CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

Rule 110 PROSECUTION of Offenses

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
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)
Jurisdiction of the court over the offense is determined at the time of the institution of the action and is
retained even if the penalty for the offense is later lowered or raised (People vs. Lagon)
2. Complaint sworn written statement charging a person with an offense, subscribed by the offended
party, any peace officer or other public official charged with the enforcement of the law violated
Information accusation in writing charging a person with an offense, subscribed by the fiscal and filed
with the court
3. Complaint and Information distinguished:
Complaint Information
A sworn statement Need not be sworn to
Subscribed by the offended party, any peace
officer or other officer charged with the
enforcement of the law violated
Subscribed to by the fiscal
May be filed either with the court or in the
fiscals office generally to commence the
preliminary investigation of the charges made
Filed with the court
4. Cases where civil courts of equal rank are vested with concurrent jurisdiction:
1. Features stated in Art. 2, RPC
Cognizable by proper court in which charge is first filed
1. Continuing crimes committed in different judicial regions
2. Offenses wherein any of the essential elements were committed in different territorial
jurisdictions
3. Offenses committed aboard a train, vehicle, aircraft or vessel (see R110, 15)
i. Railroad, train, aircraft
(1) Territory or municipality where vehicle passed
(2) Place of departure
(3) Place of arrival
ii. Vessel
(1) First port of entry
(2) Thru which it passed during voyage
e. Libel and written defamation
5. Remedies of offended party when fiscal unreasonably refuses to file an information or include a
person therein as an accused
1. In case of grave abuse of discretion, action for mandamus
2. Lodge a new complaint against the offenders
3. Take up matter with the Secretary of Justice
4. Institute administrative charges against the erring fiscal
5. File criminal charges under Art. 208, RPC (prosecution of offenses)
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
6. Writs of injunction or prohibition to restrain a criminal prosecution are not available, EXCEPT
1. To afford adequate protection to constitutional rights of accused
2. Necessary for the orderly administration of justice or to avoid oppression or multiplicity of
actions
3. Pre-judicial question which is sub judice
4. Acts of the officer are without or in excess of authority
5. Prosecution is under an invalid law, ordinance or regulation
6. Double jeopardy is clearly apparent
7. Court has no jurisdiction over the case
8. Case of persecution rather than prosecution
9. Charges are manifestly false and motivated by lust for vengeance
10. Clearly no prima facie case against the accused and MTQ on that ground had been denied
7. Institution of Criminal Actions:
a. In RTC:
By filing a complaint with the appropriate officer for the purpose of conducting requisite preliminary
investigation therein.
b. In Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts:
By filing the complaint or information directly with said courts, or a complaint with the fiscals office
c. In Metropolitan Trial Courts
By filing the complaint ONLY with the office of the fiscal
In all 3 above cases, such institution shall interrupt the period of prescription of the offense charged
(Rule 110, 1)
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]
The complaint or information shall be filed directly in court without need of a prior preliminary
examination or preliminary investigation.
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.
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 fiscals office should suspend the running of the Statute of Limitations.
The ruling in Zaldivia isnot applicable to all cases subject to the Rules on Summary Procedure, since that
particular case involved a violation of an ordinance. Therefore, the applicable law therein was not Art. 91
of the RPC, but Act No. 3326 (An Act to Establish Periods of Prescription for Violations Penalized by
Special Acts and Municipal Ordinances and to Provide when Prescription Shall Begin to Run), 2 of
which provides that period of prescription is suspended only when judicial proceedings are instituted
against the guilty party.
8. Contents of information
a. Name of the accused
Information may be amended as to the name of the accused, but such amendment cannot be questioned
for the first time on appeal (People vs. Guevarra)
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 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)
Only one offense charged, EXCEPT where law prescribes a single punishment for various offenses.
If facts do not completely allege all the elements of the crime charged, the info may be quashed;
however, the prosecution is allowed to amend the info to include the necessary facts (People vs.
Purisima)
c. Acts or omissions complained of constituting the offense
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
Approximation of time is sufficient; amendment as to time is only a formal amendment; no need to
dismiss case (People vs. Molero)
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. Reyes)
f. Place of commission
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 courts jurisdiction and accused was not
surprised by the variance between the proof and the information
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 and retaking of
plea of accused
Another preliminary investigation is entailed and
accused has to plead anew
Refers to the same offense charged or which
necessarily includes or is necessarily included in
original charges, hence, substantial amendments
to info after plea taken cannot be made over
objections of accused for if original info is
withdrawn, accused could invoke double
jeopardy
Requires or presupposes that new info involves a
different offense which does not include or is not
included in the original charge, hence, accused
cannot claim 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
Only offended spouse can be complainant
Both guilty parties must be included in complaint
b. Crimes against chastity
With consent of the offended party, offended spouse, grandparents, guardian, or state as parens
patriae, in that order
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.
If offended party who is a minor fails to file the complaint, her parents, grandparents or guardian may
do so.
In crimes against chastity, the consent of the victim is a jurisdictional requirementretraction renders
the information void (People vs. Ocapan)
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])
Complainant must be offended party
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
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)
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)
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
May be filed after arraignment but before plea on the grounds provided by the rules (generally, a flaw
in the info)
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
May be filed after plea but before judgment on most of grounds for motion to quash
16. Duplicity of Offense (in information or complaint)
Defined as the joinder of separate and distinct offenses in one and the same information/complaint
Remedy: file a motion to quash; failure is equivalent to a waiver
Exception: when existing laws prescribe a single punishment (complex crimes)