisdiction giving it discretion over the disposition of
the case and the Sec. of Justice should refrain from entertaining petitions for review or
appeals from the decision of fiscal (Crespo vs. Mogul; Velasquez vs. Undersecretary of Justice)

NOTE: Information may be filed by offended party, peace officer or fiscal without preliminary
investigation.

6. Remedies

a. Motion for preliminary investigation

à Filed when accused is arrested without warrant

à Must be with assistance of counsel and after waiving Art. 125, RPC

b. Motion for preliminary investigation

à Filed within 5 days after accused learns an information against him has been filed without a
preliminary investigation

c. Motion for re-investigation

d. Appeal to DOJ

à Filed upon denial of his motion for a preliminary investigation, on the ground that his rights
to due process of law were violated, ousting the court of jurisdiction

e. Petition for prohibition

à Filed with appellate court to stop the criminal proceedings

à Ordinarily, injunction will not lie but may be granted in certain cases

à When prohibition proper to restrain criminal proceedings:

1. When strong-arm tactics are used for vindictive purposes (Salonga vs. Cruz-Pano)
2. When the accused is deprived of his rights
3. When the statute on which the charge is based is null and void
4. When it will aid the administration of justice (Tatad vs. Sandiganbayan)
5. When multiplicity of suits will be avoided (Guingona vs. City Fiscal)

Rule 113 Arrest

1. Arrest – taking a person into custody in order that he may be bound to answer for the
commission of some offense, made by an actual restraint of the person or by his submission to
custody

2. General Rule: No person may be arrested without a warrant.

à Not all persons detained are arrested; only those detained to answer for an offense.

à “Invitations” are not arrests and are usually not unconstitutional, but in some cases may be
taken as commands (Babst vs. NBI); however, the practice of issuing an “invitation” to a person
who is investigated in connection with an offense he is suspected to have committed is
considered as placing him under “custodial investigation.” (RA 7438)

à Warrants of arrest remain valid until arrest is effected, or the warrant is lifted

à Arrest may be made at any time of the day or night

3. Warrantless arrests by a peace officer or a private person

a. When person to be arrested is committing, attempting or has committed an offense

b. When an offense has just been committed and the person making the arrest has personal
knowledge that the person to be arrested committed it

à Warrantless arrest anytime for a continuing offense like rebellion, subversion (Umil vs.
Ramos)

à The continuing crime, not the crime finally charged, needs only be the cause of the arrest
(Umil vs. Ramos)

c. When person to be arrested is an escaped detainee (either serving sentence or with case
pending)

1. When a person lawfully arrested escapes

2. Bondsman, for purpose of surrendering the accused
3. Accused attempts to leave country without court permission

4. Procedure

a. With warrant

1. Complainant files application with affidavits attached

2. Judge conducts ex parte preliminary examination to determine probable cause

à In determining probable cause, judge must:

(1) Personally examine witness

(2) Witness must be under oath

(3) Examination must be reduced to writing (Luna vs. Plaza)

à In determining probable cause, the judge may rely on findings by responsible officer (Lim vs.
Felix)

iii. Judge issues warrant of arrest

à If without preliminary examination, considered irregular (Bagcal vs. Villaraza)

iv. If peace officer is unable to serve warrant 10 days after issuance, he must file a report and
explanation with judge within 10 days

v. If warrant served

(1) Person informed that he is being arrested

(2) Informed of cause of his arrest

(3) Officer may break door or window if admission to building is refused

(4) Person physically restrained

à For private citizens making an arrest

à May not do so except to do some service to humanity or justice

(5) No violence or unnecessary force may be used

(6) Officer may summon assistance

(7) Person who escapes after arrest may be immediately pursued

vi. Person arrested is brought to nearest police station or jail

b. Without warrant:

1. Person is arrested
1. Person arrested may waive right to Art. 125, RPC and ask for preliminary investigation or
inquest

à Fiscal is not judicial authority contemplated under Art. 125 (Sayo vs. Chief of Police)

1. Fiscal files info

5. Requisites for a warrant of arrest:

1. Probable cause
2. Signed by judge
3. Specifically naming or particularly and sufficiently describing person to be arrested

à John Doe warrants are void for being general warrants (Pangandaman vs. Cesar)

6. Remedies

a. Petition for writ of habeas corpus

à Filed with any court, to effect immediate release of the person detained

à Filed when a person is being illegally detained (without judicial process), or was illegally
arrested (void warrant or unlawful warrantless arrest, or warrantless arrest beyond period with
no information filed)

à Habeas corpus is not allowed when:

1. The person is in custody of an officer under process of law, and

2. The court had jurisdiction to issue the process (Luna vs. Plaza)

à If an arrest is improper, the remedy is a motion for quashal of the warrant of arrest and/or a
motion to quash the information, not habeas corpus (Ilagan vs. Enrile)

à Habeas corpus is no longer available after an information has been filed, the information
being the judicial process required by law (Ilagan vs. Enrile)

à Habeas corpus is proper when a person is being restrained illegally, e.g., imprisoned past
maximum penalty allowed by law (Gumabon vs. Director of Prisons)

b. Quashal of warrant of arrest

à Filed with court which issued the warrant of arrest when the warrant of arrest is fatally
flawed

c. Motion to quash information

à Filed with court when information against the person arrested has been filed

à Must be made in a “special appearance” before the court questioning only its lack of
jurisdiction over the person of the accused

à Otherwise, the voluntary appearance of the person arrested by filing a motion before the
court would be deemed a submission to the authority of the court, thus granting it whatever
jurisdiction it lacked over the person

à Any irregularity in the arrest is cured when the petitioner submits himself to the jurisdiction
of the court, e.g., by filing for bail (Bagcal vs. Villaraza)

7. V.V. Mendoza, “Rights to Counsel in Custodial Investigation”

à Evolution of rights of the accused under custodial investigation

1. All involuntary confession were inadmissible; accused had to prove involuntariness

1. Involuntary confessions were inadmissible only if they were false
2. Revert to exclusionary rule: any involuntary confession is inadmissible
1. Miranda rule: the accused must be informed of his rights
1. To remain silent
2. Against self-incrimination
3. To counsel
4. Definition of custodial investigation questioned
1. It begins only after arrest
2. Police investigations prior to arrest are not covered
3. The rights may be waived, but the rights to be informed of these rights,
i.e., to warning, may not be waived
4. Warning must not only be said, officer must make sure the person arrested
understands them specifically
5. Present rules
1. Voluntary confessions are admissible
2. Test of voluntariness determined on a case-to-case basis
3. Waiver of rights must not only be with counsel but must be in writing

à Confessions made without assistance of counsel are inadmissible as evidence to incriminate

the accused, but they may be used to impeach the credibility of the accused, or they may be
treated as verbal admission of the accused through the testimony of the witnesses (People vs.
Molas)

Rule 114 Bail

1. Bail – security given for the release of a person in custody of law, furnished by him or a
bondsman, conditioned upon his appearance before any court as required under the following
conditions:

1. Undertaking effective upon approval and remains in force at all stages until promulgation of
judgment, unless sooner cancelled
2. Accused shall appear before court when required
3. Failure to appear despite notice to him or the bondsman will waive his right to be present and
trial shall proceed in absentia
4. Bondsman shall surrender accused for execution of judgment

à Bail applies to all persons detained, not just to those charged with the offense (Herras vs.
Teehankee)

à Court has power to prohibit person out on bail from leaving the country (Manotoc, Jr. vs. CA)

à Bail implies delivery of the accused to the sureties who, though not holding him prisoner,
may seize him and imprison him until they can deliver him to court (US vs. Bonoan)

2. General Rule: All persons are entitled to bail as a matter of right, except those charged
with capital offenses.

à Right to bail traditionally unavailable to military personnel facing court martial, who are not
in the same class as civilians (Comendador vs. de Villa)

à Bail should be available regardless of other circumstances or the merits of the case, if the
health or the life of the detainee is in danger (Dela Rama vs. People’s Court)

à Excessive bail is tantamount to denial of bail, which is unconstitutional (Dela Camara vs.
Enage)

3. When bail is a matter of right

à Before or after conviction by MTC, MCTC, MJC

à Before conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or
life imprisonment

4. When bail is discretionary (application filed with court where case is pending)

1. Upon conviction by RTC of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life
imprisonment
2. Provisional liberty under same circs. but during period to appeal subject to consent of bondsman
3. In case he has applied for probation after final judgment, he may be allowed temporary liberty
under his bail or recognizance

5. Procedure

a. Offense charged is not capital:

i. Accused applies for bail

(1) Where information against him was filed or where case is pending

(2) Absent (1), in another branch of the same court within the province or city where he is
held

(3) If arrested in another province, city or municipality, file with the RTC

(4) Absent (3), with the MTC

1. Judge sets bail

1. Accused may move to reduce bail, and hearing will be set
2. Accused posts bail and deposits the same with the Municipal/City/Provincial Treasurer or, if
cash, with the Collector of Internal Revenue
3. Accused is released

b. Offense charged is capital:

1. Accused petitions for bail