Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
1.
2.
1.
2.
3.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Complaint, defined.
Sworn written statement
Charging a person with an offense
Subscribed by the offended party, any peace officer, or other public officer
Name: People of the Philippines
Private offended parties only as witnesses
Thus they may not appeal the dismissal of a criminal case or the acquittal
ONLY the civil aspect
In so doing, the private offended party who appeals must prosecute in his
own personal capacity
So how then can a dismissal or acquittal of the criminal case be
appealed?
CAN ONLY BE APPEALED BY THE OSG
Reason: private offended party has no legal personality to do so
Chapter12, Title III, Book IV of the Admin. Code
Only the OSG can bring and/or defend actions on behalf of the Republic or
represent the people or the State in criminal proceedings pending in the
Supreme Court and the CA
Information, defined.
1.
2.
3.
b.
c.
d.
Accusation in writing
Not required to be sworn; because the prosecutor is under the oath of his office
Charging a person with an offense
Subscribed by the prosecutor
And filed with the court
Name: People of the Phils
What happens if there is infirmity of the signature in the information?
The information confers jurisdiction on the court, thus if there is infirmity
invalid
An infirmity in the information, such as lack of authority of the officer
signing it, cannot be cured by silence, acquiescence, or even by express consent
The complaint or information should include the ff (sufficiency test):
Name all of the accused
Designation of the offense given by the statute
Acts/omissions complained of - should be described with such
particularity as to appraise the accused, with reasonable certainty, of the
offense charged
1. Offense being charged
2. Acts or omissions complained of
3. Qualifying and aggravating circumstances
Name of the offended party
Approximate date of the commission unless material element/ingredient of
the crime
Place where the offense was committed
Purpose: TO ENABLE THE ACCUSED TO SUITABLE PREPARE FOR HIS DEFENSE,
SINCE HE IS PRESUMED TO HAVE NO INDEPENDENT KNOWLEDGE OF THE FACTS
THAT CONSTITUTE THE OFFENSE!
Note: sufficiency of information is not negated by an incomplete or defective
designation of the crime. Failure to specify the correct crime committed will not
bar conviction of the accused.
Question: When is the right time to question the sufficiency or validity of the
information or complaint?
Answer: before arraignment or during trial, otherwise, deemed waived.
Actions: 1) bill of particulars; 2) quashal of the information
Question: What should be given preference, the designation of the crime in the
information or the allegation of the facts?
Answer: The allegation of facts is controlling because the nature and
character of the crime charged are determined not by the designation of the
specific crime, but by the facts alleged in the information. So even if the
information is defective, the allegation of facts must be preferred over the
defective information. Allegation in the information, not the technical name
given by the prosecutor.
Question: What happens if there is a mistake on the name of the accused?
Answer: A mistake in the name of the accused is not equivalent, and does not
necessarily amount to, a mistake in the identity of the accused especially when
sufficient evidence is adduced to show that the accused is pointed to as one of
the perpetrators of the crime. However, the identity must be proven.
In offenses against property it is enough that the property is described with
such particularity as to properly identify the offense charged.
OR
1.
2.
1.
2.
3.
Test whether the rights of the accused are prejudiced by the amendment of a
complaint or information is:
whether a defense under the complaint or information, as it originally
stood, would no longer be available after the amendment is made; and
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
identical with those of the original information for homicide,
there could not be any effect on the prosecutions theory of the
case;
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
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
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
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
1.
2.
3.
4.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Preliminary Investigation
Preliminary Examination
by the prosecutor
by the judge
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
Proper arrest
Inquest shall proceed
Detainee may ask for bail (?)
Prosecutor should ask the detainee if he wants to
avail
preliminary
investigation
(remember:
purpose of preliminary investigation is to
determine the probability of guilt of the accused,
and whether he should be held for trial
Case
(People
v.
Aminnudi
n)
Facts
More than two days before the
arrest, the officers received a
tip that the accused was on
board an identified vessel and
carrying marijuana; acting on
the information they waited for
the accused and approached
him as he descended the ship
and arrested him.
(People
v.
Molina)
(Malacat
v. CA).
People
v.
Mengot
e.
Ruling
marijuana is inadmissible since
it was not incident to a lawful
arrest. The accused was not, at
the moment of his arrest,
committing a crime nor was it
shown that he was about to do
so or that he had just done so.
He was just descending the
ship; no outward indication that
called for his arrest. To all
appearances, he was like any
other passengers innocently
disembarking from the vessel.
The officers could have obtained
a warrant since they had
reasonable time to apply
Invalid arrest made merely on
the basis of reliable information
that the persons arrested were
carrying marijuana
A warrantless arrest cannot be
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
The
requirements
of
a
warrantless arrest were not
complied with. There was no
offense which could have been
suggested by the acts of
Mengote of looking from side to
side while 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.
People v
Laguio.
Case
People
v. Anita
Claudio
Facts
The accused was carrying a
woven buri-like plastic bag
which appeared to contain
camote tops, boarded a bus.
Overt act: instead of placing
the bag by her side, which is the
usual practice of a traveler, she
placed the same on the back
seat where a trained antinarcotics 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
Ruling
People
v.
Tanglib
en.
People
v
Maspil
Case
the accused.
Two police officers together with
a
barangay
tanod
were
conducting
surveillance
operations in a bus station to
check on persons who may be
engaging in the traffic of
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.
Because of confidential reports
from informers that two persons
would be transporting a large
quantity of marijuana, officers
set up a checkpoint to
monitor, inspect, and scrutinize
vehicles. A couple of hours after
midnight, a jeepney was flagged
down in the checkpoint. On
board
were
the
persons
identified by the informers who
were also with the policemen
manning the checkpoint. When
the sacks and tin cans were
opened,
they
contained
marijuana leaves
Facts
Judgment
Abelita
III
v.
Doria
WHAT:
shootin
g
incident
People
v Acol.
People
v
Gerent
e.
1.
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.
2.
To determine:
Whether a crime has been committed
Whether the respondent is probably guilty thereof
Prosecutors duties:
1.
To determine the existence of probable case
2.
To file information
1.
2.
does not pronounce guilt (only the probability of guilt which would lead
the accused to stand trial)
require a full and exhaustive presentation of the parties evidence
Discretion:
The determination lies within the discretion of the prosecuting officers
after conducting a preliminary investigation.
Merely binds over the suspects to stand trial
1.
2.
When required?
Preliminary investigation is required in a criminal offense has a penalty of at
least 4yrs, 2months, and 1 day.
1.
2.
1.
2.
INQUEST PROCEEDINGS
(summary investigation):
Inquest must pertain to the offense for which the arrest was made
Case: Beltran v. People
Facts: Beltran was arrested without a warrant for inciting to sedition based on a
speech he gave. Second inquest was based on rebellion.
Ruling: Inquest proceedings are proper only when the accused has been
lawfully arrested without a warrant. The officers arrested Beltran for inciting to
sedition and not for rebellion, therefore the prosecutor could only have
conducted an inquest for inciting to sedition and no other! Second inquest
invalid
1.
2.
3.
1.
2.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1.
2.
3.
1.
city
2.
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.
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
1.
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 prosecutors report and require the submission of supporting
affidavits of witnesses
1.
2.
1.
2.
3.
1.
2.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
NOTE: The officer need not have the warrant in his possession at the time
of the arrest. However, after the arrest, the warrant shall be shown to him as
soon as practicable, if the person arrested so requires.
The officer also has the duty to deliver the person arrested to the nearest police
station or jail without necessary delay.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1.
2.
Reasonable ground:
Based on actual facts
1. Supported by circumstances sufficiently strong in themselves to
create probable cause of guilt
2. Probable cause with good faith
Summon assistance
Chapter XI JUDGMENT
Judgment, defined.
Adjudication by the court
That accused is guilty or not guilty
Imposition of the proper penalty
And civil liability
1.
2.
3.
1.
ii.
offense
charged
Promulgation
of Judgment
by reading in the presence of the accused and any judge
for light offense in the presence of counsel or representative
may be promulgated by the clerk of court if the judge is absent or outside
the province or city
4.
if the accused is confined or detained in another province or city, may be
promulgated by the executive judge of the RTC having jurisdiction over the place
of confinement or detention
1.
2.
3.
Entry of judgment
After judgment has become final, it shall be entered in accordance with
Section 8, Rule 120, Rules of Court
1.
2.
3.
4.
2. taken anew
the court may allow additional evidence
b. newly-discovered evidence
evidence already adduced shall stand
the newly-discovered evidence shall be taken together with the evidence
already in record
c. in all cases where it is granted
original judgment shall be set aside or vacated
new judgment shall be rendered
ii.
i.
ii.
i.
ii.
III APPEALS
1.
2.
3.
1.
2.
3.
b.
1.
2.
i.
Except: judgment is favorable to others; this time it will bind the others
who did not appeal
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.