Criminal Procedure Notes based on Riano NOTE: these crimes shall not be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed

not be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by the

offended spouse
Prosecution of Criminal Action: RULE: PROSECUTOR CANNOT PROSECUTE THE CASE WHERE NO
 Under the supervision of the PUBLIC PROSECUTOR COMPLAINT IS FILED BY THE OFFENDED SPOUSE
1. Direct supervision  Cannot be instituted against one party alone! AGAINST BOTH GUILTY
2. Control PARTIES!
Cases where it cannot be prosecuted
When PRIVATE PROSECUTOR intervenes  If the offended party has consented to the offense or has pardoned the
 Allowed ONLY where the civil action is INSTITUTED in the criminal action offenders (express/implied)
 Remember that civil actions are deemed instituted
 If the offended party 3. Seduction
1. Waives 4. Abduction
2. Reserves 5. Acts of lasciviousness
3. Institutes civil action prior to the criminal action SAME RULE: cannot be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by the:
1. Offended party – even if minor, still has the right to initiate
 The PRIVATE PROSECUTOR CANNOT INTERVENE! 2. Parents
Exception on the involvement of the private prosecutor: 3. Grandparents or legal guardian
 If he is authorized to do so in writing 4. State
 He may prosecute up to the end of the trial 6. Defamation
 Provided, the authorization shall be given by either the Chief of the -- should be the imputation of the offenses of adultery, concubinage, seduction,
Prosecution Office or the Regional State Prosecutor abduction, and acts of lasciviousness
 AND, must be approved by the court SIMILAR RULE: filed by the offended party
 HOWEVER, it may be revoked or withdrawn by the public prosecutor any time
Since prosecution is under the control and supervision of the PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, V COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION
it follows that the SC CANNOT compel the former to file and information, or prosecute Complaint, defined.
a person if he believes that there is no probable cause in doing the same!  Sworn written statement
Exception: grave abuse of discretion on the public prosecutor  Charging a person with an offense
 Subscribed by the offended party, any peace officer, or other public officer
Hierarchy:  Name: People of the Philippines
DOJ ------ SEC of Justice ------- PROSECUTORS Private offended parties – only as witnesses
 Thus they may not appeal the dismissal of a criminal case or the acquittal
Criminal action in MTC or MCTC – prosecuted under the public prosecutor ONLY the civil aspect
If public prosecutor is absent or not available, may be prosecuted by:  In so doing, the private offended party who appeals must prosecute in his own
1. Offended party personal capacity
2. Any peace officer So how then can a dismissal or acquittal of the criminal case be appealed?
3. Public officer charged with the enforcement of the law violated  CAN ONLY BE APPEALED BY THE OSG
 Reason: private offended party has no legal personality to do so
III PROSECUTION OF PRIVATE CRIMES  Chapter12, Title III, Book IV of the Admin. Code
What are these crimes?  Only the OSG can bring and/or defend actions on behalf of the
1. Adultery Republic or represent the people or the State in criminal proceedings pending in the
2. Concubinage Supreme Court and the CA
Information, defined.
 Accusation in writing Question: What happens if there is a mistake on the name of the accused?
 Not required to be sworn; because the prosecutor is under the oath Answer: A mistake in the name of the accused is not equivalent, and does not
of his office necessarily amount to, a mistake in the identity of the accused especially when
 Charging a person with an offense sufficient evidence is adduced to show that the accused is pointed to as one of the
 Subscribed by the prosecutor perpetrators of the crime. However, the identity must be proven.
 And filed with the court
 Name: People of the Phils In offenses against property – it is enough that the property is described with such
particularity as to properly identify the offense charged.
What happens if there is infirmity of the signature in the information?
 The information confers jurisdiction on the court, thus if there is infirmity – Statement of the qualifying and aggravating circumstances:
invalid  Needed since without it, the accused cannot be convicted of qualifying
 An infirmity in the information, such as lack of authority of the officer signing or aggravating circumstance even if proven in court
it, cannot be cured by silence, acquiescence, or even by express consent  Even if an aggravating circumstance had been proven, but was not alleged,
The complaint or information should include the ff (sufficiency test): courts will not award exemplary damages!
1. Name – all of the accused  Reason: tantamount to denial of due process since the accused is deprived
2. Designation of the offense given by the statute to be informed of the charges against him!
3. Acts/omissions complained of - should be described with such particularity  How about mitigating? – no need. The accused may be convicted with
as to appraise the accused, with reasonable certainty, of the offense charged mitigating circumstances, since the nature of it is in favor of the accused
a. Offense being charged VI. VENUE OF CRIMINAL ACTIONS
b. Acts or omissions complained of Criminal action shall be instituted and tried in the court of the municipality or territory:
c. Qualifying and aggravating circumstances a. Where the offense was committed
4. Name of the offended party b. Where any of its essential ingredients occurred
5. Approximate date of the commission – unless material element/ingredient of VII. AMENDMENT OR SUBSTITUTION OF THE COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION
the crime  Before plea or arraignment – leave of court not required
6. Place where the offense was committed  Without leave of court
Purpose: TO ENABLE THE ACCUSED TO SUITABLE PREPARE FOR HIS  Any formal or substantial amendment may be made
DEFENSE, SINCE HE IS PRESUMED TO HAVE NO INDEPENDENT KNOWLEDGE  After plea or arraignment
OF THE FACTS THAT CONSTITUTE THE OFFENSE!  Amendment is prohibited
Note: sufficiency of information is not negated by an incomplete or defective  Except if beneficial to the accused
designation of the crime. Failure to specify the correct crime committed will not bar  Before plea or arraignment – leave of court required where:
conviction of the accused.  The amendment downgrades the nature of the offense charged;
Question: When is the right time to question the sufficiency or validity of the  The amendment excludes any accused
information or complaint? Formal Amendment, defined.
Answer: before arraignment or during trial, otherwise, deemed waived.  New allegations which relate only to the range of the penalty
Actions: 1) bill of particulars; 2) quashal of the information  Which does not charge another offense different or distinct from that charged
Question: What should be given preference, the designation of the crime in the in the original one
information or the allegation of the facts?  Additional allegations which do not alter the prosecution’s theory
Answer: The allegation of facts is controlling because the nature and character of  Does not adversely affect any substantial right
the crime charged are determined not by the designation of the specific crime, but by  An amendment that merely adds specifications to eliminate vagueness in the
the facts alleged in the information. So even if the information is defective, the information
allegation of facts must be preferred over the defective information. Allegation in the  Not to introduce new and material facts
information, not the technical name given by the prosecutor.
 Merely states with additional precision something which is already contained
in the original information
 Adds nothing essential for conviction
Facts of a case: prosecutor entered his amendment by crossing out the word Homicide
and instead wrote the word Murder
Issue: Is it a formal or substantial amendment?
Ruling: Only a formal amendment. The only change made was in the caption of the
case; and in the opening paragraph or preamble of the Information, with the crossing
out of word Homicide and its replacement by the Murder. There was no change in the
recital of facts constituting the offense charged or in the determination of the jurisdiction
of the court. The averments in the amended Information for murder are exactly the
same as those already alleged in the original information for homicide, as there was
not at all any change in the act imputed to the accused. In allowing formal
amendments in which the accused has already pleaded, it is necessary that the
amendments do not prejudice the rights of the accused.
Test whether the rights of the accused are prejudiced by the amendment of a complaint
or information is:
1. whether a defense under the complaint or information, as it originally stood,
would no longer be available after the amendment is made; and
2. When any evidence the accused might have would be inapplicable to the
complaint or information.
Since the facts alleged in the accusatory portion of the amended information are
1. identical with those of the original information for homicide,
2. there could not be any effect on the prosecution’s theory of the case;
3. neither would there be any possible prejudice to the rights or defense of
petitioner.
SUBSTITUTION OF COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION
 if it appears at any time before judgment that a mistake has been made in
charging the proper offense
 if it becomes manifest that the accused cannot be convicted of the offense
charges or of any other offense necessarily included therein, the court shall commit the
accused to answer for the proper offense by requiring the filing of the proper
information.
 Accused shall not be discharged if there appears good cause to detain him.
After the proper information is filed, it shall dismiss the original case
 in such a case, the court shall dismiss the original complaint or information
once the new one charging the proper offense is filed
 provided, accused will not be placed in double jeopardy
 may be made before or after arraignment
Substitution, distinguished/defined
 substantial change
 with leave of court as the original information has to be dismissed
 requires another preliminary investigation and the accused has to plead anew
to the new information filed
 new information involves a different offense which does not include or is not
necessarily included in the original charge, hence, accused cannot claim double
jeopardy!
Amended information entails:
 formal or substantial amendment
 before plea can be without leave of court, etc
 only to form – no need for preliminary investigation
 amendment of the same offense charged – hence, substantial amendments
to the information after the plea has been taken cannot be made over the objection of
the accused, for if the original information would be withdrawn, the accused could
invoke double jeopardy!
CHAPTER III – PROSECUTION OF CIVIL ACTION
 when criminal action is instituted, the civil action is deemed included
 every person criminally liable for felony is also civilly liable
 the rule on implied institution of the civil action does not apply before the
filing of the criminal action or information --- when there is no criminal case yet
against the respondents as when the Ombudsman is still in the process of finding
probable cause to prosecute the respondent
Civil liability arising from the crime – the governing law is rules of Criminal Procedure
not rules of civil procedure!
Exception: civil action other than the one arising from the crime is not suspended
by the commencement of the criminal action because they may proceed independently
of the criminal proceedings.
Reservation of the civil action should be made before the prosecution starts
presenting its evidence!
Note: after the criminal action is commenced, the separate civil action arising therefrom
cannot be instituted until final judgment has been entered in the criminal action!
 Preference is given to the resolution of the criminal action
 If the civil action was commenced before the institution of the criminal
action, the civil action shall be suspended in whatever stage it may be found before
judgment on the merits, once the criminal action is filed. The suspension shall last until
final judgment is rendered in the criminal action
 Exception: does not apply to independent civil action since they are distinct
and separate from the civil action arising from the offense committed
 Another exception: prejudicial question
RULE on counterclaims, etc:
 NO COUNTERCLAIM, CROSS-CLAIM, THIRD-PARTY CLAIM IN A CRIMINAL
CASE may be filed by the accused in the criminal case but any cause of action which
could have been the subject may be litigated in a separate civil action.
Note that a criminal case is not the proper proceedings to determine the private
complainant’s civil liability.
A court trying a criminal case is limited to determining the guilt of the accused, and if
proper, to determine his civil liability those arising only from offense.
CAUSE OF DEATH of the accused:
 If the accused dies after arraignment and during the pendency of the criminal
action
– the civil liability arising from the crime – extinguished (but this does not preclude the
offended party from filing a separate civil action based on other sources of obligation
may be continued)
 Dies before arraignment – case dismissed but the offended party may file
the proper civil action
 Death prior to final judgment – terminates criminal liability and only civil
liability directly arising from and based solely on the offense committed (again, does
not bar for filing a separate civil action on other sources of obligation)
 Death during pendency of his appeal with SC – totally extinguished the
criminal and civil action based solely on the crime. Reason: no final judgment of
conviction was yet rendered by the time of his death.
Novation of contract: extinguishment of criminal liability
Criminal liability is not affected by a compromise or novation of contract
It may affect the civil liability but not the criminal aspect since it is a public offense
which must be prosecuted and punished by the government.
EFFECT OF ACQUITTAL OR EXTINCTION OF THE PENAL ACTION ON THE CIVIL
ACTION OR CIVIL LIABILITY
Degree of evidence: mere preponderance of evidence
Note: extinction of the penal action does not carry with it the extinction of the civil
action where:
a. Acquittal is based on reasonable doubt
b. Court declares that the liability is only civil
c. Civil liability does not arise from or is not based upon the crime of which he
was acquitted
However, extinction of the civil action based on delict – deemed extinguished
 Provided, there is a fining in a final judgment in the criminal action that the
act or omission from which the civil liability may arise did not exist!
Note: when the trial court acquits or dismisses the case on the ground of lack of
evidence to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, the civil action is not automatically
extinguished since liability on civil action can be determined based on mere
preponderance of evidence!
Hence, there is a requirement to state whether the prosecution absolutely failed to
prove his guilt or merely failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt – in either case it
shall determine if the act or omission from which the civil liability might arise did not
exist
Example: may be acquitted but if his negligence is proved by mere preponderance of
evidence, he may still be civilly liable
Elementary rule: payment of civil liability does not extinguish criminal liability
PREJUDICIAL QUESTION, defined
 Previously instituted civil action
 issued involved in a civil case
 which is similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the criminal case
 resolution of which
 determines whether or not the criminal action may proceed
 civil action instituted previously or ahead of the criminal action; must precede
the criminal action
 civil action requires a decision before a final judgment can be rendered in the
criminal action
 proceedings in the second case may be suspended to await the resolution of
the prejudicial question in the first case
 existence of two actions –civil action and criminal action
 the issue in the civil case needs to be resolved first before it is determined
whether or not the criminal case should proceed or whether or not there should be, in
the criminal case, a judgment of acquittal or conviction
 the issue raised in the civil action is determinative of the guilt of the accused
in the criminal aspect
 the issue in the civil case is determinative of the issue in the criminal case;
the resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action may proceed
 it follows that if the resolution of the issue in the civil action will not determine
the criminal responsibility of the accused in the criminal action based on the same facts,
the civil case does not involve a prejudicial question. Neither is there a prejudicial
question if the civil and the criminal action can proceed independently of each other,
that is, the criminal action can proceed without waiting for the resolution of the issues
in the civil case
Reason: to avoid two conflicting decisions
REQUISITES:
1. civil case involves facts intimately related to those upon which the criminal
prosecution would be based;
2. in the resolution of the issues raised in the civil case, the guilt or innocence
of the accused would necessarily be determined
3. jurisdiction to try said questions must be lodged in another tribunal
Not a prejudicial question if:
1. both cases are criminal
2. both civil
3. both cases are administrative
4. one case is administrative and other civil
5. one case is administrative and other criminal
6. criminal case was instituted prior to the civil case!
Effect of the prejudicial question:
1. suspension for the criminal action may be filed
2. the criminal case may be suspended pending the final determination of the
issues in the civil case – this is the exception on the general rule that if the civil action
was commenced before the institution of the criminal action, the civil action shall be
suspended in whatever stage it may be found before judgment on the merits, once the
criminal action is commenced – the suspension shall last until final judgment is
rendered in the criminal action
3. accords a civil case a preferential treatment and constitutes an exception to
the general rule that the civil action shall be suspended when the criminal action is
instituted
4. however, suspension does not include dismissal therefore, double jeopardy
cannot be invoke
Where and when to file the petition for suspension
1. does not need to wait for the criminal case to be filed in court, it is sufficient
that there be previously instituted civil case – it may be filed in the stage of preliminary
investigation
2. the petition for suspension should be filed in the criminal case not in the civil
case since what is
3. suspended is the criminal case right?? Lol
4. where? – in the office of the prosecutor conducting the preliminary
investigation
5. any time before the prosecution rests

Case illustrations:
Preliminary Investigation
by the prosecutor
purpose: whether the accused should be purpose: to determine probable cause
held for trial or if he should be released for the issuance of a warrant of arrest
Nature: executive, since it is part of the Nature: judicial
prosecutor’s job
Irregularity of arrest (not in
accordance with Rule 113,
Sec5(a)&(b)
Inquest proceeding shall not
proceed
Release of the detainee
*if the evidence warrants
preliminary investigation, the
prosecutor may serve notice
to the detainee
Preliminary Examination
by the judge
Case Facts Ruling
(People v. More than two days before the marijuana is inadmissible since it
Aminnudin) arrest, the officers received a tip was not incident to a lawful arrest.
that the accused was on board The accused was not, at the
an identified vessel and carrying moment of his arrest, committing
Proper arrest
marijuana; acting on the a crime nor was it shown that he
information they waited for the was about to do so or that he had
accused and approached him as just done so. He was just
Inquest shall proceed he descended the ship and descending the ship; no outward
arrested him. indication that called for his
Detainee may ask for bail (?) arrest. To all appearances, he
Prosecutor should ask the detainee if he wants to was like any other passengers
avail preliminary investigation (remember: purpose innocently disembarking from the
of preliminary investigation is to determine the vessel. The officers could have
probability of guilt of the accused, and whether he obtained a warrant since they had
should be held for trial reasonable time to apply
(People v. The accused were arrested Invalid arrest made merely on the
Molina) while inside a pedicab despite basis of reliable information that
the absence of any outward the persons arrested were
indications of a crime being carrying marijuana
committed.
(Malacat v. A warrantless arrest cannot be
CA). justified where no crime is being
committed at the time of the
arrest because no crime may be
inferred from the fact that the
eyes of the person arrested were
moving fast and looking at every
person passing by
People v. There was a telephone call from The requirements of a
Mengote. an alleged informer that warrantless arrest were not
suspicious looking men were at complied with. There was no
a street corner. The operatives offense which could have been
dispatched to the place, they suggested by the acts of Mengote
saw three men who was looking of looking from side to side while
 from side to side clutching his
abdomen. The operatives
approached the men and
introduce themselves as
policemen. Two of them tried to
run away but the attempt was
foiled. The search yielded a
revolver in the possession of
Mengote and a fan knife in the
pocket of another.
People v Two men who were arrested told
Laguio. the officers that they knew of a
scheduled delivery of shabu by
their employer WW. The police
operatives proceeded to the
place and found WW who came
out of the apartment towards a
parked car, the officers
approached him, introduced
themselves and upon hearing
that he was WW, immediately
he frisked him and asked him to
open the back compartment of
the car. When frisked, an
unlicensed pistol with live
ammunitions was found inside
his pocket. The operatives
searched the car and found
shabu, unlicensed pistol, etc
Case Facts
People v. The accused was carrying a
Anita woven buri-like plastic bag which
Claudio appeared to contain camote tops,
boarded a bus. Overt act:
instead of placing the bag by her
side, which is the usual practice
holding his abdomen. These are
obviously not sinister acts. He
was not skulking in the shadows
but walking in the clear light of
day. By no stretch of the
imagination could it have been
inferred from these acts that an
offense had just been committed,
or was at least being attempted in
their presence.
the facts and circumstances did
not manifest any suspicious
behavior on the part of WW that
would reasonably invite the
attention of the police. He was
merely walking from the
apartment and was about to enter
a parked car when the police
operatives arrested him, frisked
and searched his person and
commanded him to open the
compartment of the car. He was
not committing any visible
offense then. Therefore, there
can be no valid warrantless arrest
in flagrante delicto. It is settled
that reliable information alone,
absent any overt act indicative of
a felonious enterprise in the
presence and within the view of
the arresting officers, is not
sufficient to constitute probable
cause that would justify an in
flagrante delicto arrest.
Ruling
of a traveler, she placed the same
on the back seat where a trained
anti-narcotics agent was seated.
Since the act of the accused was
unusual, the suspicion of the
agent was aroused. Feeling that
something was unusual, the
agent inserted his finger inside
the bag where he felt another
plastic bag in the bottom from
which emanated the smell of
marijuana. Right after she got off
the bus, the agent arrested the
accused.
People v. Two police officers together with there was a valid warrantless
Tangliben. a barangay tanod were arrest and a valid warrantless
conducting surveillance search, since the officers were
operations in a bus station to faced by an “on-the-spot”
check on persons who may be information which required them
engaging in the traffic of to act swiftly.
dangerous drugs based on
information supplied by
informers. They noticed a person
carrying a red travelling bag who
was acting suspiciously. When
asked to open the bag, the
accused did so only after the
officers identified themselves.
Found in the bag were marijuana
leaves.
People v Because of confidential reports Again, the Court distinguish
Maspil from informers that two persons Maspil from Aminnudin. In
would be transporting a large Aminnudin, the officers were
quantity of marijuana, officers aware of the identity of the
set up a checkpoint to monitor, accused, his planned criminal
inspect, and scrutinize vehicles. enterprise and the vessel he
A couple of hours after midnight, would be taking, and the officers
a jeepney was flagged down in had sufficient time to obtain a
the checkpoint. On board were search warrant. In Maspil, the
the persons identified by the officers had no exact description
informers who were also with the of the vehicle of the accused,
policemen manning the and no idea of the definite time
 checkpoint. When the sacks and of its arrival. A jeepney on the
tin cans were opened, they road is not the same as a
contained marijuana leaves passenger boat the route and
time of arrival of which are more
or less certain and which
ordinarily cannot deviate or alter
its course or select another
destination.
People v Two robbers divested the
Acol. passengers of a jeepney of their
belongings including the jacket of
one passenger. The passengers
immediately sought the help of
police officers which formed a team
to track down the suspects. One of
the passengers, who went with the
police officers, saw one of the
robbers casually walking in the
same vicinity and wearing his
jacket.
People v The police station received a report
Gerente. of a mauling incident, right away the
officers went to the crime scene and
found a piece of wood with blood
stains, a hollow block and two
pouches of marijuana. A witness
told the police that the accused was
one of those who killed the victim.
They proceeded to the house of the
accused and arrested him.
The warrantless arrest of the
accused was sustained by the
Court as well within the hot
pursuit exception.
 based on their
knowledge of the circumstances
of the death of the victim and the
report of an eyewitness, in
arresting the accused, the
officers had personal
knowledge of facts leading them
to believe that it was the
accused who was one of the
perpetrators of the crime.

Case Facts Judgment

Abelita III A team was dispatched to
v. Doria investigate. The investigation
WHAT: disclosed that a victim was
shooting wounded and that the witness
incident tagged the petitioner as the one
involved and that he had just left the
scene of the crime. After tracking
down the petitioner, he was invited
to the police headquarters but the
petitioner sped off.
The petitioner’s act of trying to
get away, coupled with the
incident report which they
investigated, is enough to raise
a reasonable suspicion on the
part of the police authorities.
 To determine:
1. Whether a crime has been committed
1. Private respondent filed an action for frustrated parricide, then several months 2. Whether the respondent is probably guilty thereof
after, she filed another action for the declaration of the nullity of their marriage. The Prosecutor’s duties:
petitioner filed an urgent motion to suspend the proceedings. Ruling: no prejudicial 1. To determine the existence of probable case
question since the criminal action was first filed before the civil case. For a prejudicial 2. To file information
question to exist, the civil action must be instituted first before the filing of the criminal What is probable cause in preliminary investigation?
action. Moreover, the issue in the annulment of marriage is not similar or intimately  Implies probability of guilt
related to the issue in the criminal case for parricide.  Requires more than bare suspicion
2. Respondent contracted his first marriage. Without said marriage having been The prosecutor does not:
annulled, nullified, or terminated, the same respondent contracted a second marriage  determine the guilt or innocence
with the petitioner. Based on petitioner’s complaint-affidavit, information for bigamy was  exercise adjudication nor rule-making functions
filed against respondent. Sometime thereafter, respondent initiated a civil action for the Ultimate purpose:
judicial declaration of absolute nullity of his first marriage. Respondent then filed a  to secure the innocent against hasty, malicious and oppressive prosecution
motion to suspend the proceedings in the criminal case for bigamy. Issue: whether the  to protect him from an open and public accusation of a crime
subsequent filing of a civil action for declaration of nullity of a previous marriage  to protect the State from useless and expensive prosecution
constitutes a prejudicial question to a criminal case for bigamy. Ruling: the civil action  designed to free a respondent from the inconvenience, expense, stress of
for declaration of the nullity of the marriage was not determinative of the issue in the defending himself/herself in the course of a formal trial, until the reasonable probability
bigamy case, the Court placed emphasis on Art40 of the Family Code which requires of his or her guilt has been passed upon in a more or less summary proceeding
a prior judicial declaration of nullity of a previous marriage before a party may remarry. Is the prosecutor a quasi-judicial officer?
Without it, the first marriage is presumed to be subsisting. Thus, any decision in the No. A preliminary investigation is not a trial of the case on the merits, and has no
civil action for nullity would not erase the fact that respondent entered into a second purpose except that of determining whether a crime has been committed and whether
marriage during the subsistence of a first marriage. Therefore, a decision in the civil there is probable cause to believe that the accused is guilty thereof. While the fiscal
case was not essential to the determination of the criminal charge – not a prejudicial makes that determination, he cannot be said to be acting as a quasi-court, for it is the
question. courts, ultimately, that pass judgment on the accused, not the fiscal.
CHAPTER IV – PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION Is the substantial right of the accused to a preliminary investigation waivable?
“Is the respondent probably guilty and therefore, should go to trial?” Yes. It is deemed waived for failure to invoke the right prior to or at the time of the
Nature: INQUIRY PROCEEDING / Judicial Proceeding plea/arraignment.
Purpose: TO DETERMINE whether there is SUFFICIENT GROUND to engender a
well-founded belief that a crime has been committed and the respondent is probably PROBABLE CAUSE , defined.
guilty thereof, and should be held for trial  existence of facts and circumstances
Function: executive not a judicial function  as would lead a person of ordinary caution to entertain an honest and strong
 The only means of discovering the persons who may be suspicion
reasonably charged with a crime  that the accused is guilty of the crime subject of the investigation
 To enable the fiscal to prepare his complaint or information  based only on opinion and reasonable belief
 Lasts for 10 days  implies probability of guilt
 Not a trial nor a part of it
 Does not involve the examination of witnesses Requires:
 The purpose is not to declare the respondent guilty beyond reasonable doubt  requires more than bare suspicion
 Does not require confrontation between the parties  but less evidence
 Conducted through submission of affidavits and supporting documents, and  elements of the crime charged should be present since every crime is defined
through exchange of pleadings by its elements, without which there should be no criminal
It does not  a person is lawfully arrested without a warrant
 does not import absolute certainty  involving an offense which requires preliminary investigation
 need not be based on clear and convincing evidence of guilt  not a preliminary investigation; distinct
 does not pronounce guilt (only the probability of guilt which would lead the  does not follow the procedure on preliminary investigation
accused to stand trial) CONDUCTED WHEN: (by the inquest officer/prosecutor)
 require a full and exhaustive presentation of the parties’ evidence  a person has been lawfully arrested and detained
Discretion:  without warrant
 The determination lies within the discretion of the prosecuting officers after WHERE:
conducting a preliminary investigation.  police stations/headquarters of the PNP, unless otherwise directed (which is
 Merely binds over the suspects to stand trial why it is an informal and summary proceeding)
Deemed COMMENCED:
Kinds of determination of probable cause  from the time the Inquest Officer receives the complaint and referral
1. Judicial – made by judge documents
2. Executive – made by the prosecutor during preliminary investigation  detained persons should be present during inquest proceedings
Purpose: to determine whether or not the person detained should remain under
When required? custody and then charged in court – ahh ok!!! Grrrr!!
Preliminary investigation is required in a criminal offense has a penalty of at least - PN NOT REQUIRED even if offense requires preliminary investigation
4yrs, 2months, and 1 day. Substitute – INQUEST PROCEEDING?
1. a person is arrested lawfully without a warrant
Procedures for cases not requiring preliminary investigation: note: he may ask for a preliminary investigation*
1. Directly submit with the prosecutor; or note: inquest proceedings apply
2. By filing an information or complaint with the MTC – conducted by the judge 2. in flagrante delicto
Reason: preliminary investigation is not required since the person is lawfully arrested
Application for bail: Riano: if he has been arrested in a place where an inquest prosecutor is available, an
 while a preliminary investigation is undertaken, the person arrested is still inquest will be conducted instead of a preliminary investigation.
under detention Question: What is the use of inquest proceeding?
 to effect release, he may apply for bail since he is not yet charged in court Question: Is an inquest a substitute of preliminary investigation?
Question: Is it needed in lieu of preliminary investigation?
After plea has been entered/after arraignment: Answer: an inquest proceeding shall normally apply when a person is lawfully
-deemed to have waived the absence of preliminary investigation arrested without a warrant

Remand to the prosecutor: *When may the person lawfully arrested without warrant ask for a preliminary
 if the accused wants a preliminary investigation, the court will not dismiss, investigation?
BUT remand the case to the prosecutor so that investigation may be conducted
 the Sandiganbayan will hold in abeyance any further proceedings - before the complaint/information is filed but he must sign a waiver under Article 125
Lack/Irregularity of Preliminary investigation will not affect: of the RPC (imposes a penalty on the officer)
1. court’s jurisdiction
2. validity of the information or render it ineffective - after filing, within 5 days from the time he learns of its filing
What is the effect of denial of a motion for reinvestigation?
 cannot invalidate the information Duty of the Inquest Prosecutor:
INQUEST PROCEEDINGS (summary investigation): 1. to determine if the detained person has been arrested lawfully in accordance
 for persons detained with Rule 113, Sec 5 (a) and (b)
a. he may examine the arresting officers on the arrest Respondent may be allowed to reopen the case to submit his counter-affidavit; should
2. should it be found that it was not in accordance with Rule113, inquest be done before the prosecutor has issued a resolution; it should contain an explanation
prosecutor shall not proceed with the inquest proceedings. And recommend the for the failure to timely file the counter-affidavit
release of the detainee
** see the table at the back/below Clarificatory Hearing:
 set by the prosecutor
Inquest must pertain to the offense for which the arrest was made  to clarify facts and issues
Case: Beltran v. People  no right to cross-examine
Facts: Beltran was arrested without a warrant for inciting to sedition based on a speech  if the parties have questions to ask, it should be addressed to the prosecutor,
he gave. Second inquest was based on rebellion. and the latter shall be the one to ask the questions to the party concerned
Ruling: Inquest proceedings are proper only when the accused has been lawfully  lasts only for 5 days
arrested without a warrant. The officers arrested Beltran for inciting to sedition and not  dispensable
for rebellion, therefore the prosecutor could only have conducted an inquest for inciting  within the discretion of the prosecutor
to sedition and no other! Second inquest – invalid Resolution; final stage of preliminary investigation
STEPS ON PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION: If the prosecutor finds probable cause to hold the accused for trial, he shall prepare:
*initial step: filing of the complaint with the prosecutor 1. resolution
(an affidavit of complaint) 2. *information (to be filed in court)
Contains: 3. or dismissal
1. address of the respondent *the information shall contain a certification, in which he certifies:
2. affidavits of his witnesses 1. he personally examined the complainant and witnesses
3. other supporting documents 2. there is reasonable ground that a crime has been committed
 the number of copies to be filed shall – also the number of respondents 3. accused is probably guilty
included plus 2 copies for official file 4. accused was informed of the complaint and evidence
 example: 2 respondents – 2 copies + 2 official files = total4 5. he was given an opportunity to submit evidence
Dismissal of the complaint: (made by the complainant) Effect of the absence of certification:
 from filing, prosecutor has 10 days to decide:  the information is still considered valid
1. dismiss After resolution – prosecutor shall forward the case to the provincial or city
2. issue subpoena to the respondent prosecutor or chief state prosecutor or Ombudsman
Rights of the Respondent: Reason: there should be prior written authority or approval of the provincial, city
 right to examine the evidence submitted prosecutor, or chief state prosecutor or Ombudsman before an information or complaint
 right to copy the evidence at his expense may be filed or dismissed by the prosecutor
 objects shall be made available for examination, copying, or photographing at *Resolution of the investigating prosecutor is not conclusive since it may be reversed
the expense of the requesting party (may be respondent or complainant) or affirmed by the prosecutors earlier cited
Filing of counter-affidavit by respondent:
 within 10days from receipt of subpoena, he is required to submit his counter- Reiteration of the rule: no complaint or information may be filed or dismissed by an
affidavit with other documents investigating prosecutor without the prior written authority or approval of the provincial
*reply-affidavit from complainant; rejoinder-affidavit from respondent or city prosecutor, or chief state prosecutor, or the Ombudsman
Effect of no counter-affidavit: ex parte investigation
 prosecutor shall resolve the complaint based on the evidence presented by When recommendation for dismissal is disapproved:
the complainant  the Ombudsman may file the information or he may direct another assistant
prosecutor
Motion for Reconsideration
 aggrieved party may file within 15 days from receipt of the resolution
Appeal
 within 15 days from the denial of the MR
 appeal to the Secretary of Justice
 verified comment may be filed by the adverse party, 15 days from receipt of
appeal
 if there is no verified comment, Secretary of Justice may resolve on the basis
of the petition
 if there is probable cause, information may be filed in court
 proceedings in court should be held in abeyance
 aggrieved party may file a motion for suspension of arraignment; Rule 116,
11(c) arraignment shall be suspended if a petition for review of the resolution of the
prosecutor is pending
 Secretary may dismiss outright
 IF an information has been filed and accused has already been arraigned
before the filing of the appeal, the appeal shall not be given due course
 IF, accused has been arraigned after the filing of the petition,
any arraignment shall not bar the Secretary of Justice to review
 Secretary of Justice has the power to affirm, modify, nullify, or reverse
the resolution made by his subordinates; has the ultimate power to decide which
conflicting theories of the parties should be believed; his finding are not subject to
review, except if tainted with grave abuse of discretion (remedy of aggrieved party:
petition for certiorari); his decision is final
 Courts are not empowered to substitute their own judgment, only that of the
investigating prosecutor and ultimately that of the Secretary of Justice
 General rule: Principle of non-interference – leaves the investigating
prosecutor sufficient latitude of discretion
 Exception: when there is grave abuse of discretion
Appeal to the Secretary of Justice
 May be availed of despite the filing of information in court
Appeal to the Office of the President; administrative appeal
Appeal to the Court of Appeals; judicial appeal
Appeal to the Supreme Court
Duties of the Judge; upon filing of the complaint/information
1. Personally evaluate the resolution; look into its evidence
2. Judge may find that evidence:
a. Fails to establish probable cause
(Judge may dismiss)
b. Establishes probable cause
(Judge shall issue warrant of arrest)
(If lawfully arrested – issue a commitment order)
c. Engenders a doubt as to the existence of probable cause
(Order to submit additional evidence)
When warrant of arrest is not necessary:
1. Accused is under detention pursuant to a lawful warrantless arrest, and
a complaint or information has already been filed
2. Offense is punishable by fine
3. Case is subject to the Rules on Summary Procedure (inquest?)
BAR Question: Whether the TRIAL COURT may refuse to grant the motion filed
by the Provincial Fiscal (upon instructions of the Sec of Justice) and insist on
the arraignment and trial on the merits.
Answer: YES, the court may deny the motion and require that the trial on the
merits proceed for the proper determination of the case. Once a criminal complaint
or information is filed in court, any disposition of the case or dismissal or acquittal or
conviction of the accused rests within the exclusive jurisdiction of the trial court. The
fiscal or even the Secretary of Justice cannot impose his opinion on the trial court since
it is the best and sole judge on what to do with the case before it. The judge of the trial
court is not bound to rely solely on the resolution of the fiscal; he must make a personal
evaluation of the case, and satisfy himself that there is indeed a probable cause to
issue a warrant of arrest or a commitment order. Further, judge is required to positively
state that the evidence presented was insufficient for a prima facie case. It must include
the discussion of the merits and state the reasons for granting the motion to withdraw.
Chapter V. ARREST, SEARCH, AND SEIZURE
How made
 The taking of the person into custody
 In order that he may be bound to answer for the offense
 Need not be actually restrained
 Sufficient: submission to the custody of the person
 Control over the person
 Restraint on his liberty
 He is not free to leave on his own volition
Who will arrest?
 Law enforcement officers are entrusted with the power to:
 Conduct investigations
 Make arrests
 Perform searches and seizures of persons and their belongings
 Must be exercised within the boundaries of the law
PROBABLE CAUSE on ARREST
1. Personal knowledge by the arresting officer
2. of facts and circumstances
3. that the arrestee is indeed the perpetrator of the criminal act
QUESTION: What if the act of the officer does not amount to an arrest; will the
requirements on probable cause and personal knowledge stay?
ANSWER: No. It will not be pre-requisites to the legality of the said arrest.
REQUISITES FOR ISSUANCE OF A WARRANT OF ARREST; judge’s duties
(While on preliminary investigation, it was more on the prosecutor’s duty)
1. it shall be issued upon finding of probable cause
 otherwise, unreasonable, violates the constitutional right to privacy
of persons subject to such warrant
2. personally determined by the judge
 case: AAA vs. Carbonell: judge is not required to personally examine
the complainant and her witnesses in satisfying himself of the existence of probable
cause; judge should have taken into consideration the documentary evidence as well
as the transcript of stenographic notes
Ruling: The judge committed grave abuse of discretion for dismissing the criminal case
on the ground that petitioner and her witnesses failed to comply with his orders to take
the witness stand.
Case: Soliven v. Makasiar – this provision does not mandatorily require the judge to
personally examine the complainant and her witnesses. He may opt to:
1. personally evaluate the report and supporting documents submitted by the
prosecutor; or
2. disregard the prosecutor’s report and require the submission of supporting
affidavits of witnesses
 but such personal examination is not mandatory and indispensable in
the determination of probable cause; the necessity arises only when there is an
utter failure of the evidence to show the existence of probable cause; otherwise,
the judge may rely on the report of the investigating prosecutor
The Judge must:
 satisfy himself of the existence of probable cause
 not required to personally examine
 judges merely determine the probability, not the certainty, of guilt of an
accused
 personally review the initial determination of the prosecutor finding probable
cause to see if It is supported by substantial evidence
 but such personal examination is not mandatory and indispensable in the
determination of probable cause; the necessity arises only when there is an utter failure
of the evidence to show the existence of probable cause; otherwise, the judge may rely
on the report of the investigating prosecutor
PROBABLE CAUSE (on WARRANT OF ARREST), defined
 assumes the existence of facts
 that would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that a crime
has been committed or it was likely to be committed
 by the person sought to be arrested
In determining probable cause:
 average man weighs the facts and circumstances
 without resorting to the standards of the rules of evidence
 of which he has no technical knowledge
 he relies on common sense
 demands more than suspicion
 requires less than evidence
Personal determination by the judge
 in Carbonell case – judge is not required to personally examine the
complainant and her witnesses; he may take into consideration the documentary
evidence, supporting affidavits
 however, the Court found that the judge’s finding of lack of probable
cause was premised only on the complainant’s and her witnesses’ absence during the
hearing scheduled by the judge for the judicial determination of the probable cause
 therefore, absence of the complainant or the witnesses, or failure or
refusal to take the witness stand would not warrant the existing of probable cause #lol
#dontstatetheobviousclairy
 SC found that the judge committed grave abuse of discretion for
dismissing the criminal case on the ground that petitioner and her witness failed to
comply with his orders to take the witness stand
Judge may disregard the fiscal’s report and require the submission of supporting
affidavits of witness to aid him in determining probable cause – case: Soliven v
Makasiar
 Judges just personally review the initial determination of the prosecutor
finding a probable cause to see if it is supported by substantial evidence
 Personal examination – not mandatory and indispensable;
When personal examination is required (literal)
 Only when there is utter failure to show the existence of probable cause
 Otherwise, judge may validly rely (not solely – hence, evaluation of 3. In case he is refused admittance
documentary evidence) on the report of the prosecutor , provided that he likewise 4. After announcing his authority and purpose
evaluates the documentary evidence in support thereof 5. If necessary, he may break out from said place to liberate himself
 He should not rely solely on the report of the investigating prosecutor but
must also evaluate the documentary evidence and affidavits, and stenographic notes LAWFUL WARRANTLESS ARREST*
 If the report, taken together with the supporting evidence, is sufficient to 1. in flagrante delicto – in his presence, the person to be arrested, is actually
sustain a finding of probable cause, it is not compulsory that a personal examination of committing or is attempting to commit an offense
the complainant and his witnesses be conducted a. citizen’s arrest is allowed
 Never allowed to follow blindly the prosecutor 2. hot pursuit – an offense has just been committed, and he has probable
cause to believe based on personal knowledge of facts/circumstances that the
When directly filed with the MTC person to be arrested has committed it
1. Judge shall personally evaluate the evidence; or 3. escapee – when the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped
2. Personally examine in writing and under oath the complainant and his *the exception to the general rule that a warrant of arrest is required before an arrest
witnesses in the form of searching questions and answers is made
Method of Arrest with a warrant
1. Warrant is issued by a judge WHAT is CITIZEN’S ARREST?
2. Delivered to the proper law enforcement officer for execution  a private person, may without a warrant, arrest a person when, in his
3. Head of the office to whom the warrant of arrest was delivered shall cause the presence, the person to be arrested is in flagrante
warrant to be executed within 10 days from its receipt Who may make the warrantless arrest?
4. Within 10 days after the expiration of the period, the officer to whom it was 1. Peace officer
assigned for execution shall make a report to the judge who issued the warrant 2. Private person
5. In case of his failure to execute, he shall state the reasons for its non- 3. a bondsman
execution
Procedure of arrest by virtue of a warrant; the OFFICER SHALL: Requisites of in flagrante delicto
1. Inform the person to be arrested of the cause of his arrest; 1. accused must perform an overt act
2. Inform him of the fact that a warrant has been issued 2. done in the presence or within the view of the arresting officer
 mere suspicion and reliable information – not justification for a warrantless
The information need not be made when the person to be arrested: arrest!
1. Flees
2. Forcibly resists CASES where warrantless arrest is upheld
3. Giving of the information will imperil the arrest The HOT PURSUIT exception

NOTE: The officer need not have the warrant in his possession at the time of the REQUIREMENTS:
arrest. However, after the arrest, the warrant shall be shown to him as soon as 1. Offense has just been committed
practicable, if the person arrested so requires. 2. The person making the arrest has personal knowledge of facts indicating
that the person to be arrested has committed it
The officer also has the duty to deliver the person arrested to the nearest police station
or jail without necessary delay. Note: a warrantless arrest made, one year after the offense was allegedly committed
is an illegal arrest!
When the person to be arrested is INSIDE a BUILDING
1. The officer is authorized
2. To break into any building or enclosure
Does not require the officers to personally witness the commission of the offense;
PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE must be based on PROBABLE CAUSE – actual belief Effect of an ILLEGAL ARREST on JURISDICTION of the court
or reasonable grounds of suspicion.  Legality of the arrest affects only the jurisdiction of the court over the
person
Reasonable ground:  Waiver of an illegal warrantless arrest does not mean a waiver of the
1. Based on actual facts inadmissibility of evidence seized during an illegal warrantless arrest.
a. Supported by circumstances sufficiently strong in themselves to create Chapter XI JUDGMENT
probable cause of guilt
b. Probable cause with good faith Judgment, defined.
Method of arrest WITHOUT a WARRANT  Adjudication by the court
1. Arrest by an officer; he shall inform:  That accused is guilty or not guilty
a. Of his authority  Imposition of the proper penalty
b. Cause of his arrest  And civil liability
 The info need not be given if:
a. If the person to be arrested is engaged in the commission of an offense Formal Requisites of Judgment:
b. In the process of being pursued immediately after its commission 1. Written in the official language
c. Escapes or flees 2. Personally and directly prepared an signed by the judge
d. Forcibly resists before the officer could inform him 3. Must contain clearly and distinctly
e. The information will imperil the arrest a. Statement of facts
Officer may: b. Law
 Summon assistance
 Break into a building or an enclosure or break out from it Jurisdictional requirements:
a. over the subject matter
2. Arrest by private person; he shall inform b. territory
a. His intention to arrest him c. person of the accused
b. Cause of his arrest
*need not be given under the same conditions above Contents of a judgment of CONVICTION
a. legal qualification
NOTE: the right to break into a building or an enclosure does not apply to private b. aggravating and mitigating circumstances
person!! c. participation of the accused; principal, accomplice, accessory
d. penalty imposed
TIME OF ARREST: any day; any time of the day or night e. civil liability or damages

Rights of a person arrested: Contents of a judgment of ACQUITTAL:

a. Assisted by counsel at all times 1. state whether the evidence of the prosecution:
 Counsel must be independent and competent i.absolutely failed to prove the guilt
b. Remain silent ii.merely failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt
c. To be informed of the above rights 2. determine if the act or omission from which the civil liability might arise did not
d. To be visited by the immediate members exist
Note: verdict of acquittal is immediately final!
Custodial investigation – in a form of an “invitation” to person who is investigated in
connection with the offense he is suspected to have committed
Rule on duplicitous complaint or information; two or more offenses in a single What if the accused fails to appear in the promulgation?
information or complaint – 2-in-1 1. Shall be made by recording the judgment in the criminal docket
 Remedy: MOTION TO QUASH (during arraignment) 2. Serve him a copy at his last known address or thru his counsel
 Exception: when the law prescribes a single punishment for various offenses
What happens if the accused fails to object before trial? Judgment for conviction:
 Waiver  Accused fails to appear without just cause
 May be convicted for as many offenses as are charged and proved, and  He shall lose the remedies available against the judgment
impose penalty for each offense!  Court shall order his arrest
 Note: can no longer be raised on appeal  Within 15 days from promulgation of judgment, accused may surrender and
Judgment rendered by a judge who did not hear the case file a motion for leave of court to avail the remedies
 Valid! Modification of Judgment
 Valid even if he merely relied on the records of the case 1. Upon motion of the accused
 especially where the evidence on record is sufficient to support its conclusion 2. Before the judgment becomes final or before appeal is perfected

Variance doctrine; variance between allegation and proof When judgment becomes FINAL
a. offense proved is different from the offense charged a. After the lapse of the period for perfecting an appeal; or
b. offense charged is either included in the offense proved or necessarily b. When the sentence has been partially or totally satisfied or served
includes the offense proved c. When the accused has waived his right to appeal
d. He has applied for probation
General rule: convicted only of the offense charged
Exception: variance doctrine; may be convicted of the: Entry of judgment
 offense proved which is included in the offense charged or of the offense  After judgment has become final, it shall be entered in accordance with
charged which is included in the offense proved Section 8, Rule 120, Rules of Court

When an offense includes or is included in another II – NEW TRIAL OR RECONSIDERATION (conviction)

1. essential elements or ingredients of the offense charged constitute or Who may file? – Accused
form part the offense proved When filed? – any time before the judgment of conviction becomes final

Promulgation of Judgment The court may:

1. by reading in the presence of the accused and any judge a. Grant a new trial or reconsideration
2. for light offense – in the presence of counsel or representative b. With the consent of the accused
3. may be promulgated by the clerk of court if the judge is absent or outside the c. Without waiting for the motion of the accused
province or city
4. if the accused is confined or detained in another province or city, may be Grounds for new trial
promulgated by the executive judge of the RTC having jurisdiction over the place of a. Errors of law
confinement or detention b. Irregularities prejudicial to the substantial rights
c. New and material evidence has been discovered*
Notice on the promulgation of judgment 1. Discovered after trial
 given by the clerk of court personally to the accused or thru his bondsman or 2. accused could not have discovered and produced
warden and counsel 3. Even with the exercise of reasonable diligence
 if tried in absentia – served at his last known address 4. And which if introduced would probably change the judgment
i.It must be material
 ii.Must affect the merits and produce a different result if admitted What if the accused appeals?
iii.must concur  Waives his right against double jeopardy
 Runs the risk of being sentenced to a penalty higher than that imposed by the
Grounds for reconsideration trial court
1. errors of law
2. errors of fact Who may institute proceedings before the CA or SC?
Form:  Only the OSG or Solicitor General (as appellate counsel)
1. in writing  He should be given the opportunity to be heard in behalf of the
2. state the grounds People.
a. if based on new and material evidence it should be supported by affidavits
Notice of the motion Case: appellate court failed to notify the Solicitor General of its resolution on a petition
 given to the prosecutor filed by the accused and failed to require to file its comment – effect: deprivation of a
fair opportunity to prosecute and prove its case
When hearing on the motion is required Rule: a petition for review should be filed by the Solicitor General who is solely vested
 when it calls for a resolution of a question of fact with the authority to represent the people

EFFECT: EFFECT OF APPEAL on CRIMINAL CASE:

a. based on errors of law or irregularities  Opens the entire case for review
 all the proceedings and evidence affected shall be  Appellate court may correct errors; or
i.set aside; and  reverse the trial court’s decision on grounds other than those that the parties
ii.taken anew raised as errors
 the court may allow additional evidence
b. newly-discovered evidence EFFECT of appeal on civil case:
 evidence already adduced shall stand  in contrast with the criminal case
 the newly-discovered evidence shall be taken together with the  no error will be considered by the appellate court unless stated in the
evidence already in record assignment of errors, except when:
c. in all cases where it is granted a. error affects the jurisdiction
 original judgment shall be set aside or vacated b. affects the validity of the judgment appealed
 new judgment shall be rendered c. closely related or dependent on an assigned error
d. plain error or a clerical error
III – APPEALS
 Not a natural right Change of theory on appeal – not allowed!
 Merely a statutory privilege Rule: A PARTY CANNOT
 May be exercised in the manner and in accordance with the provisions of law 1. change his theory on appeal
 Once granted by law, its suppression is tantamount to a violation of due 2. nor raise in the appellate court any question of law or of fact that was not
process raised in the court below
 Subject: judgment or final order 3. or which was not within the issue raised in their pleading
WHERE and HOW to appeal?
Who may appeal? a. RTC – cases decided by MTC
 Any party 1. Notice of appeal served to the RTC
 Exception: accused will be placed in double jeopardy 2. filed with the court which rendered the judgment
3. serve a copy upon the adverse party (personal service)
  No notice of appeal – RTC imposed the reclusion perpetua; the CA will Except: After examination of the record and evidence, it finds that there is an error
automatically review the judgment which injuriously affects the substantial rights of appellant
b. CA or SC – cases decided by RTC
1. Judgment by the RTC in its original jurisdiction Rule if the opinion of the Supreme Court en banc is equally divided
i.Notice of appeal 1. It shall again be deliberated (re-deliberation)
2. Judgment by the RTC in its appellate jurisdiction 2. If no decision is reached, judgment of conviction of the lower court shall be
.File a petition for review reversed and the accused acquitted!
c. SC – cases decided by CA
1. Petition for review on certiorari IV PROVISIONAL REMEDIES IN CRIMINAL CASES
 Remedies available in a civil action; since a civil action is deemed instituted
When appeal is to be taken in the criminal case, it follows that provisional remedies are also available, save in
1. Within 15 days from promulgation of judgment cases where the civil action is reserved, or waived, or separately filed
2. The period shall be suspended from the time a motion for new trial or To avail:
reconsideration is filed until overruled  the criminal action must be one with a corresponding civil liability
May an appeal be withdrawn?  the civil action must be one arising from the offense charged and which is
Yes. As long as the record has not been transmitted or forwarded to the appellate court. instituted in the said criminal action
When it is withdrawn – judgment becomes final!  IF, civil action has been waived, reserved, or instituted separately – the
1. Motion to withdraw is filed provisional remedy may not be availed of. Instead, it may be applied for in the separate
2. Filed before the RTC civil action
EFFECT of appeal by any of several accused Who may avail? – offended party
 Only binds those who appealed What are these provisional remedies?
 Will not affect those who did not appeal 1. Preliminary attachment
 Except: judgment is favorable to others; this time it will bind the others who 2. Preliminary injunction
did not appeal 3. Receivership
 Except: procedural consequences; the stay of execution will not benefit those 4. Replevin
accused who failed to file on time 5. Support pendente lite
Appeal from the civil aspect
 Shall not affect the criminal aspect When preliminary attachment is available
 Within 15 days from promulgation of judgment  when the civil action is properly instituted in the criminal action
Period to apply for probation  when the accused is about to abscond
 Within 15 days from promulgation  when criminal action is based on claim for money or embezzlement or
Stay of execution misappropriation
 Upon perfection of the appeal  when accused has concealed, removed, or disposed of his property, or is
 procedural consequences; the stay of execution will not benefit those accused about to do so
who failed to file on time  when the accused resides outside the Phils.
COURT OF APPEALS may dismiss:  May be availed of without the need for a showing that the accused has
1. if the appellant fails to file within the time prescribed concealed, removed, or disposed of his property or is about to do so.
a. except: appellant is represented by a counsel de oficio
2. if the appellant escapes
Ground for reversal of judgment or its modification
Rule: CA is mandated not to reverse or modify a judgment