Criminal procedure is concerned with the procedural steps through which a criminal case passes,

commencing with the initial investigation of a crime and concluding with the unconditional release of
the offender. In its generic term, it describes the network of laws and rules which governs the
procedural administration of criminal justice, that is laws and court rules governing arrest, search and
seizure, bail etc.

Criminal procedure may be defined, therefore, as the method prescribed

by law for the apprehension and prosecution of persons accused of any
criminal offense, and foe their punishment in case of conviction.
Rules of Court 110-127
1987 Constitution Article III Bill of Rights
Various acts passed by the legislature (BP 129)
PDs AMC, and Jurisprudence
If concurred by 2/3 of the senate, the same way considered as a source of criminal procedure which will
supervene any provision of the rules of court but will only be applied to the subject covered by the said
treaty or international agreement.
Criminal law is substantive; it defines crimes, treats of their nature and provides for their punishment.
On the other hand, criminal procedure is remedial; it provides for the method by which a person
accused of a crime is arrested, tried and punished. Criminal law declares what is punishable and the
latter provides how it would be punished.
Inquisitorial prosecution of crimes is wholly in the hands of the prosecution and the court.
Accusatorial requires all crimes except the private crimes, commenced by the complaint of the
offended party to be prosecuted by the public prosecutor. The accused has the right to be present at
any stage of the proceedings and to be heard personally of by his counsel. Trial is conducted publicly
and the right of the accused against self-incrimination is guaranteed.
It is of the essence of the accusatorial system grounded in the due process school of criminology that
there be a moral certainty of guilt to defeat the constitutional presumption of innocence.
Mixed system mixed of both it was said that the Philippines practice this system but mostly the
accusatorial rather than the inquisitorial.

Construction these rules shall be liberally construed in order to

promote their objective of securing a just, speedy, and inexpensive
disposition of every action and proceeding.
Jurisdiction the power or the capacity given by the law to a court or tribunal to entertain, hear and
determine certain controversies. Is is vested in the court and not in the judges.
Distinguished from venue venue of action should not be confused with jurisdiction. In remedial law,
venue is defined as the particular country or geographical area in which a court with jurisdiction may
hear and determine a case. Venue deals with the locality the place where the suit may be had, while
jurisdiction treats of the power of the court to decide the case on the merits. Venue is procedural
jurisdiction is substantive.
Jurisdiction is conferred by law and not fixed by the will of the parties; it cannot be acquired through,
enlarged or diminished by, any act or omission of the parties.
Criminal jurisdiction- applied to criminal procedure, jurisdiction is the power of the tribunal to hear and
try a particular offense and impose the punishment for it. However, while a court has an abstract
jurisdiction within its territorial jurisdiction, it has no power to try and convict or acquit a person for a
crime committed within its territory, unless a complaint or information has been filed with said court.
Requisite of criminal jurisdiction
(1) The offense is one which the court is by law authorized to take cognizance of;
(2) The offense must have been committed within its territorial jurisdiction
(3) The person charged with the offense must have been brought to its presence for trial forcibly by
warrant of arrest or upon his voluntary submission to the court.

The court must have jurisdiction over the subject matter, jurisdiction over the
territory where the offense was committed and jurisdiction over the person
accused.
Where the court has a general cognizance over the class of cases to which that to be adjudged belongs,
it has jurisdiction of a particular case upon a colorable presentation of the fatcs necessary to constitue it
a meber of the class. Consequently by the mere fact that after the trial and after the court has heard the
evidence it was found that the crime committed was lesser than that described in the complaint the
court cannot dismiss the case because in the complaint, the action should have been brought in a lower
court. The courts jurisdiction in the first instance is determined by the facts alleged in the complaint and
not by the qualification of the crime made in the title of the complaint or by the result of proof after the
trial.

Jurisdiction over the territory venue in criminal cases is jurisdictional. Criminal action shall be
instituted and tried in the court of the municipality or province wherein the offense was committed or
where any of its essential ingredients took place.
Jurisdiction over the person accused rule 113
In continuous crimes, the court where the case was filed first acquires the jurisdiction over the same to
the exclusion of all other courts, provided it has custody of the accused or has first acquired jusrisdiction
over his person.
Exceptions to territorial principle
(a) Where the offense was committed under the exceptional circumstances provided for in Art 2 of
the RPC treaties and preferential application
(b) Piracy
(c) Railroad train aircraft moving vehicles
(d) Vessel
(e) When the SC, in the interest of truth and impartial justice, transfers the place of trial from one
place to another.
(f) In cases of written defamation
Jurisdiction over the person of accused it is acquired upon either his apprehension with or wo warrant,
or his voluntary submission to the jurisdiction of the court. Voluntary submission of the accused may be
effected by posting bail or by filing a motion to quash or by appearing at the arraignment or entering
trial. Jurisdiction over the person of the accused may be waived, if he fails to make seasonable objection
thereto, the accused may be deemed to have waived it. One who desires to object to the jurisdiction of
the court over his person must appear in court for that purpose only, and if he raises other questions, he
waives the objection.
Determination jurisdiction is determined by the fine and imprisonment prescribed by law, by the
extent of the penalty which the law imposes together with other obligations, on the bases of the facts as
recited in the complaint or information constitutive of the offense charged, for once the jurisdiction is
acquired by the court in which the information is filed, it is there retained, regardless of wheter the
evidence proves a lesser offense that that charged in the information or the subsequent happening of
events, although of a character which would have prevented jurisdiction from attaching in the first
instance.
Criminal jurisdiction of the MTC
1. Offenses punishable by imprisonment for a period of 6 years and less
2. Offenses where the fine is 4000 or less
3. Under PD 1606
a) Government official
b) 6years imprisonsment 400 fine

8.
9.

c) Salary grade of 26 and lower

BP 22 cases
Violations of municipal or city ordiances
Violation of rental law
All other criminal cases wherein penalty is 1000 or less and imprisonment is 6 months or less;
damage to property is 10000 or less
Traffic violations
Destierro penalty

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.

Offenses punishable by imprisonment for a period more than 6 years

More than 4000 as fine
Government official with penalties over 6 years imprisonment
Fine of more than 4000
26 salary grade and lower
Violation of ra 9165 drugs
Libel cases
Intellectual prop violations
Election offenses
Appellate jurisdiction over decisions by the MTC

4.
5.
6.
7.

RTC

RULE 110
A formal accusation is an essential condition precedent to a valid prosecution for a criminal offense, and
no criminal proceedings can be said to be brought or instituted untila formal charge is openly made
against the accused by complaint or information. A formal accusation of the type required by the statute
cannot be waived, and in its absence there is nothing fo rhte court to act upon and the court acquires no
jurisdiction. It must be in writing, as It is compatible for the right of the accused to be informed of the
nature and the cause of the accusation against him serves also the practival purpose of enabling him to
preparw his defense fully and intelligently based upon a fixd record.
The posken word flies, the written letter remains.
The prosecuting officer has the power to determine whether the evidence at hand ia sufficient to
egender a reasonable belief that a person has committed an offense, this power or prerogstive is not
absolute. It is subject to judicial reviewin proper cases as where frm the evidence submitted and
gathered by the prosecutring officer a person appearing responsible for the commission of an offense is
not included in the information. So wehre the presecution abuses his discretion by refusing to include a
person as a co-aacused despite sufficient evidence against the latter, mandamus will lie against him as
his act amounts to a deliberate refusal to perfom a duty enjoined by law. Other accused have an interest
in the inclusion of their companions in the commission fo the crime because they are jointly and
severally liable with them for indemnities that may be imposed upon them for the offense thay may
have committed together

Writs of injunction or prohibition to restrain a criminal prosecution are

generally not available. Public interest requires that criminal acts be
immediately investigated and prosecuted for the protection of society.
The accused has an adequate remedy at law by establishing as a defense
to the prosecution that he did not commit the act charged or that the
statute on which the prosecution is absed is void and in case of
conviction by taking an appeal.
Exceptions:
a. To afford adequate protection oto the constitutional rights of the accused
b. When necessary for the orderly administration of justice or to avoid oppression or multiplicity of
actions
c. Where there is a prejudicial question which is subjudice
d. When the acts of the officer are wo or in excess of authority
e. Where the prosecution is under an invalid law ordiance or regulation
f. When double jeopardy is clearly apparent
g. Where the court had no jurisdiction over the offense
h. Where it is a case of prosecution rather than prosecution
i. Where the charges are manifestly false and motivated by the lust for vengeance
j. When there is clearly no prima facie case against the accused and a motion to quash on that
ground has been denied
k. To prevent the threathened unlawful arrest of petitioners.

If the accused is a corporation, not criminal action can lie against it. If the corporation violates the law,
the officer, through whom the corporation acts, answers for his acts.
Complaint a sworn written statement charging a person with an offense, subscribed by the offended
party any peace officer or other public officer charged with the enforcement of the law violated.
(1) Offended party
(2) A peace officer
(3) a public officer charged with the enforcement of the law violated
Information is an accusation in writing charging a person with an offense, subscribed by the
prosecutor and files with the court.
While both the complaint and information are written accusations of the commission of a criminal
offense, they are nonetheless to be differentiated in that
(a) the complaint may be signed by the offended any peace officer or other public officer charged
with the enforcement of the law violated while the information is always signed by the fiscal or
an authorized prosecuting officer

(b) the complaint is a sworn statement to by the person signing it whereas the information need
not be under oath the reason being that the prosecuting officer filinf it is charged with the
special duty in regard thereto and is acting under the special responsibility og his oath of office
(c) a complaint may either be file with the fiscals office or the court while an information is always
filed with the court.
The fiscal as a quasi-judicial officer determines whether a prima facie case exists or not or may move for
the dismissal of the case already filed in court for insufficiency of evidence and that if he must have
control of the prosecution of the criminal case he must have the ultimate power to decide as between
conflicting testimonies which should be believed or which witness to present subject only to the right
against self-incrimination the determination of the witness to be presented is addressed to the
discretion of the prosecution.
It would amout to dereliction of duty if a fiscal would prosecute a person whom he does not believe to
have committed the offense he was charged with by an alleged offended partym or when the evidence
available is not in his opinion sufficient to warrant the conviction of the accused.
The court has no power or authority to direct the fiscal to file an information within a particular period
for such order would be an interference with the prosecuting officers prerogative and control of
criminal actions.